1)

2)

3)

'4)

5)

6)

7)

8)

9)

10)

11)

12)

13)

14)

15)

16)

17)

18)

19)

20) .

21 )

22)

..,~)

)

... .:»

26)

27 )

28)

2 9)

3 0)

31 )

Data file

CAS #

4127-45-1

16747-31-2

49622-18-6

594-36-5

544-76-3

629-78-7

629-78-7

17453-94-0

629-50-5

62238-11-3

112-95-8

286-45-3

112-95-8

7098-22-8

112-95-8

112-40-3

629-92-5

638-68-6

593-45-3

638-68-6

295-17-0

638-68-6

112-95-8

295-17-0

7098-22-8

295-48-7

629-99-2

68779-14-6

295-65-8

630-07-9

28981-49-9

Alkane Report for Sample BSE22

t22951.d Matrix WATER

Compound

Cyclopropane, l,l,2-trimethylHexane, 3,3,4-trimethylDecane, 3,3,4-trimethylButane, 2-chloro-2-methylHexadecane

Heptadecane

Heptadecane

Undecane, 5-ethylTridecane

Decane, 2,3,5-trimethyl-.

Eicosane

8-0xabicyclo[5.1.0]octane

Eicosane

Tetratetracontane

Eicosane

Dodecane

Nonadecane

Triacontane

Oc;tadecane

Triacontane

Cyclotetradecane

Triacontane

Eicosane

Cyclotetradecane

Tetratetracontane

Cyclopentadecane

Pentacosane

Cyclohexane, l,5-diethenyl-2,3-dimethylCyclohexadecane

Pentatriacontane

Cyclododecane, ethylConcentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

f' (:2$'"

R.T.

3.879--

3.975-

4.115 ....

5.231-

7.378-

8.215-

9.074--

9.49~

9.932-

10.79-

1L61-

13. Sa,.....

13.92-

14.18-

14.63"-

15.32-

15;97-

16.60-

16.97-

17.22-

17.66-

17.81-

18.37-

18.7&-

18.93"*

19.32"-

19.47"-

19.76-

19.83-

19.98-

20.83-

P<1ge: 1

Estimated

Cone.

10.31

2.70

2.68

2.08

2.85

2.14

2.74

3.22

2.29

3.00

2.26

37.33

3.88

3.18

4.72

4.36

8.39

9.27

3.06

10.43

14.63

12.41

20.54

28.07

7.22

8.38

14.31

4.71

16.41

5.22

5.79

10

TIERRA-A-018001
Data file

CAS #

1) ';'$'-.,,4-5

2) 584-94-1

3) 54125-39-2

4) 3074-71-3

5) 2425-66-3

--6) 354-21-2

7) 1120-21-4

B) 544-76-3

9) 295-17-0

~O) 295-48-7

11) 630-07-9

~2) 295-48-7

13) 630-07-9

14) 295-65-8

~5) 54832-82-5

16) 295-65-8

Alkane Report for Sample BSE23

t22952.d Matrix WATER

Compound

Ethane, ~,1, 2, 2- LeL..Iacl~ioIOHexane, 2,3-dimethyltrans-2,3-Epoxydecane

Heotane, 2,3-dimethylPropane, 1-chloro-2-nitro-

.t:.tha.ue, :,2:,2 '-IL ...r.loro 1,1 d:'::ltJ:OIO

Undecane

Hexadecane

Cyclotetradecane

Cyclopentadecane

Pentatriacontane

Cyclopentadecane

Pentatriacontane

Cyclohexadecane

Tricyclo[4.3.0.07,9]nonane, 2,2,5,5,8,8-

Cyclohexadecane

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

R.T.

~.6o::>

4.112-

4 .90~

5.121-

5.228-

6.8'0

9.940-

~7.21-

17.65-

18.23-

18.36-

19.32-

19.47 ...

19.84.....

20.06-

20.84"

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

TIERRA-A-018002
Data file

CAS #

-2.)

2)

3)

~:' )

5)

6)

7)

1~-",4-:;)

594-36-5

1120-21-4

")t::9-28-~

124-18-5

544-85-4

629-94-7

Alkane Report for Sample BSE26

t22950.d Matrix: WATER

Compound

~~nanei 1,i,2,2 tetraehloro

Butane, 2-chloro-2-methylUndecane

ii:t:;'ane j 1,:,2 tL':'chlo ...o-2 £laolo

Decane

Dotriacontane

Heneicosane

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

R.T.

3.~S6

S.23~

7.376-

";1.001

17.79-'

18.3r

19.46-

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

~O(j 12

TIERRA-A-018003
Da:'a file

CAS #

1) 107-81-3

2) 79 34 5

3) 544-85-4

4) 629-78-7

5) 630-06-8

6) 112-40-3

7) 53584-60-4

Alkane Report for Sample

v18355.d Matrix

Compound

Pentane, 2-bromoEthanc J

:,1,2,2 t..et....e ..... i.LloIODotriacontane

Heptadecane

Hexatriacontane

Dodecane

28-Nor-17.alpha. (H)-hopane

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

e·118'

BSE27

SOIL

R.T.

3.461 ...

:;- "0' .... ~ ...

15.21-

16.44-

17.5a18.63 ....

18.88-

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

767.40

1:' :6 .17 f!--fl

f

498.29 f!!)

882.26

2039.34

2896.32

514.70

CL 13

TIERRA-A-018004
Data file

CAS i

Alkane Report for Sample BSE28

v1B356.d Matrix: SOIL

Compound

.. 11

2)

3)

4 )

5)

6 )

7)

79 34-~

112-40-3

75163-97-2

593-49-7

6248-88-0

112-95-8

6079-19-2

Ethane, i,1,2,2-LeLlachloLoDodeeane

Oetadeeane, 2,6-dimethylHeptaeosane

Bieyelo[Z.2.1]heptane, 1,3,3-trimethylEicosane

Cholestane, 4,5-epoxy-, (4.alpha.,5.alph

Concentration units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

P:ige: 1

R.T.

3.494-

7.196 -

9.273--

17.5~

17.77-

18.65 -

19.15-

Estimated

Cone.

947.19

600.95

625.43

505.20

449.71

421. 26

1052.38

14

TIERRA-A-018005
Data file

CAS #:

:J :.:: 94-6

2) 111-01-3

3) 3386-33-2

4: ) 1921- 7.0 - 6

5) 36728-72-0

6) 295-17-0

Alkane Report for Sample

v18364.d Matrix: SOIL

Compound

Slialle I diffiS ~=:]rJ

Squalane

Octadecane, 1-chloroPentadecane, 2,6,10,14-tetramethyl28-Nor-17.beta. (H)-hopane

Cyclotetradecane

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

BSE28~L-' Page: 1

R.T.

3.:02

8.795-

9.237-

9.28CY

18.88-

19.03 ....

Estimated

Cone.

';""'1;'" P-II- I~':. 0

578.18 e£

487.92

589.16

1571. 72

1369.65

ell 15

TIERRA-A-018006
Data file

CAS #

1) 20637-47-2

2) 2216-30-0

3) 79 d 4 5

4) 74421-17-3

5) 62108-21-6

6 ) ·630 - 0 6 - 6

7) 112-40-3

B) 0-00-0

Alkane Repolt for Sample BSE29

v18399.d Matrix SOIL

Compound

Heptane, 4-methoxy-3- (methoxYffiethyl)-

Heptane, 2,S-dimethylEthane, l,l,2,2-Le ...rachloro

Hexane, 1-(hexyloxy)-2-methylDecane, 6-ethyl-2-methylHexatriacontane

Dodecane

2,2_Bis(4-trifluoroacetoxyphenyl)propane

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

Page: 1

R.T.

2.834 -

2.952-

3.555-

15.16-

17.55-

18.63""

22.79

Est.imated

Cone.

610.35

493.01

e 59 .26- j' ...n-f.

385.30 @!)

321. 74

807.15

297.54

335.77

16

TIERRA-A-018007
Alkane Report for Sample

Data file .- v1B400.d Matrix: SOIL

CAS #

1) 2216-30-0

2) 7!-94 5

3) 59958-46-2

4) 629-78-7

5) 629-92-5

6) 112-95-8

Compound

Heptane, 2,5-dimethylEthane, :,1,2,2 teLracllioLO

trans-2-0xabicyclo[4.4.0]decane

Heptadecane

Nonadecane

Eicosane

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

BSE30

R.T.

2.955 ....

3.471

3.665-

16.41--

17.55-

18.63'"

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

458.90

555.12'

-

tj

-f

444.35 r£J9

308.05

805.94

352.64

17

TIERRA-A-018008
Data file

CAS #

1) 20637-29-0

2) 2216-33-3

3) 1713-33-3

4) 630-01-3

Alkane Report for Sample

v18439.d

Compound

Matrix: SOIL

BSE3000·· Page: 1

\

R.T.

Hexane, l,2,3-trimethoxyOctane, 3-methyl7-0xabicyclo[4.1.0]heptane, 1-methylHexacosane

2.814 ....

2.933-

3.654-

17.5Y

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

/

Estimated

Cone.

1696.46

954.51

868.02

805.45

18

TIERRA-A-018009
Data file

CAS #

4) 629-78-7

5) 593-45-3

6) 17312-57-1

7) 52474-84-7

Alhane Report for Sample BSE31

v183S9.d Matrix: SOIL

Compound R.T.

Silane, dlrnel..hyl:s

Ethane, I,1,~,2-Cetrachloro-

!:C!ldIle , : I 2I:: t!~ro!LchI ere 1, 1 di f 1tIC ...0

Heptadecane

Octadecane

Dodecane, 3-methylCholestane, 14-methylConcentration Units: Water: UG!L Soil: UG/KG

16.44-

17.58-

18.64-

19.lS--

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

893.49 e.

1361.14

1206.68

943.37

0 ... 19

TIERRA-A-018010
Data file

CAS #

1) 95057-12-6

2) 2216-33-3

3) 2216 -33-3

{) '9 34 5

5) 61142-21-0

6) 630-03-5

7) 0-00-0

8) ·3386-33-2

9) 54833-23-7

10) 7098-22-8

11) 1560-88-9

Alkane R~ort for Sample

v18401.d

Compound

Matrix

1,1,3,4-Tetrametho/lcyclohexane

Octane, 3-methylOctane, 3-methylEtfiane, 1,1,2,2 eetraehlere

Cyclohexane, (l,2,,2-trimethylbutyl)-

Nonacosane

10-Methylnonadec~e

Octadecane, 1-chloroEicosane, 10-methylTetratetracontane

Octadecane, 2-metbylConcentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

BSE32

SOIL

gage: 1

R.T.

2.737-

2.953-

3.168-

3.~~9

3.631-

12.42-

13.85-

15.19-

16.41-

17.55-

18.63--

Estimated

Cone.

150.95

225.34

117.24

286.29.£-' "3-r

121.43 ~

88.20

303.97

548.42

150.30

300.28

342.87

20

TIERRA-A-018011
Alkane Report for Sample

Data file v18402.d Matrix: SOIL

CAS # Compound

1) 53584-60-4 28-No=-17.alpha. (H)-hopane

Coneentr~ion Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

BSE33

R.T.

18.86

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

1067.66

21

TIERRA-A-018012
Data file

C.~S #

1) 20637-29-0

2) 628-17-1

3) 54105-77-0

Alkane Report for Sample

v18440.d Matrix: SOIL

Compound

Hexane, l,2,3-trimethoxyPentane, 1-iodo-

(2-Methylbutyl)cyclohexane

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

BSE33 on -, Page: 1

R.T.

2.816-

B.402-

14.89-

Estimated

Cone.

3096.60

29960.66

2120.72

22

TIERRA-A-018013
Data file

CAS #

1) 630-06-8

2) 3386-33-2

3) 630-03-5

4) 638-67-5

5) 62337-97-7

Alkane Report for Sample: BSE34

.....-18403.d Matrix: SOIL

,Compound

Hexatriacontane

Octadecane, 1-chloroNonacosane

Tricosane

Cyclohexane, 1,1,2-trimethyl-3,5-bis(1-m

Concentration units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

R.T.

13.85

15.18

17.55

18.63

19.40

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

6672.16

13937.09

11321. 86

12681.56

9832.28

23

TIERRA-A-018014
Data file

CAS #

1) 629-99-2

2) 646-31-1

3) 629-94-7

4) 14739-72-1

Alkane Report for Sample

v18404.d

Compound

Pentacosane

Tetracosane

Heneicosane

Heneicosane, 11-pentylConcentration Units: Water: UG!L

Matrix

Soil: UG!KG

BSE35

SOIL

Page: 1

R.T.

15.18-

17.55- .

18.63-

19.42-

Estimated

Cone.

7610.57

5251.51

8197.83

5201.86

24

TIERRA-A-018015
Data file

CAS #

1) 629-78-7

2) 629-92-5

3) 24635-97-0

4) 593-45-3

Alkane ~ort for Sample

v18405.d Matrix: SOIL

Compound

Heptadecane

Nonadecane

1/3/2-Dioxarsen~, 2-methylOctadecane

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

BSE36

R.T.

16.41 .....

17.55-

17.65-

18.63'"

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

4298.92

4070.89

4305.14

4933.02

ell 25

TIERRA-A-018016
-:)

2)

3)

4)

Data file

CAS #

"79 ~1 5

629-62-9

112-95-8

112-95-8

Alkane Report for Sample

v18360.d Matrix

Compound

Etfiaae, :11,2/2 te~_ach'er6

Pentadecane

Eicosane

Eicosane

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

BSE37

SOIL

R.T.

3.~92

16.43-

17.58 -

18.65-

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

S7i .;;n /'..((f~

739.92 16

1185.04

639.93

TIERRA-A-018017
Data file

CAS #

1) 93-34 5

629-78-7

544-76-3

593-4$-3

593-45-3

45J~ 65 e

Alkane Report for Sample

v18365.d . Matrix

2)

3)

4)

5)

C)

Compound

Ethane, 1,1,2,2-Cb_rachloLoHeptadecane

Hexadecane

Octadecane

Octadecane

Pen'e.adeca.deI ~ -phenylBSE37 ~. ,

SOIL

R.T.

3.o€:90

16.43-

17.01-

17.57~

18.64-

2C.a5

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

r."z.

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

.""\ 27

TIERRA-A-018018
Data file

CJl..S#

-:tl 79 34 5

2) 49622-18-6

3) 590-66-9

4) 7225-67-4

5) 112-95-8

6) 544-76-3

7) 55282-29-6

Alkane Report for Sample BSE38

v18361.d Matrix SOIL

Compound R.T.

Ethanel :,1,2,2 t_trachlorc

Decane, 3,3,4-trimethylCyclohexane, 1,1-dimethylHeptane, 2,2,3,3,5,6,6-heptamethyl-.

Eicosane

Hexadecane

Hexadecane, 8-hexyl-8-pentyl3.459

3.661-

3.683-

17.01-

17.58-

18.65-

19.15--

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

('\.; 28

TIERRA-A-018019
Data file

CAS #

1) 760-21-4

2) 49622-18-6

Alkane Report for Sample

t22948.d

Compound

BSE41

Matrix: WATER

Pentane, 3-methyleneDecane, 3,3,4-trimethylConcentration Units: Water: UG!L Soil: UG!KG

R.T.

3.535

4.114

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

5.14

9.03

r .....2n

"

TIERRA-A-018020
Alkane Report for Sample

Data file v18428.d

CAS #

111-65-9 Octane

Compound

Concentration Units: Water: UG!L

Matrix

Soil: UG/KG

BSE42

WATER

R.T.

3.311

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

2.12

30

TIERRA-A-018021
Data file

CAS #

Alkane Report for Sample

v18362.d Matrix

Compound

:l

2)

3)

4)

5}

'j'~-34 5

112-95-8

111-65-9

629-99-2

629-62-9

::~har.Lc, ..,)I, 2,2

Eicosane

Octane

Pentacosane

Pentadecane

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

BSE43

SOIL

R.T.

3.4!l.:o

17.58 -

18.13-

18.65-

19.16-

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

=»32.5::

626.98

346.56

983.35

508.63

31

TIERRA-A-018022
Alkane Report for Sample BSE43 ~ Page: 1

Data file v18363.d Matrix: SOIL

Estimated

CAS # Compound R.T. Conc.

- -- -

1) 41977-43-9 Cyclopropane, 1,1,2-trimethyl-3-(2-methy 3.492..- 505.51

2) 629-78-7 Heptadecane 16.44- 457.90

3) 593-49-7 Heptacosane 17.58- 747.92

4) 593-45-3 Octadecane 18.64- 1290.63

5) 629-97-0 Docosane 19.67- 719.08

6) 541-05-9 Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl- 19.83- 353.91

7) 97-94-9 Borane, triethyl- 19.88- 1012.03

8) 0-00-0 Silaspiro[5.5]undecane, 1,2,4,5,6,7,9,10 21.11-- 3098.71

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

r' "11 32

TIERRA-A-018023
Data file

CAS #

1) 54833-48-6

2) 0-00-0

3) 629-94-7

Alkane Report for sample BSE44

v1.8442.d Matrix SOIL

Compound

Heptadecane, 2,6,10,15-tetramethylDecane, 5,6-bis(2,2-dimethylpropylidene)

Heneicosane

....

.Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

R.T.

1.6.38-

16.47 -

1.7.52 -

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

536.83

945.52

857.70

" 33

TIERRA-A-018024
Alkane Report for Sample SBLK\ flag!:::: 1

Data file v1832S.d Matrix: SOIL

CAS #

Compound

---.

....

R.T.

54699-28-4 Butane, 2,2'- [methylenebis (oxy)]bis [2-me 2.778-

2216-30-0 Heptane, 2,5-dim~1- 2.994-

24G4 35-t::--C¥clohePtane.-:'brom~,~'------'-'--.--.------ -3-:-7"04-":

"~_.-"".

Concentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

11/':'- . , ~ j -) ( Tj ,.,'.!

Estimated

Cone.

89.14

160.66

322 56

TIERRA-A-018025
Alkane Report for Sample

Data file t23013.d

CAS # Compound

565-75-3 Pentane, 2,3,4-trimethylConcentration Units: Water: UG/L

r·1. oo

SBLK(;)

Matrix: WATER

Soil: UG/KG

R.T.

4.07.0

Page: 1

Estimated

Cone.

9.72

0lJ 35

TIERRA-A-018026
Data file

CAS #

1) 2216-33-3

2) 619 -99 -8

3) 2216-34-4

4) 2216-33-3

5) 760-21-4

6) 61142-21-0

7) 590-66-9

Alkane Report for Sample

v18387a.d Matrix: SOIL

Compound

Octane, 3-methylHexane, 3-ethylOctane, 4-methylOctane, 3-methylPentane, 3-methylene- .

Cyclohexane, (l,2,2-trirnethylbutyl)-

Cyclohexane, 1,1-dimethylConcentration Units: Water: UG/L Soil: UG/KG

SBLK3 Page: 1

R.T.

2.953

3.082

3.125

3.168

3.265

3-:-6~

........... 3.663 .

/ -_..."

·~_r

Estimated

Cone.

329.51

209.20

102.46

92.66

77.73

269.82

407.90

TIERRA-A-018027
VOLATILES

GC/MSpH LOG

CASE __ ..:::::.....:0:""':::::;";::;"':"' __ ~DG#

AATS/SWLO JD I EPA SAMPLE 10 I

pH I ANALYST I DATE TESTED

3:J3SS .0/ I 8SE~;;l, I & I ~4 I J/bf/~7

... ,O~ 6SE~.3 l- I I I

,0'3 /2-,(.' ~ I") I" "J I I I

( D9 1'.,<:..,.;:; 3Cj I I. I I

,10 I f)SELI I I (, V",.. f

I /

I /

I I

/"

I I I /'

I I /"

I 1/ I

/

.

I ./

I ./

I

.// I

//

..-

."

I

/' I

-'

.;

.-

I

," I

I

I I . I

r ' - - _. _. - - - - .

I I

COMMENTS: _

p.2fJZ 37

SotmiWEST UooRATORY OF OKlAHOMA, INc./AMElUCA.~A.J'iALYI1CAI..& TEOiNICAL SERVICES, INC.

1700 W. ALuANY. ~kOKl!."i Axxow, OKI.AJIOMA 7-1012. OI'I'It.:! (918) 251-2858. FAX (918) 251·2599

TIERRA-A-018028
VOLATILES

GC~pHLOG

CAS E __ -=-=-.=::..-.;....;. __ c?-.S7Po I

-

AATSjSWLO 10 I EPA SAMPLE 10 I pH I ANALYST ~ I OATETESTEO

~D 4/~. O'Y A.<:..F l/,:} I Ld.., ~h

r/~ I .floP !~7

I

;I I v

I /

I /'

I /'

I ./

/'

/' I·

I I /' I

I / I

I /

/ I

/

1/ I

/

V

I

/ I

/

/ I

y

I

/: I

/ ~ ~ ~~ - - - -. - - - - - - ~ -- /

/

,

;.F:'·-

COMMENTS: _

p.2t>3 38

SolJI1iWEST LooRATORY OF OI\.1Al IOMA, INc./ AMER1CA.1\lANALYIlCAL & TEcHNICAL SffiVICES, INC.

]700 W. AuJANY • BIC.OKt:N MKOW, UX1AlIOMA 71012 • Ul'I'IU (918) 251·2858 • FAX (918) 251.2599

TIERRA-A-018029
EPA SAMPLE NO. 1AVOLATILE ORGANICS ~ALYSIS DATA SHEET

pb Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: j§601

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 5. 0 (g/m~) ML

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: not.dec.

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (Jmm)

Soil Extract Volume: ____ (uL)

CAS. NO. COMPOUND

74-87-3---------Chlorometha:

74-83-9---------Bromomethan

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chlor

75-00-3---------Chloroethan·

75-09-2---------Methylene c:

67-64-1---------Acetone

75-15-0---------Carbon Disu

7S-3S-4---------1,1-Dichler

75-34-3---------1,1-Dichl6r:

540-S9-0--------1,2-DichlorJ

67-66-3---------Chloroform

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichlor

78-93-3---------2-Butanone

71-SS-6---------1,1,1-TricF

56-23-S---------Carbon Tetr

75-27-4---------Bromodichlo

78-87-S-----7---1,2-Dichlor'

10061-01-5- -----cis-1, ~..bic;:

79-01-6---------Trich±6r~etr·

124-48-1--------Dibrofuochlo~-

79-00-5---------2,1,2~Tric~

71-43-2---------Benzene

10061-02-6------trans-i~

75-25-2---------Bromoform

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-

591-78-6--------2-Hexartone

127-18-4--------Tetrachloro

79-34-5---------1,1,2,2~Tet

108-88-3--------Toluene

108-90-7--------Chlorobenze

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzen100-42-5--------Styrene

1330-20-7-------Xylene ~t-To-t-;

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE22

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE2.2

Lab Sample ID: 30388.01

Lab File 1D: C25381.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

.. 10 ur.r

10 U

-

10 U

10 U

_.'··~-.lde 10 U

10 U

:.:..c.e 10 U

-= '::-~ -:ne 10 U

ct:hane 10 U

ethene (t.otal) 10 U

-

..

10 U

- 10 U

10 U

"0 10 U

-

10 U

. .";> 10 U

.. ,- 10 U

.""" . '~;,ene 10 U

.. - . 10 U

I

.-

.. "

I

··e 10 U

:.:1e 10 U

- -

- JoO - - U

.?=opene_ 10 U I

10 U

,

,

::ne 10 U i

10 U

,

1

. 10 U i

:.::-oethane 10 U

\

-

..-

10 U

10 U j

10 U !

..

10 U

10 U ~

'I

FORJ1iI VOA OLM03.0

76

TIERRA-A-018030
1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE22

Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 5.0

Lab Sample ID: 3038B.01

(g/mL) ML Lab File ID: C253B1. D

GC Column:DB-624

Soil Extract Volume:

1D: 0.53 (mm)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: OB/08/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Level: (low/med) LOH

% Moisture: not dee.

___ (UL) Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

___ (uL)

Number TICs found: 7

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

=~===~========== =====================;====== ======== =====::======= ====:::;:

1- UNKNOWN 14.356 6 J

2. Naphthalene, methyl- 19.019 140 J

3. Naphthalene, methyl- 19.212 56 J

4. Naphthalene, ethenyl- 19.769 17 J

5. Naphthalene, -ethyl- 19.971 9 J

6. Naphthalene, dimethyl- 20.086 12 J

7 . Naphthalene, dimethyl- I 20.259 13 J

B . 1

1~:------ --------------11---- -~~~------

11.2 '\----1------- ---

13 . ----l-~----- ---

14. _

15. ---~I~~----- ---

16. _

17. ~-~- ------ ---

.19. 18.______ ------------- ----1------ --- I

20.

1

tl=:=~-I

21.__ ---" I 1---1

~~: 'I 1.

1

1

--.

1

24. '\ 25. ·I---~~~-------- ---- ------ ---

26. .I~ ----- ------- ---

27. .1 _ 28. _ ----1------- ---

29..1 ---- ------ ---

30. _1 ---- ------- ---

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

o~ 77

TIERRA-A-018031
lA

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) ML

LOW

BSE23

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No. : SDG No. : BSE2.2

Lab Sample tD: 30388.02

Lab File ID: .

C25382.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

1b Name: SWL-TULSA

I

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/wa~-er)-WATER

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: not dec.

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

____ (uL)

Dilution Factor: 1.0 GC Column:DB-624

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 10 U

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 10 U

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 10 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 10 U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlor~de 10 U

67-64-1---------Acetone 10 U

75-15-0---------Carbon D~sulfide 10 U

75-35-4---------1,I-Dichloroethene 10 U

75-34-3---------1,I-Dichloroethane 10 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 10 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform

-

10 U

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 10 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 10 U

71-55~6---------1,1,I-Trichloroethane 10 U

S6-23-S---------Carbon Tetrachloride 10 U

7S-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 10 U

78-87-S---------1,2-Dichloropropane 10 U

10061-01-S------cis-l,3-Dichloropropene 10 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 10 U

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 10 U

7.9-00~5---------1,1.L2.:'"rrichlo:roethane 10 U

71-43-2---------Benzene

- -

1.0 -U

10061-02-6------trans-l,3-D~chloropropene 10 U

75-25-2---------Bromoform --- 10 U

10B-I0-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 10 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 10 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 10 U

79-34-5---------1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 10 U

108-88-3--------Toluene -- 10 U

10B-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 10 U

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 10 U

100-42-5-------~Styrene 10 U

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 10 U

t

,

\

\

:r

I

[

.

I

I

l

I

1

I

,

.

",!

i

(

\

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

89

TIERRA-A-018032
1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

,.-.lab Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE23

Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: BSE2.2

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 5.0

Lab Sample ID: 30388.02

(g/mL) ML Lab File ID: C25382.D

Level: (low/med> LOW Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97 % Moisture: not dec.

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

___ (uL)

Dilution Factor~ 1.0 GC Column:DB-624

Number TICs found: 5'

Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

___ (uL)

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

=~========;===== ============================ ======== ============= =====

1- Naphthalene, methyl- 19.018 52 J

2. Naphthalene, methyl- 19.201 23 J

3 . Naphthalene, ethenyl- 19.767 13 J

4. Naphthalene, dimethyl- 20.075 8 J

5. Naphthalene, dimethyl- 20.267 10 J

6 .

) 7. I I I I

8. I I I 9. I 10. I

I I

1l. I

I I

12. I I

13. I I I

14.

15.

16.

17. I I I

18. I I

.-

19. I I

20. 1

- - 1 - - --:- - - - - - - -

2l. I I I

22.

23. I I I

24. 1 I

25. II I I

26. I I I

27. I I I

28. I I I

29.

I

30. I

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

c 90

TIERRA-A-018033
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

10 Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE26

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE2.2

-- Hat:rix: (soil/water) WATER Lab Sample ID: 30388.03

Level: (lo.w/med)

5.0 (g/mL) ML

LOW

Lab File ID: C25385.D

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture:. not dec.

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: o. 53 (mm)

____ (uL)

Dilution Factor: 1.0 GC Column:DB-624

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

..~.

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 10 U

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 10 U

7S-01-4-----~---Vinyl Chloriae 10 U

7S-00_3---------Chloroethane 10 U

7S-09-2---------Methylene ChlorJ.de /0 ~ u-J67-64-1---------Acetone 10 U

75-1S-0---------Carbon DisulfJ.de 10 U

75_35_4 _________ 1,l_Dichloroethene 10 U

75-34-3---------1,l-Dichloroethane 10 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 10 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform

- 10 U I

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 10 U

I

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 10 U I

71_55_6 _________ 1,l,l_Trichioroethane 10 U

I

56-23-S---------Carbon Tetrachloride 10 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 10 U I

78-87-S---------1,2-Dichloropropane 10 U

I

I

10061-01-5------cis-l,3-Dichloropropene 10

I

U •

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 10 U

I

i

124-48-1--------0ibromochloromethane 10 U !

_7-9---0.0- 5 -_-:.-:-~_-_-.":=- L,.l.., 2:-T.r_ichlo;t'gethaI}e 10 U t

71-43-2---------Benzene 10 U

I 10061-02-6------trans-1,3-DJ.chloropropene __ 10 U

7S-2S-2---------Bromoform 10 U i

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 10 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 10 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 10 U

I

79_34_S _________ 1,l,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 10 U

108-88-3--------Toluene

-- 10 U

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 10 U

~

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 10 U

lOO-42-S--------Styrene 10 U

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 10 u ..

,

J

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

99'

TIERRA-A-018034
1E .

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

',abName: SWL-TULSA

I

Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE26

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) ML

Lab Sample- If): -30388.03

Lab File 10: "C25365.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97.

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: not dec.

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

___ (uL) Soil Aliquot Volume: __ (UL)

GC Column:DB-624

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

Number TICs found: 0 (ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

==~:=~~~~-===II=======_:~~~~~=~~--==-·=I~==~:~~=----

3.' I 1

4. I I~ 1------ ---

5. I I 1------ ---

6. I . I 1------

~:

9. 1

1 I I

I I

==--

10. 1 II 1

12. 11. I ~

II I1=========== --

i~: I II I -

15. I II 1-----

16. II II I --

17. I I lB. I I 1------

19. _' I I

20. I "I 21. =

22. I I

23. I I

24. I I

25. 1 1

~~: ILl I

28. _

29. _1='------------1

30. 1 I

- 1 I

=====

Q

-J. I

- - - . - -

I

1

1

I

I

I I !

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

\.._.",

100

TIERRA-A-018035
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE27

..- ",ab Name: SWL-TULSA

I

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30388.04 Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G Lab File ID: C25242.D

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)'

____ fuLl

'Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/04/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: not dec.~

GC Column:DB-624

,....

"

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q CAS NO. COMPOUND

21

21

21

21

21

100

21

21

21

21

21

21

28

21

21

21

21

21

21

21

21

_. . -;2.1 --

21

21

21

21

21

21

21

21

21

21

21

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 1

74-83-9---------Bromomethane

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chlori~d~e---------------I

75-00-3---------Chloroethane

75-09-2---------Methylene Ch~1-o-r~1~d-e-----------1

67-64-1---------Acetone

75-15-0---------Carbon~ D1-s-u~1~f~1~a~e-------------1

7S-3S-4---~-----l,l-Dichloroethene

75-34-3---------1,l-Dichloroethane-----------1

540-S9-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total)

67-66-3---------Chloroform --

l07-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane

78-93-3---------2-Butanone ---------

71-5S-6---------1,l,l-Trichloroethane, _

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride

7S-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane-------

78-87-5---------1,2-Dichloropropane

10061-01-5--~---cis-1,3-Dichloropro-p-e-n-e-----

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene

124-48-1--------Dibromochlorome~tLh~a~n~e--------

79-00-S---------1,1,2-Trichloroethane

~71~'i3.:Z--~~-----~-~enzene-- _. ~- - - - ------~---.-

10061- 02 -6---'---trans-l, 3 -D1chloropropene

7S-25-2---------Bromoform ---

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone __

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone

127-18-4--------Tetrachlor-o-e~t~h-e-n-e-----------

79-34-S---------1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

l08-88-3--------Toluene ---

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 1 100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 1

100-42-S--------Styrene

1330-20-7-------Xylene ~(~T~o~t~a~lr)--------------l

FORM I VOA

ul:J

U

U

U

U

u

u

u

u

u

u

OLM03.0

105

TIERRA-A-018036
lE

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

tab Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE27

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL -Lab Sample ID: 30388.04

Level: (low/med>

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: C25242.D Sample wt/vol:

Soil Extract Volume:

I D : O. 53 (mm)

___ (uL}

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/04/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 52

GC Column:DB-624

Soil Aliquot Volume: ___ CuLl

Number TICs found: 0

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUNDNAME . ~ EST. CONC. r Q

;;~~;;========== ============================ ======== ============= =====

; : I I I I

4. I I I I

5. I I I I

6. I I I

; 7 .

8 .

9. I 10. I I I

1l. I I I I

12. I

I

I I I

13. I. I I

14.

I 15.

16. I

17. I I I. I I

18. I

1

I I

- -19. - I ~- - - ~ I I I I - - - - - - .

20.

, - - -

I

I

I

I

,I

I

21. 1

22. .I-------~~~--------

23. 24.------\-------------- ----

25. 'I 26. ·I------~-----

27. 'I ----

28. .1 ---- ~~: :1=====-=-=--=----------- ----- -- 1 --------- ----

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

.- I

"-

1(1l6

TIERRA-A-018037
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

BSE28

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No. : SOG No. : BSE2.2

Lab Sample ID: 30388.05

Lab File ID: . L26997.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/04/97

lab Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: not dec. 48

GC Column:DB-€24 ID: 0.53 (mm)

____ (uL)

Dilution Factor: 1.0

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

Soil Extract Volume:

/

,

,

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 16 J .J

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 19 U

75-01-4---------Vinyi Chloride 19 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 19 U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlor~de i} U

67-64-1---------Acetone 1'1 lA..-<r

7S-1S-0---------Carbon D~sulf~de 19 U

75-3S-4---------1,I-Dichloroethene 19 U

7S-34-3---------1,I-Dichloroethane 19 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 19 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform - 19 U

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 19 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 19 U

71-55-6---------1, 1,I-Trichloroethane 19 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 19 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 19 U

78-87-5---------1,2-Dichloropropane 19 U

10061-01-5------cis-l,3-Dichloropropene 19 U

\

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 19 U

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 19 U

79 -0_0-5---------::t. ,1, 2-_'trich~orp~!:~~ne 19 U

71-43-2---------Benzene

- - - - -T9 U

.I

10061-02-6------trans-l,3-D~chloropropene 19 U

I

I

75-25-2---------Bromoform -- 19 U

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 19 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 19 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 19 U

I

79-34-5---------1, 1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane 19 U

108-88-3--------Toluene -- 8 J

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 19 U I

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 19 U

~

100-42-5------~-Styrene 3 J

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 4 J

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

j' '212.. III

TIERRA-A-018038
IE

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

rb Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE28

Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: BSE2.2

Matrix: (soil/waterr SOIL- Lab Sample ID: 30388.05

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: L26997.D Sample wt/vol:

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

___ (uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/04/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 48

GC Column:DB-624

Number TICs found: 6

Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

___ (uL)

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

=======:=====~== ============================ ======== ============= =====

1- 75-18-3 Dimethyl sulfide 6.214 23 NJ

2. UNKNOWN 15.391 10 J

3. UNKNOWN 16.954 13 J

4. UNKNOWN HYDROCARBON 17.080 12 J

5. UNKNOWN 17.970 20 J

6. UNKNOWN HYDROCARBON 18.124 140 J

7.

8.

9.

,

10. I Ii I I

11- I ~ I I

12. I II I 1

13.

14.

15.

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

112

TIERRA-A-018039
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Level: (low/med)

....

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

BSE29

Contract: 6B-D5-0026

SAS No. : SDG No. : BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30412.01

Lab File ID: L270SS.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

ab Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

;.

% Moisture: not dec. 32

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

____ (uL)

Dilution Factor: 1.0 GC Column:DB-624

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

74-S7-3---------Chloromethane 15 U .T

74-S3-9---------Bromornethane 15 U

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 15 U

75-0a-3---------Chloroethane IS U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlor~de 15 U

67-64-1---------Acetone 15 U

75-15-0---------Carban Disul£l.de 15 U

7S-35-4---------1,1-Dichloroethene 15 U

7S-34-3---------1,1-Dichloroethane 15 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total)

-

15 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform 15 U

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 15 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 15 U

71-55-6---------1,1,1-Trichloroethane 15 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 15 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 15 U

7B-B7-S---------1,2-Dichloropropane 15 U

10061-01-5------cis-l,3-Dichloropropene 15 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 15 U

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 15 U

79 -:OlL-5 -:-:-,-,---,-,-:1, .1",2,-:'J;'ri.chJ-.o~o~~h~~~ IS U

71-43-2---------Benzene 1.-S' U

10061-02-6------trans-l,3-D~chloropropene 15 U

75-25-2---------Brornoforrn -,- IS U

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 15 U

S91-78-6--------2-Hexanone 15 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 15 U

79-34-5---------1, 1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane 15 ul

10S-88-3--------Toluene -- IS

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 15 gl

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene IS U

t

100-42-5--------Styrene 15 U

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 15 u

\ :

.'_- FORM I VOA OLM03.0

l .127

TIERRA-A-018040
1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

, Fb Name: SWL-TULSA

.•.. ,

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE29

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE42

Matrix-: '(soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 30412.01

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: L27088.D

Sample wt/vol:

Soil Extract Volume:

I D: O. 53 (mm)

___ (uL)

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 32

GC Column:DB-624

Soil Aliquot Volume: __ luLl

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

Number TICs found: 1 (ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

==~~=~~~===-IUN~~~=~~~~~=~~~=======~-=~:~~

3. I I 1_-

4. 1

5. I I I

;: I I 1===

8. 1 I I_~

9. I I I

10. I I 1====

11. I I I

12. I I 1-- 13. _

14. 1 _

15 .1 _

16 .1 --

17 .1 _

~t-·-.---.-.-·-·-·-·-':-1 -." -. - - _ .. -

~~ : 23. 24. :I'\·I--------~---- ==========================

25. "1 _

26. "I 27. .I-~~---------

-

=====

Q

J

I I

I I

I I

I I

I

I

I

..

I

I

I

I

I

I

28. .1 _

~~: :1 -

____----,.1------------- ---- ------- ---

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

\f

~.

. .

r' z-t S t 128

TIERRA-A-018041
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

tab Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE30

,

..Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE2.2

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample- I!T:. 3-0412.02

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G Lab File ID: L27057.D

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97.

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

Level: (low/med) LOW

%.Moisture: not dec. ~

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

Soil Extract volume: ____ (uL)

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 25 U ~

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 25 U

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 25 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 25 U

75-09-2---------Methylene ChIorJ.de 3 J

67-64-1---------Acetone 25 U

7S-15-0---------Carbon DJ.sul£ide 25 U

75-35-4---------1,1-Dichloroethene 25 U

75_34-3---------1,1-Dichloroethane 25 U

540-59-0--------l,2-Dichloroethene (total) 25 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform - 25 U

lO7-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 25 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 25 U

71-55-6---------1, 1,I-Trichloroethane 25 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 2S U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 2S U

78-87-5----~----1,2-Dichloropropane 2S U

I

lO061-0l-S------cis-l,3-Dichloropropene 25 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 25 U

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 25 U !

_79 -n{)~5--- -~--::-=].,-1.., 2 -:.Tr-.i.cbJ.Q;l:'oethane 25 U I

7l-43-2---------Benzene -- - -_.-

- - - - -

.. - -

"2"5 -

U I

lOO61-02-6------trans-1,3-DJ.chloropropene 25 U

75-25-2---------Bromoform --

2S U

lO8-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 25 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 25 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 25 U

79_34_S _________ 1,l,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 25 U

lO8-88-3--------Toluene

-- 4 J

lO8-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 25 U

lOO-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 2S U

10O-42-5--------Styrene 25 U

~

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total)

_I

25 U ,v

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

r .zrb

l. 133

TIERRA-A-018042
EFA SAMPLE NO. 1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS BSE30

fb Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : snG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 30412.02

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: L27057.D

Level: (low/med) Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97 % Moisture: not dec. 60

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

___ CuLl

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Soil Extract Volume: Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Number TICs found: 9

___ CuLl

cAs NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

=:========:===== =======~=================~== ======== ============== =====

1. UNKNOWN 14.217 14 J

2. UNKNOWN 14.266 29 J

3. UNKNOWN HYDROCARBON 16.090 1200 J

4. UNKNOWN 16.574 15 J

5 . UNKNOWN 16.641 23 J

6 . UNKNOWN 16.835 33 J

7. UNKNOWN 17.144 43 J

8 . UNKNOWN 17.425 50 J

9. UNKNOWN 18.101 17 J

10.

11. I I I I

12. I I I I ,

13.4 1I----~---I~---- -~~--- I---

~~:-----1

1

'11--

17. ~11----1------ ---

~ ~ :

18. L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Ll------ J ----

21.

1

-----1·------ 22. ---I

23. 1 ----- ------- ---

24. ,1 _ 25. -~ ---- ------ ---

26.1 ---- ------- --- 27. _

28. 1---- -------1---

29 . ~ ---------.!---- 30. - --------

FORM I VOA-TIC

I

"

OLM03.0

\..134

TIERRA-A-018043
lA

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE31

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 303B8.06

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G Lab File ID: C25243.D

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: not dec.~

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/04/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Soil Extract Volume: ___ (uL) Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q CAS NO. COMPOUND

74-B7-3---------Chloromethane 24 U

74-B3-9---------Bromomethane 24 U

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 24 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 24 U

7S-09-2---------Methylene chlorJ.de - 24 U

67-64-1---------Acetone 81

7S-1S-0---------Carbon D~sulfJ.de 24 U

75-3S-4---------1,l-Dichloroethene 24 U

7S-34-3--~------l,l-Dichloroethane 24 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 24 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform - 24 U

lO7-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 24 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 24 U

71-55-6---------1,l,l-Trichloroethane 24 U

56-23-S---------Carbon Tetrachloride 24 U

7S-27-4---------Bromodichlorornethane 24 U

78-B7-S---------1,2-Dichloropropane 24 U

lO061-01-S------cis-l,3-Dichloropropene 24 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 24 U

124-4B-I--------Dibromochloromethane 24 U

_~$l~0-0--.5':'~_-= = =- -_-_-~#_l,2_=TJ:;:i.c;;:hlo_r_o_et;l].~l1e 24 U

71-43-2---------Benzene

- - - - - _. - . - -~-4 ·U

lOO61-02-6------trans-l,3-DJ.chloropropene 24 U

75-2S-2---------Bromoform -- 24 U

lOB-IO-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 24 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 24 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 24 U

79-34-5---------1,l,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 24 U

lOB-BB-3--------Toluene

-- 24 U

lOB-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 24 U

lOO-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 24 U

lOO-42-S------~-Styrene 24 U

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 24 U

FORM I VOA

:r

I

i

I

I

I

I

I,

I

t

I

i

i

V

OLM03.0

L 150

TIERRA-A-018044
1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

rb Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE31

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30388.06

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File.ID: C25243.D Sample wt/vol:

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/04/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 59

Soil Extract Volum~: ___ (uL) Soil Aliquot Volume: __ (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

Number TICs found: 0 (ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

==i~============ ============================

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME :89

2. 1------------- -'. I ----1'------- ---

4. I I

~: I 1'========--

7. I 1------ --....,..

8. 1 ---- ------ --

9. I 1-------

10. I

11. . 1 1------

12. I 1------ -~~

13. I I

15.4 . I ,============ --- _ I

16. I I ---I

17. 1 1 ,, 1

18. 1 1 11 __ 1

--H:u-j rl--'

22. I ---I

23. I \-----

24. I 1--

25. I I

26. 27. I 1-------

28. 1 1·--

29. I I

30. I j------ ---

-- 1 _-1------ --

RT EST. CONC. Q

========= ============= =====

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

I

..

". 2('\ l '151

TIERRA-A-018045
lA

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Level: (low/med) ..

5.0 (g/tttL)G

LOW

BSE32

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No. : Soo No. : BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30412.03

Lab File ID: L27058.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

jab Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOILSample wt/vol:

% Moisture: not dec. 24

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

___ CuLl

Dilution Factor: 1.0 GC Column:DB-624

CAS NO. COMPOuND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 13 U .J

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 13 U

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 13 U

75-0Q-3---------Chloroethane 13 U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlorl.de 13 U

67-64-1---------Acetone 130

75-15-0---------Carbon Disulfl.de 13 U

7S-35-4---------1,l-Dichloroethene 13 U

7S-34-3---------1,l-Dichloroethane 13 U

540-S9-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total)

-

13 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform 13 U

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 13 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 41

71-55-6---------1,l,l-Trichloroethane 13 U

S6-23-S---------Carbon Teerachloride 13 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 13 u

78-87-S---------1,2-Dichloropropane 13 U

10061-01-S------cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 13 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 13 U \

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 13 U

I

_:79-_QO_- 5-:.-_-_-_--:.-_-_-~.l J.-L4 :.·I~.:t:..ichloroethane 13 U

71-43-2---------Benzene -- -- - -- - --- - - -

__ T _ T T __ 13- - - - U

10061-02-6------trans-l,3·Vl.ch.l.oropropene__ 13 U

75-25-2---------Bromoform 13 U

10B-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 13 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 13 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 13

.

U

79-34-5---------1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 13 U

108-88-3--------Toluene ---

13 U

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 13 U

10Q-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 13 U

100-42-S--------Styrene 13 U

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 13 U \

I

'- FORM I VOA OLM03.0

\.155

TIERRA-A-018046
IE

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATI\~LY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

~. rb Name: SWL-TULSA

-'.

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE32

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30412.03

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: L27058.D

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: not dec. 24

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

___ (uL)

Dilution Factor: 1.0 GC Column:DB-624

Number TICs found: 2

Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

__ (uL)

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONCa Q

==============:= ==;===============:========= ======== ======:::;::-====== =====

I. UNKNOWN HYDROCARBON 16.086 800 J

2. UNKNOWN 16.520 7 J

3.

4. 1 I

5. I

I 1

6 . I

I I I

7. I

I I I

8 . I

I I I

9. I

I I I

10. I

-_.

I I II. I 1.2. I

i I I I

13. I

-- I I

14. 1 1

15. 1 I--~~

_Ji: - l I

~~ ~ I 11

22 . II ~~~~ ---- -~----- ---

23. _

24. -I ~~~ :I~~----------- ---- ------1 11

27. "I --

28. -I --

30. 29. .1.1 1====

1

. ________________________ - 1====_.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

j.nl 156-

TIERRA-A-018047
~A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Sample- wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G

BSE33

Contract: 68-DS-0026

SAS No. : SDG No. : BSE22.

Lab Sample ID: 30412.04

Lab File ID: L270S9.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

_1-....ab Name: SWL-TULSA

" I ~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix:- -<soil/water) SOIL

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: not dec ..@

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

Soil Extract Volume: ___ (uL)

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 43 U

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 43 U

7S-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 43 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 43 U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlor~ae 43 U

67-64-1---------Acetone J.fJ~ 4,jI.-

75-1S-0---------Carbon Disulf~de 43 U

75-3S-4---------1,l-Dichloroethene 43 U

75-34-3---------1,l-Dichloroethane 43 U

540-59-0------~-l,2-Dichloroethene (total) 43 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform - 43 U

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 43 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 43 U

71-55-6---------1,l,l-Trichloroethane 43 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 43 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 43 U

78-87-5---------1,2-Dichloropropane 43 U

lO061-01-5--~---cis-l,3-Dichloropropene 43 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 43 U

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 43 U

79-00-5---------1,l,2-Trichloroethane 43 U

71":43:..2--~;,.-.:----:.~=B'elt2:em:--------- - ---- - - - - - - - - -------43 -- - - -u

lO061-02-6------trans-l,3-D~chloropropene ___ 43 U

7S-2S-2---------Bromoform 43 U

lOB-IO-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 43 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 43 U

127-1B-4--------Tetrachloroethene 43 U

79-34-5---------1,l,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 43 U

10B-88-3--------Toluene

-- 43 U

lO8-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 43 U

lOO-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 43 ·U

lOO-42-5--------Styrene 43 U

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 43 u

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

~l 16~

TIERRA-A-018048
EPA SAMPLE NO. 1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS BSE33

jab Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-05-0026

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample 10: 30412.04

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File 10: L27059.D

Level: (low/med) Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 77

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

___ (uL) Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

Soil Extract Volume:

Number TICs found: 1

__ (uL)

CAS N-uMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ===~==========.============= ======== ============= =====

1. UNKNOWN HYDROCARBON 15.812 250 J

2.

3. I

4. I

I I I

5 .

1

I I

6 . I I

I

7 . I

I

8.

I I

I

9 . I 10. I

,

11. I I

12. 1 I I

13. 1

_ ...

14. I t

I I

I

I I

15. I I I

16.

~

.-

- -f - - - 17.

~8~

19.

. ~ - - - ---------- - -

20. 1

1

_

21. ---- ------ ---I

22.1 ---- 23·:1 ------ 24. ---II

25. 'I --

26. 'I ~--------- 27. 'I ----

28. _I ---------

29. 30. -.'\' ---I

--------------

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

l 165

TIERRA-A-018049
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

-Jab Name: SWL-TULSA

I

, Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE34

SAS No. : SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample 10: 30412.05

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G Lab File ID: L27060.D

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Mqisture: not dec.~

GC Column:OB-624 10: 0.53 (mm)

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

___ CuLl

Soil Extract Volume: ____ CuLl

CAS NO. Q

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 100 U

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 100 U

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 100 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 100 U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlor~de 10 J

67-64-1---------Acetone 660

75-15-0---------Carbon O~sulf~ae 19 J

75-35-4---------1,l-0ichloroethene 100 U

75-34-3-_-------1,l-0ichloroethane 100 U

540-59-0--------1,2-0ichloroethene (total) 100 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform

- 100 U

lO7-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 100 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 200

71-55-6---------1, 1,1-Trichloroethane 100 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 100 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 100 U

7B-87-5---------1,2-Dichloropropane 100 U

10061-01-5------cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 100 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 100 U

124-4B-I--------Oibromochloromethane 100 U

_7J~9A~~~~~~~~---1,l,2-Trichloroethane 100 U •

71- 43 -2------..::.: ·::Benzene - - - - - - - - .- - - -- - - - .. - - - --1-0-0 - - -a

10061-02-6------trans-1,3-D~chloropropene 100 U

75-25-2---------Bromoform --

100 U

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 100 U

59l-7B-6--------2-Hexanone 100 U

127-1B-4--------Tetrachloroethene 100 U

79-34-5---------1, 1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane 100 U

108-BB-3--------Toluene ---

100 U

10B-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 140

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 100 U

100-42-5--------Styrene 100 U

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 100 u \v

I

\...;, FORM I VOA OLM03.0

L 171

TIERRA-A-018050
1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-DS-0026

BSE34

Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: L27Q60.D Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: not dec. 90

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed:-08/0S/97

Soil Extract Volume:

1D: 0.53 (mm)

___ CuLl

Dilution Factor: 1.0 GC Column:DB-624

Soil Aliquot Volume: __ CuLl

Number TICs found: 4

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ================~=========== ======== ============= =====

l. UNKNOWN HYDROCARBON 15.735 91 J

2. UNKNOWN 15.928 180 J

3 . UNKNOWN ALKYL BENZENE 17.085 58 J

4 . UNKNOWN ALKYL BENZENE 17.356 92 J

5 . I 6 . I I I

7. I I I I

8 . I I I I

9.

10.

ll.

I

,

I

,

12. I I I

13. I I I

-- I I

14. 1 ,1 ~~~ ---

15. 1 _

i~:\ I !I--~= ------- ---

18. I

- -19-. - --- - - - -- - - - -~ - -,-..:.----- -:;;..=-=-------=--....-..--. ---~

~~ :-------------------- ---- ------ --

22 . ~ _

23. ----I

~~: 1============1,--

26. II ~ __ li

27. III III ~~: I ,------ ---'I 30'1 ,1-·-- . ,1-' '1-

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

lw 172

TIERRA-A-018051
lA

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE35

',abName: SWL-TULSA

I

Contract: 68-D5-0026

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 30412.06

sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G Lab File ID: L27062.D

Level: (low/med) LOW ..

% Moisture: not de~

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

Date Received: OB/Ol/97

Date Analyzed: OB/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Soil Extract volume: ____ (UL) Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q CAS NO. COMPOUND

,

I

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 83 U

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 83 U J

7S-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride B3 U

75-0Q-3---------Chloroethane 83 U

7S-09-2---------Methylene Chlor~de 8 J

67-64-1---------Acetone 230 '-'I

75-15-0---------Carbon Dl.sulfl.de 83 U

75-35-4---------l,l-Dichloroethene 83 U

75-34-3---------l,1-Dichloroethane 83 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 83 U

67-66-3---------Chloroforrn

- 83 U

lO7-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 83 U

7B-93-3---------2-Butanone 83 U

71-55-6---------1, 1,I-Trichloroethane 83 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 83 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 83 U

\ 78-87-5---------1,2-Dichloropropane 83 U

lOO61-01-5------cis-l,3-Dichloropropene 83 U

I

I

I

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 83 U

.

l24-48-l--------Dibromochloromethane 83 U

-

_79~OO:5---------1 1 2-Trichloroethane _ _ _ ._ _ ___ _ L :J _ _ _ _ ___• _______ • _ 83 U I

7l-43-2---------Benzene ..-.

. - - - ------- ---8-J- . - - . U I

10061-02-6------trans-l,3-Dl.chloropropene 83 U

i

I

75-25-2---------Bromoform --

83 U

,

108-10-l--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 83 U

i

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 83 U

127-l8-4--------Tetrachloroethene 83 .

U

79_34_5 _________ 1,l,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 12 J

108-88-3--------Toluene

-- 83 U

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 83 U

10O-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 83 U

lOO-42-5--------Styrene 83 U

l

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 83 U

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

r·22.' 185

TIERRA-A-018052
1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

- rb Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Contract: 68-05-0026

B8E35

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE2.2

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 30412.06

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: L27062.D Sample wt/vol:

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 88

Soil Extract Volume: ___ (uLl Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

__ (uL)

Number TICs found: 3

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

=~============c= ======:===================== ======== ============= =====

1. UNKNOWN HYDROCARBON 16.039 69 J

2. UNKNOWN HYDROCARBON 16.155 130 J

3 . UNKNOWN 17.137 100 J

4.

5. I ~ I I

6 . I II II I

7. I II I

I

8.

9. I I I

10. I II I I

1l. I I I I

12. I II I I

13. ! ,

14.

I

15.

16. 1 I I

17. I I I

18. I I I ~

j ~- - ~~-- --~----1- -- - - - - -------- I I Jl I

20.

2l. I I I I

22. I I I II

23. I I I I

I

I

24. I I I

25. I I I I

26.

_. ..

27.

28.

29. I I I I

30. I I I I

I I I I

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

l 186

TIERRA-A-018053
lA

VOLATILE ORGAl~ICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G

BSE36RE

Contract: 6B-D5-0026

SAS No. : SDG No. : BSE22.

Lab Sample ID: 30412. 07R.~

Lab File ID: L'27090.D

Date Received: OB/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

jab Name: SWL-TULSA

(] ~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matri~:-(soil/water) SOIL

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: not de~

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm) Dilution Factor: 1.0

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

Soil Extract Volume: ____ (uL)

..

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 25 U

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 25 U

I

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 25 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 25 U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlor1.de 25 U

67-64-1---------Acetone 29 ~

75-15-0-------~-Carbon D1.sulfide 25 U

75-35-4-------~-l,l-Dichloroethene 25 U

75-34-3---------1,l-Dichloroethane

'.. 25 U •

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total)

-

25 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform 25 U

lO7-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 25 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 25 U

71-55-6---------1, 1,1-Trichloroethane 25 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 25 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 25 U

78-87-5-----~---1,2-Dichloropropane 2S U

10061-01-S------cis-l,3-Dichloropropene 25 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene .

25 U

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 25 U

_J~~DQ-~~~~~~~~~~l~L~=Tr~G~loroethane 25 U

71-43 -2- ----- --'-Benzene --- -- ---- - - - - - - - - - ""2-S- ..-_. '-0

10061-02-6------trans-1,3-D1.chlOrOpropene 25 U

75-25-2---------Bromoform --

25 U

lOB-IO-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 25 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 25 U

127-1B-4--------Tetrachloroethene 25 U

79-34-5--------71, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 25 U

lO8-88-3--------Toluene

-- 25 U

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 25 U

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 25 U

100-42-5--------Styrene 25 U

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 25 U

:r

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

210

TIERRA-A-018054
___ CuLl

1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE36RE

T,ab Name: SWL-TULSA

I

I

'. .Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

I •.. ,,;

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 3v4k~.07RA

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: L27090.D

Level: (low/med) Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Djlution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 60

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

___ CuLl Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

Soil Extract Volume:

Number TICs found: 5

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONe. Q

18

14

20

15

43

==~====~======== ============================ ======== ============= ====;

75-18-3 6.166

12.482

15.122

16.620

17.130

FORM I VOA-TIC

NJ

J

J

J

J

OLM03.0

211

TIERRA-A-018055
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

lab Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE37

"Lab Code: SWOK Case' No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 30388.07

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: C25247.D

Sample wt/vol:

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

______ (uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/04/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 40

GC Column:DB-624

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 17 U..J

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 17 U

I

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 17 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 17 U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlorl.de 17 U

67-64-1---------Acetone 17 U

75-15-0---------Carbon Dl.sulfl.de 17 U

75_35-4---------1,1-Dichloroethene 17 U

7S-34-3---------1,1-Dichloroethane 17 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 17 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform

-- 17 U

lO7-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 17 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 17 U

71_55_6 _________ 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 17 U

56-23-S---------Carbon Tetrachloride 17 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 17 U

78-87-S---------1,2-Dichloropropane 17 U

I

10061-01-S------cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 17 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 17 U

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 17 U

.. 1-9---O-G-5-~-~~-----'" .,,~.1.., 2 -=.Trichlor.oethan..e 17 U

71-43-2---------Benzene

------ -

- - -17 - - - -

U

,-

10061-02-6------trans-1,3-Dl.chloropropene 17 U

7S-2S-2---------Bromoform ---

17 U I

lO8-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 17 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone I

17 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 17 U

79-34-5---------1, 1, 2, 2-Tetrachloroethane 17 U

108-88-3--------Toluene - 17 U

lO8-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 17 U

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 17 U

lOO-42-5-----~--Styrene 17 U

1330-2D-7-------Xylene (Total) 17 U \y

{ ,

'-.. FORM I VOA OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018056
1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

BSE37

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No. : SDG No. : BSE22

l.cro- Sample 1D: 30388.07

Lab File 1D: C25247.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed; 08/04/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

·Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: not dec. 40

Soil Extract volume:

1D: 0.53 (mm)

___ (uL)

GC Column:DB-624

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

Number TICs found: 0 (ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

=.~~:_~~~~====1-·---===:?:;~~=~======-===~~=--I==~:~~=~~~~~=I

~: I I I· I

.....

3. I

I I

4 . I

I

I

5. I 6. I 7 . I I

8. I I I

I 9. II I

10. I I

1l. I I I

12.

13. I I I

14. I I I

15. I I I

16. I I I

17. I I I

18.

..1.9~ _____ _ _T _ ~

- - .. - - - . I J

20. I

- - - - - .

I

2l. I I

22. I I

23. I

24. I

I I

25.

I I

26.

27.

28. I I I

29.

-_., ..-

I I I

30. I I I I

.1 I I .-.... I

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

I . '-..,:

p' '].11 '222

TIERRA-A-018057
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SA11PLE t-/O.

~ab Name: SWL-TULSA

I

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE38

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 3038B.08

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) G Lab File ID: C25245.D

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture7 not dec.~

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: OB/04/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

Soil Extract Volume: ___ (uL)

74-B7-3---------Chloromethane 21 U

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 21 U

75-01-4 --- -.-----Vinyl Chloride 21 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 21 U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlorl.de 21 U

67-64-1---------Acetone 21 U

75-15-0---------Carbon Dl.sulfl.de 21 U

75-35-4---------1,1-Dichloroethene 21 U

75-34-3---------1,1-Dichloroethane 21 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 21 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform -

21 U

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 21 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 21 U

71-55-6---------1,1,1-Trichloroethane 21 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 21 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 21 U

78-B7-5---------1,2-Dichloropropane 21 U

10061-01-S------cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 21 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 21 U

124-4B-1--------Dibromochloromethane 21 U

79-00-5---------1,l,2-Trichloroethane 21 U

- "7 i':43-:'2~ - ..:.----..:.:.:. :.-g-e-nzene----------- - -- - - ------_.~- ~- 21 - -

-u

10061-02-6------trans-1,3-Dl.chloropropene __ 21 U

75-25-2---------Bromoform 21 U

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 21 U

591-7B-6--------2-Hexanone 21 U

127-1B-4--------Tetrachloroethene 21 U

79-34-5---------1,l,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 21 U

108-BB-3--------Toluene -- 21 U

10B-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 21 U

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 21 U

100-42-5--------Styrene 21 U

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 21 U

-

I

}

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

f·232. ~ 225

TIERRA-A-018058
lE

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

I

~ab Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE38

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 30388.08

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: C25245.D Sample wt/vol:

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

___ (uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/04/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 53

GC Column:DB-624

Number TICs found: 5

Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug!L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

___ (uL)

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT ~ST. CONC. Q

=====~===;~===== =====~===============~====== ::::::======= ============= =====

1. UNKNOWN 12.640 52 J

2. UNKNOWN 12.66B 47 J

3. Cyclotetrasiloxane 14.827 1600 J

4. UNKNOWN 16.650 2200 J

5. UNKNOWN 18.463 98 J

6. I 7. I 1 I

8 . I I 1 I

9. I I I I

10. I I, I I

11-

12.

13.

·14. I I I

15. I I

16. I I

17

I

II

- ---L-is~----- ------t---------~~----1------ 

19. I =----l-- ~~: I 1- ~--I

22. I I I

23. I II 11--

24. jl ~~ ---- 25. ------ ---

26.

1

1 -------1

27. --

28. 1 ---- ~~: -I ------ ---I

• 1 ----- ------- I

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

L 226

TIERRA-A-018059
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE Nv.

, ~b Name: SWL-TULSA

I

Lab Code: SWOK Case No. : 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

sample· wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) ML

Level: (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-Ds-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30388.09

Lab File ID: L26952.D

% Moisture: not dec.

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/01/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Soil Extract Volume:

10 : o. 53 (mm)

____ {uL)

GC Column:OB-624

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 10 U

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 10 U

7s-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 10 U

7S-00-3---------Chloroethane 10 U

7s-09-2---------Methylene Chlor~de 10

67-64-1---------Acetone 10 U

7S-1S-0---------Carbon D~sulf~de 10 U

75-35-4---------1,1-Dichloroethene 10 U

75-34-3---------1,1-Dichloroethane 10 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 10 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform -- 3 J

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 10 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 10 U

71-55-6---------1,l,1-Trichloroethane 10 U

56-23-S---------Carbon Tetrachloride ·10 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 10 U

.

\

78-87-5-----~---l,2-Dichloropropane 10 U

10061-01-s------cis-l,3-Dichloropropene 10 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 2 J

!

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 10 U

_19= O.!t--5 - ~ - - - - - - -1 1 2-Trichloroethane _ _ ____ ~__ J _ L _______ .________ 10 U

71-43-2---------Benzene

_ ..

___ r ___ ~- - - -rcr -----0--

10061-02-6------trans-l,3-D~chloropropene 10 U

7s-25-2---------Bromoform ---

10 U

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 10 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 10 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 10 U

79-34-5---------1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 10 U

10B-88-3--------Toluene -- 10 U

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 10 U

I

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 10 U

100-42-S--------Styrene 10 U

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) le- u

I

;

I

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

246

TIERRA-A-018060
lE

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Matrix: (soi~/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 5.0 (g/mL) ML

BSE39

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No. : SDG No. : BSE22

Lab Sample 10: 30388.09

Lab File ID: L26952.D

',ab Name: SWL-TULSA

i

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

GC Column:DB-624 ID: 0.53 (mm)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/01/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: not dec.

Soil Extract Volume: ___ CuLl Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

__ CuLl

Number TICs found: 0

·_~~·~~~~··--I··----··;~~:~~·~··_-_·~~··..

2. I I I I I

~ : I III I I I

5. I I I I

6. I II I I I

7 . I ~ 1 I I

8 . I ~ I I

9. I II I I

i~: ~ I I

12. II II I I

13. I I I I

14. I I I I

15. I I I

16.

1 17.

1 18. _

.~ ~- -~ - ~ - ~ - ~

21. II 22. _

23. _

24, _

25,__ ---- 26, _

27. _

28._~~~~-

29._~~~~_

30._~~~ __

..

I :1 -, -

-- r- -

I I

I I

I

I I

I

I

I

I I I

I I

I I

I I I

-

I I

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

I ' '--

247

TIERRA-A-018061
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

~rab Name; SWL-TULS.~

I

Contract: 68-DS-0026

BSE41 F~

Lab Code: SWOK Case "No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: BSE~2

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER Lab Sample ID: 30388.10- -- -

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) ML

LOW

Lab File 1D: L26953.D Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: not dec.

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/01/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: o. S3 (mm)

____ (uL)

GC Column:DB-624

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 10 U J

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 10 U

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 10 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 10 U

75-09-2---------Methylepe Chlor~de 10

67-64-1---------Acetone 3 J

75-15-0---------Carbon Dl.sul£ide 10 U

75-35-4---------1,1-Dichloroethene 10 U

75-34-3---------1,1-Dichloroethane 10 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 10 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform - 3 J

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 10 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 10 U

71-55-6---------1,1,1-Trichloroethane 10 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 10 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 10 U

78-87-S---------1,2-Dichloropropane 10 U

10061-01-5------cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10 U

I 79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 10 U

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 10 U I

79-00-5---------1 1 2-Trichloroethane 10 U ________________ .____ ..1._L ____ ... L __ ... _~ ______

m ~ .. I

71-43-2---------Benzene ·----~~~~~l_o -----U ,

10061-02-6------trans-l,3-Dl.cnloropropene 10 U

\ 7S-2S-2---------Brornoforrn -- 10 U

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 10 U

I

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 10 U I

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 10 U I

79-34-5---------1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 10 U

I

108-88-3--------Toluene -- 10 U I

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 10 U ,

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 10 U

10O-42-S--------Styrene 10 U i

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) 10 u '"

\

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

... r-:;,':J"

o,,-'>l ...7'

TIERRA-A-018062
1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

"labName: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-DS-0026

BSE41

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

--Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 5.0

Lab Sample ID: 30388.10

(g/mL) ML Lab File ID: L26953.D

Level: (low/med) LOW Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/01/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec.

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

___ (uL) Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

___ (uL)

GC Column:DB-624

Number TICs found: 0

I

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME I===~:===

EST. CONC.

======~========= ============================ =============

1. I

2. I

I

I

3. I

I

4. I

I

5. I 6. I

7. I

I

B. I I

9. I

10. I

I

11. I

12. I

13. I

14. _

15. ----'1- 16 . --------~

17.

18.

__19.

20. 21. ~

22. ----

23 . ~ _

24. ----

25. _

26. ------------- ----

27 . ~

28. ----

29 . ~ ~ ------ 30. - ----

r==~==

I

-- - -

I I

I I

I I

II"

I I

I

-- - - -

FORM I VOA-TIC OLM03.0

('. 2'3+

TIERRA-A-018063
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

-ab Name: SWL-TULSA

;

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE42 F,,;:>

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER Lab-sample ID: 30412.08

Level: (low/rned) ...

5.0 (g/rnL)ML

LOW

Lab File 1D: L27146.D sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: not dec.

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/.97

Dilutjon Factor: 1.0

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

____ (uL)

GC Column:DB-624

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 10 U .:r

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 10 U

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 10 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 10 U

75-09"-2---------Methylene Chlorl.de 10 U

67-64-1---------Acetone 5 J

75-15-0---------Carbon Disulfl.de 10 U

75-35-4----_----1,1-Dichloroethene 10 U

75-34-3---------1,1-Dichloroethane 10 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 10 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform - 10 U

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 10 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 10 U

71-55-6---------1,l,l-Trichloroethane 10 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 10 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 10 U

78-B7-5---------1,2-Dichloropropane 10 U

10061-01-S------cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 10 U

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 10 U

79-00-5---------1 1 2-Trichloroethane 10 U

- - - - ._---- - - - - - - - - - -' - !- - - - 71-43 -2------- --Benzene - ------ -- -- - - - - - - ------1.e-- - - - U- -

10061-02-6------trans-1,3-Dl.chloropropene 10 U

75-2S-2---------Bromoform --

10 U

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 10 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 10 U

127-1B-4--------Tetrachloroethene 10 U

79-34-5---------1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 10 U

108-8B-3--------Toluene

-- 10 U

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 10 U

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 10 U

100-42-5--------Styrene 10 U \

1330-20-7-------Xylene (Total) I

10 U

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

260

TIERRA-A-018064
1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

lb Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE42

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 5.0

Lab Sample ID: 30412.08

(g/mL) ML Lab File ID: L27146,D

Level: (low/medl LOW Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Dilution Factor: 1,0

% Moisture: not dec.

Soil Extract Volume:

1D: 0.53 (mm)

___ luLl Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

___ luLl

GC Column:DB-624

Number TICs found: 0

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME ~ EST. CONC. Q

=====~========== ========%=====:=====~======= ::~===== ============= =====

l.

2 . I I 3. I I

4, I I I I

5 , I I I I

6 , I I I I

7,

8.

9 .

10, I Ii I I

1l. I I I I

12. I Ii I I

13. I I I I

14. .

IS. I

16. I

I

17. I I

18. I

_ ....

I I

~IT. ~

t

- - - - - .- - - - - -- ---- ___---t------ - - - - - - -

I

20.

21-

22.

23. I I I

24, I

-

I I

25, _

26. ---- ------- ---

27 ' 1 _

28. ----1------- ---I

2930,.-------1-------------- ----I ------- ---I

FORM I VOA-T1C OLM03.0

··...u·1 . ''\ .

..... ....

TIERRA-A-018065
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

TJab Name: SWL-TULSA

I

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE43RE

SAS No. ; SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample 10: 30388.11RP.

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File 10: L27050.D sample wt/vol:

Soil Extract Volume:

10: 0.53 (mm)

___ (uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Oate Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 21

GC Column:DB-624

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 13 U t:r

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 13 U

75-01-4---------Vinyl Chloride 13 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 13 U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlorl.de 13 U

67-64-1---------Acetone 13 U

75-1S-0---------Carbon Dlsulfl.de 13 U

75-35-4---------1,1-Dich1oroethene 13 U

75-34-3---------1,1-Dichloroethane 13 V

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 13 V

67-66-3---------Chloroform -- 13 V

lO7-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 13 V

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 13 V

71-55-6---------1,1,1-Trichloroethane 13 V

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 13 V

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 13 V

78-87-5---------1,2-Dichloropropane 13 V,

10061- 01-5- -"----cis-1, 3 -Dichloropropene 13 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 13 U

124-48-1--------0ibromochloromethane 13 U

79-00-5---------1,1,2-Trichloroethane 13 V

-7r-'!3 ~----;;.:;;;;;------;;.Benzene- - - -- - --- ----- ------ ----------B - - --U - .

10061-02-6------trans-1 3-Dl.cfiloroDropene 13 V

\

' .

7S-2S-2---------Bromoform --- 13 U

10B-IO-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 13 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone I

13 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 13 .

V

79-34-S---------1,l,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 13 V

10B-B8-3--------Toluene --- 7 J

10B-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 13 U

10O-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 13 U

10O-42-5--------Styrene 13 V

1330-20-7-----:-xylene (Total) 13 1

V Y

.!

FORM I VOA OLM03.0

r·ZLfO o 272

TIERRA-A-018066
1E

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NG.

,----,abName: SWL-TULSA

I

Contract: 68-05-0026 .

BSE43RE

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SOG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample 1D: 30388.11RA

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: L270S0.D sample wt/vol:

Soil Extract Volume:

10: 0.53 (mm)

___ CuLl

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 21

GC Column:DB-624

Number TICs found: 2

Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

__ (uL)

~=============~= ====~======================= ======== ============= =====

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

44

110

J

J

1. Cyclotetrasiloxane

2. UNKNOWN !

~ :-------------~------ ---- ------ --

5. 1 _

6. --

7. __ ---- 1 _

8. ~~

9. 1 ------ ~-

10. 11 ------- -~-

11. 1

1

---- ------~ ~--

12. I

~i: I 1--

i~:1------------, I 1--

19.1 I II 1-- ~20 .r - - - r---- ---II - - - - - - - -- ~ ~ -1- - I!

21. i

22. I

23. I

24. 'II ~--

~~:I 1--1

28 . ~~.--,:II~ ---- ------ ---I ~6:------1------------- ---- ------- ---

15.152

17.178

- - ,

FORM I VOA-T1C OLM03.0

r.z.'(/ 273

TIERRA-A-018067
1A

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE 1\'0.

'--ab Name: SWL-TULSA

I

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE44RE

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/wa'c-er-)-SOIL Lab Sample ID: 30412.09RA

Level: (low/rned)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: L27091. D

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: not dec. 21

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Soil Extract Volume:

ID: 0.53 (mm)

(uL)

----

Dilution Factor: 1.0 GC Column:DB-624

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soil Aliquot Volume: (uL)

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

74-87-3---------Chloromethane 13 U J

74-83-9---------Bromomethane 13 U

75-01-4---------vinyl Chloride 13 U

75-00-3---------Chloroethane 13 U

75-09-2---------Methylene Chlor~de 13 U

67-64-1---------Acetone 13 U

75-15-0---------Carbon Disulfide 13 U

75-35-4---------1,1-Dichloroethene 13 U

75_34_3 _________ 1,1_Dichloroethane 13 U

540-59-0--------1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 13 U

67-66-3---------Chloroform - 13 U

107-06-2--------1,2-Dichloroethane 13 U

78-93-3---------2-Butanone 13 U

71-55-6---------1, 1,I-Trichloroethane 13 U

56-23-5---------Carbon Tetrachloride 13 U

75-27-4---------Bromodichloromethane 13 U

78-87-5---------1,2-Dichloropropane 13 U

10061-01-5------cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 13 U

79-01-6---------Trichloroethene 13 U

124-48-1--------Dibromochloromethane 13 U

79-00-5---------1 1 2-Trichloroethane 13 U

_. _______ ~ __.~ _ ~ ~ __ t._.1 ~ ~ ___ ~__

71-43 -2- --------Benzene -- ------- - - ~~- - - --- -1-3- - -6

10061-02-6------trans-1,3-D~chloropropene 13 U

75-25-2---------Brornoform ---

13 U

108-10-1--------4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 13 U

591-78-6--------2-Hexanone 13 U

127-18-4--------Tetrachloroethene 13 U

79_34_5 _________ 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 13 U

10B-88-3--------Toluene

-- 13 U

108-90-7--------Chlorobenzene 13 U

100-41-4--------Ethylbenzene 13 U

100-42-S--------Styrene 13 U

1330-20-7-' ------Xylene (Total) 13 u .y

'-- FORM I VOA OLM03.0

293

TIERRA-A-018068
IE

VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

,- -,ab Name: SWL-TULSA

!

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE44RE

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS' No. : SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Lab Sample 1D: 30412.09R..~·-- --

Level: (low/med)

5.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: L27091.D

Sample wt/vol:

Soil Extract Volume:

I D: O. 53 (mm)

___ CuLl

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: not dec. 21

GC Column:DB-624

Number TICs found: 2

Soil Aliquot Volume:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

__ CuLl

:'..,-'.

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

=======~===~==== ==~~====~=======~===:======= ======== ============== =====

1. Cyclotetrasiloxane 15.124 32 J

2. UNKNOWN 17.122 100 J

3.

4. I I

5. I

I I I

6 . I

I I I I

~ :~------------------ ---------- --

9. _

10. ----I

11. . ------ ---I

12. ---- ---~--.!---

13. I I

14. II--~ 1-- 15. ------ --

16. I I I

i~: I I I

-~~:-- ------~f ----+-- --~

21. I I I

22. II I I

23. I I 24. _

25. _

26.

~~ :---------~----------

29._----- _

30.

I I

I I

I I

I I

I

I

I

\ .....J

FORM I VOA-T1C OLM03.0

L 294

TIERRA-A-018069
18-

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ~YSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE22

Contract: 68-D5-0026 ab Name: SWL-TULSA

,

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 2~601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30388.01

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Lab File 1D: T22951.D

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

1000 (g/mL) ML

LOW Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

"DateAnalyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: decanted: '~/N}_

:1LOOO(uL) Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

(Y/N) N PB$ 8.0 GPC Cleanup:

,

I .

~"

CAS NO. COMPOuND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

",

•

""

108-95-2---~----PhenoL lD r

U

.

111_~4_4________bis(2_Chl~oethyl)Ether 10 U

95-57-a---------2-chloro1

bOno1 1(1, -.

541-73-1--------1,3-Dich ~obenzene J

106_46_7________1,4_Dichl~obenzene /

..r

! 95_50_1_________1,2_D~chl~~obenzene -.

95-48-7---------2-Me~hYlEb§nol -

108-60-1--------2,2'-~ !§(l-Chloropropane) -

~j

106-44-5--------4-Metny p~nol

.,. ~ . -

621_64-7--------N-Nitroso-ai-n-propylamine .-

67-72-1---------Bexacnlor~ethane --

~i

98-95-3---------Nitrobenzdpe "J :

78-59-1---------Iso~h6ron._

.

U -

88-75-5---------2-N~t~Qph8Pol I

~~; U

105-67-9--------2 4-Dimethylphenol .:.0 U

111_91_1________bls(2-Chlo~oethO~)methane 10 U

120-83-2--------2,4-Dichlo~opheno --

10 U

120_82_1________1,2,4-TriChlorobenzene 10 U

~-~-2o_---g-...-----Naphthal-eB.e- --- - - - - - ---- -- - -~- - - - - __ J..o -----_Q -

106-47-8--------4-Chloroanil~ne 10 U

87-6B-3---------Hexachlo~obutadiene 10 u

59-50-7---------4-chloro~~-Methl1Phenol 10 U

91-57-6---------2-MethylnAphtha ene 10 U

77_47_4_________Hexachloroclclopentadiene 10 U

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Trieh orophenol --- 10 u

95_95_4_________2,4,5-T.iehlorophenol 25 U

91-58-7---------2-C~loron~1~thalene 10 U

88-74-4---------2-N~troan~ ~ne 25 U

131-11-3--------Dimeth~1~hthalate 10 U

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 10, U

606-20-2--------2 6-D~nit~otoluene 10 U

, i1' -' 99-09-2---------3-Nitroaft ~ne 25 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 10 U

\

"

i

;/

\

\ -

•I

;

FORM I 5V-1 OLM03.0

652

TIERRA-A-018070
1C

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ~YSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE22

p Name: SWL-TULSA

Contract: 68-D5-0026

)

.Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 256\01 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

% Moisture: decanted: C!/N)_

1000(uL)

Lab Sample -ID:~-30388.01

Lab File ID: T22951.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

sample wt/vol: 1000 (g/mL, ML

Level: (low/med) LOW

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 8.0

CAS NO. COMPouND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

..

."

51-28-5---------2 4-Dinitrophenol 25 u i.]

, .

100-02-7--------4-N~trophenol 25 U

132-64-9--~-----Dibenzofuran

10 U

121_14-2--------2,4-Dinitrotoluene 10 U

84_66-2---------Diethylphthalate 10 U

7005_72_3 _______ 4_Chlorophenyl-phenylether--- 10 U

B6-73-7---------Fluorene 10 tl

100-01-6--------4-Nitroanil~ne 25 .~

534_52-1--------4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 25 ..

B6_30_6 _________ N_Nitrosodiphen~lamine (1)== ~l) U

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether 1"0 iJ

118_74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene ---

.1'0 U

B7_86_5 _________ pentachlorophenol 25 U

85-01-B---------Phenanthrene 2

{

120-12-7--------Anthracene 10

86-74-8---------Carbazole 10 U I

"84_74-2---------Di-n-but~rphthalate 10 U I

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 3

_l~~~OO-~~~=~~~~pvrene 3 ~ J

B5_68_7 _________ Butylbenzllphthalate

- - - -- - - - - -10 - - -/11 I

91-94-1---------3,3"-Dieh orobenzidine 10 J 1

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 1

218-01-9--------Chrysene 2

117_Bl_7 ________ bis(2-Etfirlhexyl)pfitfialate 3

~ I

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate --- 10 .

205_99_2 ________ BenZo(b~fluoranthene 2 J

I

207-08-9--------Benzo(k fluoranthene 1 i1 I 50-32-B---------Benzo(alpyrene 1

~ 193-39-S--------Indeno( 2 3-cd)pyrene 0.6 \

53_70_3 _________ 0ibenz(a:hlanthracene 10 U

~

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h, )perylene 10 U

,

'.

(1) - Cannot-be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

.... 653

TIERRA-A-018071
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE22

J:> Name: SWL-TULSA

Contract: 68-D5-0026

r

. Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SOG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 1000 (g/mL) ML

Level: (low/med) LOW

Lab Sample ID: 30388.01

Lab File ID: T22951.D

Concentrated Extract Volume: 1000(uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: decanted: (Y/N)___

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 8.0

Number TICs found: 29

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC.

================ ============================ ======== =============

1. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.139 -3-

2. UNKNOWN 3.235 6

3. UNKNOWN 3.740 2

4. UNKNOWN 4.148 7

5. 3658-80-8 Trisulfide, dimethyl 4.351 3

i 6. UNKNOWN 4.974 2

7. 5756-24-1 Dimethyl tetrasulphide 6.165 4

8. UNKNOWN 6.616 2

9~ UNKNOWN 8.537 3

10. UNKNOWN 8.602 10

11. 143-07-7 Dodecanoic acid 8.774 3

12. UNKNOWN 9.782 2

13. 5325-97-3 Phenanthrene, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, 10.137 9

14. 544-63-8 Tetradecanoic acid 10.523 26

15. 10544-50-0 Sulfur, mol. (58) 11.070 3

16. UNKNOWN KETONE 11.671 3

~7.-- --~ ----- !I'e~ecanol- - ------- -- -------___1.l..•.1.6 ~ 6

18. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 12.036

~---------- 2

19. 57-10-3 Hexadecanoic acid 12.294 240

20. 10544-50-0 Sulfur, mol. (58) 13.185 37

21. 112-80-1 Oleic Acid 13.636 64

22. 57-11-4 Octadecanoic acid 13.743 46

23. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 15.031 -3

24. 57-10-3 Hexadecanoic acid 15.127

,

4

25. UNKNOWN 15.224 4

26. 112-88-9 1-0ctadecene 18.229 6

27. UNKNOWN 19.603 4

28. UNKNOWN 19.893 6

29. UNKNOWN PAB 21.288 ·S

30. -

I.~l 1=~'R

-rr.:T.t\ r

J

J

J:

NJ

J

NJ

J

J

J

NJ

J

NJ

NJ

NJ

J

J

-- - - J

NJ

NJ

NJ

NJ

J

NJ

J

NJ

J

J

J

I . l .

, , ~--

FORM I SV-TIC

r .Z'ib ~1 •

OLM03.0

654

TIERRA-A-018072
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE23

~b Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

j

.uab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 1000(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 303BB.02

Lab File ID: T22952.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:OB/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture:

1000 (g/mL) ML

LOW

decanted: (Y/N)___

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 7.2

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ugjL.or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

........

108-95-2--------Phenol

10 U

111_44_4 ________ bis(2-Chloroethyl)Ether 10 U

9S-s7-8---------2-chlorolhenol 10 U

541-73-1--------1,3-Dich orobenzene 10 U

106_46-7--------1,4-Dichlorobenzene 10 U

95_50_1 _________ 1,2_Dichlorobenzene 10 U

9S-4B-7---------2-MethYlEhenol 10 U

108-60-1--------2,2.-0;1 is (1-Chloropropane) 10 U

106-44-5--------4-Methy phenol O.B -s.

621_64-7--------N-Nitroso-di-n-propyl~ne __ 10 U

67_72-1---------Bexachloroethane 10 u

98-95-3---------Nitrobenzene 10 U

78-S9-1---------Iso~horone 10 U

BB-7S-S---------2-N~trophenoI 10 U

105-67-9--------2,4-Dimethylphenol 10 U

111_91-1--------bis(2-Chloroethoxylmethane 10 U

120_83_2 ________ 2,4-Dichlorophenol -- 10 U

120_B2_1 ________ 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 10 U

- -9-l-2-O---3-~=~-~...~"'"-~htha' ena

10 U

106-47-B--------4-Chloroanil~ne

--- ----- 1.0 - -- -u87_6B-3---------Bexachlorobutadiene 10 U

59_50-7---------4-Chloro-3-Methrlphenol 10 U

91-S7-6---------2-Methrlnaphtha ene 10 U

77-47-4---------Hexach oroCrClopentadiene 10 U

8B-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 10 U

95-95-4---------2,4,s-Trichloro 1

henol 25 U

91-s8-7---------2-chloronalhtha ene 10 U

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 25 U

131-11-3--------Dimeth~lhhthalate 10 U

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 10 U

606_20_2 ________ 2,6-D~nitrotoluene 10 U

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline ---_. 25 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 10 U

/

!

'-

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

734

TIERRA-A-018073
lC

SEMIVOLATILB ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE23

rb Name: SWL-TULSA

contract: 68-D5-0026

J

.&JabCode: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER Lab Sample ID: 30388.02

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture:

1000 (g/mL) ML

LOW

decanted: (Y/N)___

Lab File ID: T22952.D

Concentrated Extract Volume: 1000(uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0 Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 7.2

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

51-28-5---------2 4-Dinitrophenol 25 U

, , 25 100-02-7--------4-N~trophenol U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran 10 U

121-14-2--------2,4-Dinitrotoluene 10 U

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate 10 U

7005_72_3 _______ 4_Chlorophenyl-phenylether-- 10 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 10 U

100-01-6--------4-Nitroan~l~ne 25 U

534_52_1 ________ 4,6_Dinitro-2-methylphenol 25 U

86-30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphen~lamine (1)-- 10 U

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 10 U

118-74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene 10 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 25 U

85-01-8---------Phenanthrene 1 ~

120-12-7--------Anthracene 10 U

86-74-8---------Carbazole ,10 U

84-74-2---------Di-n-but~lphthalate 10

~

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 2

.~J29-0~-0~~~~~~~~~rene 3 ~

85-6S-7---------Buty1benzIlphthalate

- ---- - - -- ---1 -_._-~-

91-94-1---------3,3'-Dich orobenzidine 10 U

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 1

~'

218-01-9--------Chrysene 2

117-81-7--------bis{2-Ethilhexyl)pfitfialate 3 ' -J.:

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate --

10 U ...

'205-99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene 21 ;

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2:

50-32-8---------Benzo(a)pyrene 1 'i:J.

193-39-5--------I~deno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.8 "'1J-."

53-70-3---------D~benz(a,h}anthracene 10 U

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h,1)perylene 0.9 J

-

(1) - Cannot_be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

735 ,",

TIERRA-A-018074
lF EFA SAMPLE NO.

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS I. BSE23

~b Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-05-0026 --------------

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 1000(uL)

Lab sample ID: 30388.02

Lab File ID: T22952.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water)-WATERSample wt/vol: 1000

Level: (low/med) LOW

(g/mL) ML

% Moisture: decanted: (.Y/N)_

Injection Volume: 2.0(UL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 7.2

Number TICs found: 34

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

CAS NUMBER COMPOqND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ =============-============== -==:===== ============= ==-==

1. UNKNOWN ALKENE 3.039 370 J

2. Furaldehyde 3.103 6 J

3. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.168

.

-- ...u.n.

4. UNKNOWN 3.264 12 J

5. UNKNOWN -3.994 ..... JS

i

6. UNKNOWN -4.027 2

7. Propene, -trichloro- 4.155 9 J

8. UNKNOWN 4.348 9 J

9. UNKNOWN 4.585 3 J

10. UNKNOWN 4.735 2 J

11- UNKNOWN 4.971 4 J

12. UNKNOWN 5.046 3 J

13. 65-85-0 Benzoic Acid 5.722 2 NJ

14. UNKNOWN 6.109 3 J

15. 5756-24-1 Dimethyl tetra sulphide 6.162 3 NJ

16. UNKNOWN 6.613 3 J

___~'L.._____________ JrnKNO~ _______ 7.182 2 J

18. UNKNOWN ----------- -

J .386 - -- -- - - ---- - -----z - - - -J

19. 101660-61- Geranyl nitrile 7.676 4 NJ

20. Beptanone, -diethyl-tetrame 8.406 2 J

21- UNKNOWN 8.599 4 J

22. UNKNOWN 9.060 2 J

23. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 9.146 3 J

24. 544-63-8 Tetradecanoic acid 10.509 4 NJ

25. UNKNOWN 11.132 3 J

26. UNKNOWN KETONE 11.196 2 J

27. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 12.033 3 J

28. 57-10-3 Hexadecanoic acid 12.184 17 NJ

29. 10544-50-0 Sulfur, mol. (S8) 13.150 12 NJ

30. 112-80-1 Oleic Acid 13.557 19 NJ

.-_.-

FORM I SV-TIC

j" z&{'f

... .

OI.l,.M03

736

TIERRA-A-018075
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE23

i3-b Name: SWL-TULSA

i

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30388.02

sample wt/vol: 1000

Level: (bow/med) LOW

(g/mL) ML Lab File ID: T22952.D

% Moisture: decanted: (Y/N)_

1000 (uL) .

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 7.2

Number TICs found: 34

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

===========~==== ============================ ======== ============= :=====

1- 57-11-4 Octadecanoic acid 13.718 10 NJ

2. 3234-85-3 Tetradecanoic acid, tetradec 18.795 60 NJ

3. UNKNOWN 19.611 6 J

4. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 21. 318 7 J

J 5. I

I

I

I

I

------ - -

FORM I SV-TIC

r' Z "'0

.-.

TIERRA-A-018076
EPA SAMPLE NO.

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANI~~ AIJ:~YSIS DATA SHEET

Jb Name: SWL-TULSA

lab Code: SWOK Case No.:

Mat-rJ.x:(soil/water) WATER

sample wt/vol: 1000 (g/~'~

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: decanted:

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CAS NO. COMPOUND

·n

108-95-2--------Phenol

111-44-4--~-----bis(2-·~C-hI~o-r-(

95-57-8---------2-Chloropbel

S41-73-1--------1,3-Dich~c

106-46-7--------1,4-Dichlo rc

9S-S0-1---------1,2-Dichlorc

95-48-7---------2-MethylpheI

108-60-1--------2,2'-oxybis(

106-44 -5--------4-Methy lpher.

621-64-7--------N-Nitroso-di

67-72-1---------Bexachlor~.t

98-95-3---------NitrobenZent.

78-59-1---------Iso~horone

88-75-5---------2-N~troph.llc.

105-67-9--------2,4-Dime~hyJ

111-91-1--------bis(2-Chlorc

120-83-2--------2,4-Dichlor c

120-82-1--------1,2,4-Tr!ch~

i-20 3 ---!faph'!:h~~ -- ~

106-47-8--------4-Chloroani ..

87-6B-3---------Bexach~orob·

59-S0-7---------4-Chloro-3-r

91-57-6---------2-Methy~napl

77-47-4---------BexachlarOC·.

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Trl~h~

95-95-4---------2,4,5-~~!oh.

91-58-7---------2-Chloronapl

88-74-4---------2-Nitr6~Ai~~

131-11-3--------Dimeth htrYlt.

208-96-8--------Acenal?hb-nylt

606-20-2--------2,6-D~nitrot

99-09-2---------3-Nitroa~il

83-32-9---------Acenapht~.n:

BSE26

:tract: 68-D5-0026

~;~SNo.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30388.03

Lab File ID: T22950.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:Oa/01/97

ate Analyzed: 08/05/97

'ilution Factor: 1.0

..~"'tATIONUNITS:

.~.=ug/Kg) UG/L Q

_. -- . _.

.. -.

10 U

10 U

."

10 U

...·_c 10 U

..

10 U

10 U

10 U

.~~pane) 10 U

,

10 U

;.:..1ll.ne 10 U

-

-

10 U

10 U

10 U

-

10 U

'..~ethane_

10 U

10 U

-

10 U

.:.ene 10 U

- _ ..

10 U

- - -- - - - - - - - -1"0' - - --u _i

I

_e 10 U •

.;.;henol

,

10 U

I

ne 10 U I

.:ntadiene 10 U I

.enol - 10 U I

-_enol 25 U

I

I

=ne 10 U

25 U

.S 10 U

10 U

,

_~ne 10 U I

--

25 U ,

·10 U·

.

."J-

,em; - 5V-1 OLM03.0

i

\._~-

lilt" 806

('. 'zsr

TIERRA-A-018077
1C

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE26

p Name: SWL-TULSA

Contract: 68-D5-0026

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

% Moisture: decanted: (Y/N)_

1000 (uL) .

Lab Sample ·ID~-30388.03

Lab File 1D: T22950.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

sample'wt/vol: 1000 (g/mL) ML

Level: (low/med) LOW

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 7.8

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

51-28-5---------2 4-Dinitrophenol 25 U .J

, .

100-02-7--------4-N~trophenol 25 U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran 10 U

121_14_2 ________ 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 10 U

84_66_2 _________ Diethylphthalate 10 U

7005_72-3-------4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether-- 10 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene

10 U

100-01-6--------4-Nitroan~l~ne 25 U

534_52_1 ________ 4

,6_0initro-2-methylphenol 25 U

86_30_6 _________ N-NitrosOdiphen~lamine (1)-- 10 U

l01-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 10 U

118_74_1 ________ Bexachlorobenzene 10 U

87_86_5 _________ Pentachlorophenol 25 U

85-01-8---------Phenanthrene 10 U

120-12-7--------Anthracene 10 U

86-74-8-----~---Carbazole 10 U

84_74-2---------0i-n-buttlphthalate 10 U

i

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 0.9 ;:J-

, ? Q -.o~":-O_-~~:::"~~_=F.yrene 0.8 ~ \

8s-68-7---------ButylbenZIlphthalate :

---- ------lfr- i

---6 i

91-94-1---------3,3'-Oich orobenzidine 10 U l

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 10 U

J

218-01-9--------Chrysene 10

~

117_S1-7--------bis(2-Etbrlbexyl)Phthalate

I

1 1

117-84-0--------oi-n-octI phthalate -- 10 U t

205-99-2--------Benzo(b) luoranthene 10 U i

207_08_9 ________ Benzo(k)fluoranthene 10 U ;

50-32-B---------Benzo(a)pyrene 10 U ..1,

193-39-5--------Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 10 U I

53_70_3 _________ Dibenz(a,h}anthracene 10 U !

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h,~)perylene 10 U .,'

I

-

~.

(1) - Cannot_he separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

.... 807

TIERRA-A-018078
EPA SAMPLE NO.

1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS BSE26

lb Name: SWL-TULSA

1 '.Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG ,No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 1000(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.03

Lab File ID: T22950.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 1000 (g/mL) ML

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: decanted: (Y/N)___

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 7.8

Number TICs found: 14

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/~ or ug/Kg) UG/L

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONe. Q

================

=====-====================== ====-=== ============= ======

1. UNKNOWN 3.019 270 J

2. UNKNOWN 3.245 2 J

3. UNKNOWN . 3.996 ·5',=,,--SB

4. UNKNOWN 4.114 4 J$

5. UNKNOWN 4.146 10 Jp"

) 6. UNKNOWN

. 4.361 5 J

7. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 9.137 3 J

8. UNKNOWN . 9.770 2 J

9. 57-10-3 Hexadecanoic acid 12.164 17 NJ

10. 10544-50-0 Sulfur, mol. (S8) 13.130 5 NJ

11. 301-00-8 9, 12, 15-0ctadecatrienoic aci 13.570 14 NJ

12. 57-11-4 Octadecanoic' acid 13.699 6 NJ

13. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 18.775 2 J

14. UNKNOWN 19.881 2 J

15. -I

16. 1

fI

17.~~~~~~~~~~~- ---- ~ t·~

18. _I ------=~-:I=

20.-------\-------==---- 19. 1---

21. -I------~~---- ---- ------1,

22. -I --

~~: :1 \==;

25. 26.------1

27. ._~II~~--------- II

28. I

29. --=, I~--I

30. II 1---'

1_-= ,_1_------------ ----1--==-- ---

FORM I SV-TIC

p.Z.53

(

\ .

--...

...

TIERRA-A-018079
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS OATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE27

Lb Name: SWL-TULS~ ..

I

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-05-0026

SAS No.: SOG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample 10: 30388.04

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 52

30.0 (g/mL) G·

LOW

Lab File ID: V1835S.D

decanted: (Y/N) N

SOO(uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/0l/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

108-9S-2--------Phenol 690 U

....

.J

111_44_4 ________ bis(2-Chloroethyl)Ether 690 U

9S-S7-8---------2-chloro1

henol 690 U

S41-73-1--------1,3-0ich orobenzene 690 U

106_46-7--------1,4-Dichlorobenzene 690 U

9S_S0-1---------1,2-0ichlorobenzene 690 U

9S-48-7---------2-MethylEhenol 690 U

108-60-1--------2,2f-o~ is (1-Chloropropane) 690 U

106-44-S--------4-Methy phenol 690 u

621_64-7--------N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 690 U

67_72-1---------Bexachloroethane --

690 U

98-95-3---------Nitrobenzene 690 U

78-59-1---------Iso~horone 690 U

88-7S-S---------2-N~trophenol 690 U

10S-67-9--------2,4-Dimethylphenol 690 U

111_91_1 ________ bis{2_Chloroethoxy)methane 690 U

120-83-2--------2,4-Dichlorophenol --

690 U

120_82-1--------1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 690 U

91 20-J---------Naobtha1 ene

690 U

106-47-8--------4-Chloroaniline

---------ogcr ----U - -

87_68_3 _________ Bexachlorobutad~ene 690 U

S9-S0-7---------4-ChlorO-3-MethrlPhenol 690 U

91-57-6---------2-Methylnaphtha ene 42. '3",

77_47_4---------Bexachlorocrclopentadiene 690 U '.

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 690 U

9S-9S-4---------2,4,S-Trichloro 1henol 1700 U

91-S8-7---------2-Chlorona 1htha ene 690 U

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 1700 U

131-11-3--------0imethhlhhthalate 690 U

208-96-8------~-Acena~ t ylene 690 U

1

606-20-2--------2,6-D~nitrotoluene 690 u

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 1700 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 85 -s:..

FORM I SV-l OLM03.0

'lA. 836

TIERRA-A-018080
1C

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ~YSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE27

lb Name: SWL-TULSA

Contract: 68-05-0026

4

"';abCode: SWOK Case No.: 2.'!it601SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

decanted: ~<fJ{/N) N500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.04

Lab File ID:, V18355.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soiljwrter) -SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 52

30.0 (g/~) G

LOW

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y

CAS NO. COMPOUNO

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) OG/KG Q

Sl_28-5---------2,4-Dinit~ophenol 1700 U .J

100-02-7--------4-Nitropbenol 1700 U.

132-64-9--------0ibenzsfuran 690 U

121_14_2 ________ 2,4_Dinit~otoluene 690 U

84_66_2 _________ Diethylph~~alate 690 U

700S_72_3 _______ 4_Chlorop~nyl-phenylether-- 690 U

B6-73-7---------Fluorene 92 J

100-01-6--------4-NitroanIl.ne 1700 U

534_52_1 ________ 4,6_Dinit~o-2-methy~phenol-- 1700 U

86-30-6---------N-Nitr,osodiphe~Ll~ne (1)__ 690 U

101-S5-3--------4-Bromoph8nyl-p enylether ___ 690 U

118_74_1 ________ Hexachlorobenzene 690 U

87-86-S---------pentachlorophenol 1700 U

8S-01-8---------Phenanthr.pe 12{}li

120-12-7--------Anth~acen.

2-~. "S'

B6-74-8---------Carbazole -

l't:.- ~

B4_74_2 _________ Di_n_but~rphthaiate 7'"

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 2:0'

l29-00-0--------Pyrene 2:

85-6B-7---------ButylbenzIlpbthaiate l U

91-94-1---------3,3'-Dich orobenzidine ( U

56-S5-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 1

21B-01-9--------Chrysene 1

..._-

117_81_7 ________ biS(2-EthIlhexyl)phthalate u

.,----J I

117-84-0--------Di-n-octI phthalate --

'J90 U

I

!

205_99_2 ________ Benzo(h)luoranthene 1000 I

I

207_0B-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 930

50-32-8---------BenZO(a)~~ene 1000

193-39-S--------Indeno(l, ,3-cd)pyrene 780

53-70-3---------nibenZ(ahh}anthracene 250 ~

191-24-2--------Benzo(9, ,1)perylene 880

-

1

(1) - Cannot be separated trom Diphenylamine

rORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

r·Z 5"f ... 837

TIERRA-A-018081
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE27

b Name: Sl-7L-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

Jab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample 1D: 30388.04

Lab File ID: V18355.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt /vol :

Level: (lQw/med)

% Moisture: 52

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N .

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. 0

================ ============================ ======== ============= :=====

1- UNKNOWN 2.762 37000 J

2. 141-79-7 3-Penten-2-one, 4-methyl- 2.794

3. UNKNOWN ALCOHOL 2.859 =t~

4. UNKNOWN 2.956 38000 I J~'

5. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.052 ~~...... !~JAB. --

1

6. UNKNOWN 3.924 780 J

7. UNKNOWN 4.333 750 J

8. 464-48-2 Bicyclo[2.2.1]heptan-2-one, 4.990 1400 NJ

9. UNKNOWN 7.971 480 J

10. UNKNOWN PAB 11.447 420 J

11- Be1tadecanol 12.383 1100 J

12. 10544-50-0 Su fur, mol. (S8) 12.523 1800 NJ

13. Benzo[]naphtho[]furan 13.158 . 550 J

14. 11B-Benzo[]fluorene 13.697 650 J

15. Pyrene, methyl- 13.890 440 J

16. UNKNOWN AMIDE 14.450 6100 J

17. . - - Rexanedioic acid, 14.622 1700 J

18. UNKNOWN PAB 16.193 480 J

19. 192-97-2 Benzo[e]pyrene 17.851 640 NJ

20. unkriown 18.400 420 J

21- UNKNOWN 18.938 390 J

22. UNKNOWN 19.153 740 J

23. UNKNOWN 19.336 400 J

24. UNKNOWN 19.444 470 J

25. UNKNOWN 19.896 460 J

26. UNKNOWN 19.950 590. J

27. UNKNOWN 20.294 650 J

28. UNKNOWN 20.348 390 J

29. UNKNOWN 20.520 420 J

30. UNKNOWN PAR 20.692 2700 J

-.-

FORM I SV-TIC

r· 2 '5"G

", ~ OLZW3' i

TIERRA-A-018082
1F

SEMIVOLATILB ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE27

J.b Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

~ t ..~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.04

Lab File ID: V1a355.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

--Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: 52 decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection volume: 2.0{uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONe. Q

================ ============================ ======== ============= :=====

1. Unknown 20.778 490 J

2. UNKNOWN PAB 21.316 430 J

3. 'UNKNOWN 21.532 600 J

4. UNKNOWN 21.596 410 J

5. UNKNOWN 22.027 870 J

I 6. J 7.

a.

9. 10. 1 I

11. 1---- -~=---,I--

12. I,

13. 11----

ti: I

1'1. I 18. _

19. I

20·_----'1------------

21- 22.-----1--------~-~~-

24.3 '\-------------

25. '1--------====--

26. 'I 27. _'II=~--------- I

28. _~ -_- ---- ------- ---I! - -------1..;..· --II

~9. .1 - 1--

o. .1 \--

t

I

I

I

I

I

II

II i

'I I

FORM I SV-TIC

P ¥ Z~1-

OLM03.0

f'- 839

TIERRA-A-018083
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SBEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE28

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

J~ab Code: SWOK Case No.~ 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wtjvol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-DS-0026

SAS No.: SOG No.: BSE.22 ':

% Moisture: 48 decanted: (Y/N) N

Lab Sampi~ ID:-30388.0S

Lab File ID: V183S6.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume: SOO(uL)

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ugjKg) UGjKG

108-9S-2--------P henol

630 U

111_44-4--------bis(2-Chloroethyl)Ether 630 U

95-S7-8---------2-Chloro 1

henol 630 U

S41-73-1--------1,3-Dich orobenzene 630 U

106_46_7 ________ 1,4_Dichlorobenzene 630 U

95_S0_1 _________ 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 630 U

9S-48-7---------2-MethYlbhenol 630 U

108-60-1--------2,2.-0~ is(l-Chloropropane) 630 U

106-44-5--------4-Methy phenol 630 u

621_64_7 ________ N_Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 630 U

67_72_1 _________ Bexachloroethane -- 630 U

98-9S-3---------Nitrobenzene 630 U

78-59-1---------Iso~horone 630 U

88-75-S---------2-N1trophenol 630 U

105-67-9--------2 4-Dimethylphenol 630 U

111_91_1 ____ ~___ bls(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 630 U

120-83-2--------2,4-Dichlorophenol --

630 U

120-82-1--------1, 2, 4-Trichlorobenzene 630 U

9l-20-3---------Naphthalene 630 U

106-47-a--------4-Chloroanl1ine

- - 639 U

87_68_3 _________ Bexachlorobutadlene 630 U

S9_S0-7---------4-Chloro-3-MethrlPhenol 630 U

91-57-6---------2-Methylnaphtha ene 630 U

77-47-4---------Hexachlorocrclopentadiene 630 U

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 630 U

9S-9S-4---------2,4,S-Trichloro 1

henol 1600 U

91-S8-7---------2-Chlorona 1htha ene 630 u

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 1600 U

131-11-3--------DimethhlEhthalate 630 U

20B-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 97 !

606-20-2--------2,6-D1nitrotoluene 630 u

99_09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 1600 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 130 ~

I

\...;

FORM I SV-1

p.25f

Q

\

I

I

'I

i

i,

•

I

I•I

OLM03.0

906

TIERRA-A-018084
ab Name: SWL-TULSA

J ~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

1C

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE2B

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30388.05

sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 48

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Lab File 10: V18356.D

Concentrated Extract Volume: SOO{uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0 Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(uq/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

...

)

51_28_5---------2,4-Dinitrophenol 1600 U

100-02-7--------4-Nitrophenol 1600 U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran 44 J

121-14-2--------2 4-Dinitrotoluene 630 U

84_66_2 _________ D~ethylphthalate ! 630 u

7005_72_3 _______ 4_Chlorophenyl-phenylether __ 630 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 79 J

100-01-6--------4-Nitroan~line 1600 U

534_52_1 ________ 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 1600 U

86_30_6 _________ N_Nitrosodiphen~lamine (1)-- 630 U

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 630 U

118-74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene ----

630 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 1600 U

85-01-8---------Phenanthrene 840

120-12-7--------Anthracene 230

~

86-74-8---------Carbazole 150

84-74-2---------Di-n-butblpfithalate 150 ~

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 1700

129-QO-0-~~~----~yr~ne 1800

8S-68-7---------Butylbenzrlphtfialate--

- . 7ee

91-94-1---------3,3'-Dich orobenzidine 630 U

56-5S-3---------Benzo (a)anthracene 940

218-01-9--------Chrysene .. 1200

117_81_7 ________ bis{2_Etfirihexyl)pfitfialate ....~,··r - .-.' .. ;-~ "1:i"

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate -- 110 's:

205-99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1100

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1100

50-32-8---------Benzo(a}pyrene 1200

193-39-5--------I~deno(lt2,3-cd)pyrene 920

53_70_3 _________ D~benz(a,h}anthracene 370 J.

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h,~)perylene 1200

I

;

:v

~ .~-v--J-I fr,-y.-,: f3SQ~JlL

(1) - Canno~ be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

r' z0f #f • 907

TIERRA-A-018085
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE28

ab Name: SWL-TULSA

,

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-05-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab sample ID: 30388.05

Lab File ID: V18356.D

% Moisture: 48 decanted: (Y/N) N

500(uL}

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL}

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

{ug/L or ug/Kg} UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ============================ ======== ============= ======

1. 141-79-7 :3-Penten-2-one, 4-methyl- 2.784 1c.nn

2. 625-33-2 3-Penten-2-one 2.945 9900 NJ

3. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.053 ~~n

4. 0-00-0 Decahydro-4,4, 8,9, 10-pentame 6.669 560 NJ

5. 0-00-0 Decahydro-4,4, 8,9, 10-pentame 7.121 600 NJ

} 6. Decahydro-pentamethylnaphtha 7.444 860 J

7. 7704-34-9 Sulfur 12.513 1500 NJ

8. UNKNOWN AMIDE 14.450 7300 J

9. Bexanedioic acid, ester 14.623 1100 J

10. UNKNOWN PAH 16.183 1200 J

11- Unknown 16.818 530 J

12. UNKNOWN 17.550 440 J

13. UNKNOWN 17.658 840 J

14. UNKNOWN 17.722 460 J

15. 192-97-2 BenZO~e]pyrene 17.851 990 NJ

16. Tetra ecanoic acid, ester ! 17.991 710 J

17. J.9.B~55-0 __ _Peryle ne 18.077 570 NJ

18. UNKNOWN --Hf.174 470 J

19. UNKNOWN 18.529 580 J

20. UNKNOWN 18.745 410 J

21- UNKNOWN 18.884 890 J

22. UNKNOWN 18.9281 870 J

23. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID ESTER 19.035 630 J

24. UNKNOWN 19.337 1300 J

25. UNKNOWN PAH 19.552 790 J

26. Unknown 19.767 620 J

27. UNKNOWN 19.896 940 J

28. UNKNOWN 19.971 920 J

29. UNKNOWN 20.187 460 J

30. UNKNOWN 20.294 500 J

-

FORM I 5V-TIC

(>- z.60

OLM03.0

908

TIERRA-A-018086

t1"
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE28

ab Name: SWL-TULSA

j

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/Ined) LOW

Contract: 68-DS-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample 1D: 30388.05

Lab File 1D: V18356.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: 48 decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONe. Q

================ _~__========_==============s --====== =-============== =====

1. UNKNOWN

I 20.370 750 J

2. UNKNOWN 20.477 540 J

3. UNKNOWN 20.789 430 J

4. UNKNOWN 20.994 620 JB

l

5. UNKNOWN 21.220 480 J

~ 6. I 7. I

I I

8. I

'I I I

9. I

I

I

I

10. I I 11. I 12. I

I I I I

13. I

I I 1 1

14. 1 I I

15. 1_

i~: ~,:1- ---~ ------- ---

18. 19. '1------------- -~~- ------ --

20. '1-----------=- ---- ------ --

21.

22. '\ 23. '1--------==--- ---- ------ --

24. 'I 25. I--~~==------ ------ ---I

26. :1

1

, ---- 27. ~ ---------1

28. _II I ------

29. ,--

30.] ,I --

I

,1---- ------- ---

_______ ------- 1_--- ------- ---

FORM I SV-TIC

f' 1."1

OLM03.0

.1I. 509

TIERRA-A-018087
lB

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE29

b Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water)-SOIL

Sample wt /vol :

Level: (l~/med)

% Moisture: 32

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

SAS No. : SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30412.01

Lab File ID: V18399.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

decanted: (Y/N) N

SOO{uL)

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0{uL}

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.4

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

108-95-2--------Phenol r 520 I

111_4~-4--------bis{2-Chloroethyl)Ether I 480 U

9S-S7-8---------2-chloro1

henol I 480 U

S41-73-1--------1,3-Dich orobenzene I 480 U

106_46_7 ________ 1,4_D;chlorobenzene I 480 U

95_50-1---------1,2-D~chlorobenzene I 480 U

9S-48-7---------2-MethylEhenol I

480 U

108-60-1--------2,2'-0;1 is(l-Chloropropane)! 480 U

106-44-S--------4-Methy phenol 480 u

621_64_7 ________ N_Nitroso-di-n-propylam1ne I 480 U

67-72-1---------Bexachloroethane --

480 U

98-95-3---------Nitrobenzene 480 U

78-59-1---------Iso~horone I

480 U

8a-75-S---------2-N~trophenol 480 U

10S-67-9--------2t

4-Dimethylphenol I

480 U

111-91-1--------b1S(2-Chloroethoxy)methane I

480 U

120-83-2--------2 4-Dichlorophenol --

480 U

, .

120-82-1--------1,2,4-Tr1chlorobenzene 480 U

91~20-3~----~---Na~hthalene 480 U

106-47-8--------4-Cn~oroanil1ne--

- - - - ----480 U

87-68-3---------Hexachlorobutadiene I

480 U

59-S0-7---------4-chloro-3-MethIlphenol I 480 U

91-57-6---------2-Methylnaphtha ene i 480 U

77-47-4---------Bexachloroc1

clopentadiene 480 U

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 480 U

9S-9S-4---------2,4,S-Trichloro1henol 1200 U

91-58-7-~-------2-chloronalhtha ene 480, u

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 1200 U

131-11-3--------Dimeth~l~hthalate 480 U

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 480 : U

606-20-2--------2,6-D1nitrotoluene 480 u

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 1200 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 480 U

l

I

\.

\

1

t

j

j

~

l

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

.. 1049

TIERRA-A-018088
1C

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE29

a.bName: SWL-TULSA

"';abCode: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

decanted: (Y/N) N

500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.01

Lab File ID: V18399.D

Date Received: OB/Ol/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

.)

Sample wt/vol:

Level: . (low/med)

% Moisture: 32

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.4

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

51-28-5---------2,4-Dinitrophenol 1200 U :J

100-02-7--------4-Nitrophenol 1200 U

132-64-9--~-----Dibenzofuran 480 U

121-14-2--------2,4-Dinitrotoluene 480 U

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate 480 U

7005-72-3-------4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether __ 480 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 480 U

100-01-6--------4-NitroaniI~ne 1200 U

534-52-1--------4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 1200 U

B6-30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphen~lamine (1)-- 4BO U

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 480 U

118-74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene ---

480 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 1200 U \

85-01-8---------Phenanthrene 340

~

l

120-12-7--------Anthracene 100 I

86-74-B---------Carbazole 480 U I

84-74-2---------Di-n-but~lPhthalate 160 ~

,

\

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 600 I

. 129:-.0O-O.-~~--_-:_':"~y~e~ti! 820 I

i

8S-68-7---------Butylbenzrlphthalate

. . - .-580 !

91-94-1---------3,3'-Dich orobenzidine 480 U i

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 400 ~ I

21B-Ol-9--------Chrysene 420 ~

I

117-Bl-7--------biS(2-Eth!lhexyl)Phthalate 1400 l.\-B- I

117-B4-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate --

480 U

,

205-99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene 320 ~ I

207-0B-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 320 3: \

50-32-8---------Benzo(a)pyrene 420

~

•

193-39-5--------I~deno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 300 r

53-70-3---------D~benz(a,h)anthracene 130 'g t

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h,~)perylene 330 ~

.l

-

!

'-

(1) - Cannot_be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

p.26"?» 1050

TIERRA-A-018089
1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE29

p Name: SWL-TULSA

Contract: 68-D5-0026

.; .uab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

, Moisture: 32 decanted: (Y/N) N

500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.01

Lab File ID: V18399.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

-Ma""""trix:(soil/water) SOIL

Sample'wt/vol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Concentrated Extract volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.4

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ============================ =_=:===== ============== ======

1- UNKNOWN 2.737 1500 JZr

2. 141-79-7 3-Penten-2-one, 4-methyl- 2.759 if2'TJtj

3. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 2.920 960 Jj

4. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.028 ~-gVV '"1't.T1tB

5. UNKNOWN ~~ .....550. J

i¥6. UNKNOWN A4k~ ~63 ) ::67-0···--JB_

7. 617-94-7 Benzenemethanol, .alpha.,.al . ~

48-0 NJ

8. 108-46-3 Resorcinol 5.816 240 NJ

9'. Benzo[]thiopbene, -ethyl--me 7.774 460 J

10. UNKNOWN 7.946 260 J

11- UNKNOWN 8.958 390 J

12. UNKNOWN 9.442 220 J

13. 25154-52-3 P}:1enol,non1

l- I 9.507 400 NJ

14. -Nonylpheno 9.561 270 J

15. Phenol, nonyl- 9.776 260 J

16. -Triazine--diamine, -phenyl- 12.176 320 J

17-4 UNKNOWN AMIDE 13.123

_ .. - -

- -

...~

.':~

18. UNKNOWN AMIDE

. - - - . -

. - - 1.-4 ;425 - -

-VL:i

19. -Indene, -dihydro--trimethyl 15.997 2000 J

20. -Indene, -dihydro--trimethyl 16.287 690 J

21- UNKNOWN AMIDE 17.019 1nn.n - c3"~

22. UNKNOWN 18.870 350 J

23. UNKNOWN 19.742 270 J

24. UNKNOWN 19.936 460 J

25. 83-47-6 .gamma.-Sitosterol 20.259 2200 NJ

26. UNKNOWN 20.603 300 J

27. UNKNOWN 20.743 330' J

28. UNKNOWN 20.818 BOO J

29. UNKNOWN 20.915 520 J

30. UNKNOWN 21.077 300 J

-

---

.'-..-"

FORM I SV-TIC

r-Z§'i

OLM03.0

1051

TIERRA-A-018090
1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

ElJA SAMPLE NO.

BSE29

lb Name: SWL-TULSA

Contract: 68-05-0026

~'ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample-I-D-: 30412.01

Lab File ID: V18399.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 32

30.0 (q/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.4

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ===========-================ ======== ============= :=====

1- 1058-61-3 Stigmast-4-en-3-one 21.184 840 NJ

2. UNKNOWN 21.443 300 J

,

3. UNKNOWN 21.507 260 J

4. 20475-86-9 Urs-12-en-24-oic acid, 3-oxo 21.572 690 NJ

5. UNKNOWN 22.799 340 J

6.

7. I

~·------1------------- ---- ------~I.~- i~:1 I III~- 12. _

i~: ,.1 _

15. -------

16· '1 ------

17 •. - .t-------------..-,,--,--

18. 19 .------·I----------=~-

20. ·I----------~~

21. ·I-------=~---

22. "I 23. :l------~~-----

24. ==--------

25. 1= _

26. _,1 _

27. = __ 28. -' _

29. -' -------

30. -' ------

1_------_ 1_------------

II --

, ,

!

I \

,

I I

- - - - -

1 I

I

I

I I

I

,

, 1

, I

, I

1 I

I

I

FORM I SV-TIC

r·2G'r

OLM03.0

1 r,5 2

TIERRA-A-018091
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE30

t b Name: SWL-TULSA

- Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.1 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

% Moisture: 60 decanted: (Y/N) N

Lab Sample ID: 30412.02

Lab File ID: _V18400.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.3

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ugjL or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

r 820 U

roetfiyl)Etfier I 820 U

enol 820 U

robenzene 820 U

robenzene 820 U

robenzene 820 U

enol I 820 U

s(l-Chloropropane)I 820 U

enol 820 U

di-n-propylamine __ \ 820 U

\

ethane 820 U

ne I 820 U

I 820 U

nol 820 U

I ylphenol I 820 U

roetho~)methane __ ' 820 U

i

ropheno 820 U I

hlorobenzene 820 U

I

;

e

820 U

I

il~n-e--- --_._-- - -- - -82-0 U

butadiene 820 U

-MethilPhenol 820 U

phtha ene 820 U

crclopentadJ.ene 820 U

h oropheno1 --- 820 U

hloropheno1 2100 u

11;thalene 820 U

J.ne 2100 U

thalate 820 U

lene 110 J

oto1uene 820 U

line 2100 U

ne 100 J ,

108-95-2--------Pheno1

111-44-4--------bis(2-=cb-l-o

95-57-8---------2-Chloroph

541-73-1--------1,3-Dichlo

106-46-7--------1,4-Dichlo

95-50-1---------1,2-Dichlo

95-48-7---------2-Methylph

108-60-1--------2,2'-oxybi

106-44-5--------4-Methylph

621-64-7--------N-Nitroso67-72-1---------Bexach10ro

98-95-3---------Nitrobenze

78-59-1---------Iso~horone

88-75-5---------2-NJ.trophe

105-67-9--------2 4-Dimethc 111-91-1--------bJ.s(2-Chlo

120-83-2--------2,4-Dich~o

120-82-1--------1,2,4-TrJ.c

91-20-3---------Naphtha1en

-1 06~47~S;.;..:.;,..;.----4..Chloroan

87-68-3---------Bexachloro

59-50-7---------4-Chloro-3

91-57-6---------2-Methylna

77-47-4---------Bexachloro

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Tric

95-95-4---------2,4,5-Tric

91-58-7---------2-Chlorona

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani

131-11-3--------Dimethylph

208-96-8------~-Acena~hthy

606-20-2--------2,6-DJ.nitr

99-09-2---------3-Nitroani

83-32-9---------Acenaphthe

. "

'---'

FORM I SV-l

.:r

I

I

I

\

I

I

I

I

I

,

i

\

!

I

I

I

V

OLM03.0

1117

TIERRA-A-018092
,b Name: SWL-TULSA t

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BFA SAMPLE NO.

I BSE30

1C

SEMIVOLATlLE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Injection Volume: 2.0{uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.02

Lab File ID: V18400.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date ~xtracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.1 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: 60 decanted: (Y/N) N

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pB: 7.3

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

51-28-5---------2, 47Dinitrophenol 2100 U )

100-02-7--------4-N~trophenol 2100

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran i" 80

121-14-2--------2,4-Dinitrotoluene 820

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate 820 U

7005_72-3-------4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 820 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene --

140 J

100-01-6--------4-Nitroan~l~ne 2100 U

534_52_1 ________ 4,6_Dinitro-2-metbylphenol 2100 U

86-30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphenhlamine (1)-- 820 U

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 820 U

118-74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene ---

820 U

87-86-S---------Pentachlorophenol 2100 U

85-01-8------~--Phenanthrene 1600

120-12-7--------Anthracene 400 OJ

86-74-8---------Carbazole 160 ~

84-74-2---------Di-n-but

h

lpfitfialate 820 U

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 2100

_12~~OQ~Q-~~~-_-~~~rene 2200

85-68-7---------ButyLEenzrlpbtbalate

~ - ~- ._----- '"2600 -

91-94-1---------3,3'-Dich orobenzidine 820 U

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 1100

218-01-9--------Chrysene 1100

117-81-7--------bis(2-Ethrlhexyl)pfitbalate IS.;.;~:;.",;] ........

~ ....

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate -- 820 U

205-99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene 790

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene ~

800

50-32-8---------Benzo(a)pyrene 1000

193-39-5--------I~deno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 580

53-70-3---------D~benz(a,h)anthracene 290 ~

191-24-2--------Benzo{glh,~)perylene 670 'il I\v

,

~ ...'" (#1 f._.... ... -... "'L -:r t:""",~""r'" " (,r", .L: C;e ~ :.,.,I

(1) - Cannot_be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

1118

TIERRA-A-018093
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS A1l~YSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE30

fb Name: SWL-TULSA

.) ~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL) .

Lab Sample 1D: 30412.02

Lab File ID: V18400.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: 60

30.1 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med) ..

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.3

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONe. Q

================= ============================ ========= ============= =====

1. 141-79:-7 3-Penten-2-one, 4-methyl- 2.761 ............... -NTl'I.'D

2. UNKNOWN 2.826 ~~n a:B

3. UNKNOWN 2.923 490 ~n~!'

4. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.030 ....... ""

5. UNKNOWN 3.084 320 J

/ 6. Phenol, -(-trimethrlpentyl)- 8.584 370 J

7. Anthracene, -me thy - 11.253 270 J

8. 203-64-5 4B-Cyclopenta[def]phenanthre 11. 414 380 NJ

9. UNKNOWN PAR 12.727 210 J

10. Phenol, I-(-methylethylidene 13.298 270 J

11- UNKNOWN PAB 13.438 250 J

12. UNKNOWN 13.642 250 J

13. 11B-Benzo[]fluorene 13.675 420 J

14. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 13.739 370 J

15. Pyrene, -methyl- 13.868 250 J

16. 82-05-3 7B-Benz[deJanthracen-7-one 14.686 320 NJ

_1L._ ~24.~-.9j-:1 ___ O.c..tici:z;~r_______ ---_. __ .- ~~-

14.955 680 NJ

18. UNKNOWN --T5~8T6 - - - - . - - - - - ~1) 0 - - J19. UNKNOWN PAB 15.892 250 J

20. -Methylchrysene 16.161 370 , J

21- UNKNOWN 17.258 310 J

22. 19B-55-0 Perylene 17.829 600 NJ

23. 192-97-2 Benzo[e]pyrene 18.044 270 NJ'

24. UNKNOWN 18.851 350 J

25. UNKNOWN 18.905 280 J

26. UNKNOWN 19.497 1800 J

27. UNKNOWN 19.863 320 J

2B. UNKNOWN PAB 19.917 320 J

29. 83-47-6 .qamma.-Sitosterol .20.261 490 NJ

30. UNKNOWN \ 20.337 520 J

\._.

FORM I SV-TIC

r·~6~

OLM03.0

..; 1 , , 0

TIERRA-A-018094
1F

SEMIVOLATILB ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE30

tb Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SQ-I-L-- .

Contract: 68-05-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.02

Lab File ID: V18400.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

, Moisture: 60

30.1 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/~) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.3

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

a========----=~=

=_=_____ =a___~~_z=_=.__===== -------= ===-========-- ======

1. UNKNOWN 20.745 430 J

2. UNKNOWN 21.101 280 J

3. UNKNOWN 21.187 530 J

4. UNKNOWN 21.757 370 J

5. Naphtho[-def]chrysene 22.102 260 J

I 6.

7.

-

I

~:------ -------------- ---- I~~

i~: 1:,------

12. I,: 13. ------

14. 1----

15. 16. I.---

--i~~ -----·----~--~----t-------- ------------ i-----· --I

~~: I-------_~=II- I I

~~ : : II r-- , I

23. II 1

1

24. 'I I

25.:1 1--- 26. -------1---

27. _

28. --------------1-----1------- 11----'1

29. _

30. ~~ --_~ __ ~:I --------- ---- ------- ---

FORM I SV-TIC

F,2€,<:i

OLM03.0

1120

TIERRA-A-018095
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE31

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

Jab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

samplewt/vol: 30.1 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-DS-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample 10: 30388.06

Lab File ID: V183S9.0

Concentrated Extract Volume: SOO(uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

, Moisture: 59 decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

108-95-2--------Phenol

111-44-4--------bis(2-·C~hl-o

95-57-8---------2-Chloroph

541-73-1--------1,3-Dichlo

106-46-7--------1,4-Dichlo

95_50-1---------1,2-Dichlo

95-48-7---------2-Methylph

108-60-1-----~--2,21-oxybi

106-44-5--------4-Methylph

-621-64-7-------- N-Ni troso67-72-1---------Bexachloro

98-95-3---------Nitrobenze

78-59-1---------Iso~horone

88-75-5---------2-N~trophe

105-67-9--------2,4-Dimeth

111-91-1----~---bis(2-Chlo

120-83-2--------2,4-Dichlo

120-82-1--------1,2,4-Tric

_ __.. .9~~2Q-~3~~':'':'':._=_:_.:e:'~~l:!thalen

106-47-8--------4-Cli16roan

87-68-3---------Hexacploro

59-50-7---------4-Chloro-3

91-57-6---------2-Methylna

77-47-4---------Hexachloro

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Tric

95-95-4---------2, 4,5-Tric

91-58-7---------2-Chlorona

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani

131-11-3--------D~ethylph

208-96-8--------Acena~hthy

606-20-2--------2 6-D~nitr

9

' • 9 -09-2---------3-N~troani

83-32-9---------Acenaphthe

r 800 U ::;

roethyl)Ether I 800 U

enol I 800 U

robenzene I 800 U

robenzene I 800 U

robenzene I 800 U

enol I

800 U

s(l-Chloropropane) \ 800 U

enol 800 U

di-n-propylamine __ \ 800 U

ethane 800 U

ne I

800 U

I

800 U

no1 800 U

ylphenol 800 U

roethO~)methane 800 U

ropheno --

- 800

hlorobenzene 800 U \

e - - --g 800

il~ne -- - - - - -- - - - - - --i3-O{T

butadiene 800 U

-MethrlPhenol 800 U

phtha ene 70

~

clclopentad~ene 800

h orophenol --- BOO U

hloro1henol 2000 U

ll,1thaene 800 U

~ne 2000 U

thalate 800 U

lene 800 U

otoluene 800 U

line 2000

.~

ne 160

.

{

',-

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

1232

TIERRA-A-018096
lC

SEMIVOLATlLE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

-.b Name: SWL-TULSA

Jab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026 \_- BSE31

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.06

Lab File ID: V18359.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

MatrIx: (soil!water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

, Moisture: 59

30.1 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

)

51_28-5---------2 ,4-Dinitrophenol

2000 U :J

100-02-7-----~--4-Nitrophenol

2000 U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran

800 U

121_14_2 ________ 2

,4-Dinitrotoluene 800 U

84_66-2---------Diethylphthalate

800 U

700S_72_3-------4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 800 U

86_73-7---------Fluorene --

150 J

100-01-6--------4-Nitroan~1~ne

2000 U

534_52-1--------4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 2000 U

86_30_6 _________ N_Nitrosodiphen~lamine (1)-- 800 U

101-S5-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether --

800 U

118_74-1--------Hexachlorobenzene ---

BOO U

B7_86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 2000 U

85_01-8---------Phenanthrene

2000

120-12-7--------Anthracene

420 l\

86-74-8---------Carbazole

270

84_74_2 _________ D

i-n-buthlpfitfialate 1100 I

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene

2900 I

,

_~DO~Q~-~~~~~-~yrene

3000 !

85_68_7 _________ ButylbenzI-rpntna~ate - - - - - - -- --s-o-o- ----tJ .,.

91-94-1---------3 ,31 -Dichorobenzidine 800 ·u i

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene

1600 I

218-01-9--------Chrysene

1800 !

117_S1_7--------bis(2-Etli!lfiexyl)pfithalate - ·660

~

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate -- 800 :

205_99_2 ________ Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1600

i

,

207_08_9 ________ Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1300 i

I

50_32-8---------Benzo(a)pyrene 1600

193_39_S ________ I~denO(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1200 ,

53_70_3 _________ D~benz(a,h}anthracene 600 ~

191_24_2 ________ Benzo(g,h,~)perylene 1400l

,

\

I

~.

.-

r

\.

(1) - Canno~be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

p.2=11 1233

TIERRA-A-018097
1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE31

llb Name: SWL-TULSA

-.Jab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-05-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID:-3C>-388.06

Lab File ID: V18359.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 59

30.1 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ugjL or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONCa Q

================ ============================ ========= 1:===========:= =====

1. UNKNOWN 2.794

.. ; ...... ~-- ~-., ...

2. UNKNOWN ALCOHOL 2.858

20~1·

3. UNKNOWN 2.944

4. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.052

.. .. ,..,..

................. J

5. UNKNOWN 3.095 720 J)5

l

6. 76-22-2 Camphor 4.989 3100 NJ

7. UNKNOWN 7.981 900 J

8. UNKNOWN PAR 11.447 610 J

9. Octadecanol 12.394 2000 J

10. 10544-50-0 Sulfur, mol. (58) 12.523 1400 NJ

11- UNKNOWN AMIDE 13.158 720 J

12. l1E-Benzo[]fluorene 13.707 740 J

13. UNKNOWN AMIDE 14.450 6500 .~

14. Bexanedioic acid, este 14.622 .. --- ~- .

15. UNKNOWN PAa 15.838 800 J

16. UNKNOWN PAa 16.204 760 J

.].].! -],9_2~~'I-:.2___ Benzo[elEyrene 17.861 820 NJ

18. O'N1{Wvnf ORGANIC "ACID - .. - - - - - - 18" ."399- - -- ~ - - - - - - -52-(} - - " J

19. UNKNOWN 18.948 470 J

20. UNKNOWN 19.207 650 J

21- UNKNOWN 19.336 590 J

22. UNKNOWN ALDEHYDE 19.454 670 J

23. UNKNOWN PAa 19.562 5.10 J

24. UNKNOWN PAR 19.895 640 J

25. UNKNOWN PAR 19.949 780 J

26. UNKNOWN 20.294 720 J

27. UNKNOWN 20.520 480 J

28. UNKNOWN 20.659 570 J

29. UNKNOWN 20.703 1100 J

30. UNKNOWN 20.789 520 J

-

FORM I SV-TIC

p.2+Z •

OLM03.0

123.4

TIERRA-A-018098
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE31

~b Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

,"

Jab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.06

Lab File ID: V18359.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

sample wt/vol: 30.1 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: 59 decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

',' CONCENTRATION UNITS:

Number TICs found: 35 (ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

.....

1 I

1

-----,1------------- ~l~----- -- t II~ __ --- ---

"I ~,..,...",...,,-,,-----

~~:-----:l~ 11

1

-'----- ~~::I 1'--

23. 24.-----"1-----~==----- ----

25. "I 26.1 I=~~~--------

27. 1---- ~!: :I=~~~--------I----

._- 1 1----

~

~

I

I

II

""_ ..

FORM I SV-TIC

p.2:2;1

1235 OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018099
lB

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ~YSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

tab Code: SWOK Case No.: 2S,Ol

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.1 (g/mLJ G

Level: (~w/med) "LOW

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE32

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

..Moisture: 24 decanted: (Y/N) N

500{uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.03

Lab File ID: V18401.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:OB/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pHS 7.4

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UGjKG Q

" .. "

,-

~

108-9S-2--------Phenol 430 U .

11l-4~-4--------bis(2-Cnloroethyl)Ether 430 U

9s-57-8---------2-chloro1

benol 430 U

541-73-1--------1,3-Dieh orobenzene 430 U

106-46-7----~---l,4-Dichlorobenzene 430 U

95-50-1---------1 2-Dichlorobenzene 430 U , . --

95-4B-7---------2-MethY1Ebenol 430 U

108-60-1--------2,2'-O~ i.(l-Chloropropanef 430 U

106-44-5--------4-Methy pbenol 430 u

621-64-7--------N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 430 U

67-72-1---------Bexachloroethane -- 430 U

98-95-3---------Nitrobenzene 430 u

78-59-1---------Iso~horone 430 U

88-75-S---------2-N~trophenol 430 U

lO5-67-9--------2,4-Dimethylpheno! 430 U

111-91-1--------bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 430 U

120-83-2--------2 4-Dichlorophenol -- 430 U

, .

120-82-1--------1, 2,4-Tr1ohlorobenzene 430 U

~~~2~3~~~-~~~~-Naphthalen. 430 U

106-47-B--------4-Chloroanil~ne

--" ~- - - - - - -- - i131T - ----i; --J

87-68-3---------Bexachlorobutad~ene 430

59-S0-7---------4-Chloro-3-MethrlPhenol 430 ~ f 91-S7-6---------2-Methrlnaphtha ene 430

77-47-4---------Bexachoroclclopentadiene 430 U ,

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Tricb orophenol --- 430 U

95-95-4---------2,4,5-Tr!chlorophenol 1100 U

91-58-7---------2-chlorona1

hthalene 430: U

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 1100 U

131-11-3--------Dimeth~lhhthalate 430 U

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 430 U

606-20-2--------2 6-D~nitrotoluene 430 U

, i . 99-09-2---------3-Nitroan l~ne 1100

~ 83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 430 :

.

r

v

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

1300

TIERRA-A-018100
1C

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

"b Name: SWL-TULSA

,

;'..·Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026 1_- BSE32

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.03

Lab File 1D: V18401.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 24

30.1 (gJmL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.4

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ugJKg) UG/KG Q

51_28_5 _________ 2,4_Dinitrophenol 1100 U

10O-02-7-~------4-Nitrophenol 1100 U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran I 430 U

121_14_2 ________ 2

,4_Dinitrotoluene I 430 U

84_66-2---------Diethylphthalate I

430 U

7005_72_3 _______ 4_Chloropheny l-phenylether __ \ 430 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 430 U

100-01-6--------4-Nitroan~l~ne I 1100 u

534_52_1 ________ 4,6_Dinitro-2-methylpheno! 1100 U

86-30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphenhlamine (1)-- 430 U

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 430 U

118-74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene 430 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 1100 U

B5-01-S---------Phenanthrene 430 U

120-12-7--------Anthracene 430 U

86-74-8---------Carbazole 430 U

84-74-2---------Di-n-but~lphthalate 430 U

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 430 U

-129-4}{)-~------Py~ -- - - - - - --- - . 430 U

- - - ._-

85-68-7---------ButylbenzIlphtha~ate

- ""-430 - - ~-

u

91-94-1---------3,3'-Dich orobenzidine 430 U

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 430 U

218-01-9--------Chrysene 430 - - u

117-81-7--------bis(2-EthIlhexyl)phthalate '-Ii' do'.=v 8B .

117-84-0--------Di-n-octI phthalate --

430 U

205-99-2--------Benzo(b) luoranthene 430 U

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 430 U

50-32-e---------Benzo(a)pyrene 190 ,""i$.

193-39-5--------I~deno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene 430 U

53-70-3---------Dibenz(a,h}anthracene 430 U

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h,1)perylene 430 U

.-j

1

i

i

!

\I

(1) - Canno~be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

1301

TIERRA-A-018101
1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE32

}h Name: Sv;'L-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

"'...~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample 10: 30412.03

Sample·wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 24

30.1 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Lab File IO: V18401.0

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0 Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.4

Number TICs found: 32

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

1. 141-79-7

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14. 7683-64-9

15.

16.

17. -1a.- - , - - ~- - - -

19.

20.

21-

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3-Penten-2-one, 4-methylUNKNOWN

123-42-2 2-Pe e, roxy-4-met

KNOWN

/' UNKNOWN A\~ r' ' ~..--:WN~IBE: ,--{)-

---- KNOWN AMIDE

UNKNOWN AMIDE

UNKNOWN AMIDE

UNKNOWN

-Eicosanol

UNKNOWN AMIDE

Squalene

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN KETONE ~------- - - -- ---- .. -

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN KETONE

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN PAS

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

RT EST. CONCa Q

================ ============================

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME

=-====== ==========~== =====

2.760 ~l NJ~I~

2.824 ~ JB I~

3.029 ---- ~ R3~2 190 J

Li.66£1> 340 JB

10.498 110 J

11.552 120 J

12.995 110 J

13.124 --...J:a t4-

14.426 JB ~

15.233 260 J ......

16.460; 830 J .

17.020 ----.;m. \-'

17.257 140 NJ

17.633 240 J

17.709 140 J

18.796 130 J

-- -19"".-538- - - - - - - - - --12--0--- J

19.786 140 J

19.861 220 J

19.926 280 J

20.044 180 J

2 0 • 259 400 i J

20.302 1100; J

20.442 200 J

20.496 660 J

20.604 510 J

20.765 540 J

20.905 520 J

21.185 160 J

________ .~~~~~_- .I I, I

\

'----"

FORM I SV-TIC

p.Z16

OLM03.0

1302

TIERRA-A-018102
lF

SBMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLB NO.

BSE32

h Name: SWL-TULSA

l r-

:"~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

--Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.1 (g/mL) G

Level: (l~/med) LOW

% Moisture: 24 decanted: (Y/N) N

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.03

Lab File ID: V18401.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

.Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0 Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.4

Number TICs found: 32

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

13.1

II I I I 14. ------------ ----1:::::=:::=:. 11::::11

15. 1

16. J~.' ~ I

. - - -l.]---'-"~;";;-...;;;;..."i~'-"-"""""- ......................... ~~====---- .

18. ----I···

19. I I

20. 21. _ II I'

22. ~~~- ------- ---

23. I 24. I-----~

25. I ----- 26. =_====- 27. ---- ------·1---1

28. I

29. 11-----1---1

30. -------1---

CAS NUMBER I COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

==============~= ============================ ======== ============= =====

1. UNKNOWN 21.400 160 J

2. UNKNOWN 21.981 710 J

3.

4. I

5. I

I 1 I

6. I

I I I

7. I

I I I

8. I

I I I

9. I I I 10. I 11. I

I I I

12. I I I

i

".'~.

FORM I SV-TIC

p.z:r~ .~

OLM03.0

130~

TIERRA-A-018103
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS AlNALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE33

,b Name: SWL-TULSA

. J ·'.L.;abCode: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 6B-D5-0026

SAS No.: SOG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample 10: -30412.04

Lab File 10: V1B402.D

Date Received: OB/01/97

Oate Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: OB/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 77

30.0 (g/mL) G.

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.3

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

10B-95-2--------P henol

1400 U ~I

111_44_4 ________ bis(2-CfiloroethyI)Ether 1400 U

95-57-B--~------2-Chlorolhenol 1400 U

541-73-1--------1,3-Dich orobenzene 1400 U

106_46_7 ________ 1,4-Dichlorobenzene BB 'J..

95_50-1------~--1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1400 U

95-48-7---------2-MethYlEhenol 1400 U

108-60-1--------2,21 -0;1 is{1-Chloropropane) 1400 U

106-44-S--------4-Methy phenol 1400 U

621_64_7 ________ N_Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 1400 U

67_72-1---------Bexachloroethane --,

1400 U

98-9S-3---------Nitrobenzene 1400 U

78-S9-1---------Iso~horone 1400 U

88-7S-5---------2-N~trophenoI 1400 U I

105-67-9--------2,4-DimethylphenoI 1400 u

111_91_1 ________ bis(2-Chloroeth06!)methane 1400 U

120-83-2--------2,4-Dichloropheno --

1400 U

120-82-1--------1, 2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1400 U I

91-20-3---------Na~thalene 600 . J \

1.06--4-7-e':'-~~;;~-4- Ioroani1:ine ---- - -- ------

.,A ...... ---ll

-,

87_68_3 _________ Hexachlorobutadiene 1400 U

s9-S0-7---------4-ChlorO-3-Methilphenol 1400 U

91-57-6---------2-Methylnaphtha ene 230 J

77-47-4---------Bexachloroclclopentad~ene 1400 U

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 1400 U

9S-9s-4---------2,4,s-Trichloro 1

henol 3600 U

91-S8-7---------2-Chlorona~htha ene 1400· u

8B-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 3600 U

131-11-3--------Dimeth~lbhthalate 1400 U

208-96-8------~-Acena~ t ylene 420 '&..

606-20-2--------2,6-D~nitrotoluene 1400' u

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline

'\

3600 U

\

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 790 ~

,~'.

{ .;'1

'-'.'

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

W'_ "'ilP"l.r-.

TIERRA-A-018104
lC

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ~ALYSIS DATA SHEET

BPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE33

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25~01

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDGNo.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: SOO(uL)

Lab Sample IO: 30412.04

Lab File ID: V18402.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed:. 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 77

30.0 (g/nW' G

LOW

decanted: cr/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y

CAS NO. COMPOuND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

51-28-5---------2,4-0initrophenol 3600 u:

100-02-7--------4-Nitropncnol 3600 U .,'

132-64-9--------Dibenzofu~an 520 ~

121-14-2--------2,4-0irtitrotoluene 1400 U

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate 1400 JB

700S-72-3-------4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether __ 1400 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 880

~

100-01-6--------4-Nitroanll~ne 3600

534-52-1--------4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 3600 u

86-30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphenhlamine (1)-- 1400 U

101-5S-3--------4-Bromoph.nyl-p enylether -- 1400 U

118-74-1---~----Bexachlorobenzene ---

1400 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorcphenol 3600 U

85-01-8---------Phenanthrane SOOO

120-12-7--------Anthracens 2300

~

S6-74-8---------Carbazole - 1000

84-74-2---------Di-n-buthl phthalate / .. '»~--"'''' , ~'';:-l-v' _

206-44-0--------Fluorant ane ,.,,~ ~ .~ \I \I V

_..l29=JtQ~O_-_-==.~-_-...:"'~rene

"." . -_ ... -

-

-1~rr-··~), v v

85-68-7-----~~~-ButyrbenzIIPhthaiate

.- - ------'jS(tO91-94-1---------3,3'-Dich orobenzidine 1400 u

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 6800

218-01-9--------Chrysene 6900

117-81-7--------bis(2-Ethrlhexyl)phthalate "2.e'C:""(r.' ~ --- -EB'

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate -- 260 .'tJ.

205-99-2--------Benzo(b}fluoranthene 5300

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 6600 I

50-32-S---------BenZO(a)p!rene 7400,

193-39-S--------Indeno(1 ,3-cd)pyrene 4800 I

l

53-70-3---------Dibenz(A'b}anthracene 1900

191-24-2--------BenZo(9th,~)perylene 5500 \

•

r

I

- _.

r

.,;{ }c:..e/A I H ~"'-·I'," l:.r!l J 3» D L.

(1) - Cannot_be separated from Diphenylamine

PORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

p.27'f 1355

TIERRA-A-018105
~b Name: SWL-TULSA

,j

.Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BPA SAMPLE NO.

I. BSE33

1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 30412.04

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 77

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Lab File ID: V18402.D

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0 Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.3

Number TICs found: 34

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ==========================-= ======== -============ =====

1. 141-79-7 3-Penten-2-one, 4-methyl- 2.762 -

~~~~ -_':".~

2. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.021 ...-.... ...,...,

3. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 8.434 25000 J

4. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 10.759 1900 J

5. 203-64-5 4H-Cyclopenta[def]phenanthre 11.415 2100 NJ

\ 6. I1B-Benzo[]fluorene 13.675 3100 J

7. pyrene,-methyl- 13.869 2100 J

8. UNKNOWN AMIDE 14.429 22000 JB

9. UNKNOWN 14.935 2100 J

10. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 15.032 2000 J

11- UNKNOWN 15.150 2000 J

12. UNKNOWN PAB 15.591 2100 J

13. UNKNOWN 15.817 3200 J

14. UNKNOWN 15.893 3300 J

15. Chrysene, -methyl- 16.162 2100 J

16. 1090-13-7 5,12-Na~hthacenedione 16.786 960 NJ

-·±-1r - - - - - - - _.,.,~,."""'~4_es :t!e______ 17.119 980 J

18. Benzo[]fluoranthene 17.539

-- ----- 2700 . - - - -;]

19. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 17.658 2400 J

20. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 17.733 4100 J

21- 192-97-2 Benzo[e]pyrene 17.830 5200 NJ

22. 198-55-0 Perylene 18.056 3000 NJ

23. -Quaterphenyl 18.110 35.00 J

24. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 18.206 2100 J

25. UNKNOWN PAR 18.282 920 J

26. UNKNOWN 19.143 880 J

27. UNKNOWN PAB 19.864 1100 J

28. UNKNOWN 20.337 1100 J

29. 603-48-5 Benzenamine, 4,4',4tt -methyl .20.746 6200 NJ

30. 1058-61-3 Stigmast-4-en-3-one 21.198 970 NJ

FORM I SV-TIC

f. zfrC

OLM03.0

1356

TIERRA-A-018106
IF

SEMIVOLATlLE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

r Name: SWL-TULSA

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE33

SAS No.: SOG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample 10: 30412.04

Lab File ID: V18402.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

, Moisture: 77 decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.3

Number TICs found: 34

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ============================ ======== ============= =====

1. UNKNOWN 21.500 1200 J

2. []Dibenzpyrene 22.113 1400 J

3. -Oibenzpyrene 22.382 980 J

4. -Dibenzpyrene 23.146 920 J

1 5. I

) 6. I

-- I

I

7. I

I I

8. I

I I

9. I

I I

10. I I 11.

12. I

I

I I

13. I I

14. I I I

15. I I

16. I

-l-+-.- - - - 1 Jl

m=::=::=- -:=--:=-~-=1---- ----;;;..--~-;;:;;::..:-----,;;;.;~::.....;;.,;;;.===.;;~~ ----I==========~~:I~ ~~---I

23.1-----------~ -=~~I

24. ,II 1-----

25. I

26. 'I ,1------ 

27. __I__ =_~ -------11---

28. ..II~~_---------- ---- ------- ---

29. I 30. J - - ------ --

._- -1 1--------

FORM I SV-TIC

t?' 281

OLM03.0

1357

TIERRA-A-018107
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

~b Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE34

F

.Gab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SOG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample 10: 30412.05

Lab File ID: V18403.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water)-SOIL

% Moisture: 90

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

108-95-2--------Phenol r 3300 U ....J

111-44-4--------bis(2-Chloroethyl)Ether I 3300 U

95-57-8---------2-chloro I 1

henol I 3300 U

541-73-1--------1,3-0ich orobenzene 3300 U

106-46-7--------1 4-Dichlorobenzene 3300 U

, .

3300 95-50-1---------1,2-D~chlorobenzene U

95-48-7---------2-MethylEhenol ..·."1 3300 u

108-60-1--------2,2'-O~ is(1-Chloropropane) I 3300 U

.106-44-5--------4-Methy phenol 3300 U

621-64-7--------N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine __ 1 3300 U

67-72-1---------Bexachloroethane . 3300 U

98-95-3---------Nitrobenzene I 3300 U

78-59-1---------Iso~horone I 3300 U

e8-75-5---------2-N~trophenoI 3300 U

105-67-9----:----2 (4-Dimethylphenol I" 3300 U

111-91-1--------b~s(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 3300 U

1

120-83-2--------2 4-Dichlorophenol -- 3300 U

, .

I

120-82-1--------1,2,4-Tr~chlorobenzene 3300 U

\ _-S).l-~~~~~=-Naphtha J ene ~ ~ ________ 3300 U =x--- --- - - - -I

106-47-8--------4-ChloroaniIIne 3300 U !

87-68-3---------Bexachlorobutadiene 3300 U I

59-S0-7---------4-Chloro-3-MethrlPhenol 3300 U I

91-S7-6---------2-Methrlnaphtha ene 3300 U

:

I

77-47-4---------Bexach oroc1

clopentadiene 3300 U

i

I

e8-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 3300 U

I

i

9s-95-4---------2,4,s-Trichloro 1

henol 8300 U

91-58-7---------2-Chlorona~htha ene 3300 U

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 8300 U

l31-11-3--------Dimeth~lhhthalate 3300 U

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 3300 U

606-20-2--------2,6-D~nitrotoluene 3300 U

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 8300 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 3300 U

~

\

I

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

1493

TIERRA-A-018108
1C

SEMIVOL.~TILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

~b Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE34

• j'abCode: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.05

Lab File ID: V18403.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (lQw/med)

% Moisture: 90

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

51-28-5---------2,4-Dinitrophenol 8300 U

100-02-7--------4-Nitrophenol 8300 U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran 3300 U

121-14-2--------2,4-Dinitrotoluene 3300 U

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate 3300 U

700S-72-3-------4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether __ 3300 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 3300 U

100-01-6--------4-Nitroanil~ne 8300 U

534-52-1--------4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 8300 U

86-30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphen~lamine (1)-- 3300 U

101-S5-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 3300 U

118-74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene --- 3300 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 8300 U

8S-01-8---------Phenanthrene 3300 U

120-12-7--------Anthracene 3300 U

86-74-8---------Carbazole 3300 U

I

I

84-74-2---------Di-n-but~lphthalate 3300 U I

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 3300 U

----1-2-9--00-G-~--- ..Pyrene _~_______ 3300 u I

8S-68-7---------Butylbenzrlphthalate 3300 -- - - -U .

I

91-94-1---------3,3'-Dich orobenzidine 3300 U

1

56-55-3---------Benzo{a) anthracene 3300 U

j

218-01-9--------Chrysene 3300 U I

117-81-7--------bis{2-Ethrlfiexyl)phtfialate ?JO" '7cn

.......

-- '\

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate -- 3300 U

205-99-2--------Benzo(blfluoranthene 3300 U

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 3300 U

SO-32-8---------Benzo(a)pyrene 3300 U

193-39-S--------Indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene 3300 U

53-70-3---------Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 3300 U

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h,~)perylene 3300 U

I

I

I

i

I

~

(1) - Canno~ be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

,.Z&1

14 9.~

TIERRA-A-018109
1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE34

il b Name: SWL-TULSA

1~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

'-lMa~rix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30412.05

Lab File ID: V18403.D

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: 90 decanted: {Y/N} N

Injection volume: 2.0{uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

==~============= c=========================== ========= ============== =====

1- . UNKNOWN 2.737 13000 ,.¥

2. 10574-37-5 2-Pentene, 2,3-dimethyl- 2.759 -----

-

... Ji 3. UNKNOWN 2.920 8200

4. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.028 ~

rlf;JUU .L'H"'~

5. 5153-92-4 1H-Naphtho[2,I-b]pyran, 4a,5 11.842 9000 NJ

; 6. 19407-28-4 Phenanthrene, 1,2,3,4,4a,9,1 12.424 6000 NJ

I

7. 511-15-9 2-Phenanthrenol, 4b,5,6,7,8, 14.275 15000 NJ

8. UNKNOWN 14.339 13000 J

9. UNKNOWN AMIDE 14.425 29000 JB

10. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 16.460 6600 J

11- UNKNOWN AMIDE 17.030 21000 JB

12. UNKNOWN ORGANIC ACID 18.720 13000 J

13. UNKNOWN KETONE 18.795 13000 J

14. 471-68-1 Olean-12-ene 18.870 9800 NJ

15. UNKNOWN 19.021 8500 J

16. UNKNOWN 19.129 8500 J

~1-h- 1615--91~-- A~~eogammacer-22~}~Bna __ _ -.l.9.-t 27~t_____ ~ __21_000 NJ

18. UNKNOWN 19.548 7400 ~---J

19. UNKNOWN 19.656 16000 J

20. UNKNOWN 19.753 7400 J

21- UNKNOWN 19.796 15000 J

22. 0-00-0 2-Nonacosanone 19.871 11000 NJ

23. UNKNOWN 19.936 23000 J

24. UNKNOWN 20.087 11000 J

25. 514-07-8 D-Friedoolean-14-en-3-one 20.323 170000 NJ

26. UNKNOWN 20.442 31000 J

27. 127-22-0 Taraxerol 20.506 62000 NJ

28. UNKNOWN 20.646 29000 J

29. 1617-70-5 Lup-20(29)-en-3-one 20.808 510000 NJ

30. 1678-31-5 a'-Neogammacer-22(29)-en-3-o 20.948 82000 NJ

. {

" .

..,2

FORM I SV-TIC

p. 2 [1y

OLM03.0

149 !1

TIERRA-A-018110
1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE34

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

1

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.0 (q/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

, Moisture: 90 decanted: (Y/N) N

500(uL)

Lab S~ple-%D:-30412.05

Lab File ID: V18403.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/~7

Date Analyzed: 08/07/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ============================ =======1:1 ============= ~~====

L UNKNOWN 21. 098 34000 J

2. UNKNOWN 21.195 12000 J

3. UNKNOWN 21.421 7900 J

4. UNKNOWN 21. 809 6900 J

5. UNKNOWN 21.981 34000 J

. 6• l

7. I

8. I I: I

9.

10.

1L I

12. I I I

13. I I I

I

I I

14. I

I I I I

15. I

I. I I

16. I II

_11L I

I I

18.

,

I II I~ I

19 .------ ------~------ ---- -------1 ~-- r -

20. _

21. ---- ------- ---I

22. =~~_____ I

23. ---- ------- ---.

24. I

25. 26.====--------- ---- I

27. _

28. ------------- ---- ------- ---I

29. ~- _

30. ---- ------- ---

!

'_..

FORM I SV-TIC

. p" 2S>!"

OLM03.0

1496

TIERRA-A-018111
IB

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE35

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

'.Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Injection Volume: 2.0{uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.06

Lab File ID: V18404.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

30.1 (g/mL) G

LOW

, Moisture: 88 decanted: (Y/N) N

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.0

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

108-95-2--------Phenol 2700 U

111_44_4 ________ bis(2_ehloroethyl)Ether 2700 U I

95-s7-8---------2-chloro1

h enol

2700 U

S41-73-1--------1,3-Dich orobenzene 2700 U

106-46-7--------1,4-Dichlorobenzene 2700 U

9S-S0-1---------1,2-Dichlorobenzene 2700 U

9S-48-7---------2-MethYlEhenol 2700 U

108-60-1--------2,21 -0;1 is (l-Chloropropane) 2700 u.

106-44-S--------4-Metby phenol 2700 U

621-64-7--------N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine . 2700 u:

67-72-1---------Bexachloroetbane --

2700 Ui

98-9S-3---------Nitrobanzene 2700 U\

78-S9-1---------Iso~horone 2700 U

I

88-7S-S---------2-N~trophenol 2700 ul

105-67-9-~------2,4-Dimethylphenol 2700

I

U\

111-91-1--------bis(2-Chloroetboxy)methane 2700 U.

120-83-2--------2,4-Dicblorophenol --

2700 U'

120-82-1--------1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 2700 u!

~~2Q-3~~~-~~--Napbthalene 2700 ul

106-47-8--------4-Chloroaniline

----- 2700 --e

,

j87-68-3---------Bexacblorobutadiene 2700

.

u:

S9-S0-7---------4-Chloro-3-Methrlphenol 2700 u;

91-S7-6---------2-MethrlnaPhtha ene 2700 U

i

77-47-4---------Bexach orocrClopentadiene

I

2700 u·

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 2700 U;

9S-9S-4---------2,4,S-Trichloro 1benol 6900 U=

91-S8-7---------2-chlorona1

bthaene 2700

I

Ui

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 6900

I

Uj

131-11-3--------Dimeth~lhhthalate 2700 uj

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 2700 u!

606-20-2--------2,6-D~nitrotoluene 2700 ui

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 6900 U'

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 2700 U V

i ;

\. .' ..--"

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

p.Z'86

1544

TIERRA-A-018112
lC

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

jibName: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 6S-05-0026

BSE35

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

30.1 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab Sample 10: 30412.06

Lab File 10: V1S404.0

Oate Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: S8 decanted: (Y/N) N

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.0

CAS NO. COMPOUNO

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

6900

6900

2700

2700

2700

2700

2700

6900

6900

2700

2700

2700

6900

2700

2700

2700

2700

2700

2700

ItsO

2700

2700

2700

3800

2700

2700

2700

210

2700

2700

2700

51-28-5---------2, 470initrophenol 1

100-02-7--------4-N~trophenol

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran ---------------1

121-14-2--------2,4-0initrotoluene, __ ~ 1

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate

7005-72-3-------4-Chlorophenyl-p~h-e-ny-I-e~t~h-e-r~~-I

86-73-7---------Fluorene

100-01-6--------4-Nitroa~n~~Tl~~~n~e--------------1

534-52-1--------4,6-0initro-2-methylphenol

86-30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphenylamine (1)---

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-phenylether ---

118-74-1--------Hexachlorobenzene ----

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol

85-01-B---------Phenanthrene ------------1

120-12-7--------Anthracene

86-74-8---------Carbazole ---------------------1

84-74-2---------Di-n-butylphthalate 1

206-44-0--------Fluoranthene

129- 00-:.<1-..:-:":"_-_-..:-= Pyrene '-----------------1

B5-68-7 --------- Butyl'C=-o4e=n=zy=·T: 1:P="')h~~tl:"';hl:""ca=-Llr.~a~LtI:""4e:---------+- - -- - - -

91-94-1---------3,3t-Dichlorobenzidi~n~e-------1

56-55-3---------Benzo(a)anthracene 1

218-01-9--------Chrysene

117-Bl-7--------bis(2-Et~h~y~1~h~e~xy~I~)p~h~t~h~a~lr.a~t~e---I

117-B4-0--------Di-n-octylphthalate ---

205-99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene, __

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene

50-32-S---------Benzo(a)pyrene --------

193-39-5--------I~denO{1,2,3-cd)pyrene,-------1

53-70-3---------D~benz(a,h}anthracene

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h,~}perylene --------I

U .=r

u

u

u

U

U

U

U

U

U

U

U

U

U

U

U t

-1-\ ..

u I

-B- L.\i

U

U

u, 0'

..{'

U

U ';J,/

( 1) - Cannot..be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I 5V-2 OLM03.0

1545

TIERRA-A-018113
1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EFA SAMPLE NO.

.1b Name: SWL-TULSA

oJ

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE35

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

Lab Sample 10: 30412.06

Lab File ID: V18404.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

30.1 (g/mL) G

LOW

% Moisture: 88 decanted: (Y/N) N

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.0

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or uq/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ============================ -======= ============= ==:~t 1- UNKNOWN 2.737 4900

2. 10574-37-5 2-Pentene, 2,3-dimethyl- 2.758 .. ~ -- K o

3. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.027 ................. ".~~~F;-. ..._---

4. 38754-94-8 s-Indacen-1(2H)-one, 3,5,6,7 12.122 6400 NJ

5. 19407-28-4 Phenanthrene, l,2,3,4,4a,9,l 12.423 4600 NJ

i 6. UNKNOWN 12.735 7400 J

7. UNKNOWN HYDROCARBON 13.855 5500 J

80'511-15-9 2-Phenanthrenol, 4b,5,6,7,8, 14.274 20000 NJ

9. UNKNOWN 14.339 12000 J

10. 2-Phenanthrenol, -octa 14.382 6700 J

11- -Nonadecanol 18.719 7900 J

12. UNKNOWN 18.784 11000 J

13. UNKNOWN 18.870 7200 J

14. 59-02-9 Vitamin E 19.042 5400 NJ

15. UNKNOWN 19.085 4900 J

16. UNKNOWN 19.300 7400 J

~ -r-7.----~~--~-~ --- -- - - - - - - - - ----- 19.§-3-1 ------

l:;.,nn - - .J- - -

18. UNKNOWN 19.645 8200 J

19. UNKNOWN 19.742 5600 J

20. UNKNOWN 19.795 8700 J

21- UNKNOWN KETONE 19.860 6700 J

22. UNKNOWN 19.935 25000 J

23. UNKNOWN 20.032 6800 J

24. UNKNOWN 20.269 14000 J

25. 514-07-8 D-Friedoolean-14-en-3-one 20.323 64000 NJ

26. UNKNOWN 20.441 15000 .J

27. UNKNOWN 20.506 29000 J

28. UNKNOWN 20.624 22000 J

29. UNKNOWN 20.807 83000 J

30. UNKNOWN 20.979 44000 J

/

,

FORM I SV-TIC

~,288' 0

0

OLM03.0

1546

TIERRA-A-018114
1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ~ALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENJjt'IFIEDCOMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE35

I b Name: SWL-TULSA

.~lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

Case No.: SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.06

Lab File 1D: V18404.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/waterf SOILSample wt/vol: 30.1 (g/mL)i @

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: 88 decanted: (yjN1) N

Concentrated Extract Volume: 5~O(u~)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y p!l: -;'"Co

1.

2. 1058-61-3

3.

4.

5.

6.7.------1------.;::.--

8.

1

-..;.;..__

9.

1

-..;.;..__ .

10.

1

• ...;....,.,.__

i~:---------------

13. 14.------ -------=---

15. _

-:i~~----- I~~~~~~~~~~~~-~-

18. ==r== 19. I------..;.=---

20. I----~----

21. 1------::;;-----

22. 23. 1-----..::.:....;;..,;..---.,;;

24. I------==;.;.....;.;;..:=..;

25. __ 1_==~ _ 26. 1 _

27. I_~ _

28. 1 _

29. 1 _

30. 1 _

UNKNOWN

Stigmast-4-en-3-~

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

Unknown

:-':'~;~'~NTRATIONUNITS:

. ~~/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

I RT I EST. CONC.

...._..~.I======== =============

j 21.098 8300

I 21.195 9400

21.238 9000

22.680 9000

22.841 5600

Q

Number TICs found: 35

================ =======-===~-===:

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND

J

NJ

J

J

J

=====

-----1-------1---

-,----I ·------11---

.-----1-------1'--

..-----1-------11---

._...-1-------1---1 ,

..._-; ·_·------1·---1

.__.~.-------11---1

.._...-----1---1

..._.-....·-----1----1

~.~--~~-------l----t ..·.-------1

.._ .-. -·-----1---1

····..-----1---1

.--------1--- -_·-----1---

··-----1---

------1---1

·------11---

..---~--I---I

--_1----1------ ---I

---- ···------11---1

..

J ,

'>.--'

:raPM I 5V-TIC

p.79"'f

OLM03.0

'(0 1~ .f .,

TIERRA-A-018115
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

BPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE36

lb Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-05-0026

i

·.uabCode: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample 10: 30412.07

Lab File ID: V18405.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Dilution Factor: 10.0

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 60

30.0 (g/mL) G·

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.5

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

108-95-2--------Phenol 8200 U

111_44_4_~------bis(2-Chloroethyl)Ether 8200 g/

95-s7-8---------2-chlorolhenol 8200

541-73-1--------1,3-Dich orobenzene 8200 U

106_46_7 ________ 1,4_Dichlorobenzene 8200 U

95_50-1---------1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene 8200 0

95-48-7---------2-MethylEhenol 8200 ui

108-60-1--------2,2'-O~ is(1-Chloropropane) 8200 U

l

106-44-5--------4-Methy phenol 8200 Ui

621_64_7 ________ N_Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 8200

67-72-1---------Hexachloroethane --

8200 gj

98-95-3---------Nitrobenzene 8200

7S-S9-1---------Iso~horone 8200 uJ

8B-7S-S---------2-N~trophenol 8200 U!

105-67-9--------2,4-Dimethylphenol 8200 ui

111_91_1 ________ bis(2_Chloroethoxy)methane 8200 U:

120-83-2--------2,4-Dichlorophenol --

8200 U

120-82-1--------1, 2,4-Trichlorobenzene 8200 U I

Ql-20-3---------Napht~ne 8200 U!

lO6-47-8--------4-Chloroanil~ne

- Uf--i

87-68-3---------Hexachlorobutadiene

"..!.uu I

8200 U

j

S9-S0-7---------4-Chloro-3-Methllphenol 8200 U

.

!

91-S7-6---------2-Methylnaphtha ene 8200 U I

77-47-4---------BexachlorocIclopentadiene 8200 U i

BS-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 8200 U \

9s-9s-4---------2,4,S-Trichloro 1

henol 21000 U

I

I

91-SS-7---------2-Chlorona1htha ene 8200 U

I

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 21000 U

i

i

131-11-3--------Dimeth~lphthalate 8200 U

.

i

208-96-8------·--AcenaJ? thylene 8200 U

I

606-20-2--------2,6-D~nitrotoluene 8200 u

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 21000 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 8200 U

..

J

I

J

FORM I SV-l OLM03.0

1595

TIERRA-A-018116
j8-bName: SWL-TULSA

" tab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Ma:Efix: {soil/water} SOIL

sample wt/vol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: 60. decanted: (Y/N) N

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

,I

. ,

i

\'-"'-

1C

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE36

Contract: 68-05-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

Lab Sample IO: 30412.07

Lab File IO: V18405.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Dilution Factor: 10.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.5

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

51-28-5---------2,4-Dinitrophenol 21000 U ~

..

100-02-7--------4-Nitrophenol 21000 U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran 8200 U

121-14-2--------2,4-Dinitroto!uene 8200 U

84-66-2---------0iethylphthalate 8200 U

7005-72-3-------4-Chlorophenyl-pheny!etber __ 8200 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 8200 U

100-01-6--------4-Nitroan~!ine 21000 U

534-52-1--------4,6-Dinitro-2-methy!pheno! 21000 U I

86-30-6---------N-NitrosodiphenLlamine (1)-- 8200 U

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 8200 U

118-74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene ---

8200 U I

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 21000

85-01-8---------Phenanthrene 4200 ~

120-12-7--------Anthracene 1000 ~{

86-74-8---------Carbazole 8200

84-74-2---------0i-n-buth

lphthalate 8200 U

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 5400 ~l 1?Q-OO-n--------Pyrene 5400

85-68-7---------Buty~benzl~pnthalate

-f.-- ",.,uu '.r +

91-94-1---------3,3'-Dich orobenzidine /iT 8200

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 2600 'J

218-01-9--------Chrysene 3100 I '

I .)1

117-81-7--------bis(2-Etfirlhexyl)pfitfialate -"0 ....--- ....... -.;$ OO~ I~RB

117-64-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate -- 7700 ./!

205-99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene 2200

~

207-06-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2600

50-32-8---------Benzo(a)pyrene 3000

193-39-5--------Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1800 ,;

53-70-3---------Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 8200 U

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h,~)perylene 2000 ~\

~

r

, /

~

"7f F\~'"f f(c:w f35tsbbJ...

(1) - Cannot be separated from Oiph~nylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

1596

TIERRA-A-018117
lF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

T.ab Name: SWL-TULSA

)

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE36

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample I~:_~0412~07

Lab File ID: VIB405.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Dilution Factor: 10.0

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 60

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.5

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ============================ ======== ================ =====

1. 141-79.-7 3-Penten-2-one, 4-methyl- 2.771 .......... .._~-

2. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.029 -l'.l ...... "T,,7\ 'D

3. UNKNOWN AMIDE 14.427 11000 JB

4. UNKNOWN 15.202 5000 J

5. UNKNOWN 15.266 40000 J

6. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 15.525 4800 J

7. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 15.804 5400 J

8. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 15.880 8600 J

9. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 15.912 5700 J

10. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 15.977 3100 J

11- UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 16.160 8200 J

12. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 16.256 14000 J

13. UNKNOWN 16.321 2900 J

14. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 16.353 2900 J

15. UNKNOWN 16.504 3500 J

16. 1330-78-5 Phosphoric acid, tris(methyl 16.579 3300 NJ

17. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 16.622 5700 J

• n .1'< 'T''F. 16.730 2900 J

..... ---- -----

19. UNKNOWN 16.848 -

4100 - --J

20. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 16.967 3100 J

21- UNKNOWN 17.031 3400 J

22. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 17.709 8400 J

23. UNKNOWN 17.774 4400 J

24. 192-97-2 Benzo[e]pyrene 17.838 5300 NJ

.25. UNKNOWN PHTHALATE 17.871 3100 J

26. Unknown 19.130 3700 J

27. UNKNOWN 19.313 2400 J

28. UNKNOWN 19.378 3600 J

29. UNKNOWN 20.271 4500 J

30. UNKNOWN .20.755 2400 J

,-' ~-'

FORM I SV-TIC

f' 29Z

OLM03.0

1~9'

TIERRA-A-018118
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

T,ab Name: SWL-TULSA

I

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE36

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

decanted: (Y/N) N

500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.07

Lab File ID: VIB405.D

Date Received: OB/Ol/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/08/97

Dilution Factor: 10.0

Sample wtJvol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 60

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.5

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT .EST. CONC. Q

================ ============================ ======== ============= =====

1. UNKNOWN 20.949 3100 J

2. UNKNOWN 21.186 5100 J

3. UNKNOWN 21.573 4900 J

4. UNKNOWN 22.133 13000 J

5. UNKNOWN 22.854 12000 J

6.7. I _

8. ---- ------- ---

9. _

10. i,----·j-------l=--

11. 11 _

12.

1

_____________ -------1---

14.------· ------------- 13. I ---- ------~ ~-- I

15. '1 I

16. 'I II

17. :1 ----

~~: .~ 1--

21. ·I------------~ =--- I

22. '1 23. "1--------==--- ----

~~: :1------------- ---- ------- ---I

26. .1 ------- ---I

27. 28. 0-1-------------- ---- ------- ---

29..1 ---- ------- ---

30. _1 ---- ------- ---

i

.1

,i

l

FORM I SV-TIC

('. z.ql •

OLM03.0

1598

TIERRA-A-018119
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE37

lb Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vo1: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-DS-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

% Moisture: 40 decanted: (Y/N) N

-Lab Sample ID: 30388.07

Lab File ID: V18360.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.2

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG o

1.-

10B-95-2--------Phenol 550 U J

111_44-4--------bis(2-ChloroethyI)Ether 550 U

95-57-8---------2-Chlorolhenol 550 U

541-73-1--------1,3-Dich orobenzene 550 U

106_46_7 ________ 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 550 U

95_50-1---------1,2-Dichlorobenzene 550 U

95-4S-7---------2-MethyIEhenol 550 U

lOS-60-1--------2,2'-O;r is(l-Chloropropane) 550 U

l06-44-5--------4-Methy phenol 550 u

621_64_7 ________ N-Nitroso-di-n-propyiamine 550 U

67-72-1---------Bexachloroethane --

550 U

98-95-3---------Nitrobenzene 550 U

78-59-1---------Iso~horone 550 U

88-75-5---------2-N~trophenol 550 U

lO5-67-9----~---2,4-Dimethylphenol 550 U

111-91-1--------b iS(2-Chloroetho 61 )metfiane I 550 U

120-83-2--------2,4-Dichloropheno --

550 ~\ 120-82-1--------1, 2,4-Trichlorobenzene 550

~, _~n_~~~-----Naphthalene 550 U

106-47-8--------4-Chloroanil~ne

---- - -- ;;J;;JV -v -

87_68-3---------Bexachlorobutadiene -550 U

59-50-7---------4-chloro-3-MethIlPhenol 550

~

91-57-6---------2-Methylnaphtha ene 54

77-47-4---------BexachlorocIclopentad~ene 550

8B-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 550 U

9S-9S-4---------2,4,S-Trichloro 1

henol 1400 U

91-S8-7---------2-Chloronalhtha ene 550 u

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 1400' U

131-1 1-3--------DimethblEhthalate 550 U

20S-96-S--------Acena~ t ylene 550 U

606-20-2--------2,6-D~nitrotoluene 550 u

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 1400 u ~~

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 560 '.

I

I'

V

FORM I SV-l OLM03.0

1674

TIERRA-A-018120
1C

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS aNALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

.!.JabCode: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE37

Case No.: 2~'Ol SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 30388.07

% Moisture: 40

30.0 (g/mt..jG

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Lab File ID: V18360.D

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med) ...

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0 Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pHS 7.2

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

51-28-5---------2,4-Dinitrophenol 1400 U

100-02-7--------4-Nitrophcnol 1400 U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran 240 .,J

121-14-2--------2,4-Dinitrotoluene 550 ,.,.u

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate 550 U

... 7005-72-3-------4-Chloropbenyl-phenylether-- 550 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 440 .,J

100-01-6--------4-Nitroanll~ne 1400 U

534-52-1--------4 6-Dinit~o-2-methylphenol 1400 U

, i h . -- 86-30-6---------N-Nitrosod p enhl~ne (1) 550 U

lOl-S5-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 550 U

118-74-1--------Hexachlorobenzene --- 550 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 1400 U

85-01-8---------Phenanthrene 3400

120-12-7--------Anthracene 870

86-74-S---------Carbazole - 420

~ 84-74-2---------Di-n-but~lphthalate 550

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene ·!.:7",~~".45..Q.O.. __ .E

129-00-0--------Pyrene 4100

8S-6S-7---------ButylbenzrlphEhalate ---- .. "" =;t- -~-

91-94-1---------3,31 -0ichorobenzidine 550 U

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 2300

218-01-9--------Chrysene 2200

117-81-7--------biS(2-EthIlfiexyl)pfithalate 1600

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate -- 550 U

205-99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1800

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1600

50-32-8---------BenZO(a)p~rene 2000

193-39-5--------IndenO~1, ,3-cd)pyrene 1200

53-70-3---------Dibenz a,hlanthracene 520 "J

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h, )perylene 1300

.-- -..-

:r

,

I

i

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

i

I

I

l

I

.

,-- - - -

i

.,

I

I

I

I

i

I

I

I

~

>j I~.~.•.r"j !-" .;:. L-: c,,;'':'-L

(1) - Cannot_be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

1675

TIERRA-A-018121
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EFA SAMPLE NO.

BSE37

"ibName: SWL-TULSA

I

~.£ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) sb~

Contract: 68-05-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.07

Lab File ID: V18360.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 40

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.2

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ =========~========~========= ========= -============= ======

1. UNKNOWN 2.793 .- - -- ........

=vv·

2. UNKNOWN .....~'T~

2.944 10000

3. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hrdro~-4-met 3.051 o.,n

4. Benzene, (-methy ethy )- 3.794 890 J

5. UNKNOWN 9.649 1000 J

J 6. 20071-09-4 Benzene, 1,11 -(1,2-cyclobuta 9.950 670 NJ

- 7. 203-64-5 4B-Cyclopenta[def]phenanthre 11.446 980 NJ

8. 10544-50-0 Sulfur, mol. (S8) 12.522 550 NJ

9. UNKNOWN 12.759 700 J

10. UNKNOWN AMIDE 13.157 470 J

11- Phenanthrene, -tetramethyl- 13.674 550 J

12. 11B-Benzo[]fluorene 13.706 810 J

13. Pyrene, -methyl- 13.900 520 J

14. UNKNOWN AMIDE 14.449 5100 J

15. Bexanedioic acid, este 14.621 ·.,~n .JR..

16. UNKNOWN PAR 14.998 650 ~

17. UNKNOWN 15.181 4400 J

18.

.,1;. OAO 210Q ----~

19. UNKNOWN 15.923 2400 J

20. UNKNOWN 15.977 680 J

21- UNKNOWN 16.031 1000 J

22. Benzo[]phenanthrene, methyl- 16.203 480 J

23. 192-97-2 Benzo[e]pyrene 17.860 11·00 NJ

24. UNKNOWN 19.163 980 J

25. UNKNOWN 19.238 570 J

26. UNKNOWN 19.335 550 J

27. UNKNOWN 19.894 510 J

28. UNKNOWN PAR 19.948 730 J

29. UNKNOWN 20.293 520 J

30. UNKNOWN PAa 20.3361 600 J

FORM I SV-TIC

P • z.-~6

OLM03.0

• 1676

TIERRA-A-018122
1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

-.ab Name: SWL-TULSA

Jab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-DS-0026

BSE37

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

decanted: (Y/N) N .

500{uL}

Lab Sample ID: 30388.07

Lab File ID: V1B360.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:OB/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 40

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0{uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.2

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

.,

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONe. Q

================ ============================ ======== ============= =====

1. UNKNOWN 20.777 500 J

2. UNKNOWN 21.218 810 J

3. Dibenzpyrene 22.144 620 J

4. Dibenzpyrene 22.413 450 J

5. Dibenzpyrene 23.123 450 J

6 •

7.

8.

,

9.

10.

11. 1 ------11 II

12. I~ II---~----- ~r-----I 11",[ ====

17.1

~.. -

'_.

FORM I SV-TIC

p.2tt7

OLM03.0

1677

TIERRA-A-018123
-",b Name: SWL-TULSA

i

contract: 68-D5-0026

EPA.SAMPLE NO.

I. BSE38

lB

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

.Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.0S

Lab File ID: V18361.D

Date Received: 07/31/9?

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: OS/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix~_(soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

30.1 (g/mL) G

LOW

% Moisture: 53 decanted: (Y/N) N

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.6

108-95-2--------Phenol

700 U :r

111_44-4--------bis(2-Chloroethyl)Ether 700 U

95_57-8---------2-chlorolhenol

700 U

S41-73-1--------1,3-Dich orobenzene 700 U

106_46-7--------1,4-Dichlorobenzene 700 U

9S_50-1---------1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene 700 U

9S-48-7---------2-MethYlbhenol

700 U

.J

108-60-1--------2,21-0~ is(l-Chloropropane) 700 U

106-44-5--------4-Methy phenol

700 U

621_64_7 ________ N_Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 700 U

67_72-1---------Eexachloroethane --

700 U

98_95-3---------Nitrobenzene 700 U

78-59-1---------Iso~horone

700 U

88_75_5 _________ 2-N~trophenol 700 U

105_67_9 ________ 2,4-Dimethylphenol 700 U

111_91_1 ________ bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 700 U

120_83_2 ________ 2,4-Dichlorophenol -- 700 U

120-82-1--------1, 2,4-Trichlorobenzene 700 U

91-20-3---------Naphthalene

700 U

~ __ .- ... JI .• ro}" • n~ 700 U

~vv ~ -- -

87_68-3---------Eexachlorobutad~ene

- i:J - IUU

S9_S0_7 _________ 4_Chloro-3-MethrlPhenol 700 U

91_S7_6 _________ 2_Meth!lnaphtha ene 50 'tl..

77-47-4---------Bexach orocrClopentadiene 700 U

I S8-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 700 U

9S_9S_4 _________ 2

,4,5-Trichlorophenol 1800 U

I

91_S8_7 _________ 2_chloronalhthalene 700 u

8S-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine

1800 U

131-11-3--------DimethKlEhthalate

700 U

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene

700 U

606_20_2 ________ 2,6-D~nitrotoluene 700 u

99_09_2 _________ 3_Nitroaniline 1800 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene

700 U~

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

. \)

1808

TIERRA-A-018124
lC

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE38

.b Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-05-0026

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 303~8~08

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 53

30.1 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Lab File ID: V18361.D

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL}

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0 Injection Volume: 2" 0 (uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.6

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

{ug/L or ug/Kg} UG/KG Q

51_28-5---------2,4-Dinitrophenol 1800 U

-

...

100-02-7--------4-Nitrophenol 1800 U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran 700 U

121_14_2 ________ 2,4_Dinitrotoluene 700 U

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate 700 U

7005_72_3 _______ 4_Chlorophenyl-phenylether 700 U I

86-73-7---------Fluorene --

39 ~ :1

100-01-6--------4-Nitroanil~ne 1800 U

534_52_1 ________ 4,6_Dinitro-2-methylphenol 1800 U

86-30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphenhlamine (1)-- 700 U

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 700 U

118-74-1--------Hexachlorobenzene 700 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 1800 U

85-01-8---------Phenanthrene 380

~ 120-12-7--------Anthracene

, 87

86-74-8---------Carbazole 700 U

84~7~~2:--------~~:n-~u~t!~~thalate 700 U

_ ........ ~~ 580 U

.... -

129-00-0--------Pyrene

630 "'&:

8S-68-7---------Butylbenz!lphthalate 700 U

91-94-1---------3,31 -Dich orobenzidine 700 U

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 260 J;,

218-01-9--------Chrysene 300 :J:

117_81_7 ________ biS(2-Eth!lhexyl)pfithalate 480 ~

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate -- 700 U

20S-99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene 260 :v

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 200 "iI,

50-32-8---------Benzo(a)pyrene 240 :~~

193-39-5--------Indeno{1,2,3-cd)pyrene 160 '~;.

53_70_3 _________ Dibenz(a,h}anthracene 700 .U

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h,~)perylene 200 J,!.

(1) - Cannorbe separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018125
":libName: SWL-TULSA

I

.,cib Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

EPA SAMPLE NO.

I. BSE3B

1F

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample,wt/vol: 30.1 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Lab Sample ID: 30388.08

Lab File ID:

...

V1836l.D

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500{uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: 53 decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.6

Number TICs found: 33

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ======-===================== , ======== ============= =====

1. UNKNOWN ! 2.758 16000 A~

2. ALDOL CONDENSATE

i 2.790 ----

i .-......

3. UNKNOWN ALCOHOL 1l 2.854 900

4. UNKNOWN ALCOHOL 2.897 --.nA

.............-- ......

5. Buten-one, -methyl- 2.951 15000 J

6. UNKNOWN 3.016 220 ~

7. 123-42,:",,2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.048 ,nnn NJAB

8. UNKNOWN I 3.102 660 ~

9. UNKNOWN ALKENE 3.285 200 J

10. UNKNOWN 3.371 ...... ""

--.oT'_"'- dB

1l. UNKNOWN 3.468 3~Q J

12. UNKNOWN ::I 1:i7':; ~. - JB

bk 13. UNKNOWN I 0.748 b1' CTVV JBK

14. 100-52-7 Benzaldehyde 3.8lJ2 410 NJ

15. UNKNOWN 3.931 210 J

16. UNKNOWN 4.318 190 J

17. UNKNOWN 1~·~~~

210 J

18.

,Qn J

19. 10544-50-0 Sulfur, mol. {58} 12.519 180 NJ

20. UNKNOWN AMIDE 13.154 420 J

21- Phenanthrene, tetramethyl- 13.671 360 J

22. UNKNOWN AMIDE 14.446 7~~~ J

23. Bexanedioic acid, este 14.618 T~

:r-:7V ........

24. UNKNOWN 16.437 250 J

25. Dodecatrien-ol, trimethy 17.276 300 J

26. 198-55-0 Perylene 17.857 300 NJ

27. UNKNOWN 18.503 280 J

28. UNKNOWN 18.880 270 J

29. UNKNOWN 19.332 210 J

30. UNKNOWN 19.881 190 J

.

\~.,' .,lI·:

FORM I SV-TIC

r .'$00

OLM03.0

L 1810. ".

TIERRA-A-018126
lF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE38

T·ab Name: SWL-TULSA

I

, ..uabCode: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.1 (g/mL) G

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.08

Lab File ID: V18361.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Dat~ Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Level: (low/med) LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

...

% Moisture: 53

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.6

Number TICs found: 33

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ============================ ======== ============= :=====

1. UNKNOWN 20.989 .-

-

u=

2. UNKNOWN 21.140 240 Jj¥

,3. UNKNOWN 22.022 730 J

4.5. I1- ;

6. ,- ----1------- ---I

- 7.

8. I

9. I

I I I' I

10. I

I I I I

11- I

I I I I

12. I

I I I I

13.

,I

I I I I

14. I I

15.

16.

17.

.....

:\ I \ \

........ .

19. ·1

I

I

~

20. I i

21- :1 I

I

22. I

I

23.

.

24.

.

25. -I I

26. -I I I

!I

27. J

I'

28., j

I I I

29. -I

I I I

,

30. -l

I I I

\ I I

FORM I SV-TIC

r .'10(

OLM03.0

1811

TIERRA-A-018127
IB

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE41

.:r...ab Name: SWL-TULSA

,

...ab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-0S-0026

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SOG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/w~~~r)_WATER

sample wt/vol: 1000 (g/mL) ML

Level: (low/med) LOW

Lab Sample ID: 30388.10

Lab File ID: T22948.D

% Moisture: decanted: (Y/N)_

1000(uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N)N pH: 7.6

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug.fL or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

108-95-2--------Phenol 10 U ji

111_44_4 ________ bis(2-Chloroethyl)Ether 10 U

9S-57-a---------2-chloro1

henol 10 U

541-73-1-~------1,3-Dich orobenzene 10 U I

106-46-7--------1,4-Dichlorobenzene 10 U I

95-50-1---------1,2-Dichlorobenzene 10 U

I

- 9S-4B-7---------2-MethylEhenol 10 U

10B-60-1--------2,2'-O~ is (l-Chloropropane) 10 U

106-44-S--------4-Methy phenol 10 u

621-64-7--------N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 10 U

67-72-1---------Hexachloroethane --,

10 U

98-95-3---------Nitrobenzene 10 U

78-59-1---------Iso~horone 10 U

B8-75-5---------2-N~trophenol 10 U

105-67-9--------2{4-Dimethylphenol 10 U

111-91-1--------b~s(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 10 U

120-B3-2--------2,4-Dichlorophenol --

10 U

120-B2-1--------1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 10 U

91-20-3---------Naphthalene 10 U

'nh-47-e--------4-Chloroanil~ne 10 U

87-6B-3---------Hexachlorobutadiene .LV u

S9-S0-7---------4-Chloro-3-MethrlPhenol 10 U

91-57-6---------2-Methrlnaphtha ene 10 U

77-47-4---------Hexach orocrClopentadiene 10 U

.~

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 10 U

9s-9S-4---------2,4,S-Trichloro 1

henol 25 U

91-58-7---------2-chlorona1htha ene 10 u

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 2S U

131-11-3--------0imethhlEhthalate 10 U

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 10 U

606-20-2--------2,6-D~nitrotoluene 10 u

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 25 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 10 U V

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

r·102.. 1874

TIERRA-A-018128
IC

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

BPA SAMPLE NO.

-T.ab Name: SWL-TULSA

I

...,ab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026 \_~BSE41 r< F=>o<'

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vo1: 1000 (g/mL) ML

Level: (low/med) LOW

Lab Sample ID: 30388.10

Lab File ID: T22948.D

Concentrated Extract Volume: lOOO(uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: decanted: (Y/N)~

Injection Volume: 2.0{uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 7.6

51_28-5---------2,4-Dinitrophenol 25 U

100_02-7--------4-Nitrophenol 25 U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran 10 U

121_14_2 ________ 2,4_Dinitrotoluene 10 U

84_66-2---------Diethylphthalate 10 U

700S_72_3 _______ 4_Chlorophenyl-phenylether __ 10 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 10 U

100-01-6--------4-Nitroanil~ne 25 U

534_52_1--------4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 25 U

86_30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphen~lamine (l)-- 10 U

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 10 U

-

118-74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene 10 U

87_86-5---------pentachlorophenol 25 U

85-01-8---------Phenanthrene 10 U

120-12-7--------Anthracene 10 U

86-74-8---------Carbazole 10 U

S4_74_2 _________ Di_n_but~lPhthalate 10 0

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 10 U

I

129-00-0--------Pyrene 10 U

as_6B_7 _________ Butyibenz¥lphthalate 10 U

91_94-1---------3,3'-Dich~orobenzidiue "IV ---tJ -

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene

10; U

218-01-9--------Chrysene 10

-~

117_S1-7--------bis(2-Eth 1

Ifiexyl)pfitfialate 0.5

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate -- 10 U

205_99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene 10 U

207_08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 10 U

50-32-8---------Benzo(a)pyrene 10 U

193-39-5--------I~deno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene 10 U

53_70_3 _________ D~benz(a,h}anthracene 10 U

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h;~)perylene 10 U

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(uq/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

,"",;,.

I

I

•

\

,

I

~.

V

(1) - Cannot be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

1875

TIERRA-A-018129
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE41

-T."abName: SWL-TULSA

i

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

__ Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 1000 (g/mL) ML

Level:. (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-05-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

, Moisture: decanted: (Y/N)_

1000(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.10

Lab File ID: T22948.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:OB/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/05/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 7.6

Number TICs found: 4

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC.

==========-==-== .================a==_~_=_===· ==-===-- ~l =============

1. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.117 A

~ '''-r 2. UNKNOWN 3.868 16 ----JB

3. Trimethyl-hexene 3.997 5 J

4. UNKNOWN 4.136 B··· JB

5. I I

6. I

I 1 I

7. I I I I B. I I I

9. I I I

10. I I

I I 11-

12. I 13. 1 I I

-I

14. I I I

1

I I

15. 1 I I

16. I I I I

17. I

I I I

"'I- I I

-~ I

19. I

--

~.

20. T

21- I I I

22. I

I

I I I

23. I I I

24. I I I I

!

25. I I I

26. I

...- I

27. I I I

28. 1 I I 1

29. I

30. I

I I I

I . I

I

I

I

I

J I

'"

'--

FORM I SV-TIC

('.~o'1.

OLM03.0

1876

TIERRA-A-018130
1B

SEMIVOLATlLE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

-_T..ab Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE42 FI3

..hb Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SOG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 1000(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.08'

- -- ~ .

Lab File 10: V18428.0

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/05/97

Date Analyzed: 08/11/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

, Moisture:

1000 (g/mL) ML

LOW

decanted: (Y/N)___

sample wt/vol:

,'., Level: (low/med)

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 8.4

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

10B-95-2--------Phenol 10 ubr

111_44_4 ________ bis(2_Chloroethyl)Ether 10 U

95-57-8---------2-chlorolhenol 10 U

541-73-1--------1,3-Dich orobenzene 10 U

106_46_7 ________ 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 10 U

95_S0_1 _________ 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 10 U

-'.

9S-48-7---------2-Methylbhenol 10 U

108-60-1-.-------2,2 I-O~ is (l~Chloropropane) 10 U

106-44-5--------4-Methy phenol 10 U

621_64-7--------N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine __ 10 U

67_72_1 _________ Bexachloroethane 10 U

98-95-3---------Nitrobenzene 10 U

78-59-1---------Iso~horone 10 U

B8-7S-5---------2-N~trophenol .

10 U

105-67-9--------2 [4-Dimethylphenol 10 U

111-91-1--------b~S(2-Chloroeth06!)methane 10 U

120-83-2--------2,4-Dichloropheno --

10 U

120-82-1--------1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 10 U

91-20-3---------Naphthalene 10 U

lO6-47-8--------4-Chloroaniline 10 U

B7~6B-3--------- -

,n TT

59-50-7---------4-Chloro-3-MethIlphenol 10 U

91-S7-6---------2-Methylnaphtha ene 10 U

77-47-4---------Bexachloroclclopentadiene . 10 U

8B-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 10 U

95-9S-4---------2,4,s-Trichloro 1

henol 25 U

91-5B-7---------2-Chlorona 1

htha ene 10 U

88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 25 U

131-11-3--------0imethhlEhthalate 10 U

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 10 U

606-20-2--------2,6-D~nitrotoluene 10 U

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 25 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphth~ne 10 U "II

.-

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

- - 1887

TIERRA-A-018131
1C

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE42 Fel

'Lab Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

I ..JabCode: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

% Moisture: decanted: (Y/N)_

1000(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.08

Lab File ID: V18428.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/05/97

Date Analyzed: 08/11/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

1000 (g/mL) ML

LOW

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 8.4

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

51-28-5---------2 4-Dinitrophenol 25 U :r

, .

100-02-7--------4-N~trophenol 25 U "

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran : 10 U I'

121-14-2--------2,4-Dinitrotoluene 10 U

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate 10 U

7005-72-3-------4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 10 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene --

10 U

100-01-6--------4-Nitroan~line 25 U

534-52-1--------4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 25 u

86-30-6---------N-NitrosodiphenLlamine (1)-- 10 U

lOl-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 10 U

118-74-1--------Hexachlorobenzene -

10 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 25 U

85-01-8---------Phenanthrene 10 U ,

120-12-7--------Anthracene 10 U

86-74-8---------Carbazole 10 U

84-74-2-----~---Di-n-butLIPhthalate 10 U

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 10 U,

129-00-0--------Pyrene 10 U

85-68-7---------Butylbenzylphthalate 10 U

91-94-T---------~, ~T-lJl.Cn.1.0L ...

.. ... ....

...y .....

56-55-3---------Benzo(a) anthracene 10 U

218-01-9--------Chrysene 10 u

117-81-7--------bis(2-EthIlhexyI)pbthaiate 12 i "'B.

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate -- 10 U

205-99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene 10 U

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 10 U

50-32-8---------Benzo(a)pyrene 10 U

193-39-5--------I~denO(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 10 U

53-70-3---------D~benz(a/h}anthracene 10 U

191-24-2--------Benzo{g,h,~)perylene 10 U

I

v

\

(1) - Cannot be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

1888

TIERRA-A-018132
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

~b Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE42

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol: 1000

Level: (lQw/med) LOW

Lab Sample ID: 30412.08

(g/mL) ML Lab File ID: V18428.D

% Moisture: decanted: (Y/N)_

1000(uL)

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/05/97

Date Analyzed: 08/11/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 8.4

Number TICs found: 2

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L

1. UNKNOWN

2. Hexanedioic acid, est

3. _

4. ---- -------1:

5. -- 6. ._--

3.452

7.079

Q

2 J

2 JB

----- ----- ================ ============================ ======== =============

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC.

7. I

I I

8. I I

9. I I I

10. I I I

11-

12. I I I

I

I

i

13. I I

14. I I

I

I I

15.

-!I

I I

16. I

I I

- -

I I I

18. I

19. :I 20. I I

21- I I I

22. I I I

23. I I I

24. I I I

25. I I I

26.

27. I I I

28. I I I

29. I I I

30. I I I

I

I I

FORM I SV-TIC

f .'3o~

OLM03.0

1589

TIERRA-A-018133
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE43

,..J;..abName: SWL-TULSA

Jib Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL Lab Sample ID: 30388.11

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 21

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: V1S362.D

decanted: (Y/N) N

500(uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 5.8

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ugjL or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

10S-95-2--------Phenol 280 J

111_44_4 ________ bis(2_Cbloroethyl)Ether 420 U

95-57-8---------2-Chlorophenol 420 U

541_73-1--------1,3-Dichlorobenzene 420 U

106-46-7--------1,4-Dichlorobenzene 420 U

95-50-1---------1,2-Dichlorobenzene 420 U

95-48-7---------2-Methylbhenol 420 U

10S-60-1-----~--2,2'-O~ is(1-Chloropropane) 420 U

106-44-5--------4-Methy phenol 420 u

621-64-7--------N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine I 420 U

67-72-1---------Bexachloroethane --

420 tJ

9B-95-3---------Nitrobenzene 420 U

78-59-1---------Iso~horone 420 U

BB-75-5---------2-N~trophenol 420 U

105-67-9--------2,4-Dimethylphenol 420 U

111-91-1--------bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 420 U

120-S3-2--------2,4-Dichlorophenol --

420 U

120-S2-1--------1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 420 U

91-20-3---------Naphthalene 420 U

lO6-47-8--------4-Chloroanil~ne 420 U

~1-b~-~--------- Ii"",n T~

-.- ~

59-50-7---------4-chloro-3-MethIlphenol 420 U

91-57-6---------2-Methylnaphtha ene 54 V

77-47-4---------aexachloroclclopentadiene 420 U

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol .--- 420 U

95-95-4---------2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 1000 U

91-58-7---------2-chlorona1

hthalene 420 u

SB-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 1000 U

131-11-3--------Dimeth~lhhthalate 420 U

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 140

~- 606-20-2------~-2,6-D~nitrotoluene 420

99-09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 1000 U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 420 U

:r

-t-- ----

\

\

l

\

,

t

FORM I SV-l OLM03.0

1897

TIERRA-A-018134
lC

SEMIVOLATlLE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE43

~b Name: SWL-TULSA

""ab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-DS-0026

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Matrix: (soil/wateri -SOIL .

Sample wt/vol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Lab Sample ID: 30388.11

Lab File ID: V18362.D

% Moisture: 21 decanted: (~/N)N

500(uL)

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pB: 5. B

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

Sl-28-S---------2,4:Dinitrophenol 1000 U 'T

100-02-7--------4-N~trophenol 1000 U I

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran 420 U

121-14-2--------2,4-Dinitrotoluene 420 U

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate 1600

700S_72_3 _______ 4_Chlorophenyl-phenylether-- 420 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 420 U

100-01-6--------4-Nitroanil~ne 1000 U

S34_S2_1 ______ ~_4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 1000 u

86-30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphenhlamine (1)-- 1200

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether -- 420 U

118-74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene 420 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 1000

~ 85-01-8---------Phenanthrene 260

120-12-7--------Anthracene 120 ~

86-74-B---------Carbazole 420 U

84-74-2---------Di-n-but~lphthalate 200 ~

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 410 '\i(

129-00-0~-------Pyrene 620

BS-68-7---------BUl:.y

"' ........

. w> .. - ..... ~- -

91-94-1---------3,31 -Dichlorobenzidine 420

56-55-3---------Benzo(a)anthracene 350 ~

218-01-9--------Chrysene 440

117-81-7--------bis(2-EthIlhexyl)phthalate 2000

117-84-0--------Di-n-octy phthalate --

150 #

205-99-2--------Benzo(b)fluoranthene 470

207-08-9--------Benzo(k}fluoranthene 340 'J

SO-32-8---------Benzo{a}pyrene 420 ':I

193-39-5--------Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 360

~ S3-70-3---------Dibenz (a,h·)anthracene 130

191-24-2--------Benzo(g,h/~)perylene 540 V

~ ~ ..M~ G.s~L{'!DL ~ .

(1) - Cannot_be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

1898

TIERRA-A-018135
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE43

~-ab Name: SWL-TULSA

)

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.11

Lab File ID: V18362.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08jOl/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

sample ~/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 21

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 5.8

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT

================ ============================ ======== =-~~~~ ~

1- 141-79!"'7 3-Penten-2-one, 4-methyl- 2.783

2. UNKNOWN 2.880

3. UNKNOWN l:m 11 2.945

4. UNKNOWN 3.053 640 J

5. UNKNOWN 3.096 ,n .vI

6. UNKNOWN 8.617 760 J

. 7. Phenol, (phenylamino)- 11. 437 660 J

8. 1,1 I-Biphenyl, -Tetrachloro- 11.899 360 J

9. Triazine-diamine, -phenIl12.211 580 J

10. I,ll-Biphenyl, -pentach oro- 13.514 540 J

11- 11B-Benzo[]fluorene 13.707 610 J

12. I,ll-Biphenyl, -pentachloro- 13.8901 680 J

13. UNKNOWN AMIDE 14.461 4400 .l

14. Bexanedioic acid, este 14.622 I:on

-

15. 115-86-6 Phosphoric acid, triphenyl e 14.870 3700 NJ

16. UNKNOWN 17.646 410 J

17. UNKNOWN 17.776 280 J'

.- ""'''' .......... -

r ~ 'I~~ • .,..~~_ 17.862' 380 NJ

...u. ...., ~ --.,-. - UNKNOWN~~· 19. 18.206 300 J I

20. UNKNOWN 18.303 420 - J

21- UNKNOWN 18.389 370 J

22. UNKNOWN PAR 18.497 600 J

23. UNKNOWN 18.572 370 J

24. UNKNOWN PAR 18.712 610 J

25. UNKNOWN 18.787 240 J

26. UNKNOWN 18.895 650 J

27. UNKNOWN 18.949 350 J

28. Unknown 19.003 250 J

29. 59-02-9 Vitamin E 19.067 300 NJ

30. UNKNOWN -19.336 270 J

-

l !

" "...

FORM I 5V-TIC

r.:510

OLM03.0

1899

TIERRA-A-018136
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE43

~ Name: SWL-TULSA

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix:--(soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

% Moisture: 21 decanted: (Y/N) N

500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.11

Lab File ID: V18362.D

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/06/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 5.8

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or U9/K9) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

=m============-= ============================ ==:=::1==== ============= ======

1. 83-47-6 .gamma.-Sitosterol 20.294 980 NJ

2. 603-48-5 ,Benzenamine,4,4',4"-methyl 20.778 450 NJ

3. ! UNKNOWN 21.123 740 Jt

4. 1058-61-3 Stigmast-4-en-3-one 21.230 720 NJ

5. UNKNOWN 22.576 340 J

6.

7. I I

--

8.

9. i~:-------------------- ---~=-----1.--

i~: 1:

1

'- --

14. _

15.

16.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

'I ·1II

l-~

'I II

1 1

'I I

I I

'I I I

1 I

"I 1 I I

~I

.I

1 1 I

J

I I I

J

I 1 I I

.

I I

I

FORM I SV-TIC

p.rl/

OLM03.0

",' 1900

TIERRA-A-018137
1B

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE44

T.ab Name: SWL-TULSA

) Mab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 6S-DS-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30412.09

sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Lab File ID: V18442.D

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:OS/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/11/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

% Moisture: 21 decanted: (Y/N) N

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 6.2

lOS-9S-2--------Phenol

420 U T

111_44_4 ________ b

is{2-Chloroethyl)Ether 420 U

9S_s7-S---------2-chlorolhenol

420 U

S41-73-1--------1,3-Dich orobenzene 420 U

lO6_46-7--------1,4-Dichlorobenzene 420 U

9S_S0-1--~------1,2-Dichlorobenzene 420 U

9S_4S-7---------2-MethylEhenol 3S 'l:l.

i

10S-60-1--------2,2'-O~ is(l-chloropropane) 420 U

l06-44-5--------4-Methy phenol 46 'J...

621_64_7--------N-Nitroso-di-n-propyl~ne 420 U

67_72-1---------Hexachloroethane --

420 u

98_9S-3---------N itrobenzene 420 U

78-S9-1---------Iso~horone 420 ·U

88_75-S---------2-N~trophenol 420 U

10S-67-9--------2,4-Dimethylphenol 420 U

111_91_1 ________ bis{2-Chloroethoxy)methane 420 U

120_83_2 ___ ~____ 2,4-Dichlorophenol -- 420 U

120_S2_1 ________ 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 420 U

91-20-3---------Naphthalene 420 U

'n~_d7-8--------4-Chloroaniline 420 U

87-68-3---------HexachloroDu~aa~ene

._ .. ...

.. 60"'"

S9_S0_7---------4-chloro-3-Methllphenol 420 *

91-57-6---------2-Methylnaphtha ene 42

77_47-4---------Bexachloroclclopentadiene 420 U

88-06-2---------2,4,6-Trich orophenol --- 420 U

9S_9S-4---------2,4,S-Trichlorophenol 1000 U

91_S8-7---------2-chlorona~hthalene 420 \

U

, 88-74-4---------2-Nitroani ine 1000 U

\

131-11-3--------Dimeth~lhhthalate 420 _·U

208-96-8--------Acena~ t ylene 120

~

606_20-2--------2,6-D~nitrotoluene 420

99_09-2---------3-Nitroaniline 1000 ·-,U

83-32-9---------Acenaphthene 91 '&.. l}

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

{ug/L or ug/Kg} UG/KG Q

FORM I SV-1 OLM03.0

p.11~

2045

TIERRA-A-018138
lC

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE44

T,ab Name: SWL-TULSA

I

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.09

Lab File 1D: -V18442.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/11/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

....

% Moisture: 21

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

decanted: (Y/N) N

sample wt/vol:

, Level: (low/med)

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 6.2

CAS NO. COMPOUND

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

51-28-5---------2,4:Dinitrophenol 1000 U .:r

100-02-7--------4-N~trophenol 1000 U

132-64-9--------Dibenzofuran 52

~ 121-14-2--------2,4-Dinitrotoluene 420

84-66-2---------Diethylphthalate 420 U

7005-72-3-------4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether __ 420 U

86-73-7---------Fluorene 74 'J..

t

100-01-6--------4-Nitroanil~ne 1000 U

.I 534-52-1--------4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 1000 U

86-30-6---------N-Nitrosodiphenhlamine (1)=: 420 U

101-55-3--------4-Bromophenyl-p enylether ___ 420 U

118-74-1--------Bexachlorobenzene 420 U

87-86-5---------Pentachlorophenol 1000 U

I

8S-01-8---------Phenanthrene 1200

120-12-7--------Anthracene 380 'ii

86-74-8---------Carbazole 110

84-74-2---------Di-n-but ~ h

lphthalate 70 !

206-44-0--------Fluorant ene 1800

,

.

129-00-0--------Pyrene 2200 .I

Q~_~A_~ _________ ~11tV'· U

I

nh+ha1ate 420 i

91-94-1---------3,3~-Dichlorobenzid~ne

1

4:20 u 1

56-55-3---------Benzo (a)anthracene 1300 I

218-01-9--------Chrysene 1400 I

117-81-7---~----bis(2-Ethllhexyl)Phthalate 1700 B I

117-84-0--------Di-n-oct¥ phthalate -- 420 U l

j

205-99-2--------Benzo(b) luoranthene 1100 1

207-08-9--------Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1100 \

50-32-8---------Benzo(a)pyrene 1300 \

193-39-5--------I~denO(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 850 ••

53-70-3---------D~benz(a,h}anthracene 350 ~

:

i

19l-24-2--------Benzo{q,h,~)perylene 980 V

(1) - Cannot be separated from Diphenylamine

FORM I SV-2 OLM03.0

2046

TIERRA-A-018139
IF

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

EPA SAMPLE NO.

jibName: SWL-TULSA

~ab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE44

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

decanted: (Y/N) N

500(uL)

-Lab Sample ID: 30412.09

Lab File ID: V18442.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date E~racted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/11/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

~J.,.

Sample wt/vol:

Level: (low/med)

% Moisture: 21

30.0 (g/mL) G

LOW

Concentrated Extract Volume:

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 6.2

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ugJL or ug/Kg) UG/KG

================

CAS NUMBER

=======================-====

COMPOUND NAME

========

RT -=~~~~~~~

L 141-79-7 3-Penten-2-one, 4-methyl- 2.738 290

2. 123-42-2 2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-met 3.007 ~JI....O....Q... -Na:AB'

3. 100-52-7 Benzaldehyde 3.761 1100 NJ

4. 57-10-3 Hexadecanoic acid 11.391 3500 NJ

5. UNKNOWN 11.574 960 J

6. Naphtho[]pyran, 11.800 3400 J

7. Indacen-one, -tetrahhdro- 12.080 2000 J

8. Phenanthrene, -dimet y1- 12.371 810 J

9. UNKNOWN 12.457 1900 J

10. UNKNOWN 1 12.694 2500 J

11- UNKNOWN 13.264, 730 J

12. Phenanthrene, -tetramethyl- 13.608 7200 J

13. UNKNOWN 13.899 670 J

14. UNKNOWN 14.125 620 J

15. UNKNOWN 14.168 6800 J

16. UNKNOWN 14.243 1400 J

17 UNKNOWN 14.3731 1400 J

18. 1740-19-8 1-Phenanthrenecarboxy~~c ac~ ~4.4~b b~UU l'hJ

19. UNKNOWN 14.599 580 J

20. 18956-15-5 2-Propen-l-one, 1-(2,6-dihyd 14.857 980 NJ

21- UNKNOWN 15.072 840 J

22. 1740-19-8 I-Phenanthrenecarboxylic aci 15.158 1800 NJ

23. Benzopyran-one, -dihydro-d 15.449 720 J'

24. UNKNOWN 15.772 620 J

25. UNKNOWN 16.008 2900 J

26. UNKNOWN 16.105 1400 J

27. UNKNOWN 16.202 820 J

28. UNKWOWN 16.536 590 J

29. UNKNOWN 17.214 920 J

30. UNKNOWN 18.602 1400 J

.

.-

.

FORM I SV-TIC

F -7fl(

OLM03.0

2047

TIERRA-A-018140
1F

'SBMIVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS

BPA SAMPLE NO.

rab Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE44

J:,abCode: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 500(uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.09

Lab File ID: V18442.D

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/11/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol: 30.0 (g/mL) G

Level: (low/med) LOW

% Moisture: 21 decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 2.0(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 6.2

Number TICs found: 35

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

CAS NUMBER COMPOUND NAME RT EST. CONC. Q

================ ============================ ======== =============. =====

1. UNKNOWN 18.828 560 J

2. UNKNOWN 18.936 620 J

3. UNKNOWN PAH 20.260 930 J

4. UNKNOWN 20.916 1000 J

.5. UNKNOWN 21.131 1500 J

6. I 7· 1

8. _

9. I

10. 11. _1

i~:1 14. _ I

15. ',

16. ,

I

II I I'

II 1--- I

I I

I I \

I 1 I

I I I

I I

--

1

I I ..__ . I

I I I

I Ii

1

!I i

1 I II -- I I I

1 1 'I

I I I

I I I

\ 1 \

1 1 1

1 I I

I 1 1

,I I

I

18. 1

19. :1

20. 21.------"1

22. 'I

23. 'I

24. :1

25. 26. _.\1 ,

27. _

28. .1

~9. .I

O. .1

!~~~..,.........---.J

" FORM I SV-TIC

f' 'SolS"

OLM03.0

204R

TIERRA-A-018141
1D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

w Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE22

I""

,

...

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

CONT

10000 (uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.01

Lab File ID:

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:OB/01/97

Date Analyzed: OB/16/97

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture:

1000 (g/mL) ML

decanted: (Y/N) ____

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL) Dilution Factor: 1.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 8.1 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L.or ug/Kg) UG/L Q CAS NO. COMPOUND

319-B4-6----~---alpha-BHC 0.050 U J

319-85-7--------beta-BHC 0.050 U

319-86-8--------delta-BHC 0.050 U

58-89-9---------gamma-BHC (Lindane> 0.050 U

76-44-8---------Heptachlor 0.050 U

309-00-2--------Aldrin 0.050 U

1024-57-3-------Heptachlor epoxide 0.050 U

959-98-8--------Endosulfan I 0.050 U

60-57-1---------Dieldrin 0.10 U

72-SS-9---------4,4'-DDE 0.10 U

72-20-8---------Endrin 0.10 U

33213-6S-9------Endosulfan II 0.10 U

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD 0.10 U

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 0.10 U

SO-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 0.10 U

72-43-S---------Methoxychlor 0.50 U

53494-70-S------Endrin ketone 0.10 U

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyae 0.1.0 U

5.J.v3-71-9-- a..pna 'l.:n.¥ ..'110010~.- - --- ..

v.\J..I\J ..-

Sl03-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane 0.050 U

8001-35-2-------Toxaphene 5.0 U

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1016 1.0 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 2.0 U

11141-16-5------Aroclor-1232 1.0 U

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 1.0 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 1.0 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254 1.0 U

11096-82-5------Aroclor-1260 1.0 U

\~

-

FORM I PEST

f' ")/b

OLM03.0

?d 11

TIERRA-A-018142
lD

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

~ Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE23

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume:

CONT

10000 (uL)

Lab Sample ~D: 3038B.02

Lab File ID:

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/16/97

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol:

t Moisture:

1000 (g/mL) ML

decanted: (Y/N) __

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL) Dilution Factor: 1.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 8.3 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q CAS NO. COMPOUND

319-84-6--------alpha-BHC I 0.050 U'

319-85-7--------beta-BHC 0.050 U

319-B6-B--------delta-BHC 0.050 U

58-89-9---------gamrna-BHC (Lindane) 0.050 U

76-44-B---------Heptachlor 0.050 U

-- 309-00-2--------Aldrin I

I 0.050 U

1024-57-3~------Heptachlor epoxide I

i 0.050 U

959-9B-B--------Endosulfan I 0.050 U

60-S7-1---------Dieldrin 0.10 U

72-55-9---------4,4'-DDE 0.10 U

72-20-8---------Endrin 0.10 U

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II 0.10 U

72-54-8----~----4,4'-DDD 0.10 U

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 0.10 U

SO-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 0.10 U

72-43-S---------Methoxychlor 0.50 U

53494-70-5------Endrin ketone 0.10 U

7421-93-4-------End~in aldehyde 0.10 U

~"I'\""'1 ""-"'--

l"l ..... , .... lo" ..,. f""I""", ... .,..";,,,.,o " "~I"\ TT

.,J ... ..,oJ , ... J

_ ....t"..~g; "'""'...I..'-' ...~fJo, ... ~ - . -

5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane 0.050 U

8001-35-2-------Toxaphene 5.0 U \

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1016 1.0 U

\

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 2.0 U

11141-16-5------Aroclor-1232 1.0 U

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 1.0 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-124B 1.0 U

\ 11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254 1.0 U

11096-82-S------Aroclor-1260 1.0 U

I

"-)

FORM I PEST

po"I(;t

2,111

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018143
10

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE26

~

~ Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

1000 (g/rnL) ML

decanted: (Y/N) __

Lab Sample 10: 30388.03

Lab File,IO:

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/16/97

Matrix: -lsoil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture:

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

CONT

10000 (uL)

0.5(uL) Dilution Factor: Injection Volume:

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 8.2 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L CAS NO. COMPOUND

1.0

Q

UJ

u

U

U

U

U

U

U'

U

U

U

U

U

U

U

U i

~ I

319-B4-6--------alpha-BHC, _

319-85-7--------beta-BHC:~-------------------------1

319-86-8--------delta-BHC

58-89-9---------gamma-BHC~(~L~~n~d~an~e~)~------------1

76-44-B---------Heptachlor 1

309-00-2--------Aldrin

1024-57-3-------Heptac~h~1~o~r~e~p~ox~id~e~------------1

959-9B-B--------Endosulfan 1 1

60-57~1---------Dieldrin

72-55-9---------4,4'-00E'----------------------------1

72-20-B---------Endrin

33213-6S-9------Endosu~1~f~an~I~I~-------------------------1

72-S4-B---------4,4'-DDD

1031-07-8-------Endosulf:-an--~su~1~fa-t~e-----------------

50-29-3-----~---4/4'-DOT

72-43-5---------Methoxyc'~h~1~o~r-----------------

53494-70-5------Endrin ketone

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehy~d~e------------------------

.,." ...., ,.,1 ... -" .'': ,~"" .'

0.050

0.050

0.050

0.050

0.050

0.050

0.050

0.050

0.10

0.10

0.10

0.10

0.10

0.10

0.10

0.50

0.10

0.10

1"1 I"1C:;O

- ~ -... 5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane __

8001-3S-2-------Toxaphene

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1~O~1~6---------------1

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 1

11141-16-5------Aroclor-1232

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242------------------1

12672-29-6------Aroclor-124B

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254---------------- 1

11096-B2-S------Aroclor-1260 '--------------

0.050

5.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

. .

FORM I PEST

p. ~IE'

U I

U I

~ I

U I

U I

g \ ut'

r)·1'- ,:.~. (

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018144
:4P

PESTICIDE ORGANIC~~ALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

1b Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-DS-0026

BSE27

Case No.: 2~1 s;."~ ~o.: SOO No.: BSE22

Sample ID: - 30388. 04~

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture:~ 52

30.0 (g/niLf G

decanted: (Y/~:

.:.- 0.= .:--·ile ID:

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc) SC

~~,~~ved: 07/31/97

.'.'~ted:08/15/97

~::i: e, 3/24/97

Concentrated Extract Volume: 5C

Injection Volume: 0.5 (uL) 1.0

-:_"/N) N

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7

CAS NO. COMPOUND

". ~,

. ~

319-84-6--------alpha-BHC

319-85-7--------beta-BHC ---

319-86-8--------delta-BH~

58-89-9---------gamrna-BHC~

76-44-8---------Heptachlor

309-00-2--------Aldrin --

1024-57-3-------Heptachlor ~

959- 9B- B--------Endosulfan 1 __ .

60-57-1---------Dieldiiri _-

72-55-9---------4, 4' -DDE- ,- .

72-20-8- --------Endriri. ~ -

33213 -65 -9- -----Endosu.t'tanJ. . .•..

72-54-8- --------4,4' -00:0 .

1031-07-8---- ---Endosulfiil'E· ...

50-29-3---------4,4/-D~T

72-43-5---------Methoxyc~

53494-70-5------Endrin keto~

-4-------Endrin alder

5103-71-9-------alpha-Ghlorc:

5103-74-2-------gamrna-Chlorc

BOOl-35-2-------Toxaphene

12674-11-2------Aroclor-l~

11104-28-2------Aroclor-122~

11141-16-S------Aroclor-123:

53469-21-9------Aroclor-124:

12672-29-6------Aroclor-124

11097-69-1------Aroclor-125·

11096-82-S------Aroclor-126

I

I

t0-.::" .

=II

: C l

~"I

FO~~ :1 PC:::''!

f' $/'

Q

u

j

..

u

u

u

u

u

U

ulV

P i2-.

. ,

'-~. -r-,..,

. :.;.-'

l ~.!.-

:.,:.~ " -

. I

I

l

u

u

u

u

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018145
1D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

,."- ~ N~me: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-DS-0026

BSE280L

SAS No.: SOO No.: BSE22

.Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30388.050L

Lab File IO:

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/1S/97

Oate Analyzed: 08/24/97

Sample wt/vol:

'Moisture: 48

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL) oilution Factor: 10.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.1 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

CAS NO. COMPOUND

319-84-6--------alpha-BHC

.,.

33 U ~

319-8S-7-7------beta-BHC 33 U

319-86-8--------delta-BHc= 33 U

58-89-9---------gamma-BHC (LJ.ndane) 33 U

76-44-B---------Heptachlor 33 U

-", 309-00-2--------Aldrin 33 U

1024-57-3-------Heptachlor epoxide 33 U

9S9-98-B--------Endosulfan I 33 U 'V

60-S7-1---------Dieldrin 100 oy :r

72-55-9---------4,4'-00E 63 U

l

72-20-8---------Endrin 63 U

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II 63 U

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDO 240 D

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 63 U

50-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 130 QP' q72-43-5---------Methoxychlor 330 U

~

53494-70-5------Endrin ketone 63 U

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyde 63 U

.... "'.. ..,.,... . .... ,-,.,- .,..,..,,~' 7":1. _ J _ IILI" I

5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane 72 DP p8001-35-2-------Toxaphene 3300 U

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1tr!6 630 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 1300 U

11141-16-S------Aroclor-1232 630 U

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 630 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 630 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor·1254 630 U

....'v

11096-B2-S------Aroclor-1260 450 DJ

'-..:' 2432

FORM I PEST

r.'320

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018146
1D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE29

ab Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.01

Lab File ID:

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/17/97

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: 32

30.0 (g/rnL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL) Dilution Fa'ctor: 1.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.4 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

CAS NO. COMPOUND

319-84-6--------alpha-BHC I: 2.5 U

319-85-7--------beta-BHC I 2.5 U

319-86-8--------delta-BHC 2.5 U

58-89-9---------gamrna-BHC (L~ndane) 2.5 U

76-44-8---------Heptachlor I 2.5 U

309-00-2--------Aldrin 4.9

lO24-57-3-----~-Heptachlor epox~de 3.5 7

959-98-8--------Endosulfan I 26

,

60-S7-1---------Dieldrin 14 p,

72-55-9---------4,4'-DDE 29 P'

72-20-8---------Endrin 4.8 U

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II 4.8 U

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD 26

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate ".

4.8 U

SO-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 73 ~

72-43-5---------Methoxychlor 25 U

53494-70-S------Endrin ketone 4.8 U

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyae 31

1

;p

~~~-/~-~------- - .' "'ID '1"\'

-

5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane '

-~24 P"

8001-3S-2-------Toxaphene 250 U

12674-11-2------Aroclor-10~6 48 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 98 U

11141-16-S------Aroclor-1232 48 U

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 48 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 48 U'

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254 48 U

11096-82-S------Aroclor-1260 520 ,..,p

2442

FORM I PEST

p. '1ZI

OLM03.0'

TIERRA-A-018147
. 10

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE30

~ab Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-05-0026

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE2~

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)

Lab Sample 10: 30412.02

Lab File 10:

Date Received: OB/01/97

Date Extracted:OB/04/97

Date Analyzed: OB/17/97

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

t Moisture: 60

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: lY/N) N

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL) Dilution Factor: LO

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.3 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/~ or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

CAS NO. COMPOUND

319-84-6--~-----alpha-BHC 4.2 U J

319-85-7--------beta-BHC 4.2 U

319-86-8--------delta-BHC 4.2 1

U

5B-B9-9---------gamrna-BHC (Lindane) 12

76-44-8---------Heptachlor

t: ... ---.. fi-

--.. 309-00-2--------Aldrin 31 ;p ~N

) 1024-57-3-------Heptachlor epoxide 4.2 U ..J

959-98-8--------Endosulfan I

17 ,p :IN

60-57-1---------Dieldrin 25 :r

72-55-9---------4,4'-DDE 54 l

72-20-8---------Endrin 8.2 U

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II 8.2 U

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD 78

.1031-07-8--~----Endosulfan sulfate 8.2 U

50-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 100

72-43-5---------Methoxychlor

... ,., - /<.... -r"V" .Po 53494-70-5------Endrin ketone 10 ::r

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyde 9- -.. rc-..

- - .~..... _ ....~ _..:1-- ?'Q ::r

-, .. "oJ 'J.'~

5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane 16 i

BOOl-35-2-------Toxa1

hene 420 U

I

12674-11-2------Aroc or-1016 82 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 170 U

\ 11141-16-S------Aroclor-1232 82 U

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 82 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254

82

82

U

U 1

11096-82-5------Aroclor-1260 600 .2' J"

/'I_POI)

.. ~...' .

. .

FORM I PEST

p' '522

OLM03.1

TIERRA-A-018148
EPA SAMPLE NO. ~D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

BSE31

Contract: 6S-Ds-0026

Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

lab Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No 0: 25601 SAS No.:

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: 59

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)

Injection Volume: 005(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.~

CAS NO. COMPOUND

Soo No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: ~03SB.06

Lab File ID:

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/~s/97

Date Analyzed: 08/24/97

Dilution Factor: 1.0

Q

319-B4-6--------alpha-BHC 4.~ U J

319-8S-7--------beta-BHC 4.~ U

319-86-B--------delta-BHC 4.1 U

5B-89-9---------gamma-BHC {Lindane> 4.1 U

76-44-8---------Heptachlor 4.1 U

- 309~00-2-~------Aldrin 4.1

"}

U

1024-s7-3-------Heptachlor epoxl.de 4.1 U

9S9-98-8--------Endosulfan I 40 1 U

60-S7-1---------Dieldrin BoO U

72-S5-9---------4,4'-DDE B.O U

72-20-8---------Endrin B.O U

33213-6S-9------Endosulfan II 8.0 U

72-54-B---------4,4'-DDD 130 ~~ E

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 8.0 U

50-29-3---------4,4'-DDT .... u - - f- ~

72-43-S---------Methoxychlor

.... ~ K

53494-70-S------Endrin ketone 8.0 U

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyde 8.0 U

S103-71-9-------alpha-~n~oraane 'S.J. u

f s103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane 4.~ U

8001-3S-2-------Toxaphene 410 U

12674-1~-2------Aroclor-1016 80 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 ~60 U

11141-16-S------Aroclor-1232 80 U

\

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 80 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 80 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor-12s4 80 U

11096-B2-S------Aroclor-1260 80 U ,V

..

'~......-.

FORM I PEST

f' "?>2~

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018149
lD

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

..........

~ Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-05-0026

BSE32

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Concentrated Extract Volume: 5000 (uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.03

Lab File ID:

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/17/97

Dilution Factor:

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: 24

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc) SONC

319-84-6--------alpha-BHC ___

319-85-7--------beta-BHC

319-86-8--------delta-BH~C---------------------

58-89-9---------gamma-BHC (L~ndane) 1

76-44-8---------Heptachlor __

309-00-2--------Aldrin

l024-57-3-------Heptac~h~1~o~r~e=p~o~x~i~d~e-----------1

959-98-B--------Endosulfan 1 1

60-57~1---------Dieldrin

72-55-9---------4,4'-DDE:--------------------11

72-20-8---------Endrin

33213-65-9------Endosu~1~f-a-n-=I~I-----------------11

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD

1031-07-8-------Endosulf~a=n--su-l~f~a~t~e--------------11

50-29-3-----~---4,4'-DDT

72-43-5---------Methoxyc~hTl=o=r----------------

53494-70-5------Endrin ketone

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehy~d~e------------- _ _ _ ~.'L _'L.~ .'

1.0

(Y/N) N

Q

2~2 U J

2.2 U

2.2 U

2.2 U

2.2 U

2.2 U

2.2 U

22

4.3 U

4.3 U

4.3 U

4.3 U

4.3 U

4.3 U

9.5 ..2'

22 U

4.3 U,

4.3 U:

......

-

---_.

20 .P'ti

220 U

43 U

88 U

43 U

43 U

43 U

43 .U

110 ;p '\V

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL)

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.4 Sulfur Cleanup:

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG CAS NO. COMPOUND

... ... ...,.... '.... ... ...-

5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane, _

8001-35-2-------Toxaphene

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1AO~1~6----------------

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221, __

11141-16-5------Aroclor-1232

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242-----------------

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254-----------------

11096-82-5------Aroclor-1260 -------------------1

'-.,'

FORM I PEST

r·12 1..'

248~

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018150
lD

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

BPA SAMPLE NO.

r

~ Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-05-0026

. BSE33

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE2:2

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)'

Lab Sample ID: 30412.04

Lab File ID:

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/17/97

Matrix: (soii7water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

t Moisture:'" 77

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: O.5(uL) Dilution Factor: 1.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.3 sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

CAS NO. COMPOUND

319-84-6--------alpha-BHC 7.4 U. :r

319-85-7--------beta-BHC 7.4 U

319-86-8--------delta-BHC 78 P

58-89-9---------gamma-BHC (Lindane) 58

76-44-8---------Heptachlor "/'16f UQ. ~$rJ

'. 309-00-2--------Aldrin 7.4 U

i,.J 1024-57-3-------Heptachlor epoxide 7-, o~:rs-e tPB959-98-8--------Endosulfan I c;-oo~60 ...a

60-57-1---------Dieldrin 330 -r E

72-55-9---------4,4'-DDE 7~O:':" ..,,.,,, %" N I

72-20-8---------Endrin

- ;;:: ":: j' -

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II ~ -I r" . 14 U

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD \ ~::"'c·~: _ _ _ B-.

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sU1!ate

7 $ (,~' --4i ~I_ PEN \ ' 50-29-3---------4,4'-DDT

72-43-S---------Methoxychlor 74 U'

53494-70-S------Endrin ketone 47 !

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyde %'9*~ J!$ N\ ~ .

:>.LU,j-I.L-::J------- -

..

'-

I

''-'.. -- Pi :

S103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane Y70r ~ 1

8001-35-2-------Toxaphene 740 U

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1016 140 U i

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 290 U i

11141-16-5------Aroclor-1232 140 I U

i

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 140 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 140 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254 ..." .. 140 }.

11096-82-5------Aroclor-1260 '" 8"/o;;-!-" ~

-

i.

. I

'-/

FORM I PEST

p.32 5"

.

TIERRA-A-018151
~D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

,..,

~ Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-DS-0026

BSE34

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)

Lab Sample ID: 30412.05--

Lab File ID:

Date Received: OB/01/97

Date Extracted:OB/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/17/97

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: 90

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: O.S(uL) Dilution Factor: ~.O

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.~ Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q CAS NO. COMPOUND

319-B4-6--------alpha-BHC 17 U j

319-BS-7-~------beta-BHC ~7 U \

319-B6-8--------delta-BHC 17 U

58-B9-9---------gamma-BHC (Lindane) 17 U

76-44-8---------Heptachlor 17 U

...~ 309-00-2-----~--Aldrin ~7 U

1024-S7-3-------Heptachlor epoxl.de ~7 U

959-98-B--------Endosulfan I ~7 U

60-S7-1---------Dieldrin 33 U

72-SS-9---------4,4'-DDE 33 U

72-20-8---------Endrin 33 U

332~3-65-9------Endosulfan II 33 U

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD 33 U

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 33 U

50-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 33 U

72-43-S---------Methoxychlor ~70 U

53494-70-S------Endrin ketone 33 U

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyde 33 U

..~".., - -

~ _. ........ , - .. .., ....

...>~u..> '~";7

_.

-

S103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane 17 U

800~-35-2-------Toxaphene 1700 U

12674-~1-2------Aroclor-l016 330 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 670 U

11141-16-S------Aroclor-1232 330 U

S3469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 330 U

~2672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 330 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254 330 U

11096-B2-S------Aroclor-1260 330 U ".;;;j

')r"CA. ~_.10""

FORM I PEST

f' :3'2b

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018152
1D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

........... rb Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE35

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SOG No.: BSE22

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)

Lab Sample ID:-30412.06

Lab File ID:

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/17/97

.Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: BS

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 0.5 (uL) Dilution Factor: 1.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.0 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q CAS NO. COMPOUND

319-84-6--------alpha-BHC 14 U

.-,j

319-B5-7--------beta-BHC 14 U·

319-B6-S--------delta-BHC 14 U

58-B9-9---------gamma-BHC (L~ndane) 14 U

76-44-S---------Heptachlor 14 U

-'\ 309-00-2--------Aldrin 14. U

1024-57-3-------Heptachlor epoxide 141 U

959-98-a--------Endosulfan I 141 U

60-S7-1---------Dieldriri 28 U

72-SS-9---------4,4'-DDE 28 U

72-20-B---------Endrin 28 U

33213-6S-9------Endosulfan II -_ .. 28 U

72-S4-8---------4,4'-DDD 81

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 28 U

SO-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 28 U

72-43-S---------Methoxychlor 140 U

S3494-70-S------Endrin ketone 28 U

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyde 28 U

~ - ~. ......... .' .. "

....

.,./ ..... .,1 ,... -' .......... 1:' •• - - •• -------- ...'"

....

S103-74-2-------gamrna-Chlordane 14 U

8001-3S-2-------Toxa1

hene 1400 U

12674-11-2------Aroc or-1016 280 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 560 U

11141-16-S------Aroclor-1232 280 U

S3469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 280 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 280 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor-12S4 280 U /' 11096-82-S------Aroclor-1260 2BO U

'--- 2570

FORM I PEST

f. 12. T

. OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018153
1D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

."

~ Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Contract: 68-DS-0026

BSE36

SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Extraction: (SepF/Cont(Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)

Lab-Sample ID: 30412.07

Lab File 10:

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/17/97

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: 60

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL) Dilution Factor: 1.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.S Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

"';.~; CONCENTRATION UNITS:

~~~ CAS NO. COMPOUND (ug/L.or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

319-B4-6--------alpha-BHC 4.2 U J

319-BS-7--------beta-BHC 4.2 U

319-86-B--------delta-BHC 4.2 U

S8-89-9---------gamrna-BHC (Lindane> 4.2 U

76-44-B---------Heptachlor 4.2 U

-.. 309-00-2--------Aldrin 4.2 U

lO24-57-3-------Heptachlor epox~de 4.2 U

959-98-8--------Endosulfan I 28

60-S7-1---------Dieldrin 21 .,p.. N

72-55-9---------4,4'-DOE 23 ~

72-20-8---------Endrin 8.2 U

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II 8.2

~

~.

72-54-8---------4,4'-000 39

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 8.2 U

50-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 78 1!"

72-43-S---------Methoxychlor 42 U

53494-70-S------Endrin ketone 8.2 U

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyde An -

~~U~-/~-~------- -

... -

-~

.5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane

-.... ,.

26

8001-3S-2-------Toxaphene 420 U

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1016 82 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 J.70 U

11141-16-S------Aroclor-1232 82 U

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 82 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 82 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor-12S4 82 U

11096-82-S------Aroclor-1260 350 ,,1/

K.

~ .

--

2576

FORM I PEST

p.32.8'

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018154
J.D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Contract: 6B-D5-0026

BSE37DL

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 3038B.07DL

Lab File ID:

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:OB/15/97

Date Analyzed: 08/24/97

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

,.-..,.

~ Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: 40

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)

0.5(uL) Dilution Factor: Injection Volume:

Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.2

CAS NO. COMPOUND

10.0

Q

r.

j

... -,

---

319-84-6--------alpha-BHC 1

319-85-7--------beta-BHC

3J.9-86-8--------delta-BH~C------------------1

5B-89-9---------gamma-BHC (Lindane) II

76-44-8---------Heptachlor 1

309-00-2--------Aldrin

1024-S7-3-------Heptac~h~1~o~r~e~p~o~x~~~d-e----------1

959-98-8--------Endosulfan I __

60-S7-1---------Dieldrin I

72-55-9---------4,4'-DDE, __

72-20-8---------Endrin

33213-65-9------Endosu~l~f~a~n-.I~I--------------~

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD

1031-07-B-------Endosulf~a~n~s~uTl~f~a~t-e----------

50-29-3---------4,4'-DDT

72-43-5---------Methoxyc~h~1-o-r----------------

53494-70-5------Endrin ketone

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehy~a~e------------

~., I'\":l .... n •• -"-."

..J. "",.,J .- _ ,"".l.J:'.I..l.1;OI. '- .1. -

5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane 1

BOOl-3S-2-------Toxaphene

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1~O~1=6---------------1

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221

11141-16-5------Aroclor-1232----------------- 1

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 1

12672-29-6------Aroclor-124B 1

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254 __

11096-82-5------Aroclor-1260 ----------------

28

2B

28

28

28

28

28

28,,.,

-..-.or

56

120

t;:l"l

42

55

55

280

55

55

O":l

63

2800

550

1100

550

550

550

550

650

FORM I PEST

('. '1Z-"1

c2.~O~.

~CS·O bb •

Jia.r. Len

TIERRA-A-018155
1D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

I' '"'" fb Name: SWL-TULSA Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE38

Lab Code: SWOK Case No.: 25601 8AS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)

Lab Sample ID: 3038B.08

Lab File ID: -

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/15/97

Date Analyzed: OB/24/97

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample' wt/vol:

t Moisture: 53

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL) Dilution Factor: 1.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 7.6 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

CAS NO. COMPOUND (ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

319-B4-6--------alpha-BHC 3.6 U .:J

319-BS-7--------beta-BHC 3.6 U

319-B6-8--------delta-BHC 3.6 U

58-B9-9---------gamma-BHC (Lindane> 3.6 U

76-44-8---------Heptachlor 3.6 U

309-00-2--------Aldrin 3.6 U

1024-S7-3-------Heptachlor epoxide -- . 3.6 U

959-98-8--------Endosulfan I 3.6 U

60-57-1---------Dieldrin 7.0 U

72-SS-9---------4,4'-DDE 7.0 U

72-20-8---------Endrin 7.0 U

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II 7.0 U

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD 7.0 U1

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 7.0 U

50-29-3-----~---4,4'-DDT OOL'"

,

.- ....

72-43-5---------Methoxychlor -:'.. ....

.... U

U

53494-70-5------Endrin ketone 7.0 U

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyde 7.0 U

~~...... ..... 1'\ ~ • .o, ...:l - ,. ..

...,"'U.J ,... Oil g. ...~ ...~Q ............-....., ................ -.. _. -

- 5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane 3.6 U

B001-35-2-------Toxa~hene 360 U

12674-11-2------Aroc or-ltr16 70 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 140 U

11141-16-S------Aroclor-1232 70 . U

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 70 U

\

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 70 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254 70 U

11096-82-5------Aroclor-1260 70 U \

I I

r-.:

-f(

. \ ......_ ....

FORM I PEST

r·3~O

TIERRA-A-018156
1D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

BSE41

........

~ Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: BSE22

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

CONT

10000 (uL)·

Lab Sample ID: 30388.10

Lab File ID:

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:08/01/97

Date Analyzed: 08/16/97

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

sample wt/vol:

% Moisture:'"

1000 (g/mL) ML

decanted: (Y/N) __

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL) Dilution Factor: 1.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 7.1 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q

CAS NO. COMPOUND

319-84-6--------alpha-BHC 0.050 U J

319-B5-7--------beta-BHC 0.050 U

319-B6-8--------delta-BHC 0.050 U

58-89-9---~-----gamma-BHC (Ll.ndane) 0.050 U

76-44-8---------Heptachlor 0.050 U

..~'\ 309-00-2--------Aldrin 0.050 U

1024-57-3-------Heptachlor epoxl.de 0.050 U

959-98-B--------Endosulfan I

0.050 U

60-s7-1---------Dieldrin 0.10 U

72-55-9---------4,4'-DDE 0.10 U

72-20-8---------Endrin 0.10 U

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II 0.10 U

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD 0.10 U

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 0.10 U

50-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 0.10 U

72-43-5---------Methoxychlor 0.50 U

53494-70-5------Endrin ketone 0.10 U

7421-93-4-------Endrin ~~de~yde 0.10 U

- -

~.LU,j-I.l.-';j------- -

-_ ..

U.U;;1U u

5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane 0.0501 U

8001-35-2-------Toxaphene 5.0 U

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1016 1.0 U

11104-2B-2------Aroclor-1221 2.0! U

11141-16-s------Aroclor-1232 1.0 U

s3469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 1.0 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 l.O U

l1097-69-1------Aroclor-12s4 1.0 U

11096-82-5------Aroclor-1260 1.0 .U' ~'

261~

FORM I PEST

f. '31/

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018157
ID

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Case No.: 25601

Contract: 68-D5-0026

SAS No.:

BSE42

.~ Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Concentrated Extract. Volume: 10000 (uL)

SDG No. : BSE22

Lab Sample ID: 30412.08

Lab File 10:

Date Received: 08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/16/97

Matrix: (soil/water) WATER

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture:

1000 (g/mL) ML

decanted: (Y/N) __

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/sonc) SEPF

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL) Dilution Factor: 1.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) N pH: 8.4 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/L Q CAS NO. COMPOUND

319-84-6-~------alpha-BHC 0.050 U :r

319-85-7--------beta-BHC 0.050 U

319-86-S--------delta-BHC 0.050 U

5B-89-9---------garnma-BHC (Lindane) 0.050 U

76-44-8---------Heptachlor 0.050 U

309-00-2--------Aldrin 0.050 U

1024-57-3-------Heptachlor epoxide 0.050 U

959-9B-B--------Endosulfan I 0.050 U

60-57-1---------Dieldrin 0.10 U

72-55-9---------4,4'-DDE 0.10 U

72-20-8---------Endrin 0.10 U

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II 0.10 U

72-54-B---------4,4'-DDD 0.10 U

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 0.10 U

50-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 0.10 U

72-43-5---------Methoxychlor 0.50 U

53494-70-5------Endrin ketone 0.10 U

., .....,,_t:I~_... ~.... "',. n , n TT

5103-71-9-------alpha-Chlordane 0.050 U

5103-74-2-------garnma-Chlordane 0.050 U

8001-35-2-------Toxaphene 5.0 U

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1016 1.0 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 2.0 U

11141-16-5------Aroclor-1232 1.0 U

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 1.0 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-124B 1.0 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254 1.0 U

11096-82-5------Aroclor-1260 'V 1.0 U

2621

FORM I PEST

p.~~2

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018158
1D

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

lab Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Contract: 68-D5-0026

BSE43DL

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: BSE22

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc)

Concentrated Extract Volume:

SONC

5000 (uL)

Lab Sample ID: 303B8.11DL

Lab File ID:

Date Received: 07/31/97

Date Extracted:OB/15/97

Date Analyzed: 08/24/97

Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: 21

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Injection Volume: 0.5(uL) Dilution Factor: 10.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) y .pH: 5.8 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

~..,;

~ CONCENTRATION UNITS:

........~., CAS NO. COMPOUND (ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

319-84-6--------alpha-BHC 22 ~ .J

319-85-7--------beta-BHC 22 U'

319-86-8--------delta-BHC 22 U

58-89-9---------gamma-BHC (Lindane) 22 U

76-44-B---------Heptachlor 22 U

-- 309-00-2--------Aldrin 22 U

1024-57-3-----~-Heptachlor epoxide 22 U

959-98-8--------Endosulfan I 22 U I

60-57-1---------Dieldrin -

.....,.,

·G'"OV ._~ g.

72-55-9---------4,4'-DDE 180 D

72-20-8---------Endrin 300 ~!j~

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II ~"'''' g.

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD u.o-: '1"\'"

~

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate "421 U

50-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 600 ! D( ~

72-43-S---------Methoxychlor 220 U :r

53494-70-5------Endrin ketone 42 U, ~

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyde 93 D,.:;,..-

_. -- -- -

---- '.1.-;:)------- -\-Ll.1- 1.9U

~~

1-.1

5103-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane .J.3- --,;;;rr f:-

8001-35-2-------Toxaphene 2200 U ::r

12674-11-2------Aroclor-l016 420 U \

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 850 U

11141-16-5------Aroclor-1232 420 U

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 420 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 420 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254 420 U .~' 11096-82-S------Aroclor-1260 1800 'D

;

2639

FORM I PEST

p.'?>'?

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018159
10

PESTICIDE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

Case No.: 25601

Contract: 68-05-0026

SAS No.:

,- BSE44DL

ab Name: SWL-TULSA

Lab Code: SWOK

Concentrated Extract Volume: 5000 (uL)

SDG NO. : BSE2:2

Lab Sample ID: 30412.09DL

Lab File ID:

Date Received: '08/01/97

Date Extracted:08/04/97

Date Analyzed: 08/17/97

-Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL

Sample wt/vol:

% Moisture: 21

30.0 (g/mL) G

decanted: (Y/N) N

Extraction: (SepF/Cont/Sonc) SONC

Injection Volume: 0.5{uL) Dilution Factor: 10.0

GPC Cleanup: (Y/N) Y pH: 6.2 Sulfur Cleanup: (Y/N) N

CONCENTRATION UNITS:

CAS NO. COMPOUND (ug/L'or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q

319-84-6---~----alpha-BHC 22 U J

319-85-7--------beta-BHC 22 U

319-86-8--------delta-BHC 22 U

58-89-9---------gamma-BHC (Lindane> 22 U

-

76-44-8---------Heptachlor 221 U

)

309-00-2--------Aldrin 22 U

1024-57-3-------Heptachlor epoxide 22 U

959-98-8--------Endosulfan I 22 U

60-57-1---------Dieldrin 42 U

72-5S-9---------4,4'-DDE 42 U

72-20-8---------Endrin 42 U

33213-65-9------Endosulfan II 42 U

72-54-8---------4,4'-DDD 42 U V

1031-07-8-------Endosulfan sulfate 42 U

-.....

SO-29-3---------4,4'-DDT 61 D}!1"1'1

72-43-5---------Methoxychlor 220 U .:r

S3494-70-5------Endrin ketone 42 U

7421-93-4-------Endrin aldehyde 42 U

S103-71-9-------alpha-Chlordane 22 U

Sl03-74-2-------gamma-Chlordane 22 U

8001-35-2-------Toxaphene 2200 U

12674-11-2------Aroclor-1016 420 U

11104-28-2------Aroclor-1221 850 U

11141-16-5------Aroclor-1232 420 U

53469-21-9------Aroclor-1242 420 U

12672-29-6------Aroclor-1248 420 U

11097-69-1------Aroclor-1254 420 U "V

11096-82-5------Aroclor-1260 810 DY -... 1

---

FORM I PEST

f' 33L(

OLM03.0

TIERRA-A-018160
U.S. EPACLP

DATA PACKAGETARGET ANALYTE LIST

------------------------~-_ .. _.

p.3 3 5

TIERRA-A-018161
Project: Keegan Landfill Site

OTHER ANAL YTES WORK TABLE

START PM: Gerry Gilliland

,. 7lpling Date: July 30 & 31, 1997

SAMPLE #/CONCENTRA TION (ug/L)

l~ontract Water Water Water Water Water

Total Metals Required MBQK29 MBQK30 MBQK33 MBQK46 MBQK41

Detection 010255 010265 010215 010285 070925

Percent Solids' Limit (CRDL) . . . - -

I Ou....rtion Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

, ,

!

200

60.0

J I

1

19200

R

14900

R

20800

R

20.4

R

119

U

31.9 38.9 u 3.0

33

likryllium 10.0 1 0.73 B r 0.45 B I 0.84 B U I u I

I~== 10.0 I 11.2 J 12.8 J I 13.2 J 1.7 B 1.6 B

I 1 150000 1 257000 1 I

---

5000 151000 91.6 B 337 B

IChromium I 10.0 1 117 I

160

B f

130

B I

1.9 B 1.0 B ,

ICobalt I SO.O I 13.9 B 1 15.5 14.6 U ~U .. 1 Ic~pp~ I 25.0 1 499 549 602 27.8 74.5

lIro~' I 100.0 I 66500 I

52200 70400 72.8 B 81.2 B

ltead I 3.0 1 1020 1 1590 1180 34.9 21.2

Magnesium 5000 I 40600 56700 «l9OO 35.1 B 151 B

IManStanese I 15.0 I 726 I

1700 748 2.2 B I

7.6 B

IMerc\l1Y I 0.2 I 7.8 I

6.2 8.7 0.17 B U I

Nickel 40.0 I 82.4 115 91.6 17.5 B 5.3 B

Potassium 5000 L 18600 21600 18500 185 B 368 B

Sp.lenium 10.0 I u J U J U J U J U

~r I

10.0 I

15.8 I

11.1 17.6 1.6 e 0.92 B

I.,udium I. 5000 I

n100 I

102000 75500 U 353 B

IThallium 10.0 I u I u J U U 6.5 B I I

Vanadium 50.0 L81.6 I

87.2 90.8 U I u I

Zinc 20.0 I 1520 I

1640 1710 46.7 I

44.1 I

200 1380 839 1470 10

Inorganic Qualifiers

U - non-detected compound

J - estimated value

B· between the ins1nJment detection limit (IDL)

and the contract required detection limit (CRDL)

R - rejected compound

TIERRA-A-018162
OTHER ANAL YTES WORK TABLE

Project: Keegan Landfill Site START PM: Gerry Gilliland

t"'-'11pling Date: July 30 & 31, 1997

)

SAMPLE #/CONCENTRATION (MG/KG) - - ~--

Contract Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil

Total Metals Required MBQK34 MBQK35 MBQ~.?_ .. MBQK37 MBQK38 MBQK39

Detection 070295 070305 070855 070865 070315 070875

Percent Solids Limit (CRDL 42.1 49.8 71.9 28.3 44.6 57.3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1

IAlumintun 1

I

... 40.0 B400 ~Jj

11100 I 7200 I 8410 J I 9820 J 6320

12.0 2.5 Bil U J -j 71.5 J 1 2.8 ~J 1 U J

Antimony -- 3.8

IArsenic I

2.0 I

27.9 J I

11.8 J -I 2.6 B 1 17.9 .J ., 18.9 ~- j

..... - 4.6

J

-, 1

J "'

IBarium I 40.0 374 J 312 55.8 511 j

..._-- 339 J 131

B 1 B;"I BJI Beryllium I 1.0 0.72 BJ 0.42 B I 0.36 00511 0.56 0.35 B

ICadmium I

1.0 I

5.3 J ] 5.8 J I 1.3 B 1 13.9 J 1 4.3 J I 1.1 B

Calcium 1000 5080 J 14800 I 1970 I 21000 J I 3570 J I 3490

Chromium 2.0 103 J 125 I 19.8 'I 229 J 1 61.7 J I 19.8 Cobalt 10.0 7.3 BJ 6.1 B 1"" 5.0 B I 12.2 BJ I 5.2 BJ I 2.8 8

Copper 5.0 447 J 279 J I R 'I 588 J 302 J I R

Iron 20.0 23100 J 27300 ~10600 'I 47400 J 17900 J 10900

I~ad " I

0.6 I

1130 J I 879 I

164 I 27700 J 844 J 92.2 I

/Magnesium I 1000 I

3680 J

I i

3870 J I 1790 J 2240 BJ 2650 J 1180 B

I II Manganese 3.0 255 J 272 335 , 266 J 99.5 J 89.1 Mercury 0.1 10.8 J 4.2 1.1 1.7 J

I

7.5 J 0.30 I Nickei 8.0 50.2 J 44.0 J I' 16.0 J 157 J 35.3 J I 12.9 B I

Potassium I 1000 1310 BJ 945 B 762 B 691 BJ 1050 BJ 494 B I

~Seleniwn 1.0 2.1 BJ U U U J 2.1 J I u I

if 2.0 7.0 J 6.5 J 1.1 B 8.6 J 5.8 J 0.95 B I

i~ ••urn 1000 996 BJ 576 B 459 B 1600 BJ 779 8J r 643 B I

IThallium I

2.0 I

u J

I

u

!

u l r I

, U J U J U

l:::~adium I

10.0 I

74.2 J

I

53.8 l

20.6 l

94.8 J 51.3 J r 13.0 8 I

Ime I

4.0 I 873 J I 877 I 290 I 1130 J 662 J 148 I

Inorganic Qualifiers

U - non-detected compound

'timated value

Itween the instrument detection limil(IDL)

and the method detection limit (MOL)

R • rejected compound

TIERRA-A-018163
OTHER ANAL YTES WORK TABLE

Project: Keegan Landfill Site START PM: Gerry Gilliland

,.. 7pling Date: July 30 & 31, 1997

SAMPLE #/CONCENTRATION (MG/KG) .

Contract Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil I Total Metals Required MBQK40 MBQK41 MBQK42 MBQK43 MBQK44 MBQK45

Detection 07088S 070895 070905 070915 070325 070335

Percent Solids Limit (CRDL 17.4 9.8 10.2 43.8 58.1 59.2

Dilution Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

IAlummum

IAntimonv

/Arsenic •

15200

23.2

93.0

6390

15.9

31.4

13100

6.6

9.2

7300 1 16900

1.7 BJ 1 4.0

4.5 ] 60.5

IBarium

IBeryllium

40.0

1.0

1740

0.70

129 I 85.1

0.27 B] 0.17

Cadmium 1.0 22.2 1.5 3.4 8.4

ICalcium

IChromium

ICobalt

&>pper

IIron

~ ] 21200

57.0 C28.9

6.0 B ] 3.5

1n J r=_48 __7_()__ ~

29900 I 15000

ILead 1 0.6 2250 J I 215 J ] 518 J ] 319 J ,I 463 91.4 i

I

Magnesium I 1000 4SOO BJ I, 4550

~JI

4750

~JI

6530 J I

1710 J I 2560 J

JManRanese I 3.0 590 J I 114 123 3n J I 272 r 370

IMcrcwy 0.1 7.1 J 0.82 BJ 0.89 BJ 1.2 J 2.1 I 0.15 B

INickel I 8.0 I 46S J I 21.7 BJ 43.9 BJ 56.2 J r 27.3 J L 13.8 J

IPotassium I 1000 I

872 BJ I 701 BJ] 1080 BJ " 2030 BJ! 645 'B I 637 B

lSelcnium 1.0 U J U J L u J U J U U

r

,.-

BJ I

.. - -- ._- _.-

r 2.0 16.4 J 2.8 2.3 BJ 1.9 BJ 2.5 B 0.80 B

I::...... lunl " --.

1000 2100 BJ 4730 BJ r 4340 BJ 1180 BJ I 308 B 435 B

Thallium 2.0 u J U J U J U J U U

Vanadium ' 10.0 145 J 51.7 BJ 112 J 49.3 J 23.1 24.3

Zinc 4.0 3620 J R 492 J 979 J 528 43S

Inorganic Qualifiers

pn-detected compound

~ .stimated value

B • between the instrument detection limit (IOL)

and the method detection limit (MOL)

R • rejected compound

TIERRA-A-018164
OTHERANALYTES WORK TABLE

Project: Keegan Landfill Site START PM: Gerry Gilliland

ppling Date: July 30 & 31, 1997

SAMPLE #/CONCENTRATION (MG/KG)

ITotal Metals

Contract Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil

Required MBQKj8 __ _~QK49 MBQK66 MBQK67 MBQK68

Detection 07034S 07093S 07094S 07095S 070965'

Percent Solids Limit (CRDL 71.9 79.0 34.5 34.3 21.6

DUution Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Alwninwn 40.0 10500 6000 11400 J 7510 J 4420 J

Antimonv 12.0 215 J 3.9 BJ 4.7 BJ U J U J

Arsenic 2.0 39.6 J 12.1 J 2.7 BJ 1.8 BJ 5.4 BJ

Barium 40.0 1110 704 236 J 118 J 323 J

BCI)'llium 1.0 1.1 B 0.36 B 0.65 BJ 0.43 BJ 0.37 BJ

Cadmium 1.0 22.4 J 5.4 J 8.2 J 1.7 BJ 5.9 J

Calcium 1000 4590 4570 8390 J 4100 J 13100 J

Chromium I 2.0 118 34.2 281 J 35.1 J 44.2 J

ICobalt I 10.0

.,

11.8 B 1 6.9 B ] 6.4 BJ1 6.3 BJl 10.6 BJ

!Copper I 5.0 I 443 J I 154 J I 545 J I R I 390 J

IIron I 20.0 1 116000 I 51800 I 15200 J 1 12400 J I 23400 J

ILead I

0.6 1 1200 '1 522 I1330 JI 282 J I 754 J

IMagnesium I 1000 I 1100 B j 1450 J 4130 J 2480 BJ 1910 BJ

IManganese [ 3.0 1 598 1 225 I 150 J 1 691 J I 207 J

IMercury I 0.1 1 3.7 1 1.1 I

5.0 J I 0.75 J I 4.0 J i

INickel I 8.0 I

82.3 J 1 24.0 J I 71.1 J I 24.6 J 1 299 J I

Potassium

I

1000 662 B 656 B i 1150 BJ 1110 BJ II 839 8J

lci-lcnium 1.0 U I u

, 1.4 BJ U J U J

br I 2.0 I 5.4 J r 2.3 TII 7.2 J 1.5 BJ 4.7 5J

;)udium I 1000 I 385 B 194 B I 866 BJ 1630 8J 1500 SJ

Thallium I 2.0 U U U J U J U J

Vanadium I 10.0 I 106 30.4 72.4 J 35.7 J 59.6 J

Zinc I 4.0 I 1580 862 1090 J 281 J 1000 J

Inorganic Qualifiers

hon-<ietected compound

_ • estimated value

B • between the instrument detection limit (IOl)

and the method detection limit (MOL)

R· rejected compound

TIERRA-A-018165
RECORD OF COlVIMUNICATION

REGIONAL SAl'VIPLECONTROL CENTER

DATE:

SUBJECT:

FROM:

TO:

:t1uc.-. (~) 19q7

eLP Data Package for Quality Assurance Review

RSCC I ESAT

Hanif Sheikh, Hazardous Waste SuPPOrt Section

RtCE\VE0

SEP. 1 1 1997

Attached is the following INORGANIC Data Package to be reviewed for Quality Assurance

SITE /<'ct6-IUJ Lr CASE# .J.~601

CONTRACTOR S'i4l.:l tt.) #SAMPLES MATRIX

17 SOIL

PHASE Sit 5'" tt.lt7E".1.

LAB S£)J7JIJ FRACTION T(j-l- ONL.V

REGION IT RSCC DATA TRANSFER LOG

Relinquished By

Signature DatefTime

Received By

Signarure ,

(over for instructions) revised 7/90

TIERRA-A-018166
SfANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE Page 1 or6

TitJe:Evaluation ofMetalsData for theContractLaboratoryProgram

Appendix A.2: Data Assessment Narrative

Date:Jan. 1992

Number: HW~2

Revision: 11

e-I 25601 sa: Keepa 1aDcIfiD SaI: 17

SDGI MBQ.KZ9IMBQK34 t.II: Sentinel WIIIIr. 05

CODt::racto:r, STNOW/SIP ae.1 ... :rr C. M. Alailm/ESAT Otllll:rI

A.2.1.Va lldatIon flags- Toe fOIIOWlD~ t ags have !lecnapplied In red by the data val idator anI

must be consldercd by the data user.

I - This flag indicates the result qualified as estimated.

Red-Line - A red-line drawn through a sample result indicates unusable value. The

red-l ined data are known to contain s igni ficant errors based on

documented information and must Dot be used by the data user.

'.

Fully Usable ~ta- The rcsults that do not carry -J- or -rcd-linc- are fully usable.

Contractual Oualifiers- The legend of contractual qualifiers applied by the lab on Fonn 1'5 is

found on page B-20 of SON !lM)1.0

A.2.2. The data assessment is given below and on the attached sheets.

This package cousists of seventeen (17) soil and five (5) aqueons s.mples takeD fraD the Keegan

T ~ndfi II site on 7/30197 and 7/31/97 for TAL me tals analys is. ~ was performed on s&lq)lc~O

]or the aqueous matrix and sI.Iq)leM3(J05 for the soil matrix. Two field blanks were identified

as sllJq)les~46 de ),BJ(48. Two field duplicate pairs were taken: for aqueous matrix-

~9~3; for soil matrix-MQ04~8. All holding times were met.

CSF

The trip report and chain of custody listed two samples with the same IDW MBQK48. This ~s

corrected by the lab (see page 180). TWo soil s~les ~67 &~68) were included in this

package but was not listed on the trip report. RSCX::was contacted aud the lab submitted a

revised trip report with the additional s.mples included.

OIDL

SOO# MQU9

The initial CRI $ recovery for Tl (75.5$) fell between 50-79$ therefore all associated data

wi thin the affec ted-tange were es timated.

J--->l1 In MQOO.

SOO# ~9 (water matrix)

For Sb, the umtrix spike recovery W2S less than 30$ (17.0$) therefore all associated data ~re

rejected. For Se, the matrix spike recovery fell between 30-74$ (74.S~), therefore all

associated data were estiaated.

MtLIRIX SPIKE

R--->Sb in ~9, ~O. M3(J03 &.MBQK46

J--->Se in ~9, MQt30, ~3 &~46

SOO# M3(J04 (soi I ...trix)

For Sb, the matrix spike recovery fell bet~eQ 10-74$ (10.7$). therefore all associated data were

estimated. For Cu, the umtrix spike recovery fell between 126-200$ (130.5$), therefore all

positive associated data were estiuated. Please note that due to field blank coutauUnation

several Cu results Were notated for rejection nnder that criterion.

F' '}t{l

TIERRA-A-018167
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE

·He, w~ ....

Oft/ i I,r. -~ Page 2. or 6

-I ! "1 t .!. ate: Jan. 1992

Nwnber: HW-2

Revision: 11

Title: Evaluation of Metals Data for the Contract Laboratory Program

Appendix A.2: Data Assessment Narrative

A.2.2. (con t inua t ion)

ICP SERIAL DIIIJrICN

SOO# ~9 (water matrix) .

For Al (15.6%) and Cd (20.8%), the ms were >10% but <IO~when tbe initial saqJle results were

>IOxIDL, therefore all associated data2:.amL (or2:.IOxIDLwhen IOxIDL><EX.) were estiu.ted.

J'--->Al &. CD in ~9, ~O &~3.

500# ~4 (soi 1 matrix)

For As (57.0%), Cd (17.9%). Mg (15.3%). Ni (31.0~) and Ag (ll.l~), the,;)s were >IO~ but <1009li

'When the initial saqJle results were >IOxIDL, therefore all associated data2:.amL (or2:.10xIDL

when 10xIDL > aIDL) were es t ima ted.

J--->As in ~4, ~S, ~1, ~8, ~40, MQ(43, J.lQ(4S, MQ(48 &~49

J--->Cd in ~4, ~S, ~7, ~8, ~40, ~43, ~44, ~48, M.Qt49, ~66 &.

~68 ,

J---:;lMg in ~4, MQOS, ~6, ~8, MQt43, MQt44, MQ(4S, ~49 &~66

J---:>Ni in ~4-->38, ~40, ~43-->4S, MQC48, MQC49, ~6-->68

J--->Ag in ~4, ~S, ~7, ~8, ~40, MQC48, MQC49 &.~66.

FINn BLANKaNrlMINATICN

Both field blanks had values greater than the amI. for several analytes. Only field blank~47

had assoc i a ted da ta tha t was a ffec ted by the con tamina tes. Assoc ia t ed pos it i ve da ta wi th resu 1 t 15

less than Sx the contaminate results were rejected.

~- - ->CD in ~6, ~9, M3Qr41, ~42, M3Qr67

R--->Zo in ~41.

% JUrAL S<LIDS

For s&JqJles~4 (42.1~)'M3Qr37 (28.3~),~8 (44.6~),~40 (l7.4%),~41 (9.8~-rounded

up to 10%), M3Qr42 (lO.2~). M3Qr43 (43.8~), ~66 (34.S~) ~7 (34.3~) &~8 (21.6~), the

~ total sol ids were less than 50% but greater than I~, therefore all associated data not

previously qualified were estimated.

}--->all IO:tals not pr'eviously qualified in ~4,

MQC43, MQt66, ~7 &: ~68.

---A....2..~ Contract-problems lNoD-CClq'l iaDce

KNE.

~7, ~8, MQC40, MQt41, MEQ42,

NMB Reviewer: Date: . -~~;i;~lf~--~---------------- -----/-~7-----------

Contractor Reviewer: __~s.!1~ Date: ~!j_L!] _

lcnature

Verified by: Date: - --Signature-------------------- -----------:--------

TIERRA-A-018168
Page .3. of to .

'Iitle: Evaluation of Metals Data for the

CQ1ttaet LatoratOIY P:t0:.3LdIlI

~ A.3: Q:ntraet Ncn-c:npliance

(S1J Rep:lrt)

Date: Jan. 1992

Nurtber: HW-2

Revisie:::tn: 11

Regional Review of Uncontrolled HazardaJs Waste

Site Cont:ract l.al:oratOI:y Data Package

The ha.rdccpied (laboratory narre)_....."...........,..--=::--:----:----:---:---:---:-----:--:--------:-

Inorganic data package received at Region II has been revi&Wed arrl the quality assurance and

perfonrance data surmarized. 'n1e data reviewed included:

00 Ssrrple No.: '.

Ccnc. & ftBtrix: _

Contract l'b. ( ) requires that specific analytical w::>Ik l::e done arrl

that associated rep:::lrts l:e provided by the contractor to the Regions I EMSL- LV, arrl S1). The

Qene..~ criteria used to detennine the perfonrance were base:! en an examination of:

- Data O:trpleteness - D..1plicate Analysis Results

- M3.trix Spike Results - Blank Analysis Results

- cali.braticn St:arXiards Results - MSA Results

ItBT5 of nrn-carpliance with the ab:::M3 ~t:ract are desc:ril:::e:ibelCM.

~ts: N/~ ---)1-.--_--

I

I

I

I

1/;/~ '7

Reviewer's Initial tate .

TIERRA-A-018169
nOt: EwuaUOD or MttalJ Inta tor the

CODtract LaboraCol1 Prova=

AppcadIx A.4: MaJUnr Use tor Data Rcvfewers

'i

Date: J~ 199:

Number: HW-;

Rnisloll: 1:

DPO MAILING LIST FOR DATA REVIEWERS

L USEPA lcpoa r (ESO) ~ VSEPA lcpoa D ESD

60 Wemiew Soul Woodbrid~ A~DUC

Lc.dal\OG. MA 02173 Edilca, NJ 08U7

Dc!I Szuo 1JIa Ciaaoa VICfIlliQ

(617) &61-431: (201) 321-6&7l5

cr, ME, Ju.. NH. R..(, vr NI, NY, PJt, VI

c.v.. ~ AAI~u, Yori:, CcDNIy, CkmlCda. US Tat, N&lICD

231, SkWe,. 1'MA ETC. 0ackcG, EMS, Ga1loG, 10,(

3. VSEPA ~poa m (ell) ~. USEPA ~poe.lV (ESD)

139 ~p~ RllIad AAlIytb1 Support Brucb

Auapolil, MD 21401 ColIeae SlItioG Roed

Ould SudI AlhcaI, QA 306U

(301) 266-9W Toea Bc::ucu, Jr.

DE!. MD, J'A, VA, WV, DC (040() 546-JIU

Cea&cc, HitmaA, Jrc:, MA(X. VER..SAJt. AI., f1. CiA, n.us, NC, sc. 'IN

rrAS, WCEtcc, w.ces, EA bpae.cN" Ctlmpuc.e., BPS, ESE. PBS.lJ,

Subjca T~ ICEYl"A Triaailc 1.abI

5- VSEPA lq)oa V (2SD) USEPA Jtqia. VI (ESD)

$36 Sovo Cart Street Noaruer Put PSa:a, BI4 C

Tc.alh Plr:::u, o.L 66QI Harwwood DrM

Ot.k:::qg, D.. 606QS Hauar., 1X m74

Par QIlI'iIla DtvId~

(312)lS~ (713) m..3C2S

~ IN, NJ. PoiN, OH, WI AA I..A. Nhl.. 1X, OJ::

NU., TAJIPNJ ANAa>H.lADlAN, SPECS, E1S, G1odM:a

Jtac.ar4, x.e.. SPL 1Dl:.., SWRI,

Amed, ICEYIX, ElM

7. VSEPA ~poa vn Labonte1y L t1SEPA Jl&poe. vm Laboratory 2SPIIutoa ~ Bar 2S3l56

J:uAa Cry. XS 66115 De-=r Pcdc:ral Carer

Debit UoRr ~comzs (913) 1160311:11 &.Hctr_

10. x:s, NIl, UO ~)236-7J71

WiIIoa, J::&aIu Cry Scic.adtk co. I'm, SO, Uf, WY, lIlI'

Eal&lptilel. !!ape Pidlcr ACX:SJ, CSUlU, JtMAL, Dlr:a o.ca. Ccan:f

t. VSP2'A ~ XI (ESD) 10. USl!7A ~ X Labantory

QA M&Aqemcllr Sec1Joe P.O. Beese

215P~StRcc 1.La"Chc«r:t.WA983S3

Su~C\ ~IQS OcnJdN.

~ JJtrltinpu (2OS) 4G4JiV

(41S)~ .u.m,OI,WA

AZ, CA, HI, NY, Americu Same., Laucb Tatbc Labc, CczItlaq Tcsda(

Ov.aa 'tJ'I&l TurilOlics 01. hci6: LI!II (Par VQA 0DJr), WC)'CrlIawez eo.. Ia1udI, 'Vue hlud CdIambia Tadac. Sihv VaJScr AU. CAL WatoII, $-Oabed, rr_CA,

VcpI

lL Carta DemplCf- (QS.230) Ecfwvd J::uror

USEPA lJSE!'A

«J1 "M" Streec S.W. ~V

WMblnJll:le. DC 20460 ,... B. Rumaa A-.u. m:m.n46 Bar9Jom

LM Vepc, NY I9Ut _

Saaapk JWarem=r Offici

VlarIDdOlmf&D1

P.o.Berm

Abao4ria, VA mu

F' ~t./q

TIERRA-A-018170
Title: Evaluation of ~ta1s rata for the

cenmct LaboratOl:Y Prc.ardlll

Apperrlix A.6: CLPD3ta-Assessrent O1e'""..Jcl,.:i:?t __

Inorganic Analysis

Page 5" cf l,

D3te: Jan. 1992

Nurrt:er: HW - 2

Revision: 11

CASE roo 1~~O\

IAOORAIDRY :) ...~ ~\

SJ);# 1:\~q \l}3 / i190 \<l ~-.J

I

ILno~.D

R.t:.~ (IF NJI' FSD) _

SCW#_---:.....-.~~.....:....:....--------- e. \\. 1\\.- ~

Dro: 1ICTICN.__ ----.F'iI.-....".--~~===. a:MPIEI'ICN otm::"--_l-..!--.l:.......l-l......:.. _ 1/ '"Iq,

MTA ASSFSS1ENl" $.M1ARY ..

ICP AA'

1. IDIDm3 TIMES () tJlb...

i: ~CNS ( ---!-/--

~. ~ --1 I

~: ~~:YSIS ==F=~--I;.....~-

9. SERIAL DIIlJI'ICN --r- 1

10. SAMPLE VERIFlCATICN -.-...,.-- ' --;---

li. OIHER et::. X _-+\ __

12. OVERALL ASSESs-tENI' 0- 'r _.....;~~__

o = Data has no prdJle:rs/or qualified due to minor problars.

M = rata qualifie:i due to najor prablars.

Z = Data unacceotable.

X = P:rc:blars, tAlt do not affect data.

REVIEWER'S NAME

"i

ACI'ICN rIE1S: _

AREAS OF a:N::E:RN: _

~ PERFORMAN:E: I --------------------------

p.1"ff)

TIERRA-A-018171
Page (, OJ ~

Oate: r~. 1990

N\.:n!::le r: n,.,:.. 2

Revision: 10

Tit.le: E\Taluatiori of Metals Dat.a for the

Contract Lat:oratory Prog"riml

~ix ".6: QP Data ).ssessnent

&m'riaIy Form (Imrgani cs )

----------------_._-------- _._-- -_.

CL' DAtA A5S[SS~~~ SVNxAlT ,o~(lM01eAXICS)

~1<I'iJ

llo1~1., Pup rhl.

'fs.u C.U~ratSofl , 11Il~ Jat.,· f I'.... Dv,Ucat .. D.unin Jute 1 Totd J:'"k t.r."t •• l.c ••,ry L..."rp"J. Iohlu LeS ~l1utSOII l(S,\ b.htu 1,1tctSol'l 6 '+ ... 'i!"( ID

1CP

'1.. , loA

'ur.It' loA

".reur,. I

.l} 0

teul G If )0(..

I 10

I

I

Oth.r

J

1(" 15<0 I ~/t )7 "I~~ )7r/-:;"

'h .. u.

Furl" rt loA

.

~).

"-rev,.,

T.ul I~O I )'5/'!I. )"1 {ot.. )7)/;"-

Otlwr

"Ut

~\.ri ...(.) I.4.c.t •••• 4Itt ...t •• tl•••• C••• , r,y'" crit,ri••

TIERRA-A-018172
S

~

ENTINEf", Inc.

Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Services

2800 Bob Wallace Avenue, Stt. L3 Huntsville, AL 35805 (205) 534- 9800

FAX TRANSMITTAL

DATE: August 4, 1997

TO: Dyncorp

ATTN: Mistie Sisson

FAX NUMBER: (703) 519-8626 '.

NO. OF PAGES: 1 (Including Transmittal Page)

FROM: Susan Pearsall

Sentinel, Inc.

2800 Bob Wallace Avenue, Suite L-3

Huntsville, AL 35805

Telephone No.: (205) 534-9800

Fax No.: (205) 534-9878

COMMENTS: Concerning Case 25601:

Sample MBQK48 (L W TM) was incorrectly labeled on the

COe. The actual sample number is MBQK47.

I/you hl1ll~an.v qUBtions '~ga,ding this t,anstnit1Q(.0'you nud on..,fldditional in/ant/orion, p(~QS~do not IIBitau to call

\oj)

TIERRA-A-018173
U.S. EPA - eJi

5nJ·"..:n..\ 1,..,<:-

S....A, N C.u.. No.: .J.""~ D\ s:.S Ni=.:

------

[\\~ \(.~,itt l)Q \l.. 3:

Con:ra:: b~-b,-()'Il>'(

CG Nc.: h~q K. .1 t

lkv"al (1cw~.:): \ c ~

G

FIEl.!> OUPUc.&.iES

~ So/ies $.un;llc:. .....:::::...- _ o

.

i

"'~t'I

II

$.1.::'.;:: 101 'S) I

F"ael: Ol,.j:lbl.l (0)

.

AnlIy1I Wmll C C a DIi'1 8:] eel""::' nt-Iti:l"l eo~tr:tl"2SoI'l .

AhJt'nlnum I

:1 I, J OC.000 0I

•

,.J. G 8c c, Co coe • ~.u ~_

"

II P t

A.nt::nonv ~

'I J '7 peo 19

"

5.IC C O0 11- U .f,.. I.e Ic::JFA

A.rnni: ,. 3;, ccc~

g )6. Creo c R - ~ le, c; h II F

SariLr.'l'l ~ II \ ~tC • DCCX:: II , "']0 CC"Co II e-.) k- liliT1

ServlhUl"'l .. U. J'y", c· b" c,'g':jco !) h - ".11 M II II ,

I,

Ca::'l"Ii~ Ii I; I \' .).cos:. II r3,,l.0CC. "

- K ..J.O II P I

Cal:iI.•'m \-';-0 ooo,oc=t:: ~ 'YI. (;0(,.'. Cc~cO II 0.1 P- ~ ....,..,

_f fi~ ~ Ii II K 10.-( I!- --

\

l :'""J, OCCr i ')0. l.::O<",() II II II I

~. ,~Il : .. 1"'\, C; COC; b n ;~. G CO e.> Q U - 110.7 III~

Cc:;'1r I; II -IS Cj cc'~ II G c }....000(.) II i~.l h -

jll!T1

Ir::'I

" L. l. ;) c c '~C 0c::. II 7 0 '-\ co. u C DC) M 5,'] 11- lrt~

Lud Ii t: i D ;+"0. CCCC II I , sa Co. (')/":' 00 111"\.< 1

1

- II 1m

~:"Iesl:.J:"l"\ r '-10 l- CO, ooct::J II ...., oCjc,.o ace.o

"

0,1 E- Ii Ii P I

~ncar:~:'a~n Un/'.s(u;.~. or mg.'"':. dry w.i;nt): f1J I L

Ma~::anew - I' t'J

'*k! COC(:)

II '1:l~ cooe;.

Me:::.Jrv 1,~.::c.c U t. 1co C)

NI:icel 'I l. ~J.... I"j oct:: II 9 ,.. L. 00(,

;:::.aSSI:Jm I ~' l: C C . ooec I H ,~ .,-co. boCoG

S.i;ni:.om II .;l.., "(bOb ILL I .-. aoe..

U'o'IH r ..,.

$ceIL.."" ..' 'J 1 / 0 (;. c, Cac:., 1 J '\.. DO. OO('~c.

ihalhur:"l I· j ,-'coo U \,.R 3 "1000

Va~adium !I 5' t , ~ c:'c I )1 Su, '?~DC

ZI!"l: II i ~J..C . CC (".c.~ I n 1110. v..·>cC

Cva:"IIC; II II I II

I' I

I~

:

FOr=.M VI - IN

TIERRA-A-018174
~N&mc: '__ ....~........:~...:;.!..-J-.....I..:.~------------

'-{.:t..\

'.

U.S. EPA - C1.P

I

F!E1.tl OUPUC..l.iES

Cu... Nc.: .1,(,6 i

% $:)lids Sarnpll: .__----:.~.:....----

I h 0,0l<J\r! fll)~K ~

Cot-.::z::: (, £ ~\J ')-- 0 ,.l ~

CG~.: 11 ~ Gd~'J '-I

l.I'va I(bw/me:f): low

% Sefids c..opr,;ata: "V. C.

s.:.S N:.:'-----

·

i

A.:-~n I

SoI.":",-?" (5) Ie riel: O""?~Lt (0)

Ana~ L.!tn/l c6CIFFI~MI · ec~.::.n:-a~1"l Co rc. rr.rstic I"l

·

AlumInum' I

,oo7~~ .ll, '0;): ocoO I i ~l ?r "1 R kOOO I R t".:> I - IrllPi

A.nl..MonCnV fl ! .L.O I! I e; ij I 15M -- _ \''l,~11 II P I J SSG" t... ,",~D

·Arseni: .l.'O jl ~3, ::p. '1< I

•

4,).\'-\JD I 1- RII..."ib1.-<If II F

·Svium ~ 'jpo II Jti,:liOO Ii )-;~-1J0C I U- li3\.::>11IiPI

·Bervillum 10 I. j • "'. -\ lz p..n 16b - "0+'-' r-II P /

..

! l()

Ca=:ni~ .j 10 /; I \ • I )~ ') 1/ 9 .SKCz 0 I II M\,1fej(1/ ILL

Ca!:ium 10000 \Ol:oS3·YQOQ rl '9_"IOOD 1

I n ~ '1\:ljll ,. P I

! rniL.-""n /I loci~ h =t IIe , y 1,0 /I 137. ytl Q I U Lj~ ,"1 ~ -lrliPl

t-_.lrt 190 .. 1"$. 't. ¥'\ r--n IIr)-C'l. 0 If\ h- II3;)20<11 I, P I

C::~.r jOU(o II '1 ....\ O. q, )'9 11 \;']3· "'lps?p I n .,~ ~ \ II _II IIFI

Iren

Laad

~:"les:w~

Ma~:2.ne~

IwIt~::Jrv

lO~J,.

tool, I:

lo.oco r

\90].. ,.

\0':l79

.

'1 29 I.

lO,ooe

II If II

0

,.

10,00<::: .. ij

I; II

!l 100 I:

u Icv"lo Ih II

~ I'

P::.aSS/;J:"n

. S.iQni:."I"n

?IIVer

Sedil-'"'Tt

Tnalilum

V.:-oac:!ium

ZIn::

C'vanlce

.-

...

FORM VI - IN

TIERRA-A-018175
_...--_ ......

z:v.lua tion of Meta l' t.:a u ror the ecDtract t,.ab:ln tor)" Pl'O'fI aD (c::LP)

be"'" on

~. 3/'0

(Sv'"? il.e'Vis ion XI)

.\. :~

.1 "'I

1_

TIERRA-A-018176
Page 1 of 34

Title: Evaluaticn of t"'etals taU for the

o:ntraet Lal:oratOIY Pto;;ram

Date: Jan. 1992

NI,Iri:er: aor·2

R,eVisicn: U

1.0 ~

1.1 'this proce:lllre is aw1icab1e to in:>rgarU.c data cX>taiJ1ed tran a:nna=

1a!Xlratories ...,r\dn3 tor }la.ZartbJS waste Site O::nua

ct

L;Il:oratoXY

Plogtam (CLP).

1.2 'lbe data validatia> is baSed up::n analytical arrl quality assurance

~ specified in Stateme<>l' of WOrl< (lPil 3/90 •

2.0 !!!'%9"'il>il:l.tid _ !:ata """"eeos will ='P 1etethe fo11e:win3 tasks as assigred by

the rata F,eVietl ceordinat..or:

:2 .1. Far a ~t.tt.l revie'!!:

2.1.1 Ilata A:is!lS......,~_ "Total W",,·'!'mr!lO!l:l-"",. ~i'lt lV'"9'lx lA.11L

'1be reviewer m.1St answer eve--ry quest.ic;:ll a'1 the c;hedclist.

2 .1. 2 Ilata ;.ssesSll>OQt - llI!lto, ),s:!eS!llIlO!'\t!!.Url!~ ~ ,,:Ix 1..21

'lbe answer en the c!Jed<list 1I1ISt ""teh the aeticn in the narrative

(~1..2) arrl a> Fo:tm l' So ~ nc:t use ~ to write the narrative.

2.1.3 Q;Pt-rAd; Ncp_Q:ppl~ - ~!fpO*t ()T3""'""?1i:.c A,31. 'Ibis report is to te carpleted crlJ,y when a serialS a::ntr.>Ct violati<n is

ex=nt

ered

•or up::n the xspost of the Data validat1cn Task ~ter. or Technical

Pxoject Officer mol. Jt'ct<I'iaxd 5 c:e:pies: C2lB each for intelD"l files,

aw<cpriate Ilegic>1a1 no. saq>le ~ Office (SoDI and last biO ~ ct

Jom1ing List tor Data ~ ~ 1..41. :In oc:ber cases. all cx:m:raet v>l5l:lItiWS lIllal1d te """,,%led to the eX! of the Pata )\SSeSSIl!!Dt Nanative (see.

A.2.2) .

TIERRA-A-018177
Page :2 of J.4

P3te: Jan. 1992

~ -- a;·2

Revisicn: 11

Title: Evaluatia1 of t-'etals rata for the

Q:ntraet I.al:::oratory Px03t am

2 .1.5 Da t:a Revie-.r Leg: It is reco 1Ilerled that each dat.a reviewer shoJ1d naintain 'a leg of

the reviE!'w'S coYPlet~ to incl~: a. date of start of case revi.e'w

b. date of carpleti01 of case review

c. site

d. case nuri::er

e. ccntraet lab:lratorY

f. nnt::er of satples

g. uatrlx

h. WJrs ~~

i. revi~' s initials

2.1.6 :te1ri'me EegJ;rd Leg - the data reviewer sh:uld enter the bare facts of.

iJ'x:II.1ixY, tefore initiating artf pxne c::nversaticn with CLP l.ab:Jratarj.

After the case revietl has 1:::een carp1eted, nail ...rote ccpy of Telepxr.e

R-cocord Leg to tl':e laroratOl.'Y an:! pink o::py to S-O. File yelle:w ccpy in

t.~ Teleph::ne ~ Leg folcer, ~ attac.~a xerc:zx c::;y ot the Te1epxne

ReCOI'd Leg to tr..e a:npleted rata Assessrent Narrative ~ A.2).

2.1.7 l~P~

2.1.7.1 ~ o::npleticn of review, the follorin; are to be forwarCe1 to tl':e Regimal

. 5aItple o::nt.rol center (RSC.'C) lcx::at.ed in the SJrJeiJ,lance am M:nit.orir.g BtdlO:

a. data padcage b. o::nplete:1 data ii.ssessre!1t c::bed<J,ist ~ A.]., crigi:cal)

~:~C:~~ ~jin3 (CJ:Sl

e. Q2 ReanalYSis Rs;ueSt~ Reccxd (ccigiml + 3 ccpi.es)

f. ~ A.6 (original). .

2.1.7.2 FcnoIaId 2 cx:pies of carpleted tata Jl.sseSs:telt N3rrative ~ A.2)

alcn; with 1a::pies of the InJrsaI1ic Data Asse:ssTe1t Form ~ A.S) am

Te1~ Reo:ttd I..cg , if lInJ,: en! ead1 for dfP1cpriate Regicml no,

aro the other en! to EPA EMSL office in Las vegas. 'Ib! ad:h"esses of ncs am BPA

office in I.as Ve!iifJS are gi~ in ~ A-l.

2.1.8 Filed p~ - q:cn o:rrpleticn of review, t.~ fcllod.n; are to t:e tiled

withi.71 MoB files: a. ~ ccpies cf a::rrpleted !Bta .Assessrent N3.rrative ~;x A.2) eac!l ar:yin;

~A.6.

b. Tel~ Record I.o3 (c:::py)

c. g.o Rep:rt (c:py ~ A-3)

d. C!.P Reanalysis ~/~ Reccrd (o:pf)

r:~!)1

TIERRA-A-018178
Title: Evaluatia1 of Metals tata for the

Q:ntract I..ab:>ratoty PrcytaTl

Date: Jan. 1992

}bTb!r: Hf-2

Revisicn: 11

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

po ta rmp1et.J!!neS' Each data pac'<age is chec'<ed ~ a Regic:nal SanPle Q::ntrol CCOI'dinator (RSSO for

c::e:nt'letenesS. A data pac:Xage is as~ to be o::rrplete when all the deliverables

required urx3e.r the c:cntraet are present. If a data pacXage is incarplete, the RSSC

WOJ1dcall the lal:oratory for missin; c:k:current(s). If the lalxl-ratoIj' dces rtt

resp:::rrl within a wee.~, 9'00 an:! foM3 o::ominator of Regiat II will l:e notified.

RcjectiaJ of Data • All values detemined to be unacceptable en the Inctganic

Analysis Data Sheet (Form I) nust be lined a.Jer with a red ~. As seen as any

:rev1.e1l criteria causes data to te rejected, wt data can be eliminated fran arrj

fu,rthe..r review or o:nsideIaticn.

M9"9t'P2' Crlt«;1A • In order that revie.r.s be CCrlSistent arena revieweIS,

aceept.anee criteria as stated in~ A.l (pages 4-25) s!nJld be use:!.

Mliticnal guidarx:e can l::e fe:urD in the Natiasl ~c Functicnal Q,.ree

1

ine:s ,.r

CCt:eter 1, 1989.

Z' Coot.ract

Q"!"?liJl* ~~~) • 'Ibis is inten:3ed to aid revie-er in

lcx:atinJ ant prc:blens, tCC:hc:x:u>rect8f aId urmrected. a:::wever, the va];mt;cn

shculd be carrie.:! cut even if crs is nIX present. ResuJ:mi.ttals recei-ved fraD

],aboratory in resp:IlSE! to as uust be use:1 by the reviewer.

.

EPj'''!''Hoo of! rnri"4-!1 • -n:e data revi~ will follOi tl:e stan:2rd practio!.

TIERRA-A-018179
Page 4 of 34

Date: Jan. 1992

NJTter: J!rI- 2

Revisicn: U

Title: Evaluaticn of ~ta1s Data for the

Crotraet tal:orato~ PIo:;ram

~ A.l: Data Assess:renr. - a:nt-'""a~

Q:rrpliance (Total Revie'l'l)

A.l.1 Q:iptract Q:m:?1 i..aDc8 ~ RepOrt. (a::s) - Present?

l!Cl10i: If 00, ccntaet RStX.

A .1.2 F.eo:lrd of Cc.rmmiea tioo (frc:m RSO:') - Present? [_1

grIOi: If 00 ,request frcn RSO:.

A. 1. 3 Trip Re:o%:t - Present arrl e:rrpl ece?

ACI1Of: If 'no, o:ntaet Rsa: for trip n:pxt.

[_l

A.l.4 SimPleTraffic Report - Prese!'1t-?

~""""';'h1 , ~ .........e

[-)

[_1

1CI'ICN: If no, request fran Regi.cnal SBn'ple o::ntro1

center (RSO:).

A.l.S Q;?Yer Peqo - Present? [_l

Is Q:I\I'& pase prq:ier1y filled :in am sigoed 1:ly the lab

rrenager or the nanager' & desis;nee? [_l

(a) 1Yaffic Report Sheet?

(b) FoI:m I' 81

..}CI'Iai: If no far arrt of tbe al::cve, cc:ntaet PS::l: fer

cl¢ficaticn.

TIERRA-A-018180
Title: BvaJ,uatim of Metals Data for the

o:nuaet I.al:oratory PItgLal\

~ A.l: Data Asse5sren t

- o:nt.raet

c:arpl iance (Total Re'Vie'tt')

:.....

cate: Jan. 1992

N.JTber: 9'l- 2

Revisim: 11

-------_.-_ ..,------_._----_._----------_._-----------------------------.---_.----_ ....-.-_.

A.l.6.1 Are all tne Form ! ~ Form IX labeled with:

Lal:cratorj rare? [_1

caselSAS rurl::er? (-]

BPA sanple ~.? (_1

so:; N:l.? [_1

o:nuaet N:l.? [_1

Q:u;rect units? [_1

JoBtrix? (_]

grICN: If r.o for ant of the ab:Ne. J'lC:te urrer

c:nuae:t Pxd:ll~-o::npl:ianee sectial

of the -rata Assessrent Narrative-.

'A .1. 6.2 to arrj ea:rp.ltaticnluanscrlPtiCX1 e:r:t~ ex:c:eed 10\ of

rep:>rt.e:i values en FoDTS I-IX for:

(NJ'IS: QleCk all foms against ribI data.)

~~~~~- (a) all anal}'teS 8l181yzed 1¥ ~

A.l.6 FOI]ll I to DC

-

-

( ]

-

LJ ~ -

Ll -.

[_1 -

[_1 -

(b} all aralytes analyzed by G?M1.

(c) all analyte:s analyzed bf ». Plate?

(d)~

(e) Cja1lide?

grIOJ: If yes. prepare 'I'e1eP'*D:le tog, ~

lal:::orate:tY fer ~ data ax:d

UAXect. errors with re:1 p:n::iJ. am initial.

TIERRA-A-018181
Title: Evaluaticn of M:!tals I:Bta for the

O::ntraet I.al::oratoty P!031 all

~"'Xti.;( A.1: Data Assessrrent - Q:nt.raet

Corpl iance (Total Revie.i)

Pase (; of 34

Date: Jan. 1.992

N.Jrt:er: Hrl- 2

Rsvisla'1: 11

A.1.7

A.l.7.1

A.l.7.2

Raw Data

DigestiC1 I..cg'* for flarre MIle:; (Form XIII) present?

DigestiC1 lD3 for furnace AA Form XIII present?

Distillatial.I.cg for tterOJ1'Y Form XIII ~?

Distil1ati01 Leg for cyaniOe.s Form XIII present.?

~ m

l_1

l_l

l_l

[_1

(_l Are pi values (pi<2 far all netals, pb12 for cyanic3e)

pl:esent?

.weightS, dilutiC1S am volures used to c:btain values.

Pe-""'Ce!'1I: solids calo.ll.aticn present for soils/se:iirrent.s? l_l

Are prep:uaticn dateS ptesent a1 sanple pnparaticn

logs/1:ench sheets?

M=a.suraTent read Olt rec:onl present? 1CP

PlaTe Ai\

A.1.7.3 Are all xaw data to S\.g)J1t all sanple analyses an:1

cc q::eratic:ns PIesent.?

T """"';l-.1 , ~ .......e

P:tc;:edy I.al::e1e::!?

~: If IX) for arrt of tre al:ove q.:estitn;

in ~-icr3 A.l.7.1 ~ A.l.7.3,

write Te1e;tx:r.e Rec:ord Lo:3 arrl a:ntact

lab:!ratarj far resutmi teals.

--- -----

Ll

(-]

TIERRA-A-018182
tate: Jan. 1.992

N.,rrber: &1- 2

Revisia'l: 11

-

Title: !valuaticn of Metals for t:lle Q::Jltract

La}:oratcrry Ptcgt&l\

~ ~.l: Data 1\Ssessrent - O::11traet

o:rrpliance (TOtal Review) -----------------------------------------_._-----~--------------------------------------_._-

A.l.8

;\.1.8.2

A.l.9

A.1..9.1

A.1..9.2

Bols1;rp Tim' - (aquecus am soil sanples )

(Ex;3mi.ne sarrple traffic reports an:! digesticn/dis tillati01legs.)

M:!-"'U1Z'Y analysis (28 days). . .

eya.nide distillaticn (14 dayS). • ~ e:xoceedErl1

()t.he Yetals ar.alYSis (6 m::r.thS).. ~?

~: ~ a list of all sar¢es an:! analytes for

which ooldin; tineS baVe been exc~· S{:eCi ty

the mrrt:er of dayS fran date of co11ecticn to the date

of preparatia'l (fran raw data). A!:tach to cheCklist.

>enOl: If yes, ~j ect (red-line) values less than

Inst.nJtBO.t

oeteeticn Limit (IDL) an::! flag.

as estinate:! (J) tb! values a1:x::M! IlL even

thcuSh sanple (s) was preserve:i prq:erly.

Is pt of aquecus sa:t91es for: .

. Metals Aoalysis >21

___ ~ __ ~eyan:ideS AnalYSis <121

l.ct.;.al: If yes, flag the assxiated neWS am cyaI'iideS

data as estinated.

}"g;;!!l I clipal Pst,t)

kre all FcDn I' S pte:sent am carplete?

JoCI'IOf: If no. Preip3.retel~ :record leg arrl a:ntact

laroratJ:JrY for sU::mittal ~

Me correct. units (u;/l for wate-~ ani rrgft;g for soils)

iIrlicate1 a1 FcI:m I'S? [_1

~ soil sant::1e results fer each ~ter OJLxect:.e3 far

~ solids? [_1

A..~ all "less than m:." values px:q.e:dy c:a:3e:\ with "U"? [_1

TIERRA-A-018183
Page 8 of 34

Title: Evaluaticn of MaWS Data for th=

Q::Iltraet I.al::oratory PI030lattL .

~'"dix 14..1: Data Assessrent

-.c::ntraet

Q:rrpliance ('Ibta1 Review)

tate: Jan. 1992

N.Jtter: ~- 2

Revisicn: 11

Are the correct o:ncent.raticn qualifiers usa:1 with

fi.na1 data'?

A.l.9.3

ACTICN: If no for arrt of the al;:ove, prepare Te1ephcne

Record Leg, am c::::ntaet lal::oratory for corrected

data.

Are EPAsarple 11 s an:! Q:)rresp:::rx1in3 lal::oratorY sarrple

In # s the s.am! as en ~'1e cever Page, Fern I's am

in the raw data? [_1

was a brief PTfSical Oescripticn of satples given

cn Form I's?

was the diluticn of arrj sa:rple diluted teyaD the

~.t.s of the o:ntract noted en Form I or

Fo:tm XlV? .

],CTl:CN: If IX) for arr:I of the at:cve, n::te urx:3er

o:ntraet·PrcbJ,e:n/N::n·COtpliarx:e

of the"tBta Assessren tNarrative·.

A.l.10

A.l.10.1.

Ca1:U:ln.tica

Is xeco:td of at least 2 p'int c:alihraticn

present for Ic::P analysis'"

Is reo:rtd of 5 p:dnt ca1 jbraticnprCSC!litO for

H; analysis? .

Is record of " ~t calibraticn pre:se:Jt fer:

Flare AA? [_1

Fumaee AA? [_1

c:yanic3es? [_1

Is cn= caliliraticn star.dard at the rnL level for

all M_(~ B3) an:i cyanides analyses? [_1

J,C'TICl1: If n::> for arrt of the al:;ove, write in the

Q:nc...-oaC':. Prcblern/N=n -Q:Irpli..an:e secticn of

tr.e "I:e.:.a >.sse.ss:ren t Na.native".

p. '3S"'f

TIERRA-A-018184
Page 9 of 34

tate: Jan. 1992

Nsrt:er: Hrl-2

R.evisim: U

Title: EvaJ,uatiro of ~ta1s Data far the

o:ntraet Lalx>rato~ Pto31am

~ A.l: tata Assessrent - Q::.ntraet

Q::rTpliance (Total R,evie.rl)

A.l.l0.2 Is correlation coefficient less than 0.995 for:

A.l.10.3

MaraJ,ry Analysis?

cyanide Analysis?

At.anic l\bSOrpticn Analysis?

gtICH: If yes, flag the asscciat.ed data as estiIrated.

WI'E: The data validator shall· calOllate the corTelaticn

coefficient usin3 c:cncentxatiCDS of the st.aI'Dards

an:1 the corresp:n1in3' inst:nJt'Slt resp::nse

(e.g. al::E;ort>3nCe, peak area, peak height, etC.).

In the instance where less than 4 starx2%ds are

treaS\,lrE!d in al;:so11:ance (or ~ area, p!L!k height,ete.)

m:de, are the rarainin3 stai:dards analyzed in

a:ncentntiCn m:de imTediate1y after c:alibraticn

within +lot of the tnlS values? [_1

N;11QI: If no, flag the associated data as estinated

if star:datdS are IX't within ±lot of trUe values.

to DOt. flag the data as estiJtated in linear nn;e

irrlicat~ ~ gc:.cd rec;:D'J'erJ of starram{s).

- -

A.l.ll

A.l.ll.l Pu!:senearD carplete for every tretal am cya:aide?

Present arrl o:::rrplete for AAar.d Ie? ~ l:d:h are

used for the sane analyte? [_1

]CU.01: 1f 00 for a:'rf of the arove, ~ Te1~

Record Leg ar.d o:ntaet lal:oratmY.

A.l.ll. :2 Cirt:1e en each Farm IIA all p!rCSlt rec:::7-"'eries ~'lat

are OJtside the a:ntraet ~.

~ all calibratiCX1 ~ (:initial arrl cr:ntinlin:3')

wi thin o:ntrol limits: ~tals- 90-llO%R?

9; - 80-UO\R?

Cyani.des- 8S-115lR?

-

TIERRA-A-018185
..-

4.tle: EvaluatiOl of M3tals ~ta for ~

I Q:I1traet. Laboratory Pt\0:9rartl

~ 1\.1: Lata >.ssessrent - Q::ntraet

o:::rrplianO! (Total R-=v'ie1l)

Date: Jan. 1992

N..Iri:er: J!'j4:2

Revisicn: 11

NdICN:

Flag as esti.liated (J) all p:::sitive data (not

flasge:: ·..nth a "tr'l analyzed l:et:wween a

calih~::icn starXiard with \"R:t:etween 75-89\

(65-79\ for N3i 70-8·n for on or 111-125\

(121-135\ for 8;; 116-130\ for Ql) reo:Ne:'Y'ard

nearest go:::d calibraticn st.andal.'d· Q..1alify results

<IDL as estilrated (UJ) if we 101 or crY \"Ris

75-89\ (CN, 70-84\ i HG, 65-79\). Reject (red-line)

as unaceept.able data if recovert of. the ICY or .

crv is OJesiCe the ran:;e 75-125% (~, 70-130\; Hg,

65-135%). eualify five sarples en either side of

~ficaticn starXiard alt of ccntrel limits.

-

A.1.11. 3 was c::c:ntinuin3' caliDraticn ~omed every 10 sanples.

or every 2 haJr'S? [_1

was 101 for cyani.CeS distilled? [_1

N:l"ICN: If no for arrt of. the a,b::1ve, write in tb!

c:mtraet-Prebl~-Q::rtpliance secticn of the

"l:ata Assessrent Nan:ative·.

A.l.12 .1 was a CXIL st:.arrlaId (OW analyzed after initial calibraticn for all AA tretals (IDL fi~H;>? . [_1

was a mid-ran:;e "Ca1ib. verificaticn st:.arrlaId distillei

am an:Uyze:1 for ~ analYSis? [_1

'Fc:a:m n B (~ Standards for AAand P) -

A.1.12

was a 2xO<tL ( or 2XIt'L ....nen ~) analyzed (C!U)

for ~ Ia> run? [_1

(N::te: au for AL,sa I ca I Fe 1M3, NaI or K is Ix:.t recpi.red.)

H:TICN: If no for arrf of the a.l:::oVe, flag as estiIrated

all data falling within the affecte:i rau:;es.

"!he affected Ia:I~ are:

AAAnalysis - '*'*TJ:ue value .±. ~

ICP ltnalysis - '*~ Value ±::zaa,

CN Ar..alYSis - '*'*TrUe Value .±. 0.5 x T!Ue Value •

• ~'e value of CAA., au or mid-r~ st.arr.a:rd. Sul:5titute 1DLfot' OIDLwhen IDL > ~.

O:xrp.1te tbe ccncentraticn of the missin; mid-IdIJge st..an:2.rd f:::cm tre calibraticn rorqa.

TIERRA-A-018186
~o~'I'DG~

Title: Evaluatim of Metals tat.! for the

Co1traet lalXlratory Prt1'.3ram ~ A.I: tata Assessnen t

- centraet

CcrtFliance ('I'Qt.al ReVi~)

Page 11 of 34

Date: Jan. 1992

~: }!oi-2

ReVisicn: U

-A.1.12 .2 Was au analyzed after lCV/IcrA ani before t-l-)e final cev/cr::s, am twice evert eight hcUrS of ICP run'?

ltCnaf: If no, writ.e in o:ntract Pr'Cblen/N::n-Q:rrpliance

secticn of the "Data Assessrren tNan:ative".

A.l.U .3 Circle en each Form 1m all the percent rec:a...eries that

are OJtsiOe the a~ ~. .

Are ~ ani au starX2J;ds within o:ntz'01' limits :

M:!ta1s 80 - J.2O%R?

Is mid- ran;;e st:,.ar.daId within o:ntto.1 limits:

Cyanide 80 - 12O\R? - -

Flag as estiITate:i all satple resultS within

the affected rao;e if tne ret:J:]Verf of the

st,an:3ard is between 50-79\; nag ally p::::sitive

data witlUn the affected raD3E! if the recoverY

is between 121-150%; n!ject all data within the

affected raIJ3e if the reo:;Ne-~ is less than 50%;

reject ally p:sitive data within the affected ran;e

if the rect:f'l&Y is gmater than l5Ot. 0Ja' ify sot of

tl':e saaples en either side of 00 st,aD:3aJ:d eutsi.de

the ccnuol limits.

nag or reject. the fiDal xesil:ts m'y 1I!b=n sa1Ple

A.l.l3 --

A.l.l3 .1 PresE!'1t arxi ccnplete?

For bXh AA. a:rx1 10' when tcth are used fer the

sane analyte?

was an initial c:alibra ticn blank analyzed?

-

-

was a o:ntirui.n3 ca1ibraticn blank analyzed after

fN&'/ 10 sarrple9 or p;.re.T'"j 2 h::UrS (which ever is rrcre -

f~t)'? t_l - -

TIERRA-A-018187
Page 12 of 34

Title~ EvaluatiCX1 of ~t.a.1s Data for the

Q::::I1traet Lal:;oratoJ:)' ~

~ A.l: rata Assessrrent - o:neraet

o:::rrpl i,.anc:e (Total Revi~)

Date: Jan. 1992

~; ~-2

R.evisi01: U

- ~Cli: If no, prepare Te1~ RecOrd Lo3, c::ntaet

la1:oratoI:)' am write in the etntraet-Prcblsrsl

tal-Q:xTpliancs secticn of the "Data Assessrent Narrative".

10..1.13.2 Circle at each Form III all calibratiCX1 blank values

that are ab:;7ve OIDL {or 2 x lDL ...men IDL > aIDL) •

.

Are all calibraticn blankS (\lIhen lIJL,cCROL) less than or

equal to the Q:ntraet ReqUire:! ceeecticn Limits (~)? [_1

Are all calibraticn blar.kS less than two tineS

rnst..l:'UlSlt teteC'"..icn Limit (...nen :JI)L>CiIDL)?

1£'UCH: It no for ant of the a1x:M!r flag as estinate:i

(J) p=sitive semple results When hID" sarcple

value. is less than or equal to calibraticn

blank value anal}'%Si l::et;t.o.een calibratim blank

with value O\I-er ~ (or 2xlDL) am nearest oo=d

calibraticn blank· -

Flag five sarrples en either side of the

calibratien blank wtside the ccntrel l.imits.

A.l.14

~ m (~ticp 1S1Jmk) -

(N::)te: 'Ihe ~tia1 b.1.aDk for uero.JZY is tba Scm!

as the calihratim blank·)

A.I.lot .1 was. CQ& prep. blank atW-)'%S1 far:

each satple t:e1iveIY GrOJP (s:G)?

each l:at.e:h of diseste=1 satPJ.,es?

-

rotE· _.

l::c:th M am ICP 'lIb:!1 l::oth are use:i for

tbe serre analyte? 1_1

If no fer arrt of the ab:JVe, flag as

estinated (J) all the associated ~itive

dat3 <10 X IDLB fer which p:rep. bla:nk

was oct anal~· If atiy ere blar..k was analyzed far nore .

than 20 satPles, then first 20 sanples ana1

r

we1

Co net have to 1::e f)..ag;ed as estirtated (Jl.

,,35"6

TIERRA-A-018188
~ oP£?,AT1J'G ~

Title: Evaluatic:n ot ~tals tata tor the

o:ntraet. t,al::oratory ~ ~ A.1: Data Assess;rent .. ~et

o:npl i..ar'lC2 ('Jtt,a1 ReView)

Page 13 of 34

t::at.e: Jan. 1992

~: ~-2

ReVisiCl'1: U

- Is c:c:oeentratiCX1 of prep. blank value greater

~

~ HLA

A.l.14.2 than We ClDL """" :JIlL is less thaO or equal to QlDL? -

(_1 -

If yes. is tl1e c:cncentr"tiCXl af tl1e sanple with

t:.te least o:neentrated anaJ,.yte less than 10 tineS

tl1e prep .blank?

-

[_1

l&TICH:

1f yes, reject (red-line) all asscciated

data greater than a<IL ~CI1 b1t

less than -ten tineS the prep. blank value.

A.l.14.3

Is ex;tJCel1tra tiCXl of ~. blank value (Form IIIl less

than boO tin'eS IDL• ..men IDLis greater than CRDL?

l_l

N:TI;Qi:

If no, reject (red"line) all p:sitive sanple

results when satPle raw data are less than 10

_t:il're5the prep. blank value.

A.l.14.4

Is c:c:nc::enuaticn of prep. blank ):e100'l

th! negative (J('!X..?

[_1

~:

If yes, reject (:red ..line) all asscciated sarrple

results less than l())cOUJL·

)..1.1.5

19P' 1Y (!a I:P,t¢........p ".....gs 5"T 1el

A.1.15.1

PJ;eSelit alxl O:I1plete"

t_l - -

(N:)tZ:

N:X ~ for fu]:naC2 AA. flare M.

tre:r,OJrf ,

cyanide an::i ca. M3. It aIX\ Na.)

was ICS analY"~ at ~ cuD erx1 of nm

(or at least twio! evert 8 hcUX'S)?

[_1 -

lQ"IQ!:.

If no. flag as estimated (J) all tlle sanples for

which AL. ca, Fe, or Ma is higher than in lCS.

}..!.1.5.2

Circle all values en each FOCIl I'l tbat are U'IXS

t-~ .±. 20\ of t.J:\,le or established wean value.

A..'""'e--all Interie-~ QleCt S;atp1e results inside

the c::nt--ol limits It 20%)?

t_l -

If ro, is c:er.eent-"'iitiCS'lOf Al. ca. Fe, or M; l~

tbaI1 tr.e ~i .... -e ~cn in ICS?

(~l - -

TIERRA-A-018189
, J •

,.

Page 14 of 34

Dace: Jan. 1992

~: ~-2

Title: E\1a1uatiro of M3tals rata for the Revisicn: U

c:ntraet. t.at:oratory PI03Iam

~ A.l: Data -"ssessrent - Q:x'ltraet.

carpli,ance (Total Revieil)

-

A.1.16

A.l.16.1

..

ACnQi: If no. flag as estimated (J) thoSe p::sitive

results for which lCS- recovert is l:e~ 121-150\;

flag all sanPle results as estirrated if rcs

recovert falls within 50-79%; reject (red-line)

those satP le results for which ICS rec:ove-ry is less

than sot; if ICS recoverY is a.tove 150\, reject

p::sitive results cnly (oot fJ.as9=d with a -un) •

_ Pre-D~ti<X1 -Distilla ticn -

K, an1 Na (l::oth natriees), 1U, am Fe

Pre:SeIlt. arrl o::rrplete for:

each s:x;?

each rratrix type? -

eac."l ccnc. range (Le. lcw, m:d., high)?

For lXtl1 AAam Ie::? when 00th a,.""e used for

the sane analyte? l_]

JC!'IQi: If no for arrj of the a]::ove, f1.aS as estinated (J) all the p:sitive data less

than fOJ%' tin'eS the spildD3 levels sp:ci£isi

in s:1Il for ..mich spiked sarple was rx:::t ana,lyze1.

1m: It CD! spiked szple was analyzed for m::re

-

A.:1.16.:2

A.:l.16.3

than 20 Scmples, then fiJ:st. 20sarples

analyzed do net. ba'Je to te fJ ag;ed as

estinae.e:i (J).

was field blank used for spiJced sa:rple'?

N:"IIO{: If yes, flag all pc:sitive data less than

4 x spike a31ed as e:st.ilrated (J) for whio

field blank was used as spiJced saxple.

Circle en each Form VA all spike recoveries that

are rots ide ccn~-ol limits (75\ to 12S\).

Are _all recoveries within c:x:nuol limits? [_1

If 00, is sanple o::n:enuatiCX1greater th3n or eq.alto fwr t:irreS sPi}:.e ~ticn? {_1

,~~

f'

-

TIERRA-A-018190
page 15 of 34

Date: Jan. 1992

~: l6'J-2

Title: Evaluaticn of ~tals Data for.W! ReVisicn: 11

CO'1tI'aet tatoratory Pt'O.3,am

~ A.1: I:ata;..ssessrrent - Q:J'1uaet

Co1\'liance (Total ReView)

-

JlCnOi: If yes, disregard spil<.e recoveries for analytes

~ cencentratiC11S are. greater ~ or equal

to fCllI' tirr'eS spike aCdfd· If no, circle thc;)se

analyt.eS en Fonn V for which sarrple o:::neentratiCX1

is less than fcur tineS the spike cx:ncentratien.

Are results OJtside the c:cnt-""Ol limits (75-125%)

f~ with "N" en Fo= 1'. an:! FonU VA? {_l

N:TI~: If no, 'loIrite in the ecntraet - Prd:>1a'tV'Na'l -

Q::r:tpli.anCe seeticn of "I:ata As~ Na,rrati ve· •

-

-

A.l.16.4 ~

Are arrt S?ik.e recoveries: (a) less than 30\1

(1:» betWeen 30-74%1

(e) between 126-150%1

Cd) greater than 150%1

)C'11Q{: If less than 30%, ];eject all ass:dated agJeCUS

datai if l;et'oIES1 30-74',· nag all associated

~ data as estitre.ted. (J) ; if t.et:ween

126-15Qt. nag as estinated (J) all asscciated

cq.s::us data riOt f'l:a99'!d witb a -a-; if

-

~ than 150%, %eject (red-line) aU

asso=iated" aqJeO;$ data Jx:t fl~ with a wu-.

A.1.16.S Sgil/Sed; 'Pf'¢

Are arrj spike recoveri- es:

(al less than 1.0%1

(b) l::etween 10-74%1

(el tetween 126-200%1

(d) greater than 200%1

- -

- -

-

TIERRA-A-018191
Page 16 of 34

Title: Evaluaticn of fwEtals Data for the

ec::ntract I..al::;oratory Preg'I"Ottl

~ A.l: Data ;..ssess:rent

- Q:::nt.raet

. ('.aTpli.a,nC:e (TOtal Revierl)

tate: Jan. 1992

N..Jtbe,.r : iI'l-:2

Revisicn: 11

- JCrICN: If less than 10\, reject all asscciated dataj if

1:etwe61 10-74\, flag all associated data as estirrated;

if between 126-200\ t nag as estirrated all associated

data was not flag:;ed with a "UtI; if greater than 200\,

reject all asso=iated data not flagged with a "0".

A.1..17.1

F~ VI a@ t:upligt flo4l)

PreSe.'1t ani corplete for:

eac.'1 SCG? A.l.li

each rratri=< t:yI:e?

each c::ncentraticn range (i.e. low, tred., high)?

tcd1 AA ani ICP when t:oth are USEd for t.~ satS

analyte?

)C"f'1CN: If no for ant the al::ou'e, nag as estinated

(J) all the data ~* for ..mich duplicate

sanple was rx:e ana].yzs:1.

Note: 1. If CO! duplicate sanple was analyzed for

nore than 20 earples, then first 20 sarples cb oot

haVe to te flag;ed as estin'Bted.

2. If ~...-c;nt so' ';ds for soU sarple ar.d its dJplicate

differ ..bi nore than 1', prepue a Fo:cU VI for each

duplicate pair, n:p:JLt ceocentratiCDS inu:;/L

Q1 wee weisht msis am ca1o.1late m:o or Wferen:e

for each analyte· ..

A.l.17.3

~ field blank usei for dJplicate analysis?

gI'ICN: If yes, flag all data~· as estin'Bted

(J) for....m.ch field blank. was used as duplicate.

Are all values within (Olt..~ lintits (Fro 20% ex'

diffe..T'E!)Ce S ~)?

A.l.1.7.2

x:T1Q{: If w, write in ~ o::nt.ract - Frch1ars/N:n-

_ C:rrplianc:e secr.icn of "I:ata Assessren1: Nan'ati ve· .

.. Sub:sti tute IDL for aIDL ...men ]I'1, > ODL.

.If no, are all results OJtsiCe tr.e a::ntrol limits

nagged with an*en FoIIn I' s ani VI? -

r' '358

TIERRA-A-018192
Page 1i of 34

Title: Evaluaticn ot M!tals Data for th!

Q:ntraet I..al:oratoty ~ ~ A.l: Data ~sess:rent • Q::ntraet

cmpliance (Total R,evie'tl)

tate: Jan. 1992

~: }il-2

Revisicn: U

~: 1. RFD is DX calculable for an anaJ,yt.e of the

sanple • duplicate pUr when l:oth values are

less than IDL. 2. If the result of lab duplicate anal}"%ed

by GFAAis rej~...able due to coefficient of

rorrelaticn of ~, analytical spike r:ecavert,

or duplicate injec-...ia1S criteria, do n:t. ~y

preeisicn criteria to neWS anal~ bf GF»o..

~.1.~i.4 ~

Circle al eae.'1 FormVI all values that are:

RiD > sot, or

Difference> e.mv

Is ant Rro greater than 50%where sarcple am c;i1plicate

.are toth greater than or ~ to 5 t:izreS *ou:::L?

Is arrj difference u l:etweel sanple ar:d duplicate areater

than .e:mx. ~ sanple ard/ar 6Jplicate is leSS than

5 tineS ,*QmL'?

{~1

-

~: If yes. flag tl>e asveia ted data as estinBted·

--~AL.lJ...l1....S SOil/S'diT""'t"

Circle al ea.C1 Fctm VI all val\JeS that are:

Difference > 2 x oa..*

Is arrt J<m ("mere satt'le am duplicate are J:cth

greater than or equal to S.tiIreS '*amL) :

> loot?

Is arrt **diffe...-r-ence between sanple am d.!plicate {....rere sanple ardIor duplicate is less than sx*a<DL}

>~?

-

-

...SJbstitute mL for amL ...t.eo IIJL > aaJL . .. Use absolute values of satPle ani dlplicate to calculate tl:e diffe..."'E!>C!!·

TIERRA-A-018193
.

..::~" . ··C." ~~.- .

Page 18 ot 3-4

tate: Jan. 1992

».Jri::er: ~- 2

Revisicn: 11 Title: Evaluaticn of Metals Data for the

Q:ntraet Lal::oratory Pr03lam .

~ A.1: Data AsseSsm=n~ - o:ntraet

o:nplianC! (TOtal ReVie'#l)

-

ACrICN: If yes, flag the associated data as estirrated.

A.l.18 FieJ.d r:uolicat.es.

A.1.18.1 were field dJplicateS analyzed?

;..e:t"I01: If yes. prepare a Form VI for each aqueo.lS field

duplicate pa..;r. ~ a Form VI for eadl soil

duplicate pair, if pe.rcent sol; ds fer sarrp1ean::l

its duplicate differ by nore than 1t; x~

o:ncentraticns of soils in U3/l en wet weight

baSis am calollate Ra::s or Difference for each

analyte·

NJ'N: 1. Do not calo.llate Rro ...men 1:oth values are

less than IDL. 2. nag all asscciatsd data ooly fer field

duplicate p3i%.

A.l.18.2 ~

Circle all values en self prepared FcmD VI for

field duplica~es that are: .

1UD > sot, or

Is arrt RE) greater than 50% where sarple am OJplieate

are l:xXh greater than or e:pal to 5 tiIreS ·CZJL1 -

Is arrt **difference l::etween sanple ani duplicate greater

than -CEL where sanple arrJor ol{ilicate is less than

5 tineS *OlIL? 1_1

gr:tQi: If yes, flag the asscciat.ed data as e:st:iJtatsd.

• s~titute lIiL for cmL when II;L ,. ~.

** Use absolute values of satPle am Cuplic:ate to calOJ1ate tl".e diffe.-rer.ce.

r'~~

TIERRA-A-018194
Page 19 of 34

Date: Jan. 1.992

~: 1J'l-2

ReVisia1: U

Title: Evaluatioo of M:ta1s rata for the

Q:r'1traet. Laborat.ory PI03Iam

~ 1..1: tata Assessrrent- Q::ntraet

Co'Tl'l i.anee ('rotal R.eVieti)

-

A.l.1B.3 ~sed;rnent

Circle all values a1 self prepared Form V1 for

field duplicates that. are:

RID :>100%, or

Oiffe-...-enc:e :> 2 x a<DL+

Is arrt RK> (wT.e..~ sarrple an:i dJplicate are tce:h

greater than 5 tineS +a<tL) : :>100t?

Is arrj ••difference between sanple ar:d duplicate

(where sarrple arrl/or duplicate is less th3n SX ·eEL ):

-

JC!'I.Q{: If yes, flag the associated data as estinated.

A.l.19.1

zc::a:m m (I!t9P!t9Ff t"'rnt;;'Ol$"'Plel (Note: lCS - net

required .for aqueaJS B; am cyanide analyses.)

was roe LCS prepared an:! ana,ly:ed for:

each &G? -

A.1.19

l:x::dl AA ani Icr 'Nhen tcth are 1JSEd for the sate

analyte? [-)

ACrI--Ci: If r.o for arrt of the aboVe, ~ 1'eleP:a)l!! RecoId Leg am. o::ntaet J.a}:oratoXY for sutmittal

of results of US. Flag as estin'ated (J) all

the data far whidl u:s was nee ana1~.

~: If cnly ae LCSwas anal~ for rrore than 20

SCftl?les, then first 20 sanp3.es clcse to LCS

_ Co rx::c: haVe to l:e flagged as estinated.

.. sutstitute IDL far rn:L when 1IL :>c::RI:L.

u use absolute values of sarple ani OJplicate to calc..1J,.at..e tre diffe-~.

TIERRA-A-018195
Page 20 of 34

rate: Jan. 1992

lbtt:er: 1tl- 2

Revisicn: 11

Title: Evaluatia1 of MaWS i:ata for the

o:ntraet I..a1::Orat=xyPI03L&1l

~ A.l: tata Assessrent - o:ntraet

CcTpl iance (Tcta1 ReVietl) ,

A.l.19.2 Aguero.! I.CS

Ci.rcle 01 each Form VII tre l.CS ~t'lt recoveries

OJt::ide CO'1trol limits (80 - 120\") except for aquec:us

1'€ ~ so.

lesS than SO\?

be~ween 50\and ;9~?

retween 121\ arrl 150%?

greater than 150%1

ACTIOi: Less tna.n 50%, reject (re:!-line) all data;

l:::et'Nee!'1 SO\' am 79\, flag all assccj ated data

as estinat.ed (J); betWeen 121\ ani 150\, flag

all p:sitive (n:c flagged with a -0") results

as estinated; greater than 150\, reject all

p::sitive results.

A.l.19.3 "

~: 1. If IlFoJrrlIt value of LCS is rejectable cb! to duplicate

L,jectia1S or jDi!lytica 1 spike recoveIy criteria,

regardless of u:s rec;:Nery, flag the asscci ated data

as estin'ate:i ("1. . .

2. If m of an analyte is equal to or greata' than

tx\Je value cf lCS, d:isrega%d the -Acticn- tel"'" even

t.hcugh US is 0Jt of o:ntrel limits.

Is LCS "FoJrD" value higher than the 'o::ntrol

limits en Form VII? l_1

ACTIO!: If yes, q.a.i!y all aSscdate:! p::sitive data

as .:StinE o:.z:

Is LCS "ro.n:~value lo.oter than ~ centrol

lirni ts en Fotm VI!? LJ

hC'P0i: If yes, qualify all asscx-: ated data as

estinste::L

p. '3Eb

TIERRA-A-018196
Page 21 of 34

Date: Jan. 1992

~: Hoi·2

Revisia'l: 11

Title : Eva1ua~Jc;n_of __M!t.a1s rata for the

Q:r1traet t..atoratory Pto.3t71t\

ApperX1ix A.l: I:ata Assessrent - a:ntraet

o:npl iance (Total Review)

A.1.20

A.l.20.1

A.l.20.2

A.l.20.3

A.l.20.4

rom IX (lg serial Diluticp) -

~: serial diluticn analysis is ~red cnly

for initial ~Y'ltraticns equal to or

greater than 10 x IDL.

was serial Diluticn analYSis perforrred fer: .. each so:;?

each rrat.r".x t:yp!?

each cen::entraticn:an;e (i.e. lOt, tred.)?

ACIIaf: If IXJ for arrt of tbe a1::cVe, flag as estitrated

all the p:::sitive data 2. lQxlDt.s ar 2. em.. ltb!n

10XlDL s CRCL for which serial Dilutia1 AnalYSis

was nee pertottred. ..

Was field blank{s) usEd far serial Dilutial AnalYSis? Ll

grICH: u yes, flag all asscciated data ~ 10x IlL

as estirrated (J). If 1QxII1, s aIL. flag all

data ~.cmx..

Are results c:utside c:nt:r01 limit flaS9!d nth an ·S"

en form I's am P'otm IX lb!n :initial c::a;x:ent:%aUa1 en

Fa:m IX is e:pU to SO t::ineS 1IL' or greater. Ll

~: If 0:>, write in th! Q:ntXaet-Prcble:n/N:nQ:nyliarx:e sectim of tne "tBta ~

Narrati veil •

CirCle en each Form IX all pe.~ diffe..~

that are Oltside the c:nt:r01 limits far initial

o:n:entratia1S equal to or greater than 10 x m.s crity.

Are ant , difference va1123:

> 10\7

~ 100\1

TIERRA-A-018197
, -..:f I·' :

Page 22 of 34

Date: Jan. 1992

~: a;·2

Revisial: 11

Title: EvaluatiCJl of Matals tata for the

o:ntraet tatora.toty Pr03r&ll

AR=errlix A.l: Data AsseS~ • o:ntraet

carpliance (Total Review)

-

A.l.21

bCTIrn: Flag as est.in"ated (J) all the asscx:iated sarple

data .,.10xIDLs (or:> c;y;DL ~ lOXIDL < aIDL)

for ....hich p=rcent difference is greater than 10%

rot less tnan 100\. Reject (red-line) all th!

asscciaterl sarrple results equal to or s=-eater

than 10x1DLS (or 2 CXlL when 10xIDL So a<DL) for

\ol'hic."'1 K> is g:reat.e.r than or equal to 1.00\.

Not;: Flag 0= rej~ en Form I's cnly the sanple results

'Ir'hose ass.xiat.ed r;rw data are 2 10XlDL (or.2. miL

\rJhen 10XIDT ~ CROL)

A.l.21.1 Are duplicate injecticns pre:se:l t

in furnace raw data

(exceX. durin; full Methcd of st..an::3a.rd Miit.:i.a'1) fer

each ~le aralyze1 bi G?AA? [_1

N:'I'Ic;N: If m, reject. tb! data en Form I's for which

duplicate injectia1S were rot. perlODled.

A.1.2J..2 to the duplicate injecticn ~ agree witlrln 20%

Relative Staroard Deviat.ial (RS» or 0:ef!ic:i.e!'E of

variatie:n {CV) for cxx.ce,nt.raticn greater than aIL? l_l

was a dilutia1 analyzed for sarrple with aoalytic:al

spiJce recovery less than 40%?

gTIQi: If no for arrt of tb! a1:x:IVe. flag all the

asscx:;ate:' data as estiIrate3.

Is -analytical spike rec::;Nerf o.ltsic3e tr.e o=ntrol

limits (BS-ll5\) fer arrt satP1e ?

N:rI~: If yes, flag as estin'atEd the affected satple results

if t.':e reo::;very is 1::ebIeeO 10- 84%; i.f tre ~ is

l:.e~ US-200\, nag the a.£s·::c:.ated p:sit:'-.-e sarcle

:results as e:stinat.e:ii reject the aseod at.ed sarple·

results if the recove-"Y is less than 10\ i rejec::

p::siti ve satple results if tr.e rec:::;very is greater

tban 200\ .

• Analytical spike is rx;t required en tl:e pre-digesticn spiXE:d sarple.

p. '3bl

A.1.21.3

TIERRA-A-018198
Page 23 of 34

Date: Jan. 1992

1Ult;e.r: Roi - 2

Revisicn: 11 Title: EValuaticn of Metals teta tor the

o:otract I.atoratory PICJ3lCKU .

~ A.1: Data Assessrent • o:nt.ra~

Q:rrpl iance ('Ibtal Re\'iei)

NOn:: Reject or flag the data cnly \Irb:!n tb! a:ffect.Ed

sarrple (s) was not QJbseqUently analyzed by Methcd

of statrlard Jldiiticn.

A.l.22

A.l.22.1 PreSe!1t?

If no. is anj Form I It!SUl t o::rleCS with· S" or a II+·1

A.1.22.2

l!dICN: If yes. write recpest 0'1 Te1t::Pxne Re<::O:t'd Lo.; arrl o:ntact }.ai:::OratOtY for sutmittal of JI'a[m VIII.

Is coefficient of conelaticn for MSAless than 0.990 far

arrt sartt'le?

grIQ!: If yes, reject (red-line) the affected data.

A.1.22.3 was '*'fQ ~ far artf sarple b.1t net parforaed?

Is coefficient of ~ for lEA less than 0.9951

" - ~_ .1iOtf! M!A alOllati.=s eutside tlle linear x~ of the

calibraticn 0J,I'IJe generate! at the tegil1tWJ3 of tt.e

analytical nm?

gI'!CH: If yes far mj of the atove, flag all

the associats1 data as estinata:! (J).

lot3.s prt:per cpantitatial pz:o:eOJre. fcll~ OJLIect1y

as ~tlined in the s::w en page B-23? A.l.22A

grlQf: If' tx'l. rxXe excepticn urrer o:nt-"'Ciet Prcbleml

N:n -COtl?1i,a:rx:e sectioo of the -Data .A,sseSSte1t

Narrative., ard prepare a separate list.

TIERRA-A-018199
• •••. #-4-

Page 24 of 34

tate: Jan. 1992

N.nt:er: Jiol- 2

Revisicn: U

Title: Evaluati01 of ~tals taU for the

o:ntraet laboratorY PI03lCll\

~ ".1: Data Assessrent

- er.:ntraet

o:npliance (Total Review)

>..1.23

We..reant analyses pertorrre:i for dissolved as '«ell as

total analytes 01 the sam: sanple (s) .

\oJe-T"e arrt analyses perfo~ for inor;anic as well as teUl

(organic + in:u:sallic) analytes en the sate sat¢e (8) ? -

oon: : 1.. If yesI prepare a list c::cnparir.s diffe..~

bet'.ween all dissolve::! (or ~c) an:i

tet.al analyt.eS. eatp.lte the differax::es ~

a ~ of the teea1 analyte cn1y when

dissol ve:i a:nc:entratia1 is greater than <XL

as well as total cx:ncentrati.cn.

2. A{:ply the follewi.n; ~iC%lS cnly if inorganic (or dissol wd ) results are (i) ab:Jye

OOL, ani (ii) greater than tot.al o:::nstituent.s.

3. At least en! p~ticn blank. ICS, am LCS

slx:uld be anaJ,yz.ej in each analytical ron.

A.l.23.2 Is the ~tia1 of arrt dissol~ (or irJorganic)

analyte greater than its tet:al o:n:::entntia1 by

acre than 10%? -,

A.1.23.1

A.l.23.3 IS tne o:n:entraticn---of any dissolve::! (or imrganic)

aoalyte greater than its total o:n:::entnticn bY

ucre than sot?

gI'ICN: If trClI'e than lOt I nag b:th di sso1ved (or

inorganic) an::1 total values as estixrated (J);

if trore than sOt, reject (rE!d-liD!) tb! data

fer b:::th values.

A.l.24 yo;cn 'I <Field B'Wl -

I A.l.24.1 CiIcle all field bl.ank values en FoI:m I that are

greater tmn~. (cr:2 x IDL when JIL > ~) •

Is field blank o:;nc:s1tX'aticnless than GtL

(or 2 x IIL 'flhel IIL > CF1JL) for all paratEte-?"'5

of asscx:iate:! cq.s::us ani soil sartples? [-]

~.-u2:.

[_1

Ll

TIERRA-A-018200
.:. ;.~ ;.

Tit.le: EvaJ,uaticn of ~ta1s Data for the

o::ntraet taboratoIY ~ ~ A.l: rata. AsseSs;:tent .. o:nuaet

C,atpliance (Total ReV'ie'f/)

I :

Page 2S of 34

oate: Jan. 1992

~: '~-2

ReVisim: 11

- If no, w.s field blank value alreadY rejected

due to ot.her (1:. criteria?

ACrI~: If n::>, reject: (except field blank results)

all asscciated p::sitive sanple data less

than or eq.W. to five tin'eS tne field blank

value. Reject en FotTI1 I' & the soil s,atple

results that ",nen ~ to ug/L en wet

baSis are less than or ~ to five tiIres

the field blank value in v;/L.

A.1.25.1 Is ve....-uicaticnrepXt.p~ for:

InSt:,IUrent t;etect icnLimits (quarterly)?

10" Interelsrent OJr,reCtial FactorS (annually)?

lcP Li,near Ran;eS (quarterly)?

grIai: U 00, cr::ntae: n:o of the lab.

,

A.1.25 .2.1 A".-e Il1S pte:sent fer:

For bXh AA arrl Ia' when tet:h are used fer the sate

analyte? 1_1

£Cl'IQi: U to for a:rrt of the a]:ove, prepare

'I'e1e;:b:x:e ReCta:d 103 an:1 a:ntaet.

1,al:c:Iratar'/ .

A.1.25.2.2 15 I!L greater than (JIDLfor arrj analyte?

If yes, is tb! ~t-"Otia1 en Pcmn I of t:be sccple

anal~ m the ir.st-.~t ...n:se IDL ~ o:t:.L,

greater than 5 x II::1J.

-

-

-

-

TIERRA-A-018201
Title: Evaluatioo of ~tals Data for the

Q::ntraet. Lab::lratory PrC9Ian

~ A.l: Data AsseSS'T'Slt - o:ntraet

c:rrpl i..a,Dc:e (Total R,evietl)

Page 26 of 34

Date: Jan. 1992

N.JTte.r: ~ -:2

Revisicn: 11

-

If 00, flag as estirrate:i all values less

than five tirres IDL of the instnnent ....nose

lDL exceeds QIDL.

A.1.2S.3 lO%¥ XI ",inear~

A.l .2S.3.1 was artf sarrple result hister than high linear raJl3e

of ICP.

was arrj satple result higt:er than the highest

calibratien st:.arrlard for rx:n-ICP pararreter's?

If yes for arrj of the al:ove, was the

sarrple dilute:i to cbtai.n the result C1 Form I?

lCTIai: If no, flag t1:e result repxte:3 en Fol:m I

as estin'ate:l (J) •

A.l.26 Pe:u;:ent Solids of $eQineJ.l;3

A.l. 26.1 Are percent. SOlids in sediIr'ent (s) .

< 50\?

< lot?

grICN: If yes, qualify as estirrated all the

results of a Satple that has per cent

solids tetween lOt-SOt (i.e. trOisture

a:nt.ent between SOt-90t). Reject all

the resW ts of a sat\'le that has p!I' cent

solids less than lot (i .e. noist:ure c:::::nte!1t

greater than 90%).

001£ : Reject or flag (31 ally the sarrple results

that we-re n::>t previo.lSl Y rej ected or f).agej

dJe to other c;: crit.eria.

r"-'· .

TIERRA-A-018202
U.S. EPA - CLP

COVER PAGE - INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA PACKAGE

ab Name; SENTINEL, INC. Contract: 68-D5-0169

ab Code: SENTIN. Case No.; 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: MBQK29

ow No.: '.ILM04 .0

EPA Sample No.

MBQK29

MBQK30

MBQK30D

MBQK30S

MBQK33

MBQK46

Lab Sample ID.

070258

07026S

07026S2

07026DS

070278

07028S

~re Iep interelement corrections applied?

~re ICP background corrections applied?

If yes-were raw data generated before

application of background corrections?

'"

Yes/No YES

Yes/No YES

Yes/No NO

:>mments:

'------------------ -~------- - - --

certify that this data package is in compliance with the terms and

)nditions of the contract, both technically and for completeness, for

:her than the conditions detailed above. Release of the data contained

1 this hardcopy data package and in the computer-readable data submitted

1 floppy diskette has been authorized by the Laboratory Manager or the

lnager's designee, as.v?fified by the following .signature .

.gnature: /VVl ,If \Lt.v, ~ h Name: rherO.:., 11. 12.1 'j:v<'-, ?JV.

Title: k1.0 D;fe.C. nNCOVER PAGE - IN ILM04. a - )

TIERRA-A-018203
u.s. EPA - eLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

ab Name: SENTINEL, INC.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

Contract, 68 - D5" 6J.~"5>--~_-__'--__ MB_Q_K_2_9 _

ab Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: MBQK29

atrix (soil/water): WATER

evel (low/med): LOW

Lab Sample ID: 07025S

Date Received: 07/31/97

Solids: 0.0

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): UG/L

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

7429-90-5 Aluminum 19200 - E ,,:,(~p

Antimony

........ ,It

7440-36-0 -.:.7.-' ~ -N P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 32.0 p

7440-39-3 Barium 1380 p

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0;73 B

::( P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 11.·2 p

7440-70-2 Calcium 150000 p

7440-47-3 Chromium 117 p

7440-48-4 Cobalt 13.9 B P

7440-50-8 Copper 499 p

7439-89-6 Iron 66500 p

7439-92-1 Lead 1020 p

7439-95-4 Magnesium 40600 p

7439-96-5 Manganese 726 p

7439-97-6 Mercury 7.8 Cv

7440-02-0 Nickel 82.4 p

7440-09-7 Potassium 18600 N::f P

7782-49-2 Selenium 2.4 U p

7440-22-4 Silver 15.8 P

7440-23-5 Sodium 77100 p

7440-28-0 Thallium 3.4 U P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 81.6 p

7440-66-6 Zinc 1520 p

Cyanide NR

-

)lor Before: COLORLESS Clarity Before: CLEAR

Clarity After: CLE&~

Texture:

>lor After: COLORLESS Artifacts:

)mments:

FORM I - IN

p.3b>

ILM04 .O~

TIERRA-A-018204
U.S. EPA - eLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

,ab Name: SENTINEL, INC. Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK30

.ab Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: MBQK29

~trix (soil/water): ·WATER

.evel (low/med): LOW

Lab Sample ID: 070268

Date Received: 07/3i/97

Solids: 0.0

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): UG/L

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

-

c

7429-90-5 Aluminum 14900 E .:J ~r p

7440-36-0 Antimony '-8.~ J:f N P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 31.9 p

7440-39-3 Barium 839 p

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0 ..45 B

,,-(' P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 12.8 -2. P

7440-70-2 Calcium 257000 p

, 7440-47-3 Chromium 160 p

7440-48-4 Co~alt 15.5 B P

7440-50-8 Copper 549 p

7439-89-6 Iron 52200 p

7439-92-1 Lead 1590 p

7439-95-4 Magnesium 56700 P

7439-96-5 Manganese 1700 P

7439-97-6 Mercury 6.2 CV

7440-02-0 Nickel 115 P

7440-09-7 Potassium 21600

N.:::r

P

7782-49-2 Selenium 2.4 U ~- 7440-22-4 SLiver 11.1 p

7440-23-5 Sodium 102000

~

P

7440-28-0 Thallium 3.4 U ~ P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 87.2 P

7440-66-6 Zinc 1640 p

Cyanide NR

- -

--~._---~--~ --

)lor Before: COLORLESS Clarity Before: CLEAR

Clarity After: CLEAR

Texture:

)lor After: COLORLESS Artifacts:

)mments:

FORM I - IN

r- 3b{,

ILM04} .

TIERRA-A-018205
U.S. EPA - CLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

ib Name: SENTINEL, INC.

ib Code: SENTIN Case No. : 25601

i'trix

:". ..

(soil/water) : WATER

~vel (low/med) : LOW

Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK33

8AS No. : SDG No.: MBQK29

Lab Sample ID: 07027S

Date Received: 07/31/97

Solids: 0.0

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): UG/L

CAS No. Analyte Concentration =E M

7429-90-5 Aluminum 20800 E_-::" P

7440-36-0 Antimony l: 1 'Dc N P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 38.9 P

7440-39-3 Barium 1470 P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.84 B

"'"\ P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 13.2 ---

P

7440-70-2 Calcium 151000 P

7440-47-3 Chromium 130 P

7440-48-4 Cobalt 14.6 B P

7440-50-8 Copper 602 P

7439-89-6 Iron 70400 P

7439-92-1 Lead 1180 P

7439-95-4 Magnesium 40900 'P

7439-96-5 Manganese 748 P. ,

7439-97-6 Mercury 8.7 CV

7440-02-0 N).ckel I

91.6 , ,p

7440-09-7 Potassium. 18500

~"f~'

P

7782-4Q-., ~.:> 1,on'; 11m .,4 TT T'I

- 7440-22-4 Si-lver 17.6 '. P ,

7440-23-5 Sodium 75500 p ,

7440-28-0 Thallium 3.4 U P

7440-62-2 !Vanadium 90.8 P

7440-66-6 Zinc 1710 p

Cyanide NR

-

lor Before: COLORLESS Clarity Before: CLEAR

Clarity After: CLEAR

Texture:

lor After: COLORLESS Artifacts:

mments:

------------~'1 :

FORM I - IN

p.3 1>1 ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018206
U.S. EPA - CLP

1

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

Jab Name: SENTINEL, INC. Contract: 68-05-0169

MBQK46

lab Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: MBQK29

'.

~atrix (soil/water): WATER

level (low/med): LOW

Lab Sample'ID: 07028S··

Date Received: 07/31/97

. Solids: 0.0

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): UG/L

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

-

7429-90-5 Aluminum 20.4 B E P

7440-36-0 Antimony ~ - -- '~ _ .T U J." -, p

7440-38-2 Arsenic 2.0 U P

7440-39-3 Barium 1.0 B P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0~10 U P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 1~7 B P

7440-70-2 Calcium 91.6 B P

7440-47-3 Chl;'omium 1.9 B P

7440-48-4 Co16alt

~

U P

7440-50-8 Copper p

7439-89-6 Iron B p

7439-92-1 Lead

~

p

7439-95-4 Magnesium .1 B P

7439-96-5 Manganese 2.2 B P

7439-97-6 Mercury 0.17 B CV

7440-02-0 1'{ickel 17.5 B P

7440-09-7 Potassium 185 B

N.:t" P

7782-49-2 Selenium 2.4 U P

7440-:22-4 SJ.lver 1.6 B P

7440-23-5 Sodium 141 U P

7440-28-0 Thallium 3.4 U P

7440-62-2 Vanadium @j) U P

7440-66-6 Zinc p

Cyanide NR

- -

~lor Before: COLORLESS Clarity Before: CLEAR Texture:

~lor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: CLEAR Artifacts:

:>mments:

----,.....-:---------------l~

FORM I - IN

P' 3~

ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018207
(SAMPLE- DEU.\LERY -GROUP {SDG]

TRAFFIC REPORT (TR.) COVER SHEET

'. ,

~.

Lab Name: ~ ..t1r~.J Con'ract No ..: ~·D'5--6lbq

Lab Code: .8.entfn· Case' No..: 2'5tz::)/·.

FuU Sample Analysis Price in Contract:

SOG No..lFil"st Sample in ~~l:2A Sample Receipt oa~e:··o::t}3<h7

(Lowesl EPA Sample Number in first shipment of (MM/DD1YY

samples received under 503..) . .

Last sampleln SDG: NBQK4~ Sample Rec~ip't Date: 07@:J)c;7

(Highest EPA Sample Num~er i~ last shipment of . (MM/QO/Y Y

. samples received under 506.) .: · .

N.umb~rs in the SOG (listed in afp-!"anumeric order)

·1'-..;~ -~

1213-' -~----------,...~-

141S·----~~-......,..~---

1617·----~~.-...;:Io.or------

181 -~~-

20

9

10~-...,.~------.....,;;::a......:::~-

Note:." There are a maximum of 20 field samples in an SOG.

Attach Traffic Reports to this form in alphanumeric order

e~ the order listed on this form).

D2le

(

.... '.- -- ) .

. -: ..

...."':"., '!- -

TIERRA-A-018208
-

u. S. EPA -.CLP

COVER PAGE - INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA PACKAGE

at> Name: SENTINEL, INC.

ab Code: SENTIN Case No. : 25601

:::>w No. : .ILM04.0

EPA Sample No.

MBQK34

MBQK35

MBQK35D

MBQK35S

MBQK36

MBQK37

MBQK38

MBQK39

MBQK40

MBQK41

MBQK42

MBQK43

MBQK44

MBQK45

MBQK47

MBQK48

MBQK49

MBQK66

MBQK67

MBQK68

Contract: 68-D5-0169

SAS No.: 8DG No.: MBQK34

Lab Sample ID.

07029S

07030S

07030S2

07030DS

070858

07086S

07031S

070878

070888 .

07089S

070908

07091S

07032S

070338

070928

070348

070938

070948

070958

070968

:re ICP interelement corrections applied?

:re ICP background corrections applied?

If yes-were raw data generated before

application of backgrqund corrections?

,mments:~(# ~~~~~~ ..

&\U:S~h--'; =Ii,<....-.J-- =:~C~==-y J;;:r:.....~.

Yes/No

Yes/No

YES

YES

Yes/No NO

certify that this data package is in compliance with the terms and

)nditions of the contract, both technically and for completeness, for

:her than the conditions detailed above. Release of the data contained

1 this hardcopy data package and in the computer-readable data submitted

1 floppy diskette has been authorized by the Laboratory Manager or the

inager's designee, a~ified by the following signature.

i.gnature: ~0 C ........... \2- Name: MELVIN V. KILGORE, JR.

Title: LABORATORY DIRECTOR

.- ~ COVER PAGE: - IN ILM04.0 \-

TIERRA-A-018209
u.s. EPA - CLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

~ab Name: SENTINEL, INC. Contract: 68-05-0169

MBQK34

Jab Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: MBQK34

latrix (soil/water): SOIL Lab Sample ID: 07029S

level (low/medl: LOW._~. Date Received: 07/31/97

. Solids: "'~:/)

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

-

,

7429-90-5 Aluminum 12400 j

-

P

744.0-36-0 Antimony 3.8 B NT P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 27.9 ='" .

~ P

7440-39-3 Barium 374 1

P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0:72 B p

7440-43-9 Cadmium 5;3

:r

p

7440-70-2 Calcium 5080 p

7440-47-3 Ch~omium 103 P

7440-48-4 Co:Qalt 7.3 B P

7440-50-8 Copper 447 P

7439-89-6 Iron 23100 El P

7439-92-1 Lead 1130 p

7439-95-4 Magnesium 3680 P

7439-96-5 Manganese 255 .1.: p

7439-97-6 Mercury 10.8 t .,

.;-.'" CV

7440-02-0 Nickel 50.2 2J P

7440-09-7 "Potassium 1310 B E

1-- P

7782-49-2 Selenium 2.1 . B -

p ..

7440-22-4 Silver 7.0 ,J. P

7440-23-5 Sodium 996 B

1

P

7440-28-0 Thallium 1.4 U P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 74.2 P

7440-66-6 Zinc 873 p

Cyanide .y" NR

- -

)lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

>lor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

>rnrnents:

'.

FORM I - IN

37-1 r'

ILM04.C

TIERRA-A-018210
U.S. EPA - eLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

,ab Name: SENTINEL, INC.

ab Code: SENT IN Case No. : 25601

"

latrix (soil/water) : SOIL

~vel (low/med) : LOW

Solids: 49.8

Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK35

SAS No.: SDG No.: MBQK34

Lab Sample ID: 07030S

Date Received: 07/31./97

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

- -

7429-90-5 Aluminum 1.1.100 ~~~ P

7440-36-0 Antimony 2.5 B N~' P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 1.1.8 :J: P

7440-39-3 Barium 312 p

7440-41.-7 Beryllium 0;42 B

E.JI

P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 5i8 p

7440-70-2 Calcium 14800 '. F

7440-47-3 Chromium 1.25 p

7440-48-4 Cobalt 6.1. B

Nr

P

7440-50-8 Copper 279 p

7439-89-6 Iron 27300 p

7439-92-1. Lead 879 p

7439-95-4 Magnesium 3870 E .:r~,ip

7439-96.-5 Manganese 272 ~.;'~

.-:.~.:., P

7439-97-6 Mercury 4.2 .~:'.'.~":~ CV

7440-02-0 ~ickel 44.0 ~ P

7440-09-7 Potassium 945 B E

.·'a_ P

77A?_.dQ_" .Q ... 1 n ac: TT

..

n

,.

- .:1. - 7440-22-4 Silver 6.5 P

7440-23-5 Sodium 576 B :""~ P

7440-28-0 Thallium 1..2 U p

7440-62-2 Vanadium 53.8 p

7440-66-6 Zinc 877 P

Cyanide NR

-

~lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

~lor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

::>mments:

I.

... 'sue ..... ===m

FORM I - IN

r·nz

ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018211
u.s. EPA - CLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

-Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK36

it> Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: MBQK34

itrix (s~il/water): SOIL

~vel (low/med): LOW

Lab Sample ID: 07085S

Date Received: 08/02/97

Solids: 71. 9

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

-

,

-

7429-90-5 Aluminum 7200 ', .

. P

7440-36-0 Antimony 1.3 U N .:;J: P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 2.6 B

.,,o,.I.(b' P

7440-39-3 Barium 55.8 P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0;36 B p

7440-43-9 Cadmium 1.3 B E P

7440-70-2 Calcium 1970 P

7440-47-3 Ch~omium 19.8 p

7440-48-4 Cobalt 5.0 B P

7440-50-8 Copper I~.J. N' P

7439-89-6 Iron 10600 p

7439-92-1 Lead 164 .. P

7439-95-4 Magnesium 1790 E ::l", ~ P

7439-96-5 Manganese 335 P

7439-97-6 Mercury 1.1 ...:s.-' tv

7440-02-0 1'{ickel 16.0 p

;;>-'" 7440-09-7 Potassium 762 B E P

7782-49-2 Selenium n &:.'7 TT n ..

7440-22-4 Silver 1.1 B P

7440-23-5 Sodium 459 B P

7440-28-0 Thallium 0.95 U p

7440-62-2 Vanadium 20.6 p

7440-66-6 Zinc 290 p

Cyanide NR

- -

lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

lor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

:nments: r--------4 -..

- - ...- ..................... --_.-- ... --------------------------

FORM I - IN

3J'] r·

ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018212
U.8. EPA - CLP

'I

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

,ab Name: SENTINEL, INC. 'Contra-ct:'"68-D5-0169

MBQK37

,ab Code: SENT IN Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: MBQK34

"

~trix (soil/water): SOIL Lab Sample 10; 070868

evel (low/med); LOW Date Received: 08/02/97

,~:-, .. ,,--....

Solids: .:V~.~_.:~:::1

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

7429-90-5 Aluminum 8410 :::r p

7440-36-0 Antimony 71.5 N.[" P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 17.9 ...j P

7440-39-3 Barium 511 \

P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.91 B ~

P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 13.9 E -.j P

7440-70-2 Calcium 21000

J

p

7440-47-3 Chliornium 229 P

7440-48-4 Cobalt 12.2 B P

7440-50-8 Copper 588 N ~ P

7439-89-6 Iron 47400 P

7439-92-1 Lead 27700 p

7439-95-4 Magnesium 2240 B EJ; P

7439-96-5 Manganese 266 .1 P

7439-97-6 Mercury 1.7 :r' CV

7440-02-0 ~ickel 157 p

7440-09-7 Potassium 691 B E 1,:' p

77A'-4Q-? C01 0,.,; "m .. ... ~T -

_.

~

1

r

7440-22-4 Silver 8.6 p

7440-23-5 Sodium 1600 B

.

P

~

7440-28-0 Thallium 2.4 U P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 94.8 p

7440-66-6 Zinc 1130 P

Cyanide _1.-'1. .

.... NR

- '-

llor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

llor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

lmments:

E

FORM I - IN

r' Tl'f

ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018213
U. S. EPA - CLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

,ab Name: SENTINEL I INC. Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK38

ab Code: SENTIN Case No .':25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: MBQK34

Solids:

LOW.~...

~

-~j

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

Lab Sample ID: 0703~S

Date Received: 07/31/97

,atrix (soil/water)': SOIL

evel (low/med):

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q " M

T

Aluminum -

::r -

7429-90-5 9820 P

7440-36-0 Antimony 2.8 B Nf P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 18.9 P

7440-39-3 Barium 339 P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.'56B P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 4.:3 E.j" P

7440-70-2 Calcium 3570 1

P

7440-47-3 Ch~omium 61.7 P

7440-48-4 Cobalt 5.2 B P

7440-50-8 Copper 302 NS P

7439-89-6 Iron 17900

EJ P

7439-92-1 Lead 844 P

7439-95-4 Magnesium 2650 p

7439-96-5 Manganese 99.5 t

P

7439-97-6 Mercury 7.5 CV

7440-02-0 l{ickel 35.3 ~ P

7440-09-7 Potassium 1050 B El P

77A?-4Q_? c::... 1...n;"m ., , n

j

-

7440-22-4 Silver 5.8 P

7440-23-5 Sodium 779 B

1

P

7440-28-0 Thallium 1.3 U

-

P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 51.3 P

7440-66-6 Zinc 662 P

Cyanide ..- NR

-

~lor Before: BROWN Clarity ,Before:

Clarity After:

Texture: MEDIUM

~lor After: COLORLESS Artifacts:

Jmments: r----------b

._. :s::= __'t ._ ...

FORM I - IN ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018214
u.s. EPA - eLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

,ab Name: SENTINEL, INC.

lab Code: SENTIN Case No. : 25601

"

latrix (soil/water) : SOIL

.evel (low/med) : LOW

Solids: 57.3

Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK39

SAS No.: SDG No.: MBQK34

Lab Sample ID: 07087S

Date Received: 08/02/97

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

Aluminum 7429-90-5 - - -

6320 P

7440-36-0 Antimony 1.6 U Nj" P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 4.6 P

7440-39-3 Barium 131 P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.'35 B P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 1i1 B E P

7440-70-2 Calcium 3490 p

7440-47-3 Ch~omium 19.8 p

7440-48-4 Cobalt 2.8 B P

7440-50-8 Copper -

55.6 N P

7439-89-6 Iron 10900 P

7439-92-1 Lead 92.2 p

7439-95-4 Magnesium 1180 !B E P

7439-96-5 Manganese 89.1 P

7439-97-6 Mercury 0.30 CV

7440-02-0 N,ickel. 12.9 B iP

7440-09-7 Potass~um 494 B E P

7782-49-2 S~lp..ninm 1'\ n~ : TT ... .. - .-

--. -- ....... ..

7440-22-4 Silver 0.95 B p

7440-23-5 Sodium 643 B P

7440-28-0 Thallium 1.2: U P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 13.0 B P

7440-66-6 Zinc 148 p

Cyanide NR

- -

)lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

)lor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

)mments:

- = .cJ:ll,r~ __•

FORM I - IN

p.5?b ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018215
U.S. EPA - CLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

ab Name: SENTINEL, INC. Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK40

ab Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: MBQK34

atrix (soil/water): SOIL

Solids:

LOW ._->~,__,

.-ii'~

-'~7 .1.,.",- {~:>-

Concentration Units

Lab Sample-ID: 07088S

:!vel (low/med) : Date Received: 08/02/97

(ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

·ICAS No. 1 Analyte . Concentration

~~

M

7429-90-5 Aluminum 15200 ~ P

7440-36-0 Antimony 23.2 B N~ P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 93.0 -.J P

7440-39-3 Barium 1740 J

P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.70 B P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 22.'2 E '-' ~ P

7440-70-2 Calcium 23400 1

P

7440-47-3 Chromium 441 P

7440-48-4 Cobalt 39.1 B P

7440-50-8 Copper 1560 NS P

7439-89-6 Iron 71200

Ejr

P

7439-92-1 Lead 2250 P

7439-95-4 Magnesium 4600 B P

7439-96-5 Manganese 590 P

7439-97-6 Mercury 7.1 .:.,./ CV

7440-02-0 l-{ickel 468 '1 ,P

7440-09-7 Potassium 872 B E P

,

"7"700') An .., ...... , .- - - -- - --- ...... .A .... w."', .. ~ • I U

.j- ~

7440-22-4 Silver 16.4 P

7440-23-5 Sodium 2100 B

I

P

7440-28-0 Thallium 3.9 U p

7440-62-2 Vanadium , 145 P

,7440-66-6 Zinc 3620 p

II

I Cyanide !_t:>i NR

I -- '-

lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before:

Clarity After:

Texture: MEDIUM

lor After: COLORLESS Artifacts:

mments:

~------s _ E

FORM I - IN r' '31-1 ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018216
U.S. EPA - CLP

1

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

ab Name: SENTINEL I 'INC. Contract: 68-D5-0169

aD Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No. :

atrix (soil/water): SOIL

EPA SAMPLE NO.

MBQK41

SOO No. :.M;BQK34

9vel (low/med):

Lab Sample ID: 070898

Date Received: 08/02/97

Solids:

LOW

@

,.._'

•.- 9 8 .'-,

'... .• -;;..; 0"·. -;;.-~.

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C

7429-90-5 Aluminum 2260

7440-36-0 Antimony 9.2 U

7440-38-2 Arsenic 4.9 B

7440-39-3 Barium 174 B

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.20 U

7440-43-9 Cadmium 1.'5 B

7440-70-2 Calcium 16200

7440-47-3 Chromium 49.2

7440-48-4 Col::ialt 2.7 U

7440-50-8 Copper ---~.~.:,-,

7439-89-6 Iron 6300

7439-92-1 Lead 215

7439-95-4 Magnesium 4550 B

7439-96-5 -Manganese J.J.4

7439-97-6 Mercury 0.82 B

7440-02-0 ~ickel 21.7 B

7440-09-7 Potassium 701 B

FJt:l:l-4~-2 Selen~um 4.7 U

7440-22-4 Silver 2.8 B

7440-23-5 Sodium 4730 B

7440-28-0 Thallium 6.7 U

7440-62-2 Vanadium 51.7 B

7440-66-6 Zinc ..,I;;I-Z

,

.-

Cyanide

-

i

-

E ,

'-

lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before:

lor After: COLORLESS Clarity After:

mments:.

I

Q M

.b.~_

p

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

.P

P

P

P

P

CV

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

p

NR

Texture:

Artifacts:

FORM I - IN ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018217
U.S. EPA - eLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

b Name: SENTINEL, INC.

MBQK42

b Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: MBQK34

trix (soil/wa~er): SOIL Lab Sample ID: 07090S

vel (low/med): LOW __ Date Received:- 08/02/97

,..-;:;;>. "V ""'-

Solids: ~I

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

"ICAS No. I

Analyte !concentration

c~ M

7429-90-5 Aluminum 6390

~

P

7440-36-0 Antimony 15.9 B N-...] P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 31.4 P

7440-39-3 Barium 297 B .. P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.49 B P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 3.4 B E - P

7440-70-2 Calcium 22100 P

7440-47-3 Chromium 143 P

7440-48-4 Cobalt 3.1 B

.. P

7440-50-8 Copper -- N~ -"".J ..,I P

7439-89-6 Iron 12000 -......: P

7439-92-1 Lead 518 p

7439-95-4 Magnesium 4750 B E ;:, i P

7439-96-5 Manganese 123 I P

7439-97-6 Mercury 0.89j :1 ..,

, CV

7440-02-0 N.ickel 43.9 P

7440-09-7 Potassium 1080 B E P "'7"'70 .... A ....... ~ ., . - --., ..

- -- ... -,5 • I V r

7440-22-4 Silver 2.3 B P

7440-23-5 Sodium 4340 B P

7440-28-0 Thallium 6.7 U P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 112 p

7440-66-6 Zinc 492 .'" P

Cyanide

~:,

NR

I _.

'-

Lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

.or After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

lments: r--------\P

FORM I - IN ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018218
U.S. EPA -:CLP

1

I

/

EPA SAMPLE NO • .'

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

ab Name: SENTINEL, INC. Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK43

ab Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: MBQK34

atrix (soiljwater): SOIL

:evel (low/med): LOW

....: .---"7..----..,.:

Lab Sample ID: 07091S

Date Received: 08/02/97

Solids: .,," 43.8 "..

"----.........-..--.-

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

- -

7429-90-5 Aluminum 13100 :5 P

7440-36-0 Antimony 6.6 B -

N~ P -

7440-3"8-2 Arsenic 9.2 p

7440-39-3 Barium 389 J. P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0."59B P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 8.4 E

-J .~ P

7440-70-2 Calcium 90200

NJ

P

7440-47-3 Chromium 54.9 p

7440-48-4 Cobalt 7.5 B P

7440-50-8 Copper 247 p

7439-89-6 Iron 20500

~

p

7439-92-1 Lead 319 p

7439-95-4 Magnesium 6530 E P

7439-96-5 Manganese 377 ~I P

7439-97-6 Mercury 1.2 CV

7440-02-0 Nickel 56.2

.... ~

p

- 7440-09-7 Potassium 2030 B E

:

p

~~" ... An ... ,., . ., ~ ... ~.~ -

u .t:'

7440-22-4 Silver 1.9 B p

7440-23-5 Sodium 1180 B P

7440-28-0 Thallium 1.5 U p

7440-62-2 Vanadium 49.3 p

7440-66-6 Zinc 979 v P

Cyanide :'l~:. NR

- -

)lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

)lor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

}mments:

FORM I - IN

p_ '380 ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018219
U.S. BPA - CLP

].

BPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

:"abName: SENTINEL, INC.

:"abCode: SENTIN Case No. : 25601

!atrix (soil/water) : SOIL

~evel (low/med) : LOW

Solids: 58.1

Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK44

SAS No. : SOG No.: MBQK34

Lab Sample IO: 070325

Date Received: 07/31/97

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

7429-90-5 - Aluminum 7300 ,~ . P

7440-36-0 Antimony 1.7 B NS P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 4.5 p

7440-39-3 Barium 129 p

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.27 B P

-- 7440-43-9 Cadmium 3~3 E-J P

7440-70-2 Calcium 6850 P

7440-47-3 Chromium 57.0 P

7440-48-4 Cobalt 6.0 B P.

7440-50-8 Copper 177 NO- P

7439-89-6 Iron 29900 ., P

7439-92-1 Lead 463

BJ

P

7439-95-4 Magnesium 1710 P

7439-96-5 . Manganese 272 v Ip

7439-97-6 Mercury . 2.1 ~~~A,~

-'.. CV

7440-02-0 Nickel 27.3 -J ., .i' P

7440-09-7

,

.,. Potassium 645 B B P

77R."_.dQ_" C!"", ""... ~ .• _ n "'r I •• ..

.' ........ - -

~

7440-22-4 Silver 2.5 :B ,p

7440-23-5 Sodium 308 B P

7440-28-0 Thallium 1.1 U P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 23.1 P

7440-66-6 Zinc 528 P

Cyanide NR

[

._.

Jlor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

)lor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

:>mments:

r--------------\7,

FORM I - IN

p' 'S£-l

ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018220
U.S. E;PA - CLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

_.~-- --

.b Name: SENTINEL, INC.

h Code: SENTIN Case No. : 25601

trix (soil/water) : SOIL

vel (low/med) : LOW

Solids: 59.2

Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK45

SAS No. : .SDG No.: MBQK34

Lab Sample 1D: 07033S

Date Received: 07/31/97

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

ICAS No. 1 Analyte Concentration

~~

M

7429-90-5 Aluminum 16900 ',- P

7440-36-0 Antimony 4.0 B - N:f P

r 7440-38-2 Arsenic 60.5 P

7440-39-3 Barium 85.1

...

P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.17 B P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 0.87 :e E p

7440-70-2 Calcium 21200 p

7440-47-3 Chromium 28.9 P

7440-48-4 Cobalt 3.5 B .... P

7440-50-8 Copper 4870 N-J P

7439-89-6 Iron 15000 P

7439-92-1 Lead 91.4 - P

7439-95-4 Magnesium 2560 E..:1 P

7439-96-5 Manganese 370 ".

, P

7439-97-6 Mercury 0.15 'B ..."

CV

7440-02-0 Nickel 13.8 if p

7440-09-7 Potassium 637 B

E ..,.- P

IIOL.-'i';1-;z. ~E:1.enJ.um o.--a1J U' P

7440-22-4 Silver 0.80 B P

7440-23-5 Sodium 435 B P

7440-28-0 Thallium 1.1 U i P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 24.3 P

7440-66-6 Zinc 436 P

,Cyanide NR

I

- -

Lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before:

Clarity After:

Texture: MEDIUM

Lor After: COLORLESS Artifacts:

nments:

~------ \'S

FORM I - IN ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018221
U.S. EPA - CLP

1

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

EPA SAMPLE NO.

'\=h..\c.~t: 11 -.'-\"'--

Lb Name: SENTINEL, INC.

Lb Code: SENTIN Case No. : 25601

ltrix (soil/water) : WATER

!vel (low/med) : LOW

Solids: 0.0

Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK47

SAS No. : SDG No.: M13QK34

Lab Sample ID: 07092S

-Date Received: 08/02/97

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): UG/L

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

- -

7429-90-5 Aluminum 119 B P

7440-36-0 Antimony 4.7 U P

7440-38'-2 Arsenic 3.0 B P

7440-39-3 Barium 3.3 B P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.10 U P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 1.6 B P

7440-70-2 Calcium 337 B P

7440-47-3 Chromium 1.0 B P

7440-48-4 Cobalt cztb U P

7440-50-8 Copper P

7439-89-6 Iron 81 2 B P

7439-92-1 Lead d'-':;;::" -21.2 -). P

7439-95-4 Magnesium 151 B P

7439-96-5 Manganese 7.6 B P

7439-97-6 Mercury 0.10 U CV

7440-02-0 Nickel 5.3 B P

7440-09-7 Potassium 368 B P

7782-49-2 Selenium 2.4 U P

7440-22-4 Silver 0.92 B P

7440-23-5 Sodium 353 B P

7440-28-0 Thallium 6.5 B P

7440-62-2 Vanadium ~ U P

7440-66-6 Zinc (4 -~--~ 44.1" ) P

Cyanide NR

-

llor Before: COLORLESS Clarity Before: CLEAR

Clarity After: CLEAR

Texture:

.lor After: COLORLESS Artifacts:

Imml';!nts: ~------14

FORM I - IN ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018222
lb Name: SENTINEL, INC.

lb Code: SENTIN

ltrix (soil/water): SOIL

~vel (low/med):

Solids:

U.S. EPA - eLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

MBQK48

Contract: 68-D5~·6i6.9--_o._---_-

1

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: ~QK34

LOW

Lab Sample ID: 07034S

Date Received: 07/31/97

71. 9

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

1CAS No.

74:29-90-5

7440-36-0

7440-38-2

7440-39-3

7440-41-7

7440-43-9

7440-70-2

7440-47-3

7440-48-4

7440-50-8

7439-89-6

7439-92-1

7439-95-4

7439-96-5

7439-97-6

7440-02-0

7440-09-7

- 7-782-49-2

7440-22-4

7440-23-5

7440-28-0

7440-62-2

7440-66-6

lor Before: BROWN

lor After: COLORLESS

nrnents:

Concentration.

~~

M

10500 ~. P

215 N$ P

39.6 ..J P

1110 P

1.1 B /

P

22.4 E..J P

4590 .. P

118

.,,",

P

11. 8 B

.:r p

443 N P

116000 v P

1200 P

1100 B E P

598 P

3.7 I 0·"..... CV!

82.3 '-J P

662 B

E ~,. Ip ..

0.05 -U . , P

,

5.4 ~. P

385 B! If P

0.92 U P

106 P

I

1580 P

I

NR

- '-

J~alyt~

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

Potassium

:tui'il

Silver

Sodium

Thallium

Vanadium

Zinc

Cyanide

Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

Clarity After: .Artifacts:

~----_-----:fJ

FORM I - IN ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018223
U.S. EPA - CLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

lb Name: SENTINEL, INC. Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK49

Lb Code:. SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: MEQK34

.. .._.

itrix (soil/water): SOIL

!vel (low/med): LOW

Lab Sample ID: 070935

Date Received: 08/02/97

Solids: 79.0

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q M

-

7429-90-5 Aluminum 6000 -

P

7440-36-0 Antimony 3.9 B N -;i: P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 12.1 ~ P

7440-39-3 Barium 704 :i"o- P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.36 B

.,

J

P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 5.4 E P

7440-70-2 Calcium 4570 P

7440-47-3 Chr6mium 34.2 p

7440-48-4 Cobalt 6.9 B

,.'- P

7440-50-8 Copper 154 N ~- P

7439-89-6 Iron 51800 , P

7439-92-1 Lead 522 E2( P

7439-95-4 Magnesium 1450 p

7439-96-5 Manganese 225 .. P

7439-97-6 Mercury 1.1 j' CV

7440-02-0 Nickel 24.0 p

7440-09-7 Potassium 656 B E,:.:., " P

/1t:S:'::-4::1-:':: ~e.Len~um 0.53 U

.5 P

7440-22-4 Silver 2.3 p

7440-23-5 Sodium 194 B P

7440-28-0 Thallium 0.76 U P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 30.4 p

7440-66-6 Zinc 862 p

Cyanide NR

-

lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture:

lor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

[TIments:

-~-------~ \W

FORi"! I - IN ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018224
u.s. EPA - CLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

ib Name: SENTINEL, INC. Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK66

ib Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: MBQK34

~trix (soil/water): SOIL .. - Lab Sample ID:' 07094S

:!vel (low/med): LOW,;,.,-_,_ Date Received: 08/02/97

Solids : /~)}~;

concentra~~its {ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

lCAS No. 1

Analyte Concentration C Q M

- ,

Aluminum - so

7429-90-5 11400

N:1r

P

7440-~6-0 Antimony 4.7 B P

7440-38-2 Arsenic 2.7 B

.1

P

7440-39-3 Barium 236 P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0.65 B ....:-- p

7440-43-9 Cadmium 8.2 E-.) p

7440-70-2 Calcium 8390

~

P

7440-47-3 Chrbmium 281 P

7440-48-4 Cobalt 6.4 B P

7440-50-8 Copper 545 NS P

7439-89-6 Iron 15200 i- P

7439-92-1 Lead 1330 P

7439-95-4 Magnesium 4130 E--.j P

7439-96-5 Manganese 150 i

~

P

7439-97-6 Mercury 5.0 CV

7440-02-0 ~ickel , 71.1

E~

P

7440-09-7 Potassium 1150 B P

7782-49-2 Selenium

I

1.4 B :;- P

7440-22-4 Silver -I 7.2 ..J P

7440-23-5 Sodium 866 B

1

P

7440-28-0 Thallium 1.9 U P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 72.4 P

7440-66-6 Zinc 1090 P

Cyanide NR

)lor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

)lor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

)mments:

FOR~ I - IN ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018225
LOW~---:..i"~'~

~".;~

/3 ...4" 3'" / ,',' I • /.,

concentrat~~~ts (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

ib Name: SENTINEL, INC.

!1b Code: SENTIN

itrix (soil/water): SOIL

~vel (low/med):

Solids:

lCAS No.

7429-90-5

7440-36-0

7440-38-2

7440-39-3

7440-41-7

7440-43-9

7440-70-2

7440-47-3

7440-48-4

7440-50-8

7439-89-6

7439-92-1

7439-95-4

7439-96-5

7439-97-6

7440-02-0

7440-09-7

U.S. EPA - CLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

MBQK67

Contract: 68-D5-0169

Case No.: 25601 SAS No.: SDG No.: MBQK34

Lab Sample ID: 07095S

Date Received: 08/02/97

I Analyte

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

Potassium

Concentration ~

7510 .! ";::1P

2.6 Ui N_ iP

1.8 B ' P

118 . P

0.43 B . P

1:7 B E P

4100 ' P

35.1 :t'" ~. P

G.3 B! P

~-"~'~~.", N.:r P

l:m B EJ t

o .75 .::ri

24.6P

1110 BE:':: P

1.~ U! P

1.5 B: P

1630 B i P

1.9 U l P

35.7 P

281 • P

NR

______ ! 1. 11_1 _

7782-49-2

7440-22-4

7440-23-5

7440-28-0

7440-62-2

7440-66-6

1--

olor Before: BROWN

olor After: COLORLESS

Selenl.um

Silver

Sodium

Thallium

Vanadium

Zinc

Cyanide

Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

Clarity After: Artifacts:

ornments: r---~--_------.:itJ

FORM I - IN ILM04.0

TIERRA-A-018226
u.s. EPA - eLP

1

EPA SAMPLE NO.

INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

ib Name: SENTINEL, INC. Contract: 68-D5-0169

MBQK68

ab Code: SENTIN Case No.: 25601 SAS No. : SDG No.: MBQK34

itrix (soil/water): SOIL Lab Sample ID: 07096S

evel (low/med): LOW Date Received: 08/02/97

Solids, ,@

Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/Kg dry weight): MG/KG

CAS No. Analyte Concentration 'C Q M

~

Aluminum - PO

7429-90-5 4420 -W- P

7440-36-0 Antimony 4.1 U N "--.]P

7440':"38-2 Arsenic 5.4 B 1

P

7440-39-3 Barium 323 ' P

7440-41-7 Beryllium 0~37 B P

7440-43-9 Cadmium 5.9 E .J P

7440-70-2 Calcium 13100

L

P

7440-47-3 Chromium 44.2 P

7440-48-4 Cobalt 10.6 B P

7440-50-8 Copper 390

: j:,

P

7439-89-6 Iron 23400 P

7439-92-1 Lead 754 P

7439-95-4 Magnesium 1910 B P

7439-96-5 Manganese 207 P

7439-97-6 Mercury 4.0 CV

7440-02-0 Nickel 299 .:r p

7440-0Q-7 Potassium 839 B E

,

P ..

7782-49-2 Selenium 2.1 U P

7440-22-4 Silver 4.7 B P

7440-23-5 Sodium· 1500 B P

7440-28-0 Thallium 3.0 U P

7440-62-2 Vanadium 59.6 P

7440-66-6 Zinc 1000 P

Cyanide ',' NR

;7~-

- -

olor Before: BROWN Clarity Before: Texture: MEDIUM

alor After: COLORLESS Clarity After: Artifacts:

omments: >----------tt

FORM I - IN

p. 3g-g-- ILM04..0

TIERRA-A-018227
REFERENCE NO. 15

TIERRA-A-018228
SUPERFUND TECHNICA L ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM PROJECT NOTE

TO: DATE:

Kelbros, Inc. File 06/28/00 Page 1 of 1

FROM:

Joanne D'Onofrio

C

SUBJECT:

Groundwater Population Use Summary

REFERENCE:

Groundwater within 4-mile radius from the site is utilized as a source of potable water supply; the table presented

below provides information regarding these sources. According to representatives of the various water companies,

drinking water is obtained from the upper, middle, and lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy (PRM) aquifer. The well

locations have been transcribed onto the 4-Mile Radius Map of this report. Population apportionments, where necessary

are shown on the applicable attached telecons and/or project notes. A portion of the City of Philadelphia is located within

4 miles from the site. The City derives its drinking water supply from three surface water intakes, with one intake located

on the Delaware River upstream of the site, and two intak~s located on the Schuylkill River. An estimated 106,944

people are served by Philadelphia's Baxter Plant intake on the Delaware River (Atl. G). The East Camden and Cramer

Hill areas of New Jersey are served by New Jersey-American Water Company's (NJA WC) surface water intake, which

is also located on the Delaware River. The swface water intake went on-line in 1996/1997, and replaced NJA WC 's five

groundwater wells at Cleveland & Reeves Avenues. This intake is directly across the river from the Baxier Plant and

serves an estimated 24,300 persons (Atl. H). Although the Delaware River is tidal to an extent, available information

indicates that salt water does not normally reach the Camden area (Alt. I).

o - 1/4 None Identified

Distance Rin2 (mD Water Source

Populatjon

Served Population Per Rin2 Attachments

o 0 N~

>I /4 - 1/2 None Identified o 0 N/A

6,352 6,352 B

>I/2 • I None Identified a 0 N~

>I - 2 City of Camden (parkside

Well Nos. 17 & 18)

Collingswood Water Dep!.

1•• 1J1i

~D

N/A

C

D

E

F

N/A

Total population served by public water supply wells within 4 miles of the site is 49,951 persons.

TIERRA-A-018229
, NJSDCPII90-2

~"

.:t: "' ';j

..

lJ1

"'1.

NJSDC 1990 CENSUS runLIcA nON

I-lOUSING UNITS AND HOUSEHOLD POPULATION

NEW JERSEY, COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES: 1990

Sun

DATA

C £NHR

Stale of New Jersey

Jim Florio, Governor

Department of 4.bor

Raymond L Bramucci. Commissioner

Division of Labor Market and Demographic Research

New Jersey Stale Data Cenler

eN 388

Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0388

March 1991

TIERRA-A-018230
lJl

"Q

.

\,1

Table 2. Housing Units. Households. and PersOO! in Households and Group Quarters: 1990 (Coot.)

New Jersey Municipalilies by Counlies

(1). (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (1)

Tolal Vacant Po..,ons in Total Persons in Peuons per

CAMDEN County

] [ousing Hou~ing Tolal Group Households Householda Household

Municipalities

Uoiu Units Per5OD.S Quarters (l)-(2) (3)-(4) (6)/(5)

CAMDEN COUNTY

190,145 11.387 502,824 8.891 178,758 493,933 2.76 K

Audubon borough 3.756 134 9.205 ' 0 3.622 9,205 2.54

Audubon Park: borough 498 0 1.150 0

498 1,150 1.31

Darrington borough

. 2.765 77 6,174 0 2.688 6,174 2.51

Ddlmawr borough

4.789, 110 12:603

°

4,679 12,603 2.69

Derlin borough

2,015 65 5.672

°

1,950 S.672 2.91

~rlUn ~vvnship

1,838 61 5,466 13 1.777 S.453 3.0'7

BrooklaWn borough

763 48 1,805 0 715 1,805 2.51

C.mdon city

30.138 3.512 87,492 3,~73 26.626 &3,919 3.15

Cborry Hilt township 25.786 1,257 69,348 1,538 24,529 67,810 2.76

ChGsilhurst boroug.h

501 25 1,526 74 476 1.452 3.05

Clementoo 1>orou&h

.2,420 160 5.601

°

2,260 5.601 2.48

Collingswood boroug.h

6.134 335 15.289 77 ,6,399 15.212 2.38

Gibbsboro borough

762 12 2,383 29 750 2,354 . 3.t4

O1oucealcr tbwnship 19.893 1.366 53.797 547 18.527 53,250 2.87

~.

O1ci&ellcr City city 4.934 333 12.649 26 4,601 12,623 2.74

Haddon to~ship

,6,389 147 14,837 0 6,242 14,837 2.38

1hddonfield boroug.h 4.65,2 161 11.618 171 4,491 11.457 1.55

naddon Heights borough 3,15" 111 7,860 0 3,042 7,860 2.58

iIi-Nena bor~ugh

512 43 1,045 0 469 1,045 2.13

Laurel Springs borough

859 38 2,341 0

821 2,34'1 2.8S

continuo<! ...

TIERRA-A-018231
Table 2. Housing Uniu, Households, and Persons in Households and Group Qua.rters: 1990 (CooL)

New Jersey Municipalities by Counties

(I) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

Tolil • Vacant PeraQla in Tolal Persons in Perwns per

CAMDEN County Housing Housing Total Group Howebold& Hou.sehold. H()IJ.Kbold

Municipalities Vnils Unils Persons Quarten (1)-(2) (3)-(4) (6)1(5)

Lawn,ide borough ' 1,078 46 2,841 0 1,032 2,&41 2.75

Lindenwold borough 8,527 585 18,734 0 7.942 18.734 2.36

Magnolia borough 1.852 77 4,861 0 1.775 4,861 2.74

Moreh.ntyi\lo borough 1,656 74 4,095 3S 1,582 4,060 2.57

Mount Ephraim borough 1,844 56 4,517' 0 1,788 4,511 2.53

Oaklyn borough '1,887 41 4;430 11 1.&46 4.419 2.39

I't Peoonulcen township 12,715 309 34,738 351 12.406 34,387 2.77

Pino HiIl.borougb 3,943 135 9,854 0 3,808 9,854 2.59

..~' Pino Vanoy borough 18 8 19 0 10 19 1.90

~ Runnomedo borough 3,524 104 9,042 11 3.420 9,031 2.64

I"J Somerdalo borough 2,150 82 5,440 0 2,068 5,440 2.63

" " Stratford borough 2,881 167 1,614 110 2,714 7,504

...,

2.76

.~ Tavilloclc ~rough II 0

.

35 0 11 35 13

•18

,V()Orhcos Iown.ship 9,905 ' 798 24,559 917 9,107 23.642 2.60

Wat.or(ord Iownship 3.564 113 10,940 177 3.451' 10.763 3.12

Winslow township 10,493 757 30,087 1,231 9,736 ,28,856 2.96

, ~.

WOoi:Uynno borough 939 39 2,547 0 900 2,547 2.83

.,

''t

Sourco: 1990 Censu, of Population and Housing .

.. ..

"

15 TIERRA-A-018232
,~

Table 2. Housing Units, Households, and Persons in Houschold~ and Group Quarters: 1990 (CooL)

New Jersey Municipalilies by Counties . '

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

Total Vacant Porton. in Total Pcno[J..I in Porsons per

GLOUCESTER County Ilousing . Housing Total Group .1 [ouseholds Howeholds HOIUGhold

Municipalities Units Units Persons Quulen (1)-(2) (3)-(4) (6)/(5)

GLOUCr;STER COUl'ITY 82,459 3,614 230,082 4,1 I I 18,845 225,971 2.87 -<--

Clayton borough ,2,177 108 6,15~ 0 2,069 6,155 2.91

Deptford township 8,871 318 24,131 40S 8,554 23,132 1.11

Ent Greenwich township 1,1S0 31 5,258 115 1,113 5,133 3.00

Elk lown"hip 1,380 101 3,806 72 1,219 3,734 2.9'2

Frllnldin townsbip 4,878 199 14,482 111 4,619 14,311 3.07

Glauboro borough 5,440 421 15,614 1,949 5,019 13,665 2.12

Oroonwich township 1,865 34 5.102 5 1,83 I 5,097 2.78

Harrison township . 1,726 116 4,715 44 1,610 4,671 2.90

Logan township 1,125 60 5,147 20 1,665 5,121 3.08

Mantua toWDship 3,619 156 10,074 26 3,463 10,048 2.90

Monroe township 9,622 452 26,703 208 9,170 26,495 2.89

National Park borough 1,145 35 3,413 20 1,110 3,393 3.06

Newfield borough 570 10 1,592 0 S60 1,592 2.84

Paulsboro borough 2,584 161 6,517 20 , 2,423 6,557 2.11

Pitman borough' 3,526 13 I 9,365 286 3,395 9,079 2.67

South Harrison township 644 IS 1,919 26 626 1,893 3.02

SWcde.1bort borough 784 50 2.0'24 o· 734 2,024 2.16

Washington tOy.'Rship 13,807 657 41,960 120 13,150 41,840 3.18

Wenonah borough 837 11 2,331 0 826 2,331 2.82

Wesl Deptror.d township 7,638 231 19,380 131 7,407 19,249 2.60

WeslVillo borough 1,907 73 4,573 0 1,834 4,57J 2.49

W~bury city 4,335 180 10,904 50? -_. 4,155 '10,395 2.50

Woodbury I reights borough 1,130 23 3,392 a 1,107 3,392 J,06

Woolwich township 498 32 1,459 34 466 1,425 3,06

Source: 1990 Cc:nslU of Poplliation and I (ollsing. I? TIERRA-A-018233
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL-ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM PROJECT NOTE

TO:

-Kelbros, Inc. File

DATE:

06/28/00 Page 1 of 1

FROM:

Joanne D'Onofrio

SUBJECT:

City of Camden Water Supply Summary

REFERENCE:

Region II START received the attached documentation from the City of Camden Department

of Engineering. The City receives its drinking water from both public supply wells and New

Jersey-American Water Company (NJAWC). The City owns and operates a water supply and

distribution system providingfor-residential, commercial, industrial and fire protection needs of its

residents. Approximately 54,000 people are served by the City's distribution systems. According

to the attached City of Camden documentation, the City has permits for 26 water supply wells,

24 of these water supply wells are existing. Of the 24 existing wells, the City operates 17 wells

on a normal basis. The City's wells are primarily located in four wellfields: Morris, Delair,

Puchack, and .Parkside. All of the City's supply wells are screened in the Potomac-RaritanMagothy (PRM) aquifer. No single-well provides more than 40 percent of the total supply.

The Morris WellfieJd contains 12 permitted wells (Well Nos. 1, 2,3,4,6, 7, 8,9, 10, II, 12,

and 13) and proposed wells (Well Nos. 14 and 15). With the exception of Well Nos. 2, 6 and 9

which are out of service due to either lack of service piping, low production andlor lack of

wellhouse, all existing wells are operational.

The Delair Wellfield contains three permitted wells (Well Nos. 1, 2 and 3), all of which are

operational.

Groundwater from the Puchack Wellfield is reported to be contaminated with hexavalent

chromium. f'he Puchack Wellfield contains six permitted wells (Well Nos. 1,2,3, 5, 6 and 7). Of

the six pennitted wells, only Well NO.1 is operational. Well No.1 is operated under the direction

of the NJDEP to contain the chromium plume and is not being used for drinking water purposes.

_The Parkside \Vellfield contains three permitted wells (Well Nos. 13, 17 and 18). Parkside

Well Nos. 17 and 18 are operational.

Of all of the City of Camden wells identified above, Parkside Well Nos. 17 and 18 are the only

two wells located within 4 miles of the site. Population apportionments will be calculated for these

two wells (Att. B, p. 2).

'1<ef 15, p. to

TIERRA-A-018234
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM PROJECT NOTE

TO:

Kelbros, Inc. File

DATE:

06/28/00 Page 1 of1

FROM:

Joanne D'Onofrio

SUBJECT:

City of Camden - Parkside Water Treatment Plant

REFERENCE:

The Parkside Wellfield is owned by the City of Camden, and contains three permitted wells (Well

Nos. 13, 17 and 18). Groundwater from Parkside Well No. 13 is not being utilized due to the

presence of VQCs. Well No. 13 has not been iricluded in the apportionment calculations.

Information regarding Parkside Well Nos. 17 and 18: both of which are operational and located

within 4 miles of the site is as follows:

Well Desi2nation

Parkside Well No. 17

Parkside Well No. 18

Distance Rin2 (mi)

1 - 2

1 - 2

The well locations have been transcribed on the 4-Mile Radius Map (Ref No. 14) of this report.

Population Apportionment

Approximately 3,176 people are supplied by each well (54,000 total population served + 17 wells

=3,176 people served per well). Therefore, an estimated 6,352 people are served by Parkside Well

Nos. 17 and 18 (3,176 people served per well x 2 wells = 6,352 people served).

TIERRA-A-018235
CITY OF CAlvIDEN

DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES

MilTON MILAN

MA'r'OR

KErTH wALKER

. :ACTlNG DIRECTOR

TFI.:(609) 757-7336

1056 WKIGHT AVENUE

CAMCi:N. NEW JE~SEY 08103 FAX #: TE~(609)757-7f\.?n

FACSIMILE TRANSMITIAL .

..

TO: KATHY A. CAMPBElL

OF: ROY F WESTON.INC.

FROM: UZO AHIARAKWE. P.E.. SENIOR eiGINEER

SUBJECT

MESSAGE: PER YOUR REQUEST SEE ATTACHMENT. HOPE YOU FINO IT

User=UI.

NUM8ER OF. P~G:C !NCU.'D!NG THIS SHEET:

. :

TIERRA-A-018236
...... _~_.....

",

" -- SCHEDULE I'

"FROGKAi'\1:lNFORi,L..\. noN

1.1 BACKGROUND INFOR1Y1AUON

The pW:l'ose of this SeCtion is to provide the Operator with an ovcr1t:W and genenl

und~:nding of the CiryJsS;tstcm(s). . ~ ." .'

1.1.1 '~ity of Camden.

..

~

.'

. .

"Th~City of Camden, New J~ is located inthe southwestrcgio~"Ornew Jcr!7Y'

. directly across the Delaware River from l'hiladelphia, l"cnmylv~ The 1990

Census p<n'ulatioo of the City.is approximately 87,500.· Tne qty provides Vr~

~ervice to approximately 54,000 rcsidc1!s as w~ll as c6n:l;ncrcial, ¥tutional ind

ind~ C:~::~':'mern-within the porlionofth.e Cijywhich coni~the City's.witer

'serYice a;r:e-1. which is defined inSection 1.3 andFigure.l-1 of~;Schedu1c 1. -

"'-"

. . .

.Watet is pump¢<!' to the City's three treatrnc:m plants (Moms.nWir, parhide 2nd

'~k RU!l)by 26exirnng groundw3ta'wclls. All of the City'SWcn! are ~~

inthe Potomll~R",ritan-Magothy fcirmation. ThcMonis-Debir t:re$"entpbnt ts:tb.e

, . City's l~g~t treatment racilitywith a 1960 design ~ty eftS II\lllion ~ons per

•.. \lay (MOD). The 'P'=-~dc t:'ea.tmeat.pbm is omrcnt1y c\1t..of~~e:rvice %T'\d1~

undergoing :mhstantial mlO,,-a!iotL .Once completed, the l'arlcside !Nate:' Trotmc::nt

·Plant

· WIllh~'!,:a hydraulic "

desim_. C30adty otthreeMGD. 'I1u:w~ll.f1e1d . .:crviDg~.

.Puchack Run treatment plant is conmnin.ated with chromimn ~md is currently

:.opc:rat~ uud':i the direction ofNew Jersey Department of'Enviromp.enW Protection

:(NJDE?) for ...-ont.a.inm.mt of the chromium plmne. The wa!C' :pro·dt1ced by the

·puchack R,.!!ltreatment plmtis c~Uy dischsrged directly to P~chack R'DJl. '!'h.e

. .City operaLe:J LWO:ltO[1S.~t:tanb, (fi~ and two million gallon.::a)-l,Oc3t.ed within the

.City l.imits. A third storage facility, a 0.5 million gallon ~dpipe Iocatcd at

':'Wbitman rit!."lo-: is not currently ope::Gted.· : .

. .'

·.The City provides w;stewa!e:' collection service to the 'resjd01tial, comm~i2.1,

_in~ti.t':ltioD~ll~!'~,dint1ustrial ~meci leeud Within the City and ·to apprpx:imB.te1y

~249c~'J~~l~j", in Penns,ui{~ Township. : .

. .

,

.,

'1.2 WATER SYSTEM

r-.

The City owns and operates a wat~ supply and distribution system jJrovidmg for the

. ft:::SidC:l:tial, comm~!d'!l, irJdu!\mll.l and fire protection n~ o~the ~si~t.s. Wa~er s~c~ - .

is prov.iq.ed for all p(Jltions of the City except the area north of the Cooper~ver. The wa!er .

servi~c: area comp~,=~ about six squuemiles and is sbo~ inFi~u.rc: 1-1 ~c:n:urThe Water

Systml. serves an ~~"r;mated5.4,000 residc::lts out of a City popilla.tio~ pf approximstely

87,500'(1990 CeIlSlI~), ph1s lndustri~ institurio02l and cornmen:ial watehuers. A total of

:rppro:umatcly 13,000 custome:"S U~ the Watc:: Sys1aL. In addition. 1.155 fire hydr3.nts

serve ,,5 the ~rirna!)' source of ~ater supply for £ire protection in~e.Wat~ S~tem's service

area. A-#~g I p-4/Q' : '- .

.,~ .. ~.I... 15 "t. CJ

. )

TIERRA-A-018237
.. '.--'~' .....- .'

._."

, Adjacent water service distric:.s inch..'<ic:

• .New J ersl:)' American W;U.t:r COUlpmy

• Merchantville- P e:nnsau.~ Water CoIIlIDission

• CollingswOod Water DepartmCllt

.• Gloucester City Water Department

The CitY ofCaincknDq>aL1mcnt ofUti1itiC3 m.ffure.sponsl"ble'{ormain~g:ill p~ of

the Water Syste:IIl !'.Sset,including groundwater supply wells, treatnient plsnts, and the

distrihti.tion and storage system. . . .

The balance of this section is a S'\IIII!l'W)' of the City)! Wen Fields, treatment 'P~ts,

di:ltri~.tion md 3tOrugo syrtcm.a:. :

1.2.1 'Wcll1'"leld De3crlpt1on

'- .

..The City has pennits for 26 water supplywcD.s, 24 of these watet supplywclls ue

'ex:ining. Two wells. Moms Well Nos. 14 and lS are~roposOi. 'Ofthe 24 existing

wells, the City operates 17 wells on a notmal basis. Six other pc;rmitted welb 3re'

.currently uut of ~-rviee due to Jloor water qu.ulitY or low wen production. rwo

permitted ~'~1l5arc maintained for emerpcy use only and one pe~ well is:out

.of sO'Vice due to a lack of serviCe piping. The City's wells arc ptiIIUSrily located in

..four well fields: Moms, DeWr, 111 chacl::,llIld:Pmcside. Two additional wells. Well

'No. 7alid Wen No. 11 are .loateQ at Jefferson and 911 Streets and Bulson and 9 IIr

.::ltrcets inthe City, ~e<:tively. The lootion of t'.JlC~hwell ~ the Niorris. DeIili. 2Ild

.' Pti.chac.\: Wdl Fields is shown in Figure 1·2, and the loca.tioDS oftM parlcside and

two City wells are shown inFi~1Jfl;1-3.

.

.!

1.2.1.1 Morris-D~ 'Well Field •

. The Morris Well Field is located &d.jac:nt to the Delaware River and is spp:roXim."ate- .

ly 95 aaC:l. The Morris Well Field is commoW.y~d..-nt:iiied as eithei-the 'Morris North

or th<;: Morris South Well Field. Tnis designation is not based on geographic

location, but rather on the electric services md walt:r maUl to which the welli arc

..connected. Tho Morris North Well Field contains six peIIIlittcd v.:eIls (Well Nos. I,

. 2, 3.4,12 and 13). Ofth~e six well!, only Well No, 2 is not oPeration.s.l due to i2..ck

of J~ce piping. low f'T'(l(iu.ctinna.,d lack ofwellhouse.

The Murrb South Well Field conch3 six c;:xi=t:ing and two.propO&-e4 P~r::llrted~velJs.

The existin~ .....ells are Nos. 6)if 8, 9,10,11 and proposed wells 14 and 15. With the

.exception of Wel1.No~. 0 and 9 which are out of ~ce due: to a low r.u~ (,,If

..production. !Inexisting wells in the Marm South Well Field arc oPeratio~. :

. ... ".

The Del:tir Well Field is lo~tedjust south of the Betsy Ross Eadie atd OCcJPies .

. approximately 15 acres. The Delair Well Field contrins ~e permitted. wens .• Th~

permitted wells art:Well Nos. 1,2 aod3. All thrc-cwcll,; ~ ;;pc::::nciOl1n1. Tber-efore,

."of the 17 permitted wells located inthe Morris and DehirWel1 Fields, 12 well! ~five

r·

'.

. Re.t. J 5 Ip. 10 .

TIERRA-A-018238
... . .

. 'wells at Moms Nor-.h, .four wells at Moms South and thIee weits at Delair) ue:

':C1Jtr>;l~l1y 0r,,:!~ted on a dany buis.

Operational Concerns '. .,

. The Morro liud Delair Well Fields are collect:i:ve1yreferred to a! ~e Morru-Delii;r

Well Fil:ld.. Ooc:ratioo.a1 and mainteIWlce issues ¢2:t currently eXist inthe Mofris-·,

.DdClir Well Fi~ld include but arellOt limited tel:· . . .' "

~ .

• SecurityN~-Thdcwellficl<b are~lcbytr=p~~~d'arcused

by dirt bikes. V andalism r:i~ mll!t be dealt with. ..

, • Raw W:uer P ipelines ~The raw water tra:osIIIissian line extcndIDg to M~ .

Well No.2 i.! absent, and: in general, existing transmission 'pipelines. a::re

:Iubj?2t

to tub~~ and lecloc:igtt· . '. • .

•

Well Rehabilitation - Due to the age3:od phpical coniliLi?n o:(somc: o~thc

wells. a rehabilitation program mU!t be ad.dIt:sscd-. Produd7on rates for nuny

of the wells ha.5 decreased and efforts to iDaease.well prO<;1uctionhave:hs:d .

limited ~ess. ' . •

•

Flooding anu Wetland3 bsues - Due to me proxmuty ofith- Morm-D~lair

Well Field to the De~ River, wclIh~5:'of two weJIS iI;l. DelaiI:'WeU'

Field and one well in the Morris Nortn Well jo'ie1ds subject to blgh waf"':"

levels. Raisin~ of the wellhead! of those wells that aie in ~gt:r of or

exp~riencing flooding will be necessary. In2.dditio~ a ~gmnemt portion of

C:.cCity's Morris-Delm Well Field is within or :uijaet::ltitf) wetlands .. Tne

City' 5 two proposed wells are within or adjacent to wetlaDds ~bich m~ be

acll.in:-,sed appropriately.. '. .

r··

L2.~;1 puchack Well Field

.' The Puchack Well Fi c:ld is loC3tcd southeast of the Mom! and Delair Well Fields, .

. ~pl'O:xllnatcly 2.000 f~~t sou~ of the Del~·R.i"'~, Gro~water from ~

Pu.chack W~ll Field is rep:Jrted to be con1m:ninat ed with heuvale;c.t chromium.' 1""0.:

Puchack W ~nField contaiIu sU pemrined well!. Thepe:rmit:t.ci1wefu are Nu:s.: 1, 2.

: 3. S. 6 and 7. Of the six permitted wells, onl)' W dl No. 1 is op~ona1. T"n.e PUIIlFs

, and motOni lrQDl three: of the four ncn-opc:ratioDal wells have b~ removed.. Well

: No.1 is "~lted :at the' directioD ofNID"F.P to ~tain the chrorDium plume md as

, of l:ite 1997) is currently discharged direc+Jy to PucW:X: .Run: and b)-passeS the

trealIIlQt planL . . .

Upon cOlllpktion of a new Puchack Rlln Tremnai~'Plant. con~e:n~uPoD ~tB.te·

fundin~ lh~ wells are to be rehabilitated ADdD;:9I or r=-bun~ pumps ~ to be

, . installed.

.:

A-H.£!F~/9

. R~-f5,~. II

TIERRA-A-018239
.

,

...

1.:2.1.3 Parkslde Well FIeld . .

Toe porkside Well Field" 10;;ill:d within the City llinit.> "l'I'~tdy four miles .

to th<sou!h"'''''-' of the Puchack WeUFi<Id. Th< podcidc Wen l'ie1d eoobin< ~ ...

~ennitted wells (WeU Nos. 13,17 md 18). .' .

pp .... lionol I"u« .. ;..

Due to VO~I". orgwie

cOmpo"!'d eon~ onlyWell Nos. P>nd 18 will be

.operated on 0nonnal !'......Well No. 13 """""t!>emin""";"" for !evcnl y"" ~

in addition, e segmcnt of tJ:>enwvnter piping leading to the paD<siqe trea;tmen! ~¥",t

n.s been reuWfed. Pmcllde Wells Nos. 17 :md 13 are =tly.~=t1oU3l :: .

..

1.1.1.4.Qther City Wells··

.Inaddition to fuePul.:side weu', the City oper>1cs two other welis wUbin the City

:iiluit.>. Well N.o. 7 U ded1ea!ed to ZUWlyin&p= ...ala to .no:C=:<!<n ~ty'

~o~e R<covery Facility (lqlJl%O::dJna lo1y 0.8 MGD) and '?I'ell :So. 11 illUCd: for .

: emergeney wator s"l'Ply. Well No. 11 is disinfec1¢ :itthe wtll.h~ ."dise~

.dir<etly to !he di,tn1>unoo aystem. Use oEW ell No. 11is,,"nimizqiin eoDfotrIll!Jl

cc

.with the City" corrosion control <tntog)' due 10the eoriosive ~ ofthts snpply ..

1t 13 Lb.1j City'~ pruticc to ope:utc City WeU No.· 11 only if ~dcnt ~~

:pics=' C:!l ~otbemain~ined~g ~Morris-Del2ii. \'ueh>Ck :!i>dParl<si

de

Well

:FieldS operable wel15. . . .

1.2.1. Water PI1Jducnon

·t .

.

A.snmr.>a')' of the permitted C2p3city, 1996 pumpini cap.:citY. an<\ original yield for

. each pormitted w<U "' provided in !able 1-1. 'The WlliC< prodi1eii

on <.u for. "",h

well presented in Table 1-1 is not based On infoxmation froin me\ers. but nth';' Oil

. flow tests ;mol the number ofhollI3 of operation for eseh weU. .

1.:2.3 Water ..!Jl!:c~tion Fermit . .

: Tne City o~<rates its W.tt:r Systemund<r Wa1d: Alloea!ion;oc:mit=N0

' 5302 (cx;iir-..s

'. December 31, 1998). Inaeeordm= wilb !h.Wata Allocano.\ r=it, u", iotOl .

'pc:mi

tled

dLv.""on from the "nI'''''' identiJied'in Table 1-1 sh2ll not exi::oi'664·

, million gill.'''' permonth ,t,nte afJO,OOO gpm mdsholl not exeeod 6,928 million

: gallon. pe: y"'" The to ul div.rnon from City W,11Nos. 7 .,.; i), p",kside Well

. Nos. 13. 17 >nd 18 and Pucbacl; Well Nos. I, 2, 3, S,-6 ar.d 1sball not exe:od

2,117:343 million g~lc~ pr::yCJJI. The b:1S8 :illoczio~ ifwiIlidn"';1ttl2.12. cocst:ant

d:1lly ",te, «presents an .verallc witlulrawal- of appro;rimaieit S.8 MGD for tJ;c.

. combined total withdrawal :~~c bJ;hs",= and;omi,": 'Ii.n F;e1d. and "tjtv ..

.. Wells. _.Tne~J;;rmed Puc. 'Run Pl""t dpente psrtlaUV 0' fullv""de!'

_ senan.!e 1l.en:niL. : rr-.

,.

IH'+'~:1p ..1fer

----

p.e-C-.JS \ P-12

TIERRA-A-018240
:l

I

.. ..: ,.... ..\

. .

\ .

TIERRA-A-018241

• I

."

) .J

I .... f·

,_._~_---------------:---,--_--r_-----=------_"--:'--:-:"-_--

.. . .

. 1

1 EOENll

'. ,

•

CW-,.

. PK-,

. .

WEll LOCATIONS

cny y.£Ll.: No .

PARKSDE Y.f:lL No:'

• I ...... ,I •• " •• , •• . .

)i

J,

I:
.: .

_ . r,ble 1-1

Croundwtt.r W\thd~wtl Wills

r....~

~

Cqw;;t!

(&pili}

.m:·

J.-

-19'6 '

'l'Tvd.d5AJi.

~-

(11

w..a' y...u' ~

Na. : DrllLtd· (fed}· .,~

: .' ._- No- .

~w,nrrM: .. = . i -

. - - -

"

,

,

_.-... :-..

-. j

~l.OOO50 \

\961 \07 750 - l60Q - ,0::0:-

3151914 1 19041 115 DOpa=P ltoi- locO·

nOO9-4~ 3

19~ 101 soo . 1190 \000,

3104131 4

196) 130 . 1200 ' . 1609 lS1S

,

Sl()QJj1 6 \932 133 3:15 ..1~ 1944

Sl000Sl

j 1%0 12Q 1056 - lQO 1630

ne3.(e~::;1·-vJell :nOO944 - ~I 19~3 11.4 603 167,0 lC¢

5100076 9

\931 1'3 7CO 16i.O 19qO

3\04251 10 1960 115 UJO ~140 ·-t~ ;

1m

"

~

::nJ0

- J\1~74! 11 1.# US

3116814 11 . 19&1 117.6 . SS7 ~ . ~

. 3116813 13 \910 ·~o S():) • 2t'6> .' lO6O I

.~ 14

1.O'f;JJ- .

r-'. l'.~ 1S'

z:#J" .

.'

:

W~~~.ce~:d~·::c,"':l:,:-

..

..

'.

i

, 510005'3 1 1930 138 l10Q 1610 1~-

'.

S100054 :z \930 \41 ,SO 1130' l:no

Sl~5 :; 1930

".

135

.tDO • 1&50

650

;

.

hC7 S

••. ·'"'::::-.-wdlfr

... .~~_"~i k,¥~

- -

.

'.

.

.

i500 lZlO

-

'1~6. '\ 1m 1.&0 1010

SlOC051 l

1924 169 996 t.()OQ 144.Q

.5tOCOS! J

19%-4' 17'j 12!0 - iZSO 1134

-

S'U>OOS9 ~ 1924 116 - ll~ 1114 '11\9 .

.' 310~4S0 6 1970 220 1131 ~

r800

j10XS16A

. \915 UO -\2!4 1611. U!1

I

~}. ~_w-,;:.~..."..:;¢.... ~I • _ --=~iift-P"'''~:' ~. .' __ .,., ... ~_ ••• .-rP,,", •'li_. .,' ..-.;~~~:-<--~.~-~ ~-r..-,'.' ..

: :

5100060 7 \9'66 163 10]3 '1500 :102J

5100061 11 1941 159 "791 :\0\0 :iOOS

31C0904 13 19~ :DO 690 :i200 ;1000.

-

3101250 11 \9S4 710 0 ' :t,Soq" :1QC()

~

:

' '3109514 \8 1976 '290 1061 ' ;lZOO ·t~O

- .

'.

;

,

: ::

.'

, ,

;

,

-,'

..~

, . ,

..t·~~ "0: I." .•.

; .

:'

.~':

~..

~~..

"

to"'

.;.

.;..

'~, },,:,"

. i...

: ;~.:

;".

" ", .

.~

:~,

-,

1:--

.;.

..~~.

_; i

.': ~.

.: :.

; .

. : ,

· I

,

·~.

i

,

:.

· ~

TIERRA-A-018242
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM TELECON NOTE

CONTROL NO: DATE: TIME:

March I, 2000 745

DISTIUBUTlON:

TOD file 02-00·02-0005

PHONE CONVERSATION WITH:

John Meyer

OF

Collingswood Water Dept (856) 854-2332

RECORDED BY:

Gerald Gilliland, Region IISTART

DISCUSSION:

Public Water Supply - ColliP2swood

Collingswood obtains 10001cJofits drinking water from six groundwater wells screened in the lower

PRM aquifer. Another well (no. 6) is currently off·line due to high iron. That well hasn't been

used inmor~ than a year and he doesn't expect to use it for drinking watetpurposes again. The

well depths range from 250 to 325 feet. The total population served by the interconnected system

is 20,000 persons through 6,000 connections. The wells and recent pumpage data are as follows:

The numbers show that well 5 provides more than 40% of the total supply (Mr. Meyer said these

numbers are typical). There~ore, approximate population apportionment is:

Well # Calculation Pop Served

1 [(0.007 + 0.048 + 0.086) +(83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 6.86

2 [(0.007 + 0.048 + 0.086) +(83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 6.86

3 [(3.1 + 0.064 + 0.115) -:-(83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 319.25

4 [(14 + 5 + 3) -:-(83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 2,141.95

5 [(47 + 45 + 42) -:-(83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 13,046.44

7 [(18 + 16 + 12) -:-(83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 4,478.63

.

Well #

1

2

3

4

5

6

1

Total

Alternate

Well # Permit #

5

2R

3R

4R

6

7

.a.

31-00079

31-04053

31-04054

51·00030

51-00031

31·04799

31-04797

A4. C p. i cfz

Approx. Pumpage (gallons)

Iul::22 Aug-99 Sep-99

0.007 0.048 0.086

(numbers above are for Wells 1 and 2 combined)

3.1 0.064 0.115

14 5 3

47 45 42

000

II .l2 12

83.107 66.112 57.201

.Signature: ~y~'

'Ref No. 15) p. '5

TIERRA-A-018243
, NJSDC-PII9Q.2

:t=:,. ,

::t:: ' ';j

...

.,

''t

NJSDC 1990CENSUS runuCATION

I-lOUSING UNITS AND HOUSEHOLD POPULATION

NEW JERSEY, COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES: 1990

Sun

DATA

C£HHA

State of New Jersey

Jim Florio, Governor

Department of 4.bor

Raymond L Bramucci, Commissioner

Division of Labor Market 3nd Demographic Research

New Jersey Stale Data Center

eN 388

Trenlon, New Jersey 08625-0388

March 1991

TIERRA-A-018244
,'~

~.:t:

,,~ I

1;

N

.f.,

~

I..

Table 2. Housing Units, Households, and Persons in Households and Group Quarter!: 1990 (Conl.)

New Jersey Municipalities by Counties

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (1)

Totd Vacant Pon01U in Total Persoos in Pcrlons per

CAMDEN County

Howing Housing Total Group Households Household. Household

Municipalities

Unila Unil-' PerSOtU Quarters (1)-(2) (3)-(4) (6)1(5)

CAMDEN COUNTY

190,145 11,387 502,824 8,891 1'18,758 493,933 2.76 K

Audubon borough

3,156 134 9,205 '

°

3,622 9,205 2.54

Audubon Park borough

498 0

1,150 0

498 1,150 2.31

Darrington borough

. 2,765 11 6,774

°

2,688 6,774 1.52

Dellln.wr borough

4,789, 110 12:603

°

4,679 12,603 2.(1)

Derlio borough

1,015 65 5,672

°

1,950 5,6'11 2.91

Bertin township

1,83& 6t 5,466 13 1,771 5,453 3.0?

Brooklawn borough

763 48 1,805

°

715 1,805 2.52

Camden city

30,138 3,511 87,492 3,513 16,626 83,919 3.15

Cherry Hilt lownship 25,186 1,257 69,348 1,538 24,519 67,810 2.16

Chcsilhurlt borough

501 25 1,516 74 476 1,451 3.05

Clementon borough ' 2,410 160 5,601

°

2,260 5,601 2.48

Collingswood borough 6,734 335 15,2&9 77 ,6,399 15,212 2.38

Gibbsboro borough

762 12 2,383 29 750 2,354 ' 3.14

Oloucealcr tbwnship 19,893 1,366 53,797 547 18,527 53,250 2.81

...

Olc:iikellcr City city

4,934 333 12,649 26 4,601 12,623 2.74

Haddon to~ship

, 6,389 141 14,837 0

6,242 14,837 2.38

Haddonfield borough 4,652 161 11,628 171 4,491 11,457 2.55

Haddon Heighl! borough 3,154 112 7,860 0 3,042 7,860 2.58

in-Netla bor~llgh

512 43 1,045 0

469 1,045 2.23

Laurel Springs borough

859 38 2,341 0

821 2,34'1 2.85

cOtllinuod ...

0'1

"Q

.

w

11 TIERRA-A-018245
Table 2. Housing Units, llouschold3. and Persons in HouseholdsaOO Group Quarter!: 1990 (CooL)

New Jersey Municipalities by Counties
Table 2. Housing Units. Households. and Persons in Houschold~ and Group Quarters: 1990 (CooL)

New Jersey Municipalities by Counties .

:n.,.;X;PWI'tiOii ~~ij'~YlOnh' bdrctt~n;6ubjOCfio:~t~J.?:-CO;TCC#oorfiJF.;·~rc~i::~;ro/~iP§T;MV!iiiiCd.:;sti~·.;jjJ~Di:·([:,.k;:: :.:;.'..~1·i

V'of."'':'-'1 rnA iC6~j ~/~ ~idMiD .\~m;lh(;/to::~:rrcci' ~~&>witi::ADd :'WiJi(~:"jjS1J~iXlrl:6Ct$(j·~c&i1i~tii~;*l''>:~.$:~:;: U~t;,r,·.:t;;;nVJf'~l·5:~.:1tllll.t:,(( ~·.J.i~.::.:::·::.·.;:.;:J

... ,~ ..'~'U.•. ' .~;.~. ..8.... :' .:;. : , :..:".: :..;-: :.'::' : ,~.~ ;..;." : ; ""h"::'~~'"' ,.,•.I./.:.·, ..:~~.B9.":·':':":"''':''''''''h·:=::L~,.. ~: r.f,,,:::.,,.:,:.'.,,·j,~.,: ::::: ;.,..

~:

(I) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (T)

Tolal Vacant Porson. ;n Total Pcuon.a in Por~on.a per

GLOUCESTER County JlOllsing ,

Ilousing Total Group .llous-eholds J louseholds I[OIUGhold

Municipalities Units Uni1.5 Penons Quarters (1)-(2) (3)-(4) (6)/(5)

GLOUCESTER COUNTY 82,459 J,614 230,082 4,11 I 78,845 225,971 1.87 -4--

Clayton oorough ,2,177 108 6,15~ 0 2,069 6,155 2.91

Deptford township 8,B72 JIB 24,137 405 8,554 23,732 2.7'1

Ent Greenwich township 1,750 37 5,258 125 1,71J 5,133 3.00

Elk town,hip 1,380 101 3,806 72 1,279 3,734 2.92

.

Pranldin townlbip 4,878 199 t4,482 III 4,679 14,371 J.07

Gln'boro borough 5,440 421 15,614 1,949 5,019 13,665 2.72

Greenwich lownshlp 1,865 34 5,102 5 1,831 5,091 2.78

Harrison township .1,726 116 4,715 44 1,610 4,671 2.90

Login township 1,725 60 5,141 20 1,665 5,127 3.08

Mantua township 3,619 156 10,074 26 3,46J . 10,048 2.90

Monroa township 9,622 452 26,703 208 9,170 26,495 2.89

Nalional Park: borough 1,145 J5 3,413 20 1,110 3,393 3.06

Newfield borough 510 10 1,592 0 S60 1,592 2.84

Paulsboro borough 2,584 161 6,577 20 2,42J 6,557 2.71

Pitman borough 3,526 131 9,365 286 3,J95 9,079 2.67

South Harrison township 644 18 1,919 26 626 I,S93 3.0'2

Swc.de.sbor.9. borough 784 50 2,0'24 0 734 2,024 2.76

Washington to~nship !J,807 657 41,960 120 13,150 41,840 3.18

Wenoruh boroug.h 837 11 2,33 I 0 826 2,33 I 2.S2

West DCIMor.d township 7,618 2JI 19.180 131 7,407 19/249 2.60

Weslvillo borough 1,907 73 4,573 0 1,834 4,573 2A9

W~bllry city 4,335 180 10,904 509 - 4,155 '10,395 2.50

Woodbury Heights borough I,DO 23 3,392 0 1,107 J,J92 3.06

Woolwich township -198 J1 1,459 34 466 1,425 3.06

Source: 1990 CerUlli of Poruillion And lIoming. I!) TIERRA-A-018247
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL-ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM PROJECT NOTE

TO:

-Kelbros, Inc. File

DATE:

06/28/00 Page 1 of 1

FROM:

Joanne D'Onofrio

SUBJECT:

City of Camden Water Supply Summary

REFERENCE:

Region II START received the attached documentation from the City of Camden Department

of Engineering. The City receives its drinking water from both public supply wells and New

Jersey~American Water Company (NJAWC). The City owns and operates a water supply and

distribution system providingJor residential, commercial, industrial and fire protection needs of its

residents. Approximately 54,000 people are served by the City's distribution systems. According

to the attached City of Camden documentation, the City has permits for 26 water supply wells,

24 of these water supply wells are existing. Of the 24 existing wells, the City operates 17 wells

on a normal basis. The City's wells are primarily located in four wellfields: Morris,· Delair,

Puchack, and ~arkside. All of the City's supply wells are screened in the Potomac-RaritanMagothy (PRM) aquifer. No single well provides more than 40 percent of the total supply.

The Morris Wellfield contains 12 permitted wells (Well Nos. 1,2,3,4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,

and 13) and proposed wells (Well Nos. 14 and 15). With the exception of Well Nos. 2, 6 and 9

which are out of service due to either lack of service piping, low production and/or lack of

wellhouse, all existing wells are operational.

The Delair WeHfield contains three permitted wells (Well Nos. 1, 2 and 3), all of which are

operational.

Groundwater from the Puchack Wellfield is reported to be contaminated with hexavalent

chromium. :ThePuchack Wellfield contains six permitted wells (Well Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7). Of

the six permitted wells, only Well No.1 is operational. Well No.1 is operated under the direction

of the NJDEP to contain the chromium plume and is not being used for drinking water purposes.

_The Parkside \VeUfield contains three permitted wells (Well Nos. 13, 17 and 18). Parkside

Well Nos. 17 and 18 are operational.

Ofall of the City of Camden wells identified above, Parkside Well Nos. 17 and 18 are the only

two wells located within 4 miles of the site. Population apportionments will be calculated for these

two wells (AU. B, p. 2).

'"Ref 15} p. tv

TIERRA-A-018248
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM PROJECT NOTE

TO: DATE:

Kelbros, Inc. File 06/28/00 Page 1 of 1

FROM:

Joanne D'Onofrio

SUBJECT:

City of Camden - Parkside Water Treatment Plant

REFERENCE:

The Parkside Wellfield is owned by the City of Camden, and contains three permitted wells (Well

Nos. 13, 17 and 18). Groundwater from Parkside Well No. 13 is not being utilized due to the

presence of VQCs. Well No. 13 has not been iricluded in the apportionment calculations.

Information regarding Parkside Well Nos. 17 and 18; both of which are operational and located

within 4 miles of the site is as follows:

Well Desienation

Parkside Well No. 17

Parkside Well No. 18

Distance Ring (mil

1 - 2

1 - 2

The well locations have been transcribed on the 4-Mile Radius Map (Ref. No. 14) of this report.

Population Apportionment

Approximately 3,176 people are supplied by each well (54,000 total population served + 17 wells

=3,176 people served per well). Therefore, an estimated 6,352 people are served by Parkside Well

Nos. 17 and 18 (3,176 people served per well x 2 wells = 6,352 people served).

A4-\-. B 1'..2 q

TIERRA-A-018249
.

~

CITY OF CAMDEN

DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES

MILTON MILA"l

MA'r'OR

KEITH W ALJ{ER

. :ACTING DlRECTOR

TFI.:(fi09) 757·7~6

i056 WHIGHT AVE.NU E

CAMfJe:-l, NEW JE~SEY 08103 FAX #: TEL:(609)757,7iV'O

i ~_

FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL .

~

TO: KATHY A. CAMPBelL

OF: ROY F WESTON. INC,

FAX #: 1-732-225-7037

MESSAGE: PER YOUR REQUEST SEE ATiACHMENT. HOPE YOU FIND IT

USE~UI .

NUM8ER OF. P~G~~ !NCLUD!NG THIS SHEET:

,.

32

f

~+t,ql-f ..3Iq . :

Re~. 151 f' 6 . :

TIERRA-A-018250
. .~.. ----.*'_ ......

-.

" -"

,--,

r-'

:

_ sCHEDULEl

fROGRA:i'1 INFOR1\'1..>\.nbN

1.1 BACKGROUND INFORlYIATION

The pm'1'ose of this SeCtion is to provide the Operator with an o"V.em.ew and genenl

underst:~ng of the City's Systcrn(s). ~

1.1.1 '~ity of Camdtn.

_The City of Camden, New Jcrsq is located inthe southwest rcgio~ -ornew J~,

. directly acrosS the Delaware Kiva from :Phlladelpbi3, :pcnmyl'V~ The 19:90

r:ensUS population of the City,is approximately 87,500., TAe qty provides v..~

~ervice to appruximatdy 54,000 raidcnts as w.ell as cOtn;neTCial, ¥tutio

n2l

and

ind~ c~~~'~'menvrithin the porliono£th.e C#y which com~ the CityJs,wam-

's~cea:r.c-;1.li,ihichis definedinSeclion 1.3 andFigure.l-1 of~;Schedu1c 1. -

, . .

.Water is pum~·to the City's three treatrnCnt pbmts {Moms-DtWr, pa:rbide and

'PucluckRU!l) by 26 -existing groun.dwate'weUs. All of1he Clty'sWeus are~-,ied

,inthe 'Poto:n01<;-R~t:itan-MagothY formation. TheMorns-De1Bir tr¢"'entplant i3:the

, ' City's lzrg~t treatm~t :fucility'i'llith a 1960 design ~ty oilS ~mion gillODS per

• ',«.lay (MGD). The r-:...~de t:ea.tment ,pbnt u cun=illy out..of-s,ervice :n1d i~

undergoing 5!.ltstantial reno,,~ Once completed, the Parlcside Water TreUmc:nt

,Plant W1llh~~r;ahydr2lllic designcapadty o!thrteMGD. The w":ll ficld"e:rvillg:thc

~Puchack Run treatment pl2Ilt is ~Dbmin21ed with chromium ;and is cum:ntly

:,operatcl uud':i the direction orN ew Jersey Department ofEnviro~~ Protedion

'(NJDE?) for (,."(lnuinment of the chromium plume. The wua 'prclduced by the

.Pucback F_,.!..!lteatmcnt pl2Ilt is cu:rr:ntly dischs:rged directly to p~cback Run. The

_ .City operal~ two :sloDS-~O::tanh, (five and two million gsllOII:')·lO<:3ted. within th'.

,City limit!. A third storage facility. a 0.5 million gallon ~dpipe locs.ted at

',.Whitm2J1 'Park is not currently opc:nted. ; "

.:

:

..

;

. ".

_.The City pro"ides w~tewa.!~ collection Sc:v1Ce to the "residential, comm~i2.1,

.in~tit";ltion~~l~!'~,dindustrial C'momeci l~d Within the City 'and to apprpxima!cly

:249 C~Of!!'::r;:: in P~nnsa.~<o Township. :

'1.2 WATER SYSTEM

The C~ty OWIl! and operates a wate:r supply and distnbution system providing for the

roidc=t:tial, c:omm<:rdal, irldtl~mlllo.n.dfire protection nl:ed.s of the resicL:nts. Water service

, is prov)ded for all pUltions aCme City except the area north aCthe Cooperluver• The watei -,'

setVi~c;:area comp~~ about six square miles and is sboWD. inFigure 1-1 '1:!acut Th~W-ztcr

Syst~. serves aI! e."rimate.d 54.000 residents out of a City popi1la.tio~ pf approxinu1dy

87,500 (1990 Censll';). plus industri:.l. institutiotW and commercial watehl.Sers. A toW of

:zppro:omatc:ly 13.000 custome:s U~ the Waier System. In addition. 1455 fire liydI'iints

serve ~sthe ~rimar)' source ofv.,:a.tersupply for fircproteetion in~e.Water SYs.'tcm:ssavlce

uca. Pt+}. g Ip.4/a.' -

.., .~1,.. 15,"t· q

, '.

:-:

.,

TIERRA-A-018251
•• _ .0 .0 'o_..:o·-··~··

"'_.0

. Adjacent water service distric:.s inch.'dc:

• New J ersq American WaU::rCuw.pwy

• M~..::h.entville-pe:nnsauk.en Water CotIlIIlission

• CollingswOod Water Dcpartmc:1t

'. Gloucester City Watr::r Dep~ent

The CitY of Cainckn Department ofUtiliticz mfi'i:s TC3pon.sible,formaU1~g 211pa:Ib of

the Water System !!.Sset,including groundwater "supply wells, treatment plBn~ and the:

distribti.tion and storage system. . 0 0

The balance of this section is a sunmwY of the City's Well Fields, ~ent p~ts,

di:5trim,tion and :5toroge syn.e;:n~. :

,

0:

1.2.1 'Well1<'leld De!cripoon

c •

"The City has permits for 26 watc::r £upplywcD.s, 24 of these water; supplYwcl1s !I'C

'existing. Two wells. Moms Well Nos. 14 md 15 arc :proposed. .<!Ifthe 24 aisting

wells, the City operates 17 wells on a nonna! basis. Six othq- pc;mntted welb are'

o currently uuL of .5-..-rriee due to Jloor water qualitY or low wen production. rwo

permitted ~"~1l5are maintained for emerpcywe only a:nd one peimin.ed well is:out

,of scMce due to a lack of serviCepiping. TIle City's wellS arc prl,nwiJy located in

: foUI'well fields: Morns, DeWr,Pucb2ck. sndParkside. Two additional wells, Well

'No. 7 and Wen No. 11 are.1ocstcii at Jefferson and 911 Streets and Bulson md 9

~

,:~trcct.3 inthe City, ~ecrively. 'The lootion of t'.Jlc:hwell ~ the M:orris. Delair. and

.' PUchac.~Well Fields is shown in Figure 1·2, and the locations ofth.e parksid.e and

two City wells arc shown inFi~urc 1-3.

1.2.1.1 Morris-Ddslr 'Yell FIeld ,

, The Moms Well Field is located &dj~ to the Delaware lti'ver and is approXUn:ately 95 acrC3. The Morris Well Field i'commonlyi.dmtffied 2S eith~the Morris North

or th<? Morris South Well Field. Tni.s designation is not based on geognphic

location, but rather on the electtic services md walt:r WaU1 to which the welli ue

'.connected.. The Morris North. Well Field contains six pennitted ~el1s (Well Nos. 1,

, 2., 3,4,12 and 13). O(th~e six we~t only Well No.2 is not ope:r3tioml due to iack

of J~ce piping, low f'iC'lOuctinn a..,dlack ofwellhouse.

The Morrb South Will ridd con~ ~ c:::Wting a.ndtwo-pf':)POse4 P~r::Ucted ~velli.

The existill~ wells are Nos. 6, i,a, 9,10.11 and proposed wells 14 and 15. With the

.exception of Well. No~. 6 and 9 which are out of s.ervice due: to a low r.ui; cf

_,producti01l. ~nexisting well! inthe Morris South Well Field are oPeratio~. :

. "

The Delair Well Field is lo~ted just south t)f the 'Betsy Ros! Eadie ~d occuPies '

. approximat~ly 15 acres. The Delair Well Field contains tbr!:e permitted w~ns.. The

permitted wells an: Wl:ll Nos. 1,2 and 3. All three welli.arc ~pc:-ntiODl1l. Therefore,

o' of the Ii permitted wells located inthe MOrD! and De1airWell Fields, 12 wells ~five

TIERRA-A-018252
" _wells at Morris Nor"Jt, four wells at Morris Souih and thIee weiis at Delair) are'

o:c~!~t1y c~,,;!:!.tcdon a-~y bcis. .

Operationsl Concerns ... . 0 ".0

.The MorrU! l!.ud Delair Well Fields are collectj:ve1y reft;ued to a! lileMcrru-De~

Well Field. Ooerational and maintenance issues ~ c:urrc:Itly e:fut inthe Mottis-·-

...."Delair Well Fi~ld inclu.r!c but are not limited to:· . : . 0

• SecurityN~ - TIJesewcllfic:lcb are~lc bytr:csp~~ :md"areused

by dirt bikes. vandalism z:iW mU!t be dealt with. ..

.. Raw W::tier P ipelincs - The raw wata tra:nsmission line exiending to Moi:ru "

Well No.2 u absent, and in gc:ncnl, existing tr2T3!tT!ission "pipelines ttre

subj~t to tu.baeuIati~ and lClf.lbge. " - I . •

Well Rehabilitation· Doe to the age atn physical conwLi~ o~somc ofthc:

wdls. a rehabilitation program mmt beaddrc::ssed." Produl:;$ont31d for nimy

of the wells has decrea.sed and efforts to ~e"wcn prOe;1ucti on have:h.a;d°

limited. ~ess. . ;

•

Flooding amI Wetland3 ~ - Due to the proxhnity of~ MoIrii-D~laiT

Well Field to the De~ Rivci. we1TheaM:'oftwo we~ iJ;l De1ai1:"WeU"

Field and one well In th= Morris North Well l'"ie1ds subject to high wai~

levels. R2isin~ of the wellbnd:! of those vtells that ar.e in da:1gcr of or

exp~riencing flooding will be necessary. In 2.dditio~ a ~gD.ifiC3Ilt portion of

the City's Motris-Delm Well Field is within or :adjacot: tn w~land.s .. T.ne

City's two proposed wells are within or ~accntto wetlaDds ~hich must be

aCu-n:.'!oScd a:ppropriaxely. . "

1.1.1:.2.puchac.k Well Field

r""

0" The Puchack Well Field is lOC3ted southeast of the Moms audDelalr Well Fields.,·

_ ~pl"Oxlmatcly 2,000 f~et southc:ut of the Del~ lU"Iu. GIO~wata ircxn &

Puchack Wdl Field is ~rted to be contaminated with hc:X.aval~t chromium.· Tn.::

Puchack W-?.llField contaim m pe:mrined wela. 1hcpemlitIed ~e1ls ~Nu:s.:l, 2,

: 3. S. 6 and 7. Of the six 'Permitted wells, only WellNo. 1 is operaiional. TM pumps

. and motOni from three oi the four non-¢peratiotlal wells h.a.ve bei:n removed.. Well

· No.1 is ,,~lto:d :lot the"direction ofNID'F.P to C1'fT'!b.Tn the chrontum plum.e md as

" of b.te 19$7, is currently discharged direc+Jy to Puch2.ck .Run: and bil'asseS the

treaIIDC1lL phmL . . .

Upon compl.:tion of a new Puchack RJm Treatmai; Plant, contin&en~uPon ~tate.

fundin~. the wells are to be r-..habilitated and n;:w or re-bw1~ pumps ~ to be

·"insulled.

. !

.4H. g ,'r·..1r;../9

.

R~·/5,~. II

TIERRA-A-018253
...../

1.1.1.3 Parkside Well FIeld . .

'rhe P arkside 'Well Field is locited within the City liIoit3 app~tely four miles '

\0 the soull::

w

"'" of the Pu<:hacl<: wen Field. The p.,bidc Well Fidd eonbim ~. "

permitted wells (Jlell Nos, 13, 17 and 18). '

pp.....tion,u Isnle< " ; , .Due to vo~l;te org"';o ci>lIlpoup.d cont=inatio1!, enly Well Nos- !7 :md IS will be

op=cd on. nonnol p"';" Well No. 13 hosDOt beenin=vie:< for i

cv"'!y""" ~d

inaddition, 2segment orthe ,. ...water piping le:olini to the pmkside tr<alment pl;mt

1if.S been """0:,.d. p2rl<side well! Nos- 17 and I! are =tly,?pcatio".L ":.

I .

1.'l.l,4.0ther City Wells ..

. .Inaddltiou to the Parkside welb, the City opcn.lcs twO oth<r wolis withiu the City

, ;limit3. Well NO. 7ls dedlca!ed to Illl'Plying p= ...ater to ~ O=!= Co~'

~OjIl'Ce R'C~'<[cry Facility (sppro:ciIn>-mJ.y 0.8 MGD) and '?feU No. 11 is use:J;for '

;emergenoy wata supply. Well No. 11 is disiDfect¢ :it the wcn.J>?d a"~

,dfrc<:t1y to 1M di'tn1mtioo 1)"1= Use ofW ell No. 11 isminirqizc!im coIJfolIlWl

oe

.with the City" corrosion e4Irtr0l strategy due to the emtosive ~ of this supply. ,

It is Lh~ City'~ pn.cticc t? operutc City Well 'No .. 1.1 only if ~dc:nt ~etn

:pres=' c,,",ootbe mamtaiDed",wg tbeMOIris-De!2\r. Puchaek ~dPmksid. Well

:FieldS openbl~ weil>. .

I

. ,

1.2.1. Water production ": .

A summarY orthe p<rmltted ~ty, 1996 p=piIli cap&citY,anc\original yield for

. each pcmlitted woll "' provided inrable 1"1. 'IJ>r; W1ltcr p",.me!iOll c.

u

fur, c.eh

well p=enled iu rallie I -I is llDt based on infonnation from meim, but "theon

. flow tests 2!!d the number ofhoun of operation for csch well. .

1.2.3 Water All~~~tion :Permit

" "

':Tr.e City op«at~5 itsW."" System under W de< Allocatioup=it;No. 5301 (ex;;::'-..s ,

.' Dceen>ber 31, 199!). Inw:ordaDce with lh.W_ Alloeatio,; l'=il, the iotO!

..?oro:irted di ,'=ion from tho ",urces identili<d'in !able I-I sh:in not exceed :664 '

: million gill';>llS per month at a tate ono,COO gpm sod sl13l1not exeeed 6,918 million

, gillon. per ye>r, Tho toW divernon from CitY 'Well }lo'. 7 and ii,pmkside Well

'Nos. 13, 17 and 18 and puch>ck Well Nos- I, i,3,5,6 anI! ~ Shan not exceed

2,117:3

4

3 million gulo~ pe:tycu. The b:1S0 :illoc3tiop-,if'Witlidi':~..wu 212. cocstmt

dai Iy ",te, «presents an avenie wilhrlrawa! '"'" of approximateijr 5.8 MGD for the

, eombiDed lot;;\ withdrawal ~e ruct;::m.ml!!1d pm"" viell Field' ",d tity', .

,,~l1s. _,Tne.1l1.:;nn<dpue. Run Pi ;; 6Qerate pllrtianv

or fully onder a

" ~ arate..9.c:I'tlli1. : r.

r--.

ftf-f. ~.1 p~1fer

--....

. ('e-C-./5 \ P-12

."

,

TIERRA-A-018254
• I

.J ~ -.

I·" .-

.--_~~~'-:- -"""'-"-~--"--""'--:-":'"77-;--~-::-~-~~~----------------'--.-

, "

:\

I

.. ..:- :.,.... .. \

. .

I "

. '..

I EGENU

•

CW-,.

. PK-,

. "

WELL LOCATIONS

qTY wr:l~ No .

PARKSDE Y.f:lL Ho~'

I •••

)i

J.

1\

~

.,....,; -HIt-~:J:l.1brl:J~;::;PJ-LI.:.

I

~ I-.~1-:1IU........-I ...-n-..l-I...I-J· '.-~

. ""'=>. I

,. I

~.' \ -- ."'

. , v;:~., .

.. ..... .. ' . .' . . . ~ __ I···::~";"'-'.c'

.."«oM' .., ,.,'...., .'....., ... " :"". .'.c' : •. __:.: ,.:.' .• ~IIY__lJL.C~Ilf!l' ".J . '.. . -- -". . .... _~:I ",'_ ~ __............~."",'''''~.r''"'HJri'rITY 'If&'n~ .... ' r ". • ." ." ~: '. ::;: ••••; .. :: •••~.\..:. ~ .. :.... ,:, ••: " ':'.: -:." :.,. • :.. ::, ...... :.:. :' . llCoo"l I I

TIERRA-A-018255

: ."

• • ••• 1'-4.· ••• 0' ":' ••
~ r:ib\.. \.l

Gr01Sndwsar• Wltl:Ldr2wu Wells

J...

-1996 •

'}'Tod.ad5cUli

~.

,,~ (11

: " ". Now.a· Y..u- ~

No. : nrJUd' ({~.

.' .

~

Cqe¢1!

tJpID}

.m:-

MMrls wdifrdd:

- -

.'

.; .. :.

. -

_.-... :-..

"

!

.

l60Q

~100050 1 196\ \01 759

. lco;f

31S19S4 2- 194\ US DO pg=Il 1000· lcxxi·

3100945 :3 19~ 101 ZOO .. 1890 \"000

~ 196) 130 1200 ..

1609 lS1S

31C4'2j! ...

.

, 19:tl

.'1709 1944

S1~1 6

133 J:l.S

Sl000Sl

i

1%0 1:20 1~6 16!0 1630

.ne3.rest well 3100944 - ~a 19~3 124 603 167,0 1~

510CQ76 -

9 1932 1'3 7CO 161.U 1~

3104~1 10 1960 11.S 1230 ~~

'-1~ ;

1m

.

~

2030

. 31157.45 11 1-44 itS

~ ~

.

3116814 1Z . 19&1 117.6 SS7 .

.

3\16&13 13 1910 130 100. 2060 ~. 2060

%

.~

14

~ ..

r-'.

p;v;ostd 15 .

1!irIJ- -

:

5100053 t

51000$4 :z

51COOSS 3

l~O

1930

1930

16&0

\130-

.t!30

1

2

J

S

6

7

.

:",.-z:~,,~~_.;iii'£pd1-'5-'*,~

1~ 140

1924 169

l~' 1"

1924 l!6

1970 1'20

1915 \10

lO!O

996

12!0

1l"Z)

1!J1

-1284

uta

ttlOO

. ilSO

1324

~

1611,

l~

1440

11M

'~n9 .

t"!OO

un

1

11

13

11

is

\966

19-41

19~

1954

1976

16)

1S9

DO

no·

190

'1500

:1010

.i2.00 -

- :15oq,

;1100

:102J

:\OOS

;1COO.

:lC(:O

·l~O

.-,,'

.,

,

.-~

. ' ,

.'.

. .t< ',: ',.

....

. ~'"

~:.

: ~:

,"

·:.

, "

:...

: ;::

• ~~I

: .

·'

, ,

~t .' :

. ;- ~

.' :.

,

: I

': l

. ;

TIERRA-A-018256
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM TELECON NOTE

CONTROL NO: DATE: TIME:

March 1, 2000 745

DISTRIBUTION:

1DD file 02-00-02·0005

CONVERSATION WITH:

John Meyer

OF

Collingswood Water Dept

PHONE

(856) 854-2332

RECORDED BY:

Gerald Gilliland, Region IT START

DISCUSSION:

:fublic Water Supply - CQlljm~swQod

Collingswood obtains 1000,10of its drinking water from six groundwater wells screened in the lower

PRM aquifer. Another well (no. 6) is currently off-line due to high iron. That well hasn't been

used in more than a year and he doesn't expect to use it for drinking watetjmrposes again. The

well depths range from 250 to 325 feet. The total population served by the interconnected system

is 20,000 persons through 6,000 connections. The wells and recent pumpage data are as follows:

WeU#

1

2

3

4

5

6

1

Total

Alternate

Well # Permit #

Approx. Pumpage (gallons)

Iul.::22 Aug-99 Sep-99

0.007 0.048 0.086

(numbers above are for Wells 1 and 2 combined)

3.1 0.064 0.115

14 5 3

47 45 42

000

II .l.Q 12

83.107 66.112 57.201

The numbers show that wellS provides more than 40% of the total supply (l'M. Meyer said these

numbers are typical). Therefore, approximate population apportionment is:

5

2R

3R

4R

6

7

~

31-00079

31-04053

31-04054

51-00030

51-00031

31-04799

31-04797

Well # Calculation Pop, Served

1 [(0.007 + 0.048 + 0.086) 7 (83.107 + 66,112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 6.86

2 [(0.007 + 0.048 + 0.086) + (83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 6.86

3 [(3.1 + 0.064 + 0.115) + (83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20.000 = 319.25

4 [(14 + 5 + 3) + (83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 2,141.95

5 [(47 + 45 + 42) 7 (83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 13,046.44

7 [(18 + 16 + 12) + (83.107 + 66.112 + 57.201)] x 20,000 = 4,478.63

-

Signature: C~j(~'

'Re.f No .. 15) p. /5

TIERRA-A-018257
.:

lrIaCArfflUf lV'

-----F-a-iM-·ew. ,fr

H'dd~ ""IJ(

ami 0.2 0.4 0.5 o"~

... c ••••• ~

Streets Plus

Collingswood we

Well Locations

"".

.:J

TIERRA-A-018258
=

....•...~

Streets Plus

Collingswood we

Well Locations

Mt.:~f'2 cf 2-

..'

.".

0::::;

..,

'1

".,

TIERRA-A-018259
e!,

I--

•".

..""'-

~.,--

-I;SAMPLE DELIVERY GROUP . . _ _ - - - - (SDGl - U&:CL~._

TRAFFIC REPORT (TR} COVER SHEET

~... Lab Name: '$enffrtz.J Contract No.: ~J::ti-C2.I&l1

,. Lab code:~b{) Case' No..: ;Z5l?01· .

Full Sample Analysis price in Contract: ~

SOG NoJFirst Sample in ~~f34 Sample Receipt Date:" 0-,/31197

(Lowesl EF'A Sample Number in first shipment of (MM/OO/YY

samples received under SD3J

Last Sample in SDG: MB~~ Sample Receipt Date: a(!)kUCJ.7

(Highest EPA Sample Number In last shipment of (MM/OO/Y Y

. samples received under' SOG.) .

order) Numbe'rs in the SaG

are a maximum of 20 field samples in an SOG.

Attach Traffic Reports to this form in alphanumeric order .' '--':-"'"""'~

(i.e.. the order listed on this form).. ..~

Date

TIERRA-A-018260!
:;;. .

.

::.(1"--

:t!'

Iji\,o ..

~. [ '.

t·~...

.~ ..:

.......-~-

t='~

:r~' F-'

-•

-=

...-.,. •

~-_. ~

""" .. ., r ..

;

-

--.... ..".

SENTINd, Inc.

Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Services

2800 Bob WaUace AveDue. Ste. L3 HUDtsville, AL 35805 (205) 534- 9800

FAX TRANSMITTAL

DATE: August 4, 1997

·n--1"'. '.. 1.,

"V

-. ..~

......

______________________________ TIERRA-A-018261

--

TO: Dyncorp

ATIN: Mistie Sisson

FAX NUMBER: (703) 519-8626

NO. OF PAGES: 1 (Including Transmittal Page)

FROM: Susan Pearsall

Sentinel, Inc.

2800 pob Wall~ce Avenue, Suite L-3

Huntsville, AL .35805

Telephone No.: (205) 534-9800

Fax No.: (205) 534-9878

COMM:ENTS: Concerning Case 25601: .

Sample MBQK48 (LW TM) was incorrectly labeled on the

COe. The actual sample Dumber is MBQK47 .

/fyou htnll! tilly qul!Stio1l1 Tl!garding this transmittal, or you need tilly addUionaJ inIOTlfI41iOn, pll!lISl! do not /rui/all! /0 calL
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM PROJEcr NOTE

TO: DATE:

Kelbros, Inc. File 06/28/00 Page 1 of 1

FROM:

Joanne D'Onofrio

SUBJECT:

Gloucester City Water Treatment Plant· Water Supply Summary

REFERENCE:

Region II START used the information contained in the attached telecon note dated 02129/00

to calculate the population apportionment for the Gloucester City distribution system. The

Gloucester City Water Treatment Plant receives its drinking water supply from 4 wells drawing

from the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy (PRM) aquifer. The population served by this distribution

system is 12,400 persons.

Well Desi~nation

Gloucester City Well No. 40

Gloucester City Well No. 41

Gloucester City Well No. 42

Gloucester City Well No. 43

Distance Rin~ (mU

2-3

2-3

3-4

3-4

The well locations have been transcribed on the 4-MiIe Radius Map (Ref No. 14) of this report.

Po:pu]ntion Apportionment

Approximately 3,100 people are supplied by each well (12,400 total population served -;-4 wells

= 3,100 people served per well).

Two wells are located in the 2 - 3 mile radius; these wells serve an estimated population of 6,200

people (3,100 people served per well x 2 wells = 6,200 people served by these two wells).

Two wells are located in the 3 - 4 mile radius; these wells serve an estimated population 9f 6.200

people (3,100 people served per well x 2 wells = 6,200 people served by these two wells).

All -f cf3 1\.1) 1·.L.

TIERRA-A-018262
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM TELECON NOTE

CONTROL NO: DATE: TIME:

February 29,2000 1130

DISTRIBUfION:

TDD file 02-00-02-0005

CONVERSATION WITH: OF PHONE

Fred Schindler Gloucester City Water (856) 456-0169

Treatment Plant

RECORDED BY:

Gerald Gilliland, Region II START

DISCUSSION:

Public Water Supply - Gloucester City

,

The water supply for Gloucester City is obtained from four wells near the water treatment

plant. Wells 40 and 41 are north of the plant and Wells 42 and 43 are south of the plant. The

wells range in depth from 300 to 380 feet. No single well provides more than 40% ofthe total

supply. The population served is 12,400 persons.

-

-AU. 1) p. 2 c·~i

TIERRA-A-018263
.IC ..... ~

Streets Plus

Gloucester City Wells

TIERRA-A-018264
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM TELECON NOTE·

CONTROL NO: DATE: TIME:

February 29, 2000 1130

D!STRIBtrTION:

TDD file 02·00-02-0005

CONVERSATION WITH:

Leo Holland

OF PHONE

~erchan~e-Pennsauken (856)663-0043

Water Commission (MPWC)

RECORDED BY:

Gerald Gilliland, Region IT START

DISCUSSION:

Public Water Supply - Mercbantyille=PepDsauken

:MJ>WChas 14 active public supply wells, as follows:

Browning Road

WoodbineMctoria

MarionRR

National Highway

Park Ave

3 wells

2 wells

2 welJs

2 wells

5 wells

lA, 2A, 3A

I confirmed the addresses for the wells listed in the PSW2000 database (Browning Rd and

Woodbine).

The wells range in depth from 150 to 250 feet, and he believes they tap the lower PRM. The

total population served is 49,000 persons, and no single well provides more than 40% of the

total water supply. That works out to 3,500 persons per well (49000/14).

The two wells at Delaware Gardens are inactive and haven't been used in 8 years due to high

manganese. He's trying to reopen them as an alternate supply, but that hasn't been approved

yet and he estimates that it would take at least a year after approval to build the treatment

plant.

Signature:

TIERRA-A-018265
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM PROJECT NOTE

TO: DATE:

Kelbros, Inc. File 06/28/00 Page 1 of 1

FROM:

Joanne D'Onofrio

SUBJECT:

Merchantville-Pennsauken Water Commission (MPWC) - Water Supply Summary

REFERENCE:

Region II START used the information contained in the attached telecon note dated 02/29/00

to calculate the population apportionment for the Merchantville-Pennsauken distribution system.

The lv1PWC receives its drinking water supply from 14 active wells drawing from the lower

Potomac-Raritan-Magothy (PRM) aquifer. The total population served by,this distribution system

is 49,000 persons.

Location

Browning Road

Woodbine & Victoria Aves.

Marion Ave. & RR tracks

National Highway & Hylton Rd.

Haddonfield Rd. & Park Ave.

No. of Wells

3 wells

2 wells

, 2 wells

2 wells

5 wells

Distance Ring (mi)

3-4

>4

>4

>4

>4

The well locations have been transcribed on the 4-Mile Radius Map (Ref No. 14) of this report.

Population Apportionment

Approximately 3,500 people are supplied by each well (49,000 total population served -;-14 wells

= 3,500 people served per well).

Three wells are located in the 3 - 4 mile radius; these wells serve an estimated population of 10,500

people (3,500 people served pe~ well x 3 wells = 10,500 people served by these three wells).

AA. E p. Z 0+3

17e~.15, p. 2\

TIERRA-A-018266
·.C•• I-.·~

Streets Plus ,.

Merchantville-Pennsauken Water Commission

Welt Locations

~O,_,_,"-~-Q",",,"""}ol-"'-A .. r- . . '. . H. E p •.s 01".3

-. . ).

TIERRA-A-018267
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM TELECON NOTE

CONTROL NO.:

02-00-02·0005

DATE:

06/01100

TIME:

1030

DISTRIBUTION:

Kelbros, Inc. File

SUBJECT:

Public Water Supply Summary

BETWEEN:

Donna D'Amico, Superintendent

OF:

WestvillelBrooklaWn

Public Works

PHONE:

(856) 4~6-7785

AND:

Joanne D'Onofrio

OF:

Region II START

DISCUSSION:

Itelephoned the Public Works Department to obtl\.indrinking water supply information for Westville

(Gloucester County) and Brooklawn (Camden County). Ms. D'Amico explained that the two water

systems entities; she is the current superintendent of both independent systems. Each system has three

supply wells, which are used on a leadllag schedule. She is not aware of the presence of any private

drinking water wells in the two communities. The Westville system has approximately 1,875 serv~ce

connections, while the Brooklawn system has approximately 760 service connections. The well depths are

approximately 300 feet below ground surface. The well designations, capacities, and aquifers are as

follows:

Westville System

I Well Desil:natjon Location

Well No.4 Pine S1.& Crown P1.Rd.

Well No.5 Pine S1.& Crown Pt. Rd.

Well No.6 River Dr. (Broadway & RR)

Brooklawn System

Well No. I Broadway & Town Center

Well No.3 Town Center & Chestnut 5t.

Well No.4 Timber Blvd. & New Jersey Rd.

Distance BinI: (mil

>4

>4

>4

Capacity/Aquifer

800 gpmILower PRM

800 gprnlUp & Low PRM

800gpmILowerPRM

300-400 gpmILower PRM > 4

300-400 gpmILower PRM > 4

300.-400 gpmILower PRM 3 - 4

The welllocatio~ have been transcribed on the 4-mile Radius Map (Ref. No. I~) of this report.

Population Apportionment

The averages of persons per household for Gloucester County and Camden County are 2.87 and 2.76,

respectively (Att. A). An estimated 5,381 people are served by the Westville system (1,875 service

connections x 2.87 county average number of persons per household = 5,38lpeople served). An estimated

2,098 people are served by the Brooklawn system (760 service connections x 2.76 county average number

of persons per household = 2,098 people served). As some of the wells are outside of the 4-mile distance

I ring, the populations will not be apportioned for these wells.

i

Brooklawn Well No.4 is located within the 3 - 4 mile radius; this well serves 699 people (2098 total

population served + 3 wells = 699 people served per well). -

ACTION ITEMS:

A~. F" p.i at 2..

Re+. \5", p.23

TIERRA-A-018268
.. c••• ~

Streets Plus

tvilleIBrooklawn Public: Works Wes • ~~

Well Lceatio.-

An. 'F;·r'l..fZ lJe~.I~ p' 24

TIERRA-A-018269
r lL£. LJUl 1

TELECON NOTE

SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESS~1ENT AND RESPONSE TEAM

CONTROL NO: DAIE: TIME:

02.98-11.0005 03111/99 10:;3

DISTRJBUTlON:

Martin Aaron, Inc. file PHONE

CF Philadelphia Water Department·

BaXler Water Tre3tment Plant BETWEEN: (215) 685-8022

Nonnan Jadc:z:ak

AND (iJJ

K. Campbell

DISCUSSION Itelephoned the Water Deparunent to obtain drinking water supply information for the City of Philadelphia. Mr. Jadczak

stated that they receive their drinking ·water supply from three surface water intakes. The City also sells water to Bucks

County. The intake designations, locations. and 3\·er.age withdrawals [million gallons per day (mgd)) ~ as follows:

intake Loc3tion· Averaoe Withdrawal (mgQJ

Ba.'(ter Plant If.: mile north of Un den Ave. - Delaware River 200 (56% or total)

Belmont Plant Schuylkill River 60 (17% or total)

Clean Lane Plant Schuylkill River 100 (27% of total)

The twO intakes on the Schuyllcitl River are not located within the surface water migration limit. The Delaware River intake

is siruated approximately 12 miles upstr= of a point on the river which is parallel to the site. The approximate location of

the Ba.'(ter Plant is identified on the attached map (p. 2 of this note).

For information regarding the number of service connections, he suggested contacting Kevin McNichols, Philadelphia

Water Deparunent - Load Control at (215) 685-9656. .

ACTION ITEMS:

(tet /5" > p. 25

TIERRA-A-018270
,-

........-~

Streets Plus

Philadelphia - Baxter Plant

Approximate Intake Location

e-,.voo I_I~."""_~ __ "''''''''''''·N._''-

TIERRA-A-018271
tiLt LJU\ l

SUPERFUND TECHJ.'fICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM

TELECOi'l NOTE

CONTROL NO: DAlE: TIME:

02-98-11.0005 03118/99 1046

DISTRJBLTTION:

Martin Aaron, Inc. file PHONE

OF BETWEEN: (215) 685-0321 Philadelphia Water Depanment

Roy Romano

AND @

K. Campbell

DISCUSSION

Mr. ROmano reromed my tdephone call (3/17/99); I had called him to obtain the number of service connections for the

City'S distribution system. He stated that there arc approximately 480,000 service conn~tions. He mentioned tha! there arc

some private wells in the far northwest portion oflhe Cic:. These wells arc situated greater than four miles from the site.

According to cenSUS data for Philadelphia County, PA. the avenge number of persons per household is 2.63 (1,.585,577

people'" 603,07.5 households = 2.63 people per household (p. 4 of this note). Therefore, it is estimated that 1,262,400 people:

are served by the City's water distribution system (480,000 service connection x 2.63 persons per bou.sehold = 1,262,400

people served). Since the Baxter Plant on the Delaware River provides approximately .56 percent of the City'S supply, it is

estimated that 706.?44 people arc served by the Baxter Plant (1,262,400 toW population served x .56% of total watcr supply

= 706,944 people served by the Delaware River intake). Itshould be noted that, although the Delaware River is tidal.

background literarorc indicates that salt water does not rach the Camden area under normal circumstances (pp. 4, S of this

n~~ .

.,

ACTION ITEMS:

TIERRA-A-018272
~URL reload)

1990 US Censns Data

Datsbs.3e: C90STFIA

Summary Level: state--ComltY

Philadelphia County: FIPS. STATE=42I FIPS. coUNTY90=lOl

PERSONS

Universe: Persons Total ..•..•...•......••..•.....•...•.•••..•••.•.•••••.•••••.••..•.••.. 1585577

HOUSEHOLDS

Universe: Households Total ..••••.••.•.........••••.....•.•...•.••••.••.•••..••.••..••....•.. 60307

5

- -

http://venus.census.gov/ cdrom/lookup/921785700

Aft- G _p- Ai ,,!4·-

TIERRA-A-018273
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM TELECON NOTE

CONTROL NO: DATE: TIME:

February 29, 2000 1430

DISTRIBUTION: .

.

TOD file 02-00-02-0005

CONVERSATION WITIi; OF PHONE

Bob Fonash NJ American Water Co (856) 764-4931

xr;CORDUJ BY:

Gerald Gilliland, Region nSTART

DISCUSSION:

Public Water Supply - Camdeg Area

The NJ American groundwater wells at ClevelandlReeves Avenues are no longer in use,· They

,

haven't been used in at least 2 years and are only available as emergency back-up. There's a lot

of iron and manganese in the water and there's a filtration plant at that site. The wells were

replaced by a surface water intake directly across the river from Philadelphia's Baxter Plant

intake, south of Dredge Harbor and north of the Tacony-Palmyra Bridge. The intake currently

provides 100% of the water for the ,East Camden and Cramer Hill area served by NJ American,

serving a total of24,300 persons (21,300 in Camden City and 3,000 in Pennsauken).

Signature: ~

Kef. No.)~ p. 29

TIERRA-A-018274
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM TELECON NOTE

CONTROL NO: DATE: TIME:

February 29, 2000 1130

DISTRlBlJIlON:

TDD file 02-00-02"()()()5

CONVERSATION WITH; OF PHONE

Joe Dugandzic NJ American Water Co (856) 346-8200

RECORDED BY;

Gerald Gilliland, Region nSTART

DISCUSSION:

Public Water Supply - Camden Area

The NJ American groundwater wells at ClevdandlReeves Avenues are secondary supply wells,

only used for peak times. Bob Fonash at (856) 764-4931 would have more information on the

recent use of the wells. The wells have iron and a couple of we Ushave YQCs. There's an

aerator, pressure filters, and air strippers to treat the water. The wells were replaced by a

surface water intake that went on-line in 1996/1997. Itis directly across the river from

Philadelphia's Baxter Plant intake.

) -

I<ef l'1.iS: p. 30

TIERRA-A-018275
C1TY OF CAMDE~

DIVERSION R1Gl1T APPLICATION

TO

STATE OF NEW JERSEY -'

DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES

W.S. APplication No. 1799

\

R EPOR T ON GROUN D \VA TER HYDRO LOGY

LntroducliQll

os required by the New Jersey Department o[ Erwironmenlal protection - Division

This is a report on the ground water hydrology to furnish information

or Water Resources ~nd by the Delaw~re River :8'1sin commission when 3pplying

...

for additional water supply.

,

.

4

Irom the existing Morris Delair Puehaek field complex. It is estimated that at

The application [or ground water alloc~tion is [or an additional S. 5 mgd

least [our new wells would be required. They "'ouId be located 310ng the Delaw~re

River in Pensauken TownshiP, New Jersey just south and ro rth o[ the Betsy ROSS

Bridge to depths o[ approximately 130 [eet, pumping [rom the lower aqui[er 01 the

potomac Raritan ?-.1:1g0thy aquifer systeJ;'O.

-

-:

-

..

..-; \

will not unduly inte dere with other e<is'ing supplies. The dive rs ion is not likeI)'

The study indicates ,hat diversion o[ 8.5 mgd or water [rom this peDjeel

to exceed the natural replenishment o[ the water resources beyond a reason,bl,

TIERRA-A-018276
S:l.lt \Valer Inlrusion

11>ri 1o.n-M>golhy >nd PI ei 5toe ene ,>quil er 5 is nol 53Ily • 53It w>te r in the 10'"or

The ground W:lter in the proximity of this a.rcn in the ·potomacaqui! er is Ioc>l ed mo re than 12 mile 5 lo the south 01 lhe Cily a I C>m denand

poses nO thr,a! in lhe lor,seeable lulure. In lhe Dela"'>re River, which is \

tidnl, normally s>lt waler lrom the ocean does not re>ch the vicinity 01 Camden. );¥f.

Rarely in an extended drought such as in ] 966 the salt front of 250 ppm of

chloride reached the vicinity of Benjnmin Franklin Bridge. But this front or

tongue of relntively low levels of sail is only temporary and would only raise the

sal t content of lhe recharged groU1\d w>ter slightly. With ti me it would <,entuaUy

.

,

be flushed out by pumping with lhe "It content getting back to normal concentr>tion.

A content of 250 ppm "It is genenUy used >5 the limit for pot>ble supplies and

th>l level was set merely for aesthetic reasons 01 t:lsle, >nd is nol considered

harmful.

lor the City of C>mden. The waler from lhe nearby wells at Delair .nd ~iorris,

1..'" ye.

r

complete chemic>l an>lyses were run on e'-ery oper>ting well

which h>ve been in operation for over 30 years. were found lo be suil>ble [or

drinldng after treatment for iron and manganese. Th~s i~_ th: best performance ... ' ·:~i-_

information that couid be expected for concern 01 other chemic>l intrusions. Ther,

is no guu.ntee th>t chemic.l intrusions m>y not occur in the !utiire [rom some unknown source. The only "legu>rd is > const:lnt periodic mO/litoring in.the future

of the\v:l.ter qU:Llity of anew waler supply as well as the existing supply.

Re~.151 f· 32

(I as+ psqe)

TIERRA-A-018277
•

REFERENCE NO. 16

TIERRA-A-018278
I)FROST ASSOCIATES

,

!

88 Founders Village, Clinton, CT 06413

(860) 669-5859 FAX (860) 669-5869

March 7, 2000

To: Roy F. Weston Inc - Region II START

1090 King Georges Post Road, Suite 201

Edison, NJ

Attn: Harry Allen NEW JERSEY PORTION

Fr: Frost Associates

Founders Village

Clinton, Conn 06413

Tel: (203) 669-5859

Fax: (860) 669-5859

Sub: Kelbros, Inc

Camden, NJ

CERCLIS:

Job: 6520

Site Longitude: 75-07-38.5

lite Latitude 39-56-17

75.127357

39.938061

The CENTRACTS report below identifies the population, households, and private water

wells of each Block Group that lies within, or partially within, the 4, 3, 2, 1, .5,

and .25, mile "rings" of the latitude and longitude coordinates above. A CENTRACTS report

may have up to six radii of any length and 1500 block groups.

CENTRACTS uses the 1990 Block Group population and Block Group house count data found

in the Census Bureau's 19~0 STF-IA files. The sources of water supply data are from

The Bureau's 1990 STF~3A files. The boundary line coordinates of the Block Groups

were extracted from the Census Bureau's 1990 TIGER/Line Files.

CENTRACTS reports are created with programs written by Frost Associates, 88 Founders

Village, Clinton Conn 06413. The code was written using Microsoft's Quick-Basic Ver. 4.5.

Latitude and Longitude coordinates identifying a site are entered in degrees and

decimal degrees. One or more county files holding Block Group boundary lines are

selected for use by CENTRACTS by determining whether the site coordinates fall within

the minimum and maximum Lat\Lon coordinates of each county in the state.

Each Block Group line segment has Lat\Lon coordinates representing the "From" and

"To" ends of that line. All coordinates from the selected county files are read and

converted from degrees, decimal degrees to X\Y miles from the site location. Each

line segment is then examined whether it lies within or partially within the maximQ~

ring from the site.

The unique Block Group ID numbers of each line segment that lie within the maximum

ring are retained. All Block Group boundary lines matching the Block Group numbers

are then extracted from the respective county files to obtain all sides of the inFluded Block Groups. Boundary records are then sorted in adjacent side order to

aetermine the shape and area of each Block Group polygon.

A method to solve for the area of a polygon is to take one-half the sum of the proRe ~'.Nc I{." p. j

TIERRA-A-018279
KeloIos, Inc

Camden, NJ

~~w JERS~1 PORTION

Population:

Households:

Drilled Wells:

Dug Wells:

Other Water Sources:

151654.17

56043.09

40.45

189.00

69.00

===-========= Partial (RING) data =========--=====

---- Within Ring: 4 Mile(s) and 3 Mile(s)

Population:

Households:

Drilled Wells:

Dug Wells:

Other Water Sources:

** Population On Private Wells:

47084.87

18994.01

7.14

18.45

5.76

63.45

---- Within Ring: 3 Mile(s) and 2 Mile(s)

Population:

Households:

Drilled Wells:

Dug Wells:

Other Water Sources:

** Population On Private Wells:

50871. 48

18936.85

25.03

137.72

1.24

437.21

Within Ring: 2 Mile(s) and 1 Mile(s)

Population:

Households:

Drilled Wells:

Dug Wells:

Other Water Sources:

** Population On Private Wells:

37840.11

12491.17

8.28

32.83

16.00

124.51

---- Within Ring: 1 Mile(s) and .5 Mile(s)

Population:

Households:

Drilled Wells:

Dug Wells:

Other Water Sources:

10866.80

3970.47

0.00

0.00

42.39

** Population On Private Wells: 0.00

TIERRA-A-018280
Kelbros, Inc

Camden, NJ

NEW JERSEY PORTION

Within Ring: .5 Mile(s) and .25 Mile(s)

Population: 4202.46

Households: 1306.71

Drilled Wells: 0.00

Dug Wells: 0.00

Other Water Sources: 3.61

**

Population On Private Wells: 0.00

---- Within Ring: .25 Mile (s} and o Mile (5)

Population: 788.46

Households: 343.87

Drilled Wells: 0.00

Dug Wells: 0.00

Other Water Sources: 0.00

** Population On Private Wells: 0.00

** Total Population On Private Wells: 625.17

3

TIERRA-A-018281
,f FROST ASSOCIATES ,

88 Founders Village, Clinton, CT 06413

(860) 669-5859 FAX (860) 669-5869

March 7, 2000

To: Roy F. Weston Inc - Region II START

1090 King Georges Post Road, Suite 201

Edison, NJ

Attn: Harry Allen PENNSYLVANIA PORTION

Fr: Frost Associates

Founders village

Clinton, Conn 06413

Tel: (203) 669-5859

Fax: (860) 669-5859

Sub: Kelbros, Inc

Camden, NJ

CERCLIS:

Job: 6520

Site Longitude:

"'ite Latitude

!

75-07-38.5 75.127357

39-56-17 39.938061

The CENTRACTS report below identifies the population, households, and private water

wells of each Block Group that lies within, or partially within, the 4, 3, 2, 1, .5,

and .25, mile "rings" of the latitude and longitude coordinates above. A CENTRACTS report

may have up to six radii of any length and 1500 block groups.

CENTRACTS uses the 1990 Block Group population and Block Group house count data found

in the Census Bureau's 1990 STF-IA fjles. The sources of water supply data are from

The Bureau's 1990 STF-3A files. ~he boundary line coordinates of the Block Groups

were extracted from the Census Bureau's 1990 TIGER/Line Files.

CENTRACTS reports are created with programs written by Frost Associates, 88 Founders

Village, Clinton Conn 06413. The code was written using Microsoft's Quick-Basic Ver~ 4.5.

Latitude and Longitude coordinates identifying a site are entered in degrees and

decimal degrees. One or more county files holding Block Group boundary lines are

selected for use by CENTRACTS by determining whether the site coordinates fall within

the minimum and maximum Lat\Lon coordinates of each county in the state.

Each Block Group line segment has Lat\Lon coordinates representing the "From" and

"To" ends of that line. All coordinates from the selected county files are read and

converted from degrees, decimal degrees to X\Y miles from the site location. Each

line segment is then examined whether it lies within or partially within the maximum

ring from the site.

The unique Block Group 10 numbers of each line segment that lie within the maximum

ring are retained. All Block Group boundary lines matching the Block Group numbers

are then extracted from the respective county files to obtain all sides of the in-

~lluded Block Groups. Boundary records are then sorted in adjacent side order to

eterrnine the shape and area of each Block Group polygon.

4

TIERRA-A-018282
Kelcros, Inc

Camden, NJ

PENNStLVANIA PURTlu~

Population:

Households:

Drilled Wells:

Dug Wells:

Other Water Sources:

403686.84

190857.64

.46.00

50.80

143.46

c=======-_-=~ Partial (RING) data ===============

---- .Within Ring: 4 Mile(s) and 3 Mile(s)

Population:

Households:

Drilled Wells:

Dug Wells:

Other Water Sources:

** Population On Private Wells:

173473.75

71998.16

19.00

5.80

77.46

59.75

---- Within Ring: 3 Mile(s) and 2 Mile(s)

Population:

Households:

Drilled Wells:

Dug Wells:

Other Water Sources:

** Population On Private Wells:

160801.27

80946.50

10.28

27.56

66.00

75.17

---- Within Ring: 2 Mile (s) and 1 Mile (s)

Population: 67532.48

Households: 36690.90

Drilled Wells: 9.38

Dug Wells: 17.44

Other Water Sources: 0.00

** Population On Private Wells: 49.35

---- Within Ring: 1 Mile(s) and .5·Mile(s)

Population:

Households:

Drilled Wells:

Dug Wells:

Other Water Sources:

** Population On Private Wells:

1876.64

1219.68

7.35

0.00

0.00

11.31

5

TIERRA-A-018283
Kelbros, Inc

Camden, NJ

PENNSl'LVANIA .t'Ul\.,l..l.Ut'<

Within Ring: .5 Mile(s) and .25 Mile(s)

Population: 2.71

Households: 2.40

Drilled Wells: 0.00

Dug Wells: 0.00

Other Water Sources: 0.00

** Population On Private Wells: 0.00

...

Within Ring: .25 Mile(s) and 0 Mile (s)

Population: 0.00

Households: 0.00

Drilled Wells: 0.00

Dug Wells: 0.00

Other Water Sources: 0.00

** Population On Private Wells: Not Applicable

** Total Population On Private Wells: 195.57

TIERRA-A-018284
REFERENCE NO. 17

TIERRA-A-018285
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESS.MENT AND RESPONSE TEAM TELECON NOTE

TDDNO.:

02-00-02-0005

DATE:

07/26/00

TIME:

1545

DISTRIBUTION:

Kelbros, Inc. File

SUBJECT:

Wellhead Protection Areas - Camden County

BETWEEN:

Eric Roman

OF:

New Jersey Geological Survey

PHONE:

(609) 984-6587

AND:

Joanne D'Onofrio

OF:

Region n START

DISCUSSION:

Wel1bead Protection Area

The Wellhead Protection Program was taken over by the Source Water Assessment Program. The

Source Water Assessmen~ Program defines the sources of water; therefore, the source of water

obtained from wells would be groundwater. A Preliminary Assessment Plan was submitted to the

EPA in 1998. All of the Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPAs) in New Jersey have not been

delineated yet. The following counties in New Jersey have WHP A maps that are/or will be

approved: Hunterdon, Burlington, Cape May, EsseX, Gloucester, Mercer, Salem, and Somerset.

Other areas (counties) have WHPA maps in draft form. WHP As have been delineated for Camden

County, however the maps are in draft form and have not yet been approved. ER can determine

if site overlies WHP A or ifWHP A is located within 4 miles of the site; ER indicated that it was

very likelythat a WHP A is located within 4 miles of the site since there is a public supply well 1.9

miles from the site. To obtain specific information - fax a copy of a topo map showing the location

of the site with a request (i.e., does the site overlie a designated or proposed WHPA andlor is a

designated or proposed WHPAlocated within 4 miles of the site) to him at FAX # (609) 633-1004.

ACTION ITEMS:

TIERRA-A-018286
REFERENCE NO. 18

TIERRA-A-018287
-1e:............ - L L"A a ,=:. J .-

Originator ..I

PHONE CONVERSATION RECORD

Conversation with:

Name \L·, .......\ ..-\_ L2. "' .......,,

V'\:r \::)S?", ~""""'-GOvJ ~ i- .

Company -==_ ...... -,.r-,\_ • --:: ....\ • '\-'\£.0 .""'''

~

Address ~ \,)\. r--e.-S-t <:: ..-\,..;- ....-1.." ~..J...'i:~

- \~ .......-40-- ,\'""--- O~f"""'- T '\) _ ~..,.,;:"

Date \ '.) I i I('"" qG

Time ~'. "-u

o Originator Placed Call

crOriginator Received Call .

Phone @ Q't\ Ct~ ~ - \ \ -,l1 W.O. NO. \ \ CI Y

SUbject \.....J~\\.. ~ A "\?",...."'~ '"So-\. ,:",J!!=. A f""'e~~

\J E-~ e-_L .~ \-'A "'__~C?( e....- ~~.- ,aCt \ - -'el,......'" ( J-o co......---L---+ i"....l............. ?\0........c~

C\.c-l,'t.>--- 4.""",.......:,."\\. ~.\'""'"" ,.J$aJ.. -\-0 r¢c....l~\"- cLe..ve..-\JI? 4-4 cJ:eY•.--ec...-ViJ,r..,,-.

:== ,

"'t",)......-- \(V\L. \Lu. e-L -\~ ~~ o.C- ~"..,.J.~~""'""-..l ~v......-:,_ -.~ \.Vor\ ...; ......

w

s: rpr0t u+- -\~ V\.Lv Jv-~ 6<:'0 \ct.i(." ....\ ~-,r,-,c.......:. i'" )\..-..0 -,\. t\.(.---\'....v. \::,

re(J\.;o...J,\V~"" \c..•.,,-,,,,-~ n-rU"':'"">d\'" t1'..~'- ~w l....h.'\\....1-.,),. ~,.-u-\et.-"'-,J-,", 0.r-e.C1....

oj i" ..

elL \~-u----\LJ.. ~ -\Ss.- y:.. "f"G s: j""\S. -..J.I't"-../ ," C- G.r-'d. ""\-=> \"'- ......:."'"6 ~. \ \ ~ ~v\,.~e Co-t

~~ c....?v\, \~'- ~', ~ (?ror Rc;;.,;> .s:.or- C\',- ~\ 4(\\(-\\0"'--' ~ ~r-L..

11"\. ........ .>--... <;.---.;.~ L...;.,

g'File ~~ ........,.<,) ~ -" •• \,) :..-0 ;\1)::) A- FOllow-Up-Action: ..:....- _

o TIckle' File, --'I .J _

I

o Follow.UpBy: _

-a@Route To:.~ '1.........-;.... Fe &:=4-.-

_,_,. J0~ F", \ys;:. ....:.

Originator's Initials_--:,~-~~------- ~r .

'Rei": No. \8

TIERRA-A-018288
REFERENCE NO. 19

TIERRA-A-018289
SUPERFUND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE TEAM TELECON NOTE

CONTROL NO.:

02-00-02-0005

DATE:

07/28/00

TIME:

1415

DISTRIBUTION:

Kelbros, Inc. File

SUBJECT:

Sewers in the Vicinity ofKelbros Inc. Site

BETWEEN:

Richie

OF:

Camden Water & Sewer Dept.

PHONE:

(856) 635-1527

AND:

Joanne D'Onofrio

OF:

Region II START

DISCUSSION:

The area that I mentioned (site address: 537 South 2nd Street, Camden, NJ) is served by

combined sewers. The combined sewer system cames all stormwater and sewage from the site

and surrounding area to the Camden County Utilities Authority (CCUA) Treatment Plant,

where it is subject to sanitary treatment before its discharge to the Delaware River.

ACTION ITEMS: None

TIERRA-A-018290
REFERENCE NO. 20

TIERRA-A-018291
TIERRA-A-018292
U711dlwni'l N.J. GIVES FIRST OK FOR REVIVAL OF DUMP

Article from: Tile Record (Berge" COUrJlY,NJl Article date: [)e~embe,. e, 1992

Author: RAVJJ1_,{QHt:_A~:Q~,_8~~-"Il;t_$J"HW)tt~I_

The Record (Bergen County, NJ)

12-08-1992

N.J. GIVES FIRST OK FOR REVIVAL OF DUMP -- HMDC SEES $500M SAVING

By DAVID VOREACOS, Record Staff Writer

Date: 12-08-1992, Tuesday

Section: NEWS

Edition: 3 Star, Also in 2 Star B, 1 Star Late, 1 Star Early

A plan to develop an inactive Kearny dump into a regional landfill

and recycling center for non-burnable waste has received preliminary

approval from state regulators.

The Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission estimates that

the landfill could save North Jersey counties $500 million in disposal

costs over the next two decades.

The HMDC's plans for the Keegan landfill drew stiff opposition from

Kearny residents early this year. They opposed any new landfill

activities and the truck traffic that goes with them. The dump lies in

an industrial area near Route 280, the New Jersey Turnpike, and the

Hackensack River.

The Kearny Council later "unequivocally" opposed the project and

favored commercial development there instead.

The landfill would take 1,500 tons of bulk waste that is currently

shipped out of state each day. It also would recycle 300 tons of

construction debris daily.

The HMDC would first have to close the Keegan landfill, which is

leaching into nearby marshes a substantial flow of pollution from its

100 acres. That cleanup is projected to cost more than $60 million over

two decades. The new landfill would be atop the Keegan dump.

The state Department of Environmental Protection and Energy

approved the concept last week but questioned the HMDC's financial

analysis and said the HMDC would need permits based on far more detailed

information.

"The HMDC proposal ... represents significant positive benefits

locally and to the state," DEPE Commissioner Scott Weiner wrote. "At the

local level, existing sources of pollution would be remediated."

Weiner said that the recycling facility would further New Jersey's

goals of recycling 60 percent of its waste. It would also help the state

dispose of all of its waste within its own borders at a time when

landfills are closing.

"This facility can be a cornerstone to solving the state's

deficiencies in disposal capacity, thereby greatly reducing our

dependence on out-of-state landfills," he wrote in a nine-page opinion.

However, Weiner questioned the HMDC's projection that it would

charge $75 per ton to dump at the new landfill, a rate that he said

"does not appear to be sufficient to cover all of the facility's

costs."

Beyond spending more than $60 million in the next 20 years on

sealing and maintaining the Keegan landfill, the HMDC wants to spend

more than $60 million to close and maintain another Kearny dump known as

the 1-D Landfill. It also wants to buy and protect 320 acres of marsh

around the Keegan landfill.

To finance the project, the HMDC would issue bonds that would

probably be repaid through funds generated by tipping fees, said

spokesman Bob Grant. Officials estimate it would be two years before the

facility could be opened, and that it could operate for at least a

TIERRA-A-018293
decade.

Weiner's opinion does not address the 1-D Landfill plan, but does

note some of the environmental hazards at Keegan, which has not accepted

trash for 20 years but remains uncovered.

The HMDC has estimated that the landfill, most of which is owned by

Kearny, discharges 65 million gallons of tainted water annually into the

Kearny freshwaster marsh and Frank's Creek, which drains into Newark

Bay.

Underground fires, fed by methane, plague the site, which is full

of hazardous materials. A 1989 report prepared for the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency found the presence of mercury, lead,

chromium, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) on the site.

However, the dump remains accessible, and people continue to hunt

and fish there, according to the HMDC. The HMDC is charged with

promoting development, environmental protection, and waste management in

a 32-mile district.

Under its plans, the HMDC would install an underground system that

would collect the escaping leachate and ultimately pipe it to a sewage

plant.

Though opposed in Kearny, the HMDC's plans are backed by the Bergen

County Utilities Authority, which could lower its garbage costs by using

the Kearny facility.

"At some point, we have to come to grips with being sincere about

in-state self-sufficiency with waste," said BCUA Executive Director

Larry J. McClure.

McClure said he also hopes that the Kearny facility would cover new

waste with chemically stabilized sludge produced at the BCUA's sewage

plant.

Keywords: KEARNY. GARBAGE. NEW JERSEY. MEADOWLAND

Copyright I- 1992 Bergen Record Corp. All rights reserved.

Provided by ProQuest LLC. For permission to reuse this article, contact Q9J?YJjgt:LQt('l~)L~L"l(:t:U.~~:.Dj:~:~.

HighBeamTM Research, Inc. © Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.

TIERRA-A-018294
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

DEPARTMENT OF ENVI DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

BID DOCUMENTS BID DOCUMENTS

MSLA 1D 

LANDFILL SITE 

REMEDIAL 

CONSTRUCTION

INVITATION FOR BIDS

09-X-20957

VOLUME 4 – TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION

Date Issued: MAY 2009
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 

MSLA-1D LANDFILL SITE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 

Table of Contents 

1.0 CONTRACTUAL Page No.

1.1 General Description of the Work 1.1-1 

1.2 General Requirements 1.2-1 

1.3 Submittals 1.3-1 

1.4 Mobilization 1.4-1 

1.5 Demobilization 1.5-1 

1.6 Field Office Setup 1.6-1 

1.7 Field Office Maintenance 1.7-1 

1.8 Internet / Telephone Service / Rent 1.8-1 

1.9 Gas Pipeline Engineering and Inspection 1.9-1 

1.10 Geotechnical Testing 1.10-1 

1.11 Soil Borings 1.11-1 

2.0 EARTHWORK AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION 

2.1 Site Clearing and Grubbing 2.1-1 

2.2 Erosion and Sedimentation Control 2.2-1 

2.3 Access Road 2.3-1 

2.4 Fencing, Gates, and Bollards 2.4-1 

2.5 Waste Fill And Earth Excavation 2.5-1 

2.6 Gas Pipe 2.6-1 

2.7 Signs and Jersey Barriers 2.7-1 

2.8 Revegetation 2.8-1 

2.9 Geotextiles 2.9-1 

2.10 Common Fill 2.10-1 

2.11 Coarse Aggregate (#57) 2.11-1 

2.12 Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-1 

2.13 Piles 2.13-1 

2.14 Pavement Section at Site Entrance 2.14-1 

1.0-1 
3.0 CONSTRUCTION PLAN, HEALTH & SAFETY PLAN 

3.1 Health and Safety Plan 3.1-1 

3.2 Construction Plan 3.2-1 

3.3 Hazardous Substance Container Removal & Staging 3.3-1 

3.4 Hazardous Substance Container Staging Area 3.4-1 

3.5 Hazardous Substance Container Sampling & Analysis 3.5-1 

4.0 OPERATIONAL 

4.1 Operations and Maintenance 4.1-1 

1.0-1 
1.1 General Description of the Work 

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) will be performing remedial 

closure measures for the MSLA 1-D Landfill. The MSLA 1-D Landfill is located in Kearny, 

Hudson County, New Jersey. The general project location is shown in the location plan on the 

Drawings Title Sheet. Due to difficult site conditions, pre-closure site improvements are required to 

provide suitable working areas for the landfill closure construction. Therefore, the MSLA 1-D 

landfill closure has been separated into two phases: pre-closure site improvement and landfill 

closure. This Contract is for the pre-closure site improvement phase of work. 

The (Site Improvements Project) includes: construction of the perimeter access road, 6” Penn 

Energy gas line re-location, 12” PSE&G abandoned gas line removal, grading for new Transco gas 

line easement along eastern portion of landfill, pile foundation & concrete slab construction, 

preparation of future staging areas, filling of wetlands to accommodate the roadway, installation of 

site access and control features, and other miscellaneous activities. 

The perimeter access road has been designed to provide a suitable surface for the future installation 

of the slurry wall and leachate collection system during the second phase of construction. The 

perimeter access road will be constructed using two gradations of recycled aggregate (RA). RA 

shall be obtained from a NJDEP certified Class B recycling facility. The RA will be produced from 

crushed concrete, concrete blocks, brick, tile and masonry material, and glass. 

The abandoned gas line running along the southern portion of the landfill will be removed to ensure 

that it is not encountered during landfill closure. The exact location of the gas line is unknown and 

the location shown has been approximated. PSE&G, who owns the line, will locate the abandoned 

gas line and drill it to vent any gas. The Contractor shall then excavate and expose the pipeline, 

remove the portion within the project area for offsite disposal, cap the ends of the portion that will 

remain in place, and backfill. PSE&G has indicated that a mechanical cap, such as a “Dresser” Cap 

will be acceptable. 

The Contractor is advised that the two existing (10” and 20”) gas lines to the south of the site are to 

be avoided during construction, and a 10’ minimum offset shall be maintained between the pipelines 

and the toe of the slope created by the access road. On the eastern side of the site the Penn Energy 

gas pipeline will be relocated, and the Transco Pipeline easement will be shifted (the plans reflect 

the shifted, and final Easement location). The new easement requires filling of ponded water to 

make the easement accessible. The work includes filling the ponds that are within the limits of the 

current Transco Easement, installing a safe crossing over the two pipelines, removing the existing 

Penn Energy gas pipeline and installing the new pipeline. The contractor will be required to follow 

the requirements of the pipeline owners. Copies of the requirements can be found in the Exhibit 

portion of these specifications 

END OF SECTION 

General Description of the Work 1.1-1 
1.2 General Requirements

1.2.1 Definitions 

The terms used in the Specifications and Drawings have the definitions given in Article I of the 

General Conditions, as supplemented by Section SC-1 of the Supplementary Conditions and below. 

Wherever the words defined in this Section or pronouns used in their stead occur in the 

Specifications and Drawings, they shall have the meanings herein given. 

 Survey 

 The figures given on the Drawings or in the other Contract Documents after the word 

"elevation" or abbreviation of it shall mean the distance in feet above the National Geodetic 

Vertical Datum 1929, also known as Mean Sea Level Datum 1929. 

 The elevations indicated on the Drawings and other locations pertaining to design and 

construction (unless noted otherwise) indicate the finish grade/elevation. Contractor shall 

adjust subgrade elevations, bottom of trenches, etc., accordingly 

 All control points shall be tied horizontally to the New Jersey State Plane Coordinate System 

(NAD 1983) with horizontal accuracy to at least the nearest 0.01-foot and vertically to the 

National Geodetic Vertical Datum 1929 (100NGVD 29), with elevation accuracy to the 

nearest 0.01-foot. Mapping shall be scaled at 1” = 50’ (or an appropriate scale to fit 36” x 

42” sheets) with an elevation contour interval of 1-foot as well as spot elevations. A sketch 

generalizing the desired survey limits and typical content shall be included for clarity. 

Topographic mapping shall, at a minimum, show all final site features including structures, 

utility lines, drainage facilities (e.g., stormwater outfalls, combined sewer overflows, tide 

gates, etc.), tree and brush lines, banks, and all other significant physical and 

environmentally sensitive features evident at the time of survey. The Contractor shall 

establish and verify all ground control required for Surveying purposes. 

1.2.2 Abbreviations 

Where any of the following abbreviations are used in the Contract Documents, they shall have the 

meaning set forth. 

 AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials 

 ACI American Concrete Institute 

 AFBMA Anti-Friction Bearing Manufacturers Association 

 AGA American Gas Association 

 AGMA American Gear Manufacturer Association 

General Requirements 1.2-1 
 AIHC American Industrial Health Council 

 AISC American Institute of Steel Construction 

 AMCA Air Moving and Conditioning Association 

 AMRL American Material Reference Laboratory 

 ANS American National Standard 

 ANSI American National Standards Institute 

 API American Petroleum Institute 

 ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers 

 ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers 

 ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers 

 ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials 

 AWPA American Wood-Preservers' Association 

 AWWA American Water Works Association 

 CS Commercial Standard 

 FTM Federal Test Method 

 IBR Institute of Boiler and Radiator Manufacturers 

 IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. 

 JIC Joint Industry Conference Standards 

 NRC Nuclear Radiation Commission 

 NDB National Bureau of Standards 

 NEC National Electrical Code; latest edition 

 NEMA National Electrical Manufacturers Association 

 NFPA National Fire Protection Association 

General Requirements 1.2-2 
 NICET National Institute for Certification of Engineering Technologies 

 NJDOT New Jersey Department of Transportation 

 NSF National Sanitation Foundation 

 SMACNA Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors National Association, Inc. 

 Fed. Spec. Federal Specifications issued by the Federal Supply Service of the General 

Services Administration, Washington, D.C. 

 125-lb. ANS American National Standard for Cast-iron Pipe 

 250-lb. ANS Flanges and Flanged Fittings, Designation B16.1-1975, for the appropriate 

class 

 AWG American or Brown and Sharpe Wire Gage 

 NPT National Pipe Thread 

 OS&Y Outside screw and yoke 

 Stl. WG U.S. Steel Wire, Washburn and Moen, American Steel and Wire or Roebling 

Gage 

 UL Underwriters' Laboratories 

 USCE United States Army Corps of Engineers 

 USSG United States Standard Gage 

 WOG Water, Oil, Gas 

 WSP Working steam pressure 

1.2.3 Handling and Distribution of Materials 

The Contractor shall handle, haul, and distribute all materials and all surplus materials on the 

different portions of the work; shall provide suitable and adequate storage room for materials and 

equipment during the progress of the work, and be responsible for the protection, loss of, or damage 

to materials and equipment furnished by them, throughout the duration of the contract. 

Storage, transport, and demurrage charges by transportation companies and vendors shall be borne 

by the Contractor. 

1.2.4 Materials - Samples - Inspection 

General Requirements 1.2-3 
Unless otherwise expressly provided on the Drawings or in any of the other Contract Documents, 

only new materials shall be incorporated in the work. All materials furnished by the Contractor to 

be incorporated in the work shall be subject to the inspection of the Engineer. No material shall be 

processed or fabricated for the work or delivered to the work site without prior concurrence of the 

Engineer. 

All costs for the storage, handling, and inspection of all materials shall be furnished by the 

Contractor. Defective materials shall be removed immediately from the site of the work. 

Either prior to or after commencement of the work, the Contractor shall submit samples of materials 

for such tests as the Engineer deems necessary to demonstrate that they conform to the 

Specifications. Such samples, including but not limited to pipe and soil samples, shall be furnished, 

taken, stored, packed, and shipped by the Contractor's Independent QA/QC Consultant as directed 

by the Engineer. 

All samples shall be packed so as to reach their destination in good condition, and shall be labeled to 

indicate the material represented, the name of the work and location for which the materials are 

intended, and the name of the Contractor submitting the sample. To ensure consideration of 

samples, the Contractor shall notify the Engineer by letter that the samples have been shipped and 

shall properly describe the samples in the letter. The letter of notification shall be sent separate from 

and should not be enclosed with the samples. 

The Contractor shall submit data and samples, or place their orders, sufficiently early to permit 

consideration, inspection and testing before the materials and equipment are needed for 

incorporation in the work. The consequences of their failure to do so shall be solely the Contractor's 

responsibility. 

To demonstrate the proficiency of workmen, or to facilitate the choice among several textures, types, 

finishes, surfaces, etc., the Contractor shall provide such samples of workmanship as may be 

required. 

When required, the Contractor shall furnish to the Engineer five sworn copies of manufacturer's 

shop or mill tests (or reports from independent testing laboratories) relative to materials and 

equipment performance ratings and test data. 

After review of the samples, data, etc., the materials and equipment used on the work shall in all 

respects conform therewith. 

All acceptance testing shall be performed in the presence of the Engineer and State. The Engineer 

and/or State will independently perform confirmatory QA/QC chemical testing on imported fill 

(other than recycled aggregate), topsoil, and general fill. This testing will not excuse the Contractor 

from performing the testing as indicated in the specifications. If excedances are found in any of the 

QA/QC tests, the Contractor will be responsible for segregating and properly disposing of the failing 

material at no cost to the State. 

General Requirements 1.2-4 
The security of stockpiled materials is the responsibility of the Contractor. 

1.2.5 Inspection of Work Away From the Site 

If work to be done away from the construction site is to be inspected on behalf of the State during its 

fabrication, manufacture, or testing, or before shipment, the Contractor shall give notice to the 

Engineer of the place and time where such fabrication, manufacture, testing, or shipping is to be 

done. Such notice shall be in writing and delivered to the Engineer at least one week in advance so 

that the necessary arrangements for the inspection can be made. 

1.2.6 Contractor's Shop and Working Drawings 

The shop drawings are interpretations of and are supplemental to the Contract Drawings and 

Specifications. Their intent shall demonstrate that this Contractor understands the design 

concept, and to provide the detailed information necessary for the fabrication, assembly, and 

installation of the products or materials specified. Neither the shop drawings nor comments 

placed on them by the Engineer shall be construed as being "Change Orders". If any deviations, 

discrepancies or conflicts between the Shop Drawings and the Contract Drawings and 

Specifications are discovered, either "prior to" or "after" the shop drawings have been reviewed, 

the Contract Drawings and Specifications shall have control and shall be implemented. 

The Contractor shall submit shop and working drawings of all materials, including but not limited to, 

riprap, aggregate, structural details, piping layout, wiring, materials fabricated especially for the 

Contract, and materials and equipment for which such drawings are specifically requested. Such 

submittals shall meet the requirements of Article 6.14 - Shop Drawings and Samples of the Terms 

and Conditions and Specification Section 1.3 - Submittals. 

When shop and working drawings are required as specified below, the Contractor shall submit data 

in sufficient detail to enable the Engineer to determine whether the manufacturer and/or the supplier 

have the ability to furnish a product meeting the Specifications. The Contractor shall submit data 

relating to the materials and equipment they propose to incorporate into the work in sufficient detail 

to enable the Engineer to identify and evaluate the particular product and to determine whether it 

conforms to the design concept and Contract requirements. Such data shall be submitted as 

specified for submission of shop and working drawings. 

Such drawings shall show the principal dimensions, weight, structural and operating features, space 

required, clearances, type and/or brand of finish or shop coat, etc., depending on the subject of the 

drawing. When it is customary to do so, when the dimensions are of particular importance, or when 

so specified, the drawings shall be certified by the manufacturer or fabricator as correct for the 

Contract. 

When so specified or if considered by the Engineer to be acceptable, manufacturer's specifications, 

catalog data, descriptive matter, illustrations, etc., may be submitted in place of shop and working 

drawings. In such case the requirements shall be as specified for shop and working drawings, 

insofar as applicable, except that five copies shall be submitted one of which shall be an original, 

two of which shall be returned to the Contractor. 

General Requirements 1.2-5 
The Contractor shall be responsible for the prompt and timely submittal of all shop and working 

drawings so that there shall be no delay to the work due to the absence of such drawings. Prior to 

the submittal of any shop drawings, the Contractor shall submit a schedule of proposed shop 

drawing transmittals. The schedule shall identify the subject matter of each transmittal, the 

corresponding specification section number and the proposed date of submission. During the 

progress of the work the schedule shall be revised and updated monthly or more frequently if 

needed. A revised and updated schedule shall be submitted with the monthly invoice package. 

Current changes to the shop drawing submittal schedule shall be shown in bold, shading or 

otherwise highlighted. The revised schedule shall be properly numbered for identification. The 

schedule shall also include a numbering system for the shop drawings and revisions. 

No material or equipment shall be purchased or fabricated specifically for the Contract until the 

required shop and working drawings have been submitted as provided above and approved for 

conformance to the Contract requirements. All such materials and equipment and the work involved 

in their installation or incorporation into the work shall then be as shown in and represented by said 

drawings. 

The Engineer shall review all critical shop and working drawings within 15 working days of their 

receipt and return marked up prints to the Contractor indicating approval, conditional approval or 

disapproval. Review time shall start upon receipt of the submittal by the Engineer. Until the 

necessary review has been made, the Contractor shall not order any materials nor proceed with any 

portion of the work (such as the construction of foundations), the design or details which are 

dependent upon the design or details of work, materials, equipment or other features for which 

review is required. 

All shop and working drawings shall be submitted to the Engineer by and/or through the Contractor, 

who shall be responsible for obtaining shop and working drawings from their subcontractors and 

returning reviewed drawings to them. All shop and working drawings shall be prepared on standard 

size, 24-in. by 36-in. sheets, in AutoCAD Version 2000i or compatible, except those which are made 

by changing existing standard shop or working drawings. All drawings shall be clearly marked with 

the names of the State, Contractor, and building, equipment, or structure to which the drawing 

applies, and shall be suitably numbered. Each shipment of drawings shall be accompanied by a 

letter of transmittal giving a list of the drawing numbers and the names mentioned above and a 

diskette containing the corresponding *.DXF or *.DWG files. 

Only drawings which have been checked and corrected by the fabricator shall be submitted to the 

Contractor by their subcontractors and vendors. Prior to submitting drawings to the Engineer, the 

Contractor shall check thoroughly all such drawings to satisfy themselves that the subject matter 

thereof conforms to the Drawings and Specifications in all respects. All drawings which are correct 

shall be marked with the date, checker's name, and indication of the Contractor's approval, and then 

shall be submitted to the Engineer; other drawings shall be returned for correction. 

If a shop drawing shows any deviation from the Contract requirements, the Contractor shall make 

specific mention of the deviations in their letter of transmittal. 

General Requirements 1.2-6 
The review of shop and working drawings hereunder will be general only, and nothing contained in 

the Technical Specifications shall relieve, diminish or alter in any respect the responsibilities of the 

Contractor under the Contract Documents and in particular, the specific responsibility of the 

Contractor for details of fabrication and dimensions necessary for proper fitting and construction of 

the work as required by the Contract and for achieving the result and performance specified 

hereunder. 

Should the Contractor submit equipment that requires modifications to the structures, piping, 

electrical conduit, wires and appurtenances, layout, etc., detailed on the Drawings, they shall also 

submit details of the proposed modifications. If such equipment and modifications are accepted, the 

Contractor, at no additional cost to the State, shall do all work necessary to make such modifications. 

The marked-up reproducible of the shop and working drawings or two marked-up copies of catalog 

cuts will be returned to the Contractor. The Contractor shall furnish additional copies of such 

drawings or catalog cuts when so requested. 

1.2.7 Occupying Private Land 

The Contractor shall not (except after written consent from the proper parties) enter or occupy with 

persons, tools, materials, or equipment, any properties outside of which NJDEP has secured access 

to for the Contractor or property of the Owner. A copy of the written consent shall be given to the 

Engineer. 

1.2.8 Interference with and Protection of Streets/Roadways 

The Contractor shall not close or obstruct any portion of a street, road, or private way without 

obtaining permits from the proper authorities. If any street, road or private way shall be rendered 

unsafe by the Contractor's operations, they shall make such repairs or provide such temporary ways 

or guards as shall be acceptable to the proper authorities. 

Streets, roads, private ways, and walks not closed shall be maintained passable and safe by the 

Contractor, who shall assume and have full responsibility for the adequacy and safety of provisions 

made therefore. 

The Contractor shall, at least two weeks in advance, notify The Town of Kearny in writing, with a 

copy to the Engineer, if the closure of a street or road is necessary. The Contractor shall cooperate 

with the Police Department in the establishment of alternate routes and shall provide adequate detour 

signs, plainly marked and well lighted, to minimize confusion. The Contractor shall be responsible 

to provide, obtain and pay for all required permits, police officers, traffic control providers and 

vendors required, due to such closures. The costs for the police officers shall be reimbursed through 

Allowance Item 1.4.1. The costs to coordinate and obtain the police protection shall be borne by the 

Contractor. 

The Contractor shall not block or impede access to the gas plant by their personnel at any time. 

1.2.9 Storage of Materials and Equipment 

General Requirements 1.2-7 
All materials and equipment to be incorporated in the work shall be placed so as not to injure any 

part of the work or existing facilities and so that free access can be had at all times to all parts of the 

work and to all public utility installations in the vicinity of the work. Materials and equipment shall 

be kept neatly piled and compactly stored in such locations as will cause a minimum of 

inconvenience to public travel and adjoining owners, tenants and occupants. 

The Contractor shall not store any construction equipment and materials in front of the gas plant 

without making arrangements with the plant operators. 

1.2.10 Sanitary Regulations 

The Contractor shall provide adequate sanitary facilities for the use of those employed or involved 

on the work, including the State and Engineer. Such facilities shall be made available when the first 

employees arrive on the site of the work, shall be properly secluded from public observation, and 

shall be constructed and maintained during the progress of the work in suitable numbers and at such 

points and in such manner as may be required. 

The Contractor shall maintain the sanitary facilities in a satisfactory and sanitary condition at all 

times and shall enforce their use. The Contractor shall rigorously prohibit the committing of

nuisances on the site of the work, on the lands of the State, or on adjacent property. 

1.2.11 Lines, Grades and Measurements 

The Contractor shall employ a competent surveyor licensed by the State of New Jersey as a 

Professional Land Surveyor. The Contractor shall require said surveyor to establish all lines, 

elevations, reference marks, batter boards, etc., needed by the Contractor during the progress of the 

work, and to verify such marks by instruments or other appropriate means. 

The Engineer shall be permitted at all times to check the lines, elevations, reference marks, batter 

boards, etc., set by the Contractor, who shall correct any errors in lines, elevations, reference marks, 

batter boards, etc., disclosed by such check. Such a check shall not be construed to be an approval 

of the Contractor's work and shall not relieve or diminish in any way the responsibility of the 

Contractor for the accurate and satisfactory construction and completion of the entire work. 

The Contractor shall make, check, and be responsible for all measurements and dimensions 

necessary for the proper construction of and the prevention of misfittings in the work. 

Separate payment will not be made for layout, measurement for payment, checking lines, grades, 

and measurements. The Contractor shall include such costs in individual line items. 

1.2.12 Dimensions of Existing Structures 

Where the dimensions and locations of existing structures are of importance in the installation or 

connection of any part of the work, the Contractor shall verify such dimensions and locations in the 

field before the fabrication of any material or equipment, which is dependent on the correctness of 

General Requirements 1.2-8 
such information. Such dimensions and locations shall be indicated on the Record Drawings. 

1.2.13 Work to Conform 

During its progress and on its completion, the work shall conform truly to the lines, levels, and 

grades indicated on the Drawings or given by the Engineer and shall be built in a thoroughly 

substantial and workmanlike manner, in strict accordance with the Drawings, Specifications, and 

other Contract Documents, including approved change orders or field orders. 

All work done without proper lines or levels, or performed during the absence of the Engineer, will 

not be estimated or paid for except when such work is authorized by the Engineer in writing. Work 

so done may be ordered uncovered or taken down, removed, and replaced at the Contractor's 

expense. 

1.2.14 Pipe Location 

The proposed 6” PENN Energy/Algonquin pipeline alignment is within close proximity of the 

existing pipelines and utilities, which are currently under operation. The Contractor must exercise 

all possible caution while working within/over the existing pipelines. All safety and construction 

standards and procedures of the Engineer, State, PSE&G and TRANSCO must be followed. No 

excavation with mechanical equipment shall be allowed within 24” of the existing pipelines without 

clearly identifying the pipelines. All pipelines shall be field verified, by hand excavating to 

determine exact location and depth prior to any mechanical excavation. No more than 170 feet in 

length of open cut shall be opened at one time when a foreign pipeline is within 5 feet from the edge 

of the trench. This is to avoid any operational impact to the existing pipelines in services. It is also 

the responsibility of the Contractor to coordinate all construction activities with PSE&G and 

TRANSCO. 

Pipelines will be located as indicated on the Drawings, but the right is reserved to the State, acting 

through the Engineer, to make such modifications in location as may be found desirable to avoid 

interference with existing structures or for other reasons. Where fittings, etc., are noted on the 

Drawings, such notation is for the Contractor's convenience and does not relieve them from laying 

and jointing different or additional items where required. 

PSE&G and TRANSCO are expected to be onsite during work and the Contractor shall adhere to 

any restrictions which they might require on work. 

1.2.15 Guarantees and Warranties 

The Contractor shall comply with Article 15 of the General Conditions pertaining to guarantees and 

warranties for all work completed. The Contractor shall warranty work associated with the 6” 

pipeline for two (2) years from the date of Final Completion and shall promptly repair, correct, 

replace, and re-perform any work that fails to conform with the Bid Contract at no additional cost to 

the State. All such warranty work shall be performed on a schedule acceptable to the current 

operators of the landfill gas plant and shall be warranted for two (2) additional years from the date of 

repair, correction, replacement, or re-performance. Neither the State’s acceptance of said Work, nor 

General Requirements 1.2-9 
final payment therefore, shall relieve Contractor of its responsibility to provide conforming Work. 

Contractor shall reimburse the State for any and all costs, expenses, and direct and reasonably 

foreseeable consequential losses incurred by the State due to non-conforming Work or any other 

failure by Contractor or any Subcontractor to comply with this Contract. Copies of required 

inspection certificates and guarantees or warranties shall be provided to the Engineer within 30 days 

after the installation of materials or products, in accordance with Section 1.3 and Table 1.3-1. 

1.2.16 Computation of Quantities 

Measurements for payment will be made in accordance with United States standard measure 

(National Bureau of Standards). The method of measurement and computations to be used in 

determination of quantities of work performed under the Contract are those methods generally 

recognized as conforming to good engineering practice. The methods of weight and measurement 

listed below may be used as an alternate method. 

The method of measurement and computations to be used in determination of quantities of 

Work performed under the Contract are those methods generally recognized as conforming to 

good engineering practice. 

Longitudinal measurements for area computations are made horizontally and deductions are 

not made for individual fixtures having an area of 9 square feet or less. Transverse measurements 

for area computations are the neat dimensions shown on the Plans or ordered in writing by the 

Engineer. 

All items which are measured by the linear foot, such as pipe culverts, are measured parallel 

to the base or foundation upon which such items are placed. 

In computing volumes of excavation, the average end area method is used. 

The thickness of plates and galvanized sheet used in the manufacture of corrugated metal 

pipe, metal plate pipe culverts and arches, and metal cribbing is measured in millimeters. 

Materials measured by volume in the hauling vehicle are measured at the point of delivery. 

Vehicles for this purpose may be of any size or type acceptable to the Engineer, provided that the 

body is of such shape that the actual contents may be readily and accurately determined. 

When requested by the Contractor and approved by the Engineer, in writing, material 

specified to be measured by the cubic yard may be weighed and such weights converted to cubic 

yard for payment purposes. Factors for conversion from weight measurement to volume 

measurement will be determined and shall be agreed to by the Contractor before such method of 

measurement of pay quantities is used. 

Net certified scale weights will be used as a basis of measurement for all imported soil and 

recycled aggregate, subject to correction when material has been lost, wasted, or otherwise not 

incorporated in the Work. 

The term "lump sum" when used as a basis of payment means complete payment for the 

Work of that item, and that item will not be measured. 

When standard manufactured items are specified, such as fence, wire, plates, rolled shapes, 

and pipe conduit, and these items are identified by gauge, unit weight, section dimensions, etc, 

such identifications are considered to be nominal weights or dimensions. Unless more stringently 

controlled by tolerances indicated in cited specifications, manufacturing tolerances established by 

the industries involved will be accepted. 

Whenever the phrase "quantity in the Proposal" is used in this Subsection, it is construed to 

mean the quantity in the Proposal adjusted for Change Orders. 

When the quantity in the Proposal is specified to be the pay quantity, either the Engineer or 

the Contractor may request that the quantity be measured. If such a request is made by the 

Contractor, it shall be accompanied by drawings, calculations, or other information indicating that 

the quantity in the Proposal is not correct. 

General Requirements 1.2-10 
In computing volumes of excavation, the average end area method is used. When cut and fill areas 

are mixed, the separate volumes of cut and fill shall be computed using a straight line interpolation 

between the end areas. A reasonable spacing between end areas shall be selected by the Contractor 

and approved by the Engineer. 

When the installation depth of an imported borrow fill is predetermined as with the cap components, 

roadways, and channels, measurement shall be in the square yard plan dimension. 

Defined volumes of fill for structural items shall be calculated as in-situ volume as placed at the 

specified density or unit weight. When requested by the Contractor and approved by the Engineer in 

writing, materials specified to be measured by cubic yard may be weighed and such weights 

converted to cubic yards for payment. 

All materials will be measured for payment. Factors for conversion from weight measurement to 

volume measurement will be determined and shall be agreed to by the Engineer before such method 

of measurement of pay quantities is used. 

For estimating quantities in which the computation of areas by geometric methods would be 

comparatively laborious, it is agreed that the planimeter shall be considered an instrument of 

precision adapted to the measurement of such areas. 

Net certified scale weights or weights based on certified volumes will be used as a basis of 

measurement for payment. The State reserves the right to correct tonnage amount subject if material 

has been lost, wasted, or otherwise not incorporated in the Work. 

1.2.17 General Slope Stability 

The Contractor's attention is called to the fact that some of the side slopes of the wastefill are steep 

and may be marginally stable. The Contractor shall exercise caution in performing work in and 

around the wastefill so as not to adversely affect the stability of the wastefill, including but not 

limited to: 

 • limiting dynamic forces on top of any slopes steeper than 15%; 

 • limiting equipment speeds to less than 10 mph; 

 • avoiding hard braking by equipment on or near slopes steeper than 15%; 

 • limiting work on slopes steeper than 15% when wet or precedent saturated 

conditions exist; 

 • use low ground pressure (LGP) equipment on slopes steeper than 15%; and 

 • safeguarding/maintaining the cap cover soils around the toe of slopes from erosion. 

1.2.18 Precautions During Adverse Weather 

During adverse weather and against the possibility thereof, the Contractor shall take all necessary 

precautions so that the work may be properly accomplished and satisfactory in all respects at no 

additional cost to the State. When required, protection shall be provided by use of tarpaulins, wood 

and building-paper shelters, or other suitable means. 

General Requirements 1.2-11 
During cold weather, materials shall be preheated, if required, and the materials and adjacent 

structure into which they are to be incorporated shall be made and kept sufficiently warm so that a 

proper bond will take place and a proper curing, aging, or drying will result. Protected spaces shall 

be artificially heated by suitable means which will result in a moist or a dry atmosphere according to 

the particular requirements of the work being protected. Ingredients for concrete and mortar shall be 

sufficiently heated so that the mixture will be warm throughout when used. 

1.2.19 Temporary Heat 

If temporary heat is required for the protection of the work, the Contractor shall provide and install 

suitable heating apparatus, shall provide adequate and proper fuel, and shall maintain heat as 

required and/or directed by the Engineer. 

Temporary heating apparatus shall be installed and operated in such manner that finished work will 

not be damaged thereby. 

After the heating system has been installed, tested, and made ready for operation, the Contractor 

may, at their own risk and expense, use it for providing heat for protection of the work. They shall 

provide and pay for all fuel and care necessary, and when the work is ready for acceptance, they 

shall, at their own expense, put the system into first-class condition, even to the extent of replacing 

worn or damaged parts as directed. Separate payment will not be made for temporary heating. 

1.2.20 Traffic Control 

The site access point is located off of Harrison Avenue. The Contractor shall follow all conditions 

of the site access easement agreements. The contractor will also be required to coordinate with 

utility line companies and New Jersey Turnpike Authority to facilitate site access for portions of the 

work. Copies of the site access agreements are included in Appendix A. 

The Contractor shall submit a site specific Traffic Control Plan for approval by the State as per 

Section 3.2.6. The Traffic Control Plan shall include, but not be limited to, on-site and off site traffic 

control, the use of traffic flagmen, sign posting, cones, fencing, and barrier. The Traffic Control 

Plan shall in no way relieve the Contractor of any responsibility or liability which is a result of their 

operations under the terms of the contract. Payment for this item will be made under Payment Item 

3.2.1. 

All truck traffic entering the site shall approach the Harrison Avenue entrance on Harrison 

Avenue/Route 508 East and turn right into the site at the driveway that is to be constructed at the 

start of the project. All truck traffic leaving the site shall exit at the constructed driveway and turn 

right onto Harrison Avenue/Route 508 East. Traffic conditions are hazardous at the site entrance on 

Harrison Avenue and deviations from this traffic patterns will not be permitted. In addition, the 

Contractor should be aware that the existing driveway is steep and that low trailers may “bottom 

out.” In order to get trailer mounted equipment into the site, it may have to be offloaded on Harrison 

Avenue. This will require the assistance of the Kearny Police Department and is best performed at 

off-peak traffic hours. The cost for use of local police will be reimbursed, at cost, from the Payment 

General Requirements 1.2-12 
Allowance Item 1.4.1. 

1.2.21 Pre-Construction and Post-Construction Videos 

The Contractor shall take Pre-Construction and Post-Construction videos to adequately document 

pre-existing and final conditions of all work areas and easements. The Engineer shall be present 

during these activities and provided four copies of the videos. The cost of this activity shall be 

included in Section 1.4 Mobilization and Section 1.4 Demobilization, respectively. 

1.2.22 Interference with Existing Works 

The Contractor shall at all times conduct their operations so as to interfere as little as possible with 

existing works. All work of connecting with, cutting into, and reconstructing existing pipes or 

structures shall be planned to interfere with the operation of the existing facilities for the shortest 

possible time when the demands on the facilities best permits such interference, even though it may 

be necessary to work outside of normal working hours to meet these requirements. Before starting 

work which will interfere with the operation of existing facilities, the Contractor shall do all possible 

preparatory work and shall see that all tools, materials, and equipment are made ready and at hand. 

The Contractor shall make such minor modifications in the work relating to existing structures as 

may be necessary, without additional compensation. 

The Contractor shall have no claim for additional compensation by reason of delay or inconvenience 

in adapting his operations to meet the above requirements. 

1.2.23 Permits, Access Agreements and Easements 

The Contractor shall take out and maintain all necessary permits from the state, county, township or 

other public authorities; shall give all notices required by law; and shall post all bonds and pay all 

fees and charges incidental to the due and lawful prosecution of the work. The following are a list of 

some of the known permits which may be required to be obtained by the Contractor in the execution 

of the project. 

• Local police, fire chief and construction approvals. 

• All appropriate permits for transportation and disposal of wastes (solid or liquid), including 

transportation licenses, transfer station licenses, and Treatment, Storage and Disposal 

Facilities Permits. 

• Electrical permits – Town of Kearny 

• NJDEP Well Abandonment Permits 

• Trailer occupancy permit – New Jersey Meadowlands Commission 

General Requirements 1.2-13 
• Road Opening Permit – Hudson County 

The Contractor is required to comply with the following permits which have been obtained (Copies 

are included in Appendix B). 

• NJDEP Freshwater Wetlands Permit / Water Quality Certificate 

• NJDEP Flood Hazard Area Permit 

• NJDEP Coastal General Permit #24. 

• USACE Jurisdictional Determination and Nationwide General Permit No. 38 

• NJDEP Major Landfill Disruption Permit 

• NJDEP Tidelands License 

• Hudson-Essex-Passaic Soil Conservation District – Soil Erosion and Sediment Control 

Certification. 

The Contractor is also required to comply with access/easement agreements, including insurance 

requirements, of the following property owners: 

• New Jersey Department of Transportation 

• Town of Kearny 

• PSE&G 

• Williams-TRANSCO 

1.2.24 Record Drawings 

The Contractor shall keep one record copy of all Contract Documents, at the site in good order and 

annotated to show all revisions made during construction. Such annotations shall be kept current 

and may be inspected by the State or Engineer monthly or more frequently. Failure to maintain 

current record drawings will be cause to delay progress payments. Record drawings shall be 

available to the Engineer at all times during the life of the Contract. 

Prior to pre-final inspection, furnish a reproducible copy of the record drawings. At the completion 

of the Contract and before final payment is made, furnish the Engineer one set of reproducibles and 

five CD disks of the corresponding AutoCAD Version 2000i (or compatible) files of the final 

approved record drawings reflecting all revisions herein described below: 

General Requirements 1.2-14 
Record drawings shall be based on the construction design drawings and shall include, at a 

minimum: 

• Notations of material changes, if other than that specified 

• Incorporation of Field Order Details 

• Incorporation of Approved Change Orders 

• Specific horizontal and vertical surveyed locations of all items constructed and any existing 

items that were found in discrepancy of the design plans and 

• Notations of pay item quantity changes and or adjustments. 

Record drawings shall contain a copy of all drawings included in the construction documents. 

Drawings warranting “no changes made or noted during construction” shall be so noted and 

included in the set of record drawings. Record drawings shall be signed and sealed by the 

Professional Licensed Engineer retained by the Contractor, and by the Contractor’s responsible 

representative. Record drawings will undergo an extensive review and approval process with the 

NJDEP before they are finalized and accepted. 

This task will be paid for under Bid Item 1.5 – Demobilization. 

1.2.25 Other Contracts 

The Contractor shall coordinate their work to eliminate conflicts with any other on-site contractors 

including those for gas pipeline owners and the State. Other known on-site operations which may 

affect construction include, but are not limited to: 

• General operations of the active landfill gas venting system. 

• General operations of PSE&G and Transco-Williams. 

The Contractor shall contact the operators of the active gas venting system to coordinate all work 

(including, but not limited to, the disabling of the existing 6” Penn Energy Gas Pipeline and 

activation of the new 6” Penn Energy Gas Pipeline). Access to the gas venting system shall be 

provided to the operators at all times. 

The contractor shall comply with the PSE&G and Transco-Williams access agreements at all times. 

1.2.26 Health and Safety 

The attention of the bidders is directed to the fact that the submission of a site specific Health and 

Safety Plan (HASP) is required for this project. Minimum requirements for the submittal are 

presented in Section 3.1 of these Specifications. 

1.2.27 Utilities 

The attention of the bidders is directed to the fact that there is no water service on the property. The 

Contractor will be required to provide any water to the site necessary for completion of the work and 

General Requirements 1.2-15 
for sanitary facilities and trailers. There is non-potable water in a fire line located in front of the gas 

plant. A Town permit is required to utilize the fire line hydrant. The Contractor shall be responsible 

for obtaining a permit from the Town of Kearny and all associated fees if he chooses to utilize the 

fire hydrant. 

Additionally, there is no electric service available in the office trailer area. There is no separate pay 

item for this task. The cost for this task should be included in Bid Item 1.4 – Mobilization and Bid 

Item 1.7 – Field Office Maintenance, as detailed in these sections. 

There is currently no telephone and internet available in the proposed office trailer area. The 

Contractor shall install telephone and DSL Internet lines of sufficient quantity from the office trailer 

area to the Verizon telephone pole at the entrance to the site. The Contractor will be reimbursed for 

any Verizon connection fees and the monthly costs for internet and phone service under Payment 

Item 1.8. 

1.2.28 Cleaning Up 

During its progress of the work and the adjacent areas affected thereby shall be kept clean and all 

rubbish, surplus materials, and unneeded construction equipment shall be removed and all damage 

repaired so that the public and private property owners will be inconvenienced as little as possible. 

Where material or debris has washed or flowed into, or been placed in, existing watercourses, 

ditches, gutters, drains, pipes structures, work done under this contract, or elsewhere during the 

course of the Contractor's operations, such material or debris shall be entirely removed and 

satisfactorily disposed of during the progress of the work, and the ditches, channels, drains, pipes, 

structures, and work, etc., shall, upon completion of the work, be left in a clean and neat condition. 

On or before the completion of the work, the Contractor shall, unless otherwise especially directed 

or permitted in writing, tear down and remove all temporary buildings and structures built by them; 

shall remove all temporary works, tools, and machinery or other construction equipment furnished 

by them; shall remove, acceptably disinfect, and cover all organic matter and material containing 

organic matter in, under, and around toilet facilities, houses, and other buildings used by them; shall 

remove all rubbish from any grounds which he has occupied; and shall leave the roads and all parts 

of the premises and adjacent property affected by their operations, including temporary roads, 

staging and support areas, in a neat and satisfactory condition. 

The Contractor shall thoroughly clean all materials and equipment installed by them and their 

subcontractors, and on completion of the work shall deliver it undamaged and in fresh and newappearing condition. All mechanical equipment shall be left fully charged with lubricant and ready 

for operation. 

The Contractor shall restore or replace any public or private property damaged by their work, 

equipment, or employees, to a condition at least equal to that existing immediately prior to the 

beginning of operations. To this end the Contractor shall perform all necessary highway or 

driveway, walk, and landscaping work. Suitable materials, equipment, and methods shall be used 

for such restoration. The restoration of existing property or structures shall be done as promptly as 

General Requirements 1.2-16 
practicable as work progresses and shall not be left until the end of the contract period. 

1.2.29 If and Where Directed Items 

The Price Schedule may request bids on one or more Pay Items to be incorporated into the Project 

"if and where directed" by the Engineer. Such items or quantities may not be located on the Plans. 

The estimated quantities set out in the Price Schedule for such items are presented solely for the 

purpose of obtaining a representative bid price, but are not intended to indicate the State's 

anticipation as to the quantities of such items which are to be actually incorporated into the Project. 

Depending on field conditions, such "if and where directed" items may or may not be incorporated 

into the Project and if incorporated may be many times the estimated quantity or only a fraction 

thereof. 

Incorporation of such items shall only be made on written directions of the State. In the absence of 

written directions, no such items shall be incorporated into the Project and if incorporated will not be 

paid for. The State may order incorporation of such items at any location within the Project, and at 

any time during the Contract Time. Claims for additional compensation shall not be made because 

of any increase, decrease or elimination of such items, nor because of an increase or decrease in the 

amount of work due to the field conditions encountered in incorporating such items into the Project. 

1.2.30 Project Meetings 

The Contractor shall anticipate attending the following meetings during construction. The Cost for 

attending these meetings shall be incorporated in the contract bid items. No additional payment will 

be made for attending meetings. 

1.2.30.1 Pre-Construction and Construction Conferences 

Before construction is started, preconstruction conferences shall be held. During the first 

conference The State, the Engineer, and the Contractor will discuss the procedures to be 

followed by the Contractor during the construction process. 

A second conference, if necessary, may include representatives of The State, Engineer, 

Contractor, State and Local Authorities and would concern compliance with State and 

Federal regulations and the environmental plans and specifications. 

1.2.30.2 Job Meetings 

During construction, job meetings shall be held to review construction and restoration 

progress and to resolve difficulties, which might delay completion of the work. 

Attendees at these meetings shall include representatives of the State, the Engineer, the 

Contractor, and any appropriate subcontractors. 

The Engineer may schedule regular job meetings at least weekly during the life of the 

Contract. The time and location of meetings is to be set by the Engineer. The 

Contractor, unless otherwise notified by the Engineer, is to have an authorized 

General Requirements 1.2-17 
representative attend each meeting. 

The purpose of these meetings is for maintaining communication between the State, 

Engineer and Contractor, including the Contractor's subcontractors and suppliers. The 

meetings are to be used to coordinate various parts of the work, update construction 

schedules, prepare progress estimates and respond to questions that may be raised by the 

various participants. 

END OF SECTION 

General Requirements 1.2-18 
Submittals 1.3-1 

1.3 Submittals

The following, Table 1.3-1 is a representative list of submittals to the Engineer that are required of 

the Contractor. The list may not be definitive and is included so the Contractor will be aware of the 

large number of submittals required of them. Material and sample requirements shall comply with 

Section 1.2.4 of these specifications. Submittal status should be updated monthly by the Contractor. 

Separate payment for this task will not be made. 

TABLE 1.3-1 

SUBMITTALS 

Item 

Tech. Spec. 

Section No. Time of Submittal To Be Submitted 

· Initial Project Manning Report General 

Conditions 

Article SC 3 

Within 3 days of the 

effective date of the 

Agreement 

1 original 

4 copies 

· Material Safety Data Sheets for 

all potentially hazardous 

materials to be used or provided 

during construction 

 3.1 Within 30 days of 

the effective date of 

the Agreement 

1 original 

4 copies 

· Construction Plan, including Site 

Operation Plan and Schedule 

 3.2 

· Health and Safety Plan 3.1 

· Disposal of any Materials OffSite 2.1 Within 5 working 

days after disposal. 

Copy of disposal 

agreement (prior 

to disposal) 

Bills of Lading 

Disposal Receipts 

1 original, 4 copies 

· Shop Drawings Submittal 

Schedule 

 1.2.6 Prior to submittal of 

shop drawings. 

Schedule to be 

updated monthly or 

more frequent if 

needed 

1 original 

4 copies 

· Field Office 1.6 * ** 

· E&S Control Structures 2.2 * ** 

· Roadway Aggregate Materials 2.3 * ** 

· Infill Recycled Aggregate 2.3 * ** 

· Gates 2.4 * ** 
Submittals 1.3-2 

Item 

Tech. Spec. 

Section No. Time of Submittal To Be Submitted 

· Bollards 2.4 * ** 

· Fencing 2.4 * ** 

· Waste Disposal Areas 2.5 * ** 

· Project Signs 2.7 * ** 

· Gas Pipe 2.6 * ** 

· Slab Crossing 2.6 * ** 

· Piles 2.13 * ** 

· Concrete 2.12 * ** 

· Decontamination Facilities 3.2 * ** 

· Topsoil 2.8 * ** 

· Straw Mulching 2.8 * ** 

· Fertilizer, Seed, Lime 2.8 * ** 

· Geotextiles 2.9 * ** 

· Coarse Aggregate (#57) 2.11 * ** 

· Product Data Sheets and all 

requested relevant information, 

including proposed guarantees 

and warranties 

 --- At least one month 

prior to intended 

installation. 

Product data sheets 

must be approved 

by Engineer prior to 

installation. 

1 original 

4 copies 

· Testing and Inspection Reports 1.9 Within 12 hours of 

completion 

5 copies 

· Laboratory Testing Results 1.9 Within 12 hours of 

testing 

4 copies (2 copies 

each to the 

Engineer and 

NJDEP) 

· Field Inspection and Testing 

Reports 

1.9 At end of each work 

day 

4 copies (2 copies 

each to the 

Engineer and 

NJDEP) 

· Guarantees, Warranties, 

Inspection Certificates, 

Installation Instructions, Permits, 

Within 30 days of 

installation 

1 original 

4 copies 
Submittals 1.3-3 

Item 

Tech. Spec. 

Section No. Time of Submittal To Be Submitted 

and Quality Control Manuals for 

all installed products 

· Regulatory Inspection 

Certificates 

1.6, 1.7, 1.10, 

1.11 Within 30 days of 

installation 

1 original 

4 copies 

· Survey Drawings 1.5 Within 15 days of 

Substantial 

Completion 

1 Reproducible Set 

(4 sets of copies), 5 

Copies of the 

Digital File Version

· Record Drawings 1.2, 1.5, 2.3 Within 15 days of 

Substantial 

Completion 

1 Reproducible Set 

(4 sets of copies), 5 

Copies of the 

Digital File Version

· Health and Safety Closeout 

Report 

3.1 Within 15 days of 

Substantial 

Completion 

1 Reproducible Set 

(4 sets of copies) 

· Pre-Construction and PostConstruction Videos 

1.2.21 Prior to mobilizing 

on site and at Final 

Construction 

Completion 

4 copies 

· O&M Manual 1 Month Prior to 

Final Construction 

Completion 

1 original 

6 copies 

* - At least fifteen days prior to intended installation. Shop drawings must be approved by Engineer 

prior to installation. 

** - 1 Original and 4 copies 

END OF SECTION 
1.4 Mobilization

1.4.1 General Description 

Installation of temporary protective fence for the TRANSCO and PSE&G lines, as indicated in the 

drawings, shall be included in Mobilization. Temporary fencing shall consist of blaze orange, 

ultraviolet stabilized HDPE with a minimum tensile strength of 5000 lbs/in2

 in accordance with 

ASTM 648. Posts shall be flanged leg U-bar or flanged leg channel section having a uniform 

thickness of 0.118 inches or more. Posts shall be of sufficient length and reasonably anchored to 

support the entire barrier fence. Blaze orange construction fencing shall be installed on both sides of 

the TRANSCO pipeline on the East side of the Site. Fencing shall be installed at 10 feet from the 

line with a minimum height of 48”. After the proposed 6” gas pipeline has been installed the 

contractor shall move the western-most construction fencing to 10 feet west of the newly installed 

gas pipeline. 

Temporary chain-link fence shall be required around the trailers in the staging area. The temporary 

fencing shall be erected before construction activity in the staging area. Temporary fencing shall be 

constructed according to the requirements for permanent fence except used materials may be used. 

The fence shall be installed on stands made of hot dipped galvanized steel pipe at grade. Temporary 

fence shall be maintained as directed during construction and shall be removed and disposed 

of/recycled when no longer required on the Project. The Contractor shall also provide pedestrian 

access gates and locks for the access gates at the office trailer staging area. Temporary fencing and 

pedestrian access gates shall be paid for as a part of the mobilization. 

There is currently no telephone and internet available in the proposed office trailer area. The 

Contractor shall install telephone and DSL Internet lines of sufficient quantity from the office trailer 

area to the Verizon telephone pole at the entrance to the site. However, the Contractor will be 

reimbursed for any Verizon connection fees and the monthly costs for internet and phone service 

under Payment Item 1.8 

1.4.2 Traffic Police 

A police officer shall be provided, if required by the Town of Kearny and/or the County, as 

approved by the Engineer, to assist with traffic control during construction. The police officer will 

be from the Kearny Township Police Department. 

At the onset of the project the Contractor shall make application to, and establish an escrow account 

with, the Town of Kearny Police Department; contact Ms. Sharon Dominguez, 201-955-7893. The 

Town will be paid from that account for the officers involved in traffic control at the site. The 

Contractor shall maintain sufficient funds in the escrow account throughout the construction period 

for payment of the police officers involved. The Contractor will be reimbursed by the State from the 

Allowance set forth in Item 1.4.1. 

The Contractor shall provide a minimum of two days advance notice to the Kearny Police 

Department Traffic Bureau, 201-998-1313 to have an officer on site for that day’s work. The 

Contractor shall telefax the Engineer a confirmation of the phone call with the date and time of 

Mobilization 1.4-1 
request, number of officers requested, and name of the person at the police station who took the 

request. 

1.4.3 Measurement and Payment 

The Contractor will not be permitted to proceed with mobilization until the Contractor’s Health and 

Safety and Construction Plans are complete and accepted by the NJDEP. Furthermore, no payments 

for any line item work will be processed until these plans are completed and the Notice to Proceed 

has been issued. Mobilization shall consist of preparatory work and operations, necessary for the 

initiation of the Contract, movement of personnel, equipment, supplies and incidentals to the Project 

site, and other work performed or costs incurred prior to beginning work. Mobilization shall include 

a pre-construction video, the construction of initial staging and support areas in the southwest corner 

of the site; construction entrances/exits; temporary access roads; generator electric power, 

installation and maintenance of temporary fencing around trailers, and water for the construction 

trailers. Mobilization shall also include installation of protection of gas lines required by 

TRANSCO and PSE&G (with the exception of the concrete mats which will be paid under Item 

2.6.4). Mobilization shall not include payment for the roadway aggregate material, filter fabric, and 

clearing and grading associated with the mobilization activities. These items will be paid for under 

the unit price bid for each item. 

Payment for Mobilization will be made on a lump sum basis upon completion of all the work items 

listed above, regardless of the fact that the Contractor may have, for any reason, shut down his work 

on the Project or moved equipment away from the Project and back again. 

Payment for Bid Item 1.4 will be made in accordance with the following schedule: 

• Upon completion of work required under Mobilization - the price bid for Mobilization, up to 

5% of the Total Bid Price will be paid; 

• Upon substantial completion of all work on the Project, payment for the amount bid for 

Mobilization in excess of 5% of the Total Bid Price will be made. 

Payment for Bid Item 1.4.1 Traffic Police will be made monthly based on the actual cost as 

evidenced by paid bills from the Town of Kearny Police Department. An estimated amount to cover 

these reimbursements has been included on the Bid page as an allowance. The allowance is only for 

services provided by the police. The Contractor’s overhead and profit costs, coordination costs, etc, 

associated with the effort are to be included in the Contractor’s bid price under Item 1.4, 

Mobilization. 

For Traffic Police, the Contractor will be paid for documented deposits made to the escrow account. 

Copies of invoices, the Contractor’s payment checks, and paid receipts from the Police Department, 

must be submitted with the Contractor’s invoice. Copies of the Officer’s daily time sheets as well as 

a summary spreadsheet accounting for the various officers involved, their rates, hours per day, total 

hours, and charges for the period they are involved at the site, shall also be obtained by the 

Contractor from the Town of Kearny Police Department and submitted with the Contractor’s 

invoices. Allowance in Item 1.4.1 not paid for traffic police will not be paid to the Contractor, and 

will result in a reduction in cost to the contract price. 

Mobilization 1.4-2 
Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Pay Unit

1.4 Mobilization Lump Sum 

1.4.1 Traffic Police Allowance 

END OF SECTION 

Mobilization 1.4-3 
Demobilization 1.5-1 

1.5 Demobilization 

1.5.1 General Description 

Site cleanup shall be performed in accordance with Section 1.2.28 and with any requirements in the 

Site Access/Use Agreements. A pre-final inspection will then be conducted to identify any 

remaining tasks to be completed. From these tasks, a punch list of remaining tasks will be prepared. 

These items must be finished before Demobilization is completed. Record drawing submissions and 

any other final submissions (paper work, warranties, health and safety closeout report, etc.) are 

required as part of this task. 

Before pre-final inspection and after substantial completion, all areas occupied and/or disturbed by 

the Contractor in connection with the work shall be cleaned of all rubbish, excess materials, 

geotextiles, trailers, temporary structures and other equipment or materials and the area shall then be 

restored to the condition that existed prior to mobilization. 

1.5.2 Record Drawings 

Per the requirements of Section 1.2.24 and this section, the Contractor shall provide Record 

Drawings, which will be based on the construction design plans, and shall include, at a minimum:

• Notations of material changes, if other than that specified 

• Incorporation of Field Order Details 

• Incorporation of Approved Change Orders 

• Specific horizontal and vertical surveyed locations of all items constructed and any existing 

items that were found in discrepancy of the design plans and 

• Notations of pay item quantity changes and or adjustments. 

The Contractor shall deliver six (6) copies of the draft Record Drawings for the State and Engineers 

comment. Record Drawings will undergo an extensive review period during which, the Contractor 

shall incorporate review comments into the final Record Drawings, including a re-survey if 

necessary. 

1.5.3 Record Drawings Deliverables 

Bond Paper Prints

Final delivery for the project site shall include five (5) sets of white bond paper prints 

(36” x 42”) of the survey maps scaled at 1” = 50’ (or an appropriate scale to fit 36” x 42” 

sheets). Each set shall be signed and sealed by a licensed surveyor. It is understood that 

several drawings will be required to make up one complete map, including a cover sheet 

with plan sheet key map. 

Electronic Files

Final delivery for the site shall include five (5) electronic file of the survey photography 

and mapping on a CD-ROM. This electronic file shall either be in 2000i AutoCAD 

native format (also known as DWG format), or in AutoCAD's drawing exchange format 
Demobilization 1.5-2 

(also known as DXF format). Electronic delivery of the survey photography and mapping 

shall include a digital coverage of each layer in New Jersey State Plane Coordinates 

suitable to be uploaded directly into NJDEP's Geographic Information System. Contours 

shall be zero-width 3D polylines, layer separated into intermediate and index intervals 

and contour labels shall follow the same scheme. All contours shall be assigned 

elevations. Spot elevations shall be AutoCAD points with appropriate Z-values. All 

entities on the topographic maps shall be included in separate layers with appropriate 

names, such as “gas line” or “tree line”, etc. 

Backup Information

In addition to the electronic file deliverable, the following backup information shall be 

provided: 

• One (1) copy of all field notes, sketches, and calculations; 

• Tie details for all established benchmarks and ground control; 

• One (1) copy of all relevant documents associated with the site survey; 

1.5.4 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Pay Unit

1.5 Demobilization Lump Sum 

Payment for final cleanup and Demobilization will be made on a lump sum basis upon completion of 

all the work items listed in this section and the post-construction video. 

END OF SECTION 
1.6 Field Office Setup

1.6.1 Description 

Along with the separate office and equipment needed by the Contractor, the Contractor shall provide 

1 office trailer to be used exclusively by the State and the Engineer. 

The final location of the trailer shall be approved by the Engineer. 

1.6.2 General requirements for field office are: 

Adequate free parking shall be provided and maintained for the field office. 

Materials

General Construction: The office shall be an approved and weatherproof building or mobile trailer 

of the type specified in the contract documents. The trailer shall have insulated double walls, floors 

and roof. The structure shall have a minimum ceiling height of 7 feet and shall be provided with 

weatherproof windows and weatherproof doors each equipped with adequate locking devices, each 

with 4 keys. All internal doors will be provided with locks and keys. Each window shall have a 

minimum area of eight square feet, shall be screened, equipped with vinyl blinds and of a type that 

will open and close to provide adequate ventilation. The office shall be placed on concrete blocks 

and leveled, with full-length skirts provided. A firmly secured railed entrance platform and steps 

shall be provided at each exterior door. The office shall have heavy-duty security screens bolted 

from the interior. Horizontal locking bars, with like keyed master locks, and shall be provided on all 

exterior doors. The field office and their associated equipment shall be new, or recently renovated to 

new condition subject to Engineer's approval. Full length skirts will not be permitted on trailers. 

Trailer shall be strapped and anchored to the ground. 

- Lighting: Electrical light, non-glare type luminaries to provide a minimum illumination 

level of 100-foot candles at desk height level. 

- Heating and Cooling: Adequate equipment to maintain an ambient air temperature of 70° F. 

+ 5°. 

- Water Cooler and Heater with bottled water supply and paper cup dispenser. 

- Adding Machine: Tape type registering to at least ten digits, four function, and supply of 

paper as needed. 

- First Aid Kit: Containing the following minimum list of supplies: 

Quantity Size Item 

32 19 by 75 mm Brand sheer bandages 

20 25 by 75 mm Brand fabric bandages 

Field Office Setup 1.6-1 
4 Medium Non-stick pads 

2 50 mm Soft-gauze bandages 

2 Oval eye pads 

1 1300 mm Triangular bandage 

1 13 by 4500 mm Hypo-allergenic first-aid tape 

10 Antiseptic wipes 

1 3.5 g Burn cream, foil pack 

1 227 g First-aid cream 

1 100 caplets Tylenol Extra-Strength caplets 

1 Scissors 

1 Tweezer 

1 First-aid guide 

1 15 mL Ophthalmic irrigation solution 

1 Contents cards 

10 Disposable gloves 

10 0.33 mL Ammonia inhalants 

 

- Toilet: A portable sanitation unit, ADA Compliant, H 90” x W 77” x D77” shall be 

provided near the State/Engineer Trailer. This unit shall be for the exclusive use of the State 

and Engineer Personnel and shall be padlocked after hours to prevent vandalism. Toilet 

facilities shall be cleaned and sanitized a minimum of once per week except from May 15 

through September 15 in which these facilities shall be cleaned and sanitized a minimum of 

twice per week. 

- Lockers: A heavy metal locker (with lock and keys) of sufficient size for storage of 

surveying instruments, cameras and testing equipment and a wooded locker or closet for 

storage of clothes, hats, and boots. The heavy metal locker shall be securely fastened to the 

trailer body. 

- Fire Extinguisher: Non-toxic, dry chemical, fire extinguisher meeting Underwriters 

Laboratories, Inc., approval for Class A, Class B and Class C fires with a minimum rating of 

2A: 10B: 10C. 

- Thermometer: An outdoor minimum - maximum thermometer. 

- Pencil Sharpener: One battery or electrically operated pencil sharpener. 

- Photocopying Machine: Heavy duty, electric, dry process photocopying machine with 

automatic feed and enlargement/reduction capacity capable of making photocopies ranging 

in size from 8 1/2" X 11" to 11" X 17" and an adequate supply of copy paper (8 1/2" x 11", 8 

1/2" x 14", 11 x 17") and toner. The supply of copy paper and toner shall be replenished by 

the Contractor as required by the Engineer. 

- Signs: The Contractor shall furnish and install necessary signs to locate and identify the 

State/Engineer office. 

1.6.3 Additional Requirements, State/Engineer Office: 

Field Office Setup 1.6-2 
Type A field office shall be of weatherproof construction located on or in the immediate vicinity 

of the Project, having a floor area of not less than 520 square feet and a ceiling height of not less 

than 7 feet, and having partitions and doors providing three communicating rooms, one with a 

floor area of not less than 260 square feet and two with a floor area of not less than 130 square 

feet each. And furnished as follows: 

State/Engineer Office

 4 - Suitable office desks with drawers and locks. 

 4 - High Quality Swivel Chairs. 

 1 - 3’ x 6’ High Quality Folding Table. 

 6 - Metal Cushioned Office chairs. 

 1 - Or more clothes closets of ample size for maximum office requirements. 

 1 - Heavy Duty 3 hole paper punch. 

 1 - Refrigerator (Frigidaire 4.4 Cu. Ft. Compact Refrigerator or approved equal). 

 1 - Coffee Maker. 

 1 - Microwave Oven. 

 4 - Three-shelf book cases 3' w x 3' h x 1’d. 

 4 - Waste-paper receptacles. 

 3 - High Quality File Cabinets, 4 drawers each, legal size, with lock and keys. 

 1 - Drafting-type tables each 3 feet by 6 feet and supported by wall brackets and legs. 

 1 - Draftsman's stools. 

 1 - Calculator, printing, 12 digit. 

 1 - Metal storage cabinet with 4 adjustable shelves, tumbler lock and two keys 

(approximate size 72 inches high by 36 inches wide by 18 inches deep). 

 2 - Standard pencil sharpeners. 

3 - Fire extinguishers, one mounted in each room 

1- Paper Towel Dispenser 

1- Broom and dust pan 

 1 - Multifunction Fax/Printer/Scanner Machine, Color Canon Pixma MX850 or equal 

acceptable to the Engineer. Contractor shall provide all paper, toner, cartridges, ink 

or parts to keep the machine fully functional for the duration of the project. Machine 

shall be repaired or replaced as needed to provide uninterrupted service. Machine 

shall modified and/or all additional equipment be provided to allow unit to 

send/receive faxes from wireless communication services provided in Section 1.8. 

1- Porcelain on steel markerboard (4’h x 8’w, Dry Erase Type) for dual use as a 

magnetic bulletin board and writing surface. Steel shall be 24 gauge standard steel. 

Shall include, a full-length map rail and accessory tray with silicone rubber DuraSafeTM corners, Smooth low-gloss surface, dust-free surface without ghosting and 

factory framed in anodized aluminum or solid wood. Shall include L-clips, rawl 

plugs and screws for installation and warranty. 

24 Heavy-duty three ring binders, 4” width minimum. 

1.6.4 Office Construction Details 

 

 General Requirement: The buildings shall be fully equipped and made available for use and 

occupancy by the State and Engineer immediately after roadway surface is installed in the site 

Field Office Setup 1.6-3 
support area and before any other contract work. 

 All buildings shall be maintained in good condition and appearance by the Contractor for the 

designated period after which all portable buildings or trailers, fencing, surfacing and utilities shall 

be removed from the location, the areas cleaned, and left in a neat and acceptable condition. 

1.6.5 Other Equipment 

The Contractor shall also provide the following: 

- A Topcon AT-G auto level (or equal), level tripod stand, rod, and 200 foot long surveyor’s 

chain, all with carrying cases, to spot check long areas with less man power. 

1.6.6 Submittals 

 

Submittals shall be according to Section 1.3. 

 

1.6.7 Measurement and Payment 

Payment shall be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Pay Unit

1.6 Field Office Setup Lump Sum 

All field office items will also become the property of the Contractor at the conclusion of the project. 

Separate payment will not be made for setup or maintenance of the Contractor's field office(s). 

END OF SECTION 

Field Office Setup 1.6-4 
1.7 Field Office Maintenance

1.7.1 General Description 

Maintenance of the construction offices, for the time required, shall consist of maintaining the 

furniture, equipment, supplies and utilities, providing lavatory supplies, janitorial and waste disposal 

services weekly, and snow removal services. Maintenance of the field office shall include the 

monthly rent. The fax machine and related equipment shall be repaired or replaced within 48 hours 

of becoming inoperable or defective. Equipment should be maintained in working order for the 

duration of the contract. 

Contractor shall provide these services for both State and Engineer's offices including: 

- janitor and waste disposal services (weekly) 

- maintenance of all equipment provided with the trailers 

- furniture maintenance and repair as needed 

- bathroom supplies as needed 

- coffee service (as needed) 

- bottled water (as needed) 

- snow removal (>1" snowfall in 24 hours) 

- office equipment removed/replaced (as needed) 

The Contractor shall be responsible, until use and occupancy of the Engineer's and State's offices are 

relinquished, for any and all damage, direct or indirect, of whatever nature, occurring to property 

which is kept in State's and Engineer's offices that the Contractor is required to furnish as an item(s) 

of the contract. Such damages would include any loss caused by, but not limited to, fire, theft, 

vandalism, or malicious mischief. 

1.7.2 Electricity 

The Contractor shall provide electrical service provided with generators during the contract period 

for the State's, Engineer's, and Contractor's power uses. The Contractor is required to provide 

sufficient electrical power via generator(s) to meet all Field Office needs during working hours and 

as needed by the Contractor, State, or Engineer. The Contractor shall follow all regulatory 

requirements for proper generator usage. 

1.7.2 Submittals 

Submittals shall be according to Section 1.3. 

Field Office Maintenance 1.7-1 
1.7.3 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Pay Unit

1.7 Field Office Maintenance Month 

Payment for Bid Item 1.7 Field Office Maintenance, including the use and maintenance of the field 

offices and various types of surveying equipment will be made for each month or fraction thereof 

that the field office is required, starting with the first month after Bid Item 1.6, Field Office Setup, is 

complete, except that payment will not be made for any month or fraction thereof due to the 

Contractor’s delays. HVAC, water, providing electrical service to the trailers, and sanitary service 

shall be considered incidental to field office maintenance and not paid for separately. The Contractor 

shall not be paid additional monthly maintenance costs beyond the Contract limits due to his delays. 

END OF SECTION 

Field Office Maintenance 1.7-2 
1.8 Internet / Telephone Service

1.8.1 Telephone Description 

The intent of this section is to provide the Contractor with the needs required by the NJDEP for this 

Contract. The NJDEP will provide the Contractor with the actual service system specifications at 

time of Contract award. 

The Contractor shall provide a separate phone for each room. Each phone will be a multi-line type. 

Phones shall have a "speaker" phone capability. The location of telephone line jacks will be 

approved by the Engineer. 

The phone service will include the following services at a minimum: 

• A nationwide long distance plan. 

• Voice Mail with the capability of answering any of the voice telephone lines within the 

respective office. Callers will be able to leave messages that can be retrieved by using the 

touch-tone phone, anytime. The service will automatically provide an alert when a message 

has been left on the Voice Mail. 

• Caller ID that will display the number of the person calling (for all unblocked numbers). It 

may also display the name of the person if they are stored in the phone's memory. 

• Call Waiting that will provide an alert of an incoming call when the phone is in use. 

• Call forwarding service that will allow calls to be automatically forwarded to another phone 

number, including home, office or pager. Airtime charges apply for the duration of the 

forwarded call. 

• 3-Way Calling capable of speaking with two other people at the same time. 

• 411 Connect capable of dialing information. 

1.8.2 Internet Description 

The internet connection shall be wireless high-speed DSL service capable of connecting up to 3 

concurrent users simultaneously. The Contractor shall provide five email accounts, and provide 

spam and virus protection. 

1.8.3 Measurement and Payment 

Payment for Bid Item 1.8 Internet / Telephone Service will be made monthly based on the actual 

cost as evidenced by paid bills from the internet and telephone companies, including Verizon 

connection fees to establish service. An estimated amount to cover these reimbursements has been 

included on the Bid Documents. 

Telephone / Internet Service 1.8-1 
Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Pay Unit

1.8 Internet / Telephone Service Allowance 

 (State and Engineers Office) 

END OF SECTION 

Telephone / Internet Service 1.8-2 
1.9 Gas Pipeline Engineering and Inspection

1.9.1 General Description 

The Contractor shall notify the Williams-TRANSCO Gas Pipeline Company and PSE&G prior to 

working on their easements and/or over or on their gas pipelines. If required by WilliamsTRANSCO or PSE&G, the Contractor shall obtain their gas pipeline engineering and inspection 

services. Payment for the gas pipeline engineering and inspection service fees will be made by the 

Contractor and reimbursed by the State from Pay Item 1.9. 

1.9.2 Submittals 

A copy of the fully executed Agreement shall be provided to the Engineer. 

1.9.3 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

1.9 Gas Pipeline Engineering & Inspection Allowance 

The Contractor will be reimbursed for Williams-TRANSCO Gas Pipeline Company and PSE&G 

engineering and inspection service fees under Bid Item 1.9, Gas Pipeline Engineering and 

Inspection, upon submission of a copy of the bills to NJDEP. No payment will be made for the 

Contractor’s handling or administrative and overhead expenses under this Pay Item. The Contractor 

is responsible to pay Williams-TRANSCO Gas Pipeline Company or PSE&G promptly, and the 

State will not be responsible for interest or penalty charges due to late payments as a result of the 

Contractor’s delays. 

 

END OF SECTION 

Gas Pipeline Engineering and Inspection 1.9-1 
1.10 Geotechnical Testing

1.10.1 Description 

The Contractor shall retain an Independent Testing Agency (ITA), as approved by the Engineer, to 

perform QA/QC testing. The ITA shall perform or subcontract QA/QC tests to a qualified 

laboratory as approved by the Engineer. Testing locations shall be as designated and/or approved 

by the Engineer. 

1.10.2 Reference Standards 

A. NJDOT Standard Specifications. 

B. ASTM Standards for Soil and Rock; Building Stones Section 4, Volume 04.08. 

C. ASTM Standards for Concrete and Aggregates

D. ASTM Standards for Geosynthetics, latest edition. 

E. AASHTO Standards for soils, aggregates, pavement structures. 

F. USCE Manual - EM1110-2-1906, Appendix VII and X. 

G. OSHA Standards for Health and Safety issues. 

1.10.3 Independent Testing Agency 

The Independent Testing Agency shall provide qualified experienced personnel as necessary to 

perform field testing and sampling of on and off-site materials. At a minimum these personnel shall 

be individually licensed as nuclear gauge operators by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), 

be certified at minimum grade 1 level by the American Concrete Institute (ACI) and have at least 

two (2) years experience in the sampling and testing of construction materials as applicable to the 

assigned task of responsibility. 

The agency's laboratory shall be adequately equipped and manned to meet the requirements of 

testing, be accredited by the American Materials Reference Laboratory (AMRL) and participate in 

yearly AMRL reviews. 

The testing agency shall at a minimum be capable of performing the following testing. 

Geotechnical Testing 1.10-1 
 1. ASTM Standard Tests: 

 C39: Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete 

Specimens (“Concrete Compressive Strength”) 

 C109: Test Method for Compressive Strength of Grout (“Grout 

Compressive Strength”) 

 C143: Test Method for Slump of Hydraulic Cement Concrete 

 C231: Test Method for Air Content of Freshly Mixed Concrete by Pressure 

Method 

 C1064: Test Method for Temperature of Freshly Mixed Portland Cement 

Concrete 

 D418: Test Method for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of 

Soils (Atterberg Limits) 

 D422: Particle Size Analysis of Soils (AASHTO T27) 

 D427: Shrinkage Factors of Soils 

 D698: Test for Moisture-Density Relationship of Soils and Soil-Aggregate 

Mixtures Using 5.5-lb. (2.49-kg.) Rammer and 12-in. (305-mm) 

Drop. (AASHTO T99, Method C) ("Standard Proctor") 

 D1556: Test for Density of Soil in Place by the Sand Cone Method (or 

D2167) 

 D1557: Test for Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate 

Mixtures Using 10-lb. (4.54-kg) Rammer and 18-in. (457-mm) Drop 

("Modified Proctor") 

 D2167: Test for Density of Soil in Place by the Rubber-Balloon Method (or 

D1556) 

 D2216: Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil, 

Rock, and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures 

 D2922: Tests for Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate in Place by Nuclear 

Methods (Shallow Depth) 

 D2950: Density of Bituminous Concrete in Place by Nuclear Method 

 D3017: Test for Moisture Content of Soil and Soil Aggregate in Place by

Geotechnical Testing 1.10-2 
Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth) 

 D4253: Relative Density (or D4254) 

 D4437 Field Seam Destructive Testing (Peel and Shear) (or D3083, D413) 

 2. Other tests: All other tests as specified. 

Testing equipment shall be calibrated in accordance with manufacturer recommendations and 

frequency or at a minimum once per year. Certificates of calibration shall be available for the 

Engineer's review. 

The Testing Agency laboratory shall be adequately staffed with qualified personnel to perform 

required testing in sufficient turnaround time so as not to delay or interfere with the Contractor 

schedule. Minimum testing turnaround time capabilities shall be defined as part of the 

subcontractor (testing agency) bid to the general Contractor. It shall be the Contractor's 

responsibility to meet construction schedules as approved by the Engineer. 

The ITA shall maintain an in-house P.E. to review all testing reports and data prepared by ITA. 

1.10.4 Testing Agency Responsibilities 

Procure samples as required by the testing and sampling requirements of each work item. Sample 

locations shall be as approved by the Engineer. 

Perform specified inspection, sampling, and testing of products in accordance with specified 

standards. 

Test materials and mixes for the compliance requirements of the Contract Documents. 

Promptly report testing results to the State/Engineer and Contractor within the agreed upon 

turnaround time in accordance to the requirements of Section 1.3. 

Perform additional inspections and tests required by the State/Engineer, in accordance with Contract 

requirements. 

1.10.5 Testing and Inspection Reports 

A. Laboratory testing results shall be submitted to the Engineer and Contractor in duplicate 

within 12 hours of completion of testing. Reports shall include at a minimum the following: 

 1. Name, address and phone number of testing agency 

 2. Project title and number 

 3. Name of inspector/sampler/person performing analysis 

 4. Date, time, location, and description of sample 

 5. Date, type and procedure of testing performed 

Geotechnical Testing 1.10-3 
 6. Testing results 

 7. Report date 

B. Field Inspection and Testing Reports shall be completed and submitted to the Engineer at 

the end of each day in the form of a Daily Field Report (DFR). DFR's shall be completed by 

each individual inspector on-site and may be accompanied by a summary report prepared by 

the inspection supervisor. Daily Field Reports shall include at a minimum: 

 1. Name of testing agency 

 2. Project title and number 

 3. Name of Inspector/name and classification of person completing the report. 

4. Testing that may have been performed that day, along with results, location and 

material tested. 

 5. Date and weather conditions 

 6. Contractor, Supervisor and equipment 

 7. Duration of time on-site 

 8. Signature of person completing report 

 9. Detailed documentation of activities observed, monitored and tested during the day 

and any problems that may have arisen and corrective action taken. 

Submittals shall be in accordance with Section 1.3. 

1.10.6 Limits of Testing Agency Authority 

A. Testing Agency may not release, revoke, alter, or enlarge on requirements of Contract 

Documents. 

B. Testing Agency may not approve or accept any portion of the work. 

C. Testing Agency may not assume any duties of Contractor. 

D. Testing Agency has no authority to stop the work. 

1.10.7 Contractor Responsibilities 

A. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to provide full cooperation to the Testing Agency, 

State, and Engineer in accessing areas of testing and inspection. 

B. Provide incidental labor, equipment and facilities to provide access for QA/QC personnel

for work to be tested, to obtain and handle samples at the site or at source of products to be 

tested, and to facilitate tests and inspections, storage and curing of test samples. 

C. Notify Engineer and testing agency 24 hours prior to expected time for operations requiring 

inspection and testing services. 

Geotechnical Testing 1.10-4 
1.10.8 Schedule of Tests and Inspections 

A. Inspection and testing requirements are detailed in the individual sections of this 

specification. 

1.10.9 Testing Frequencies 

The following Table 1.10-1 provides general testing frequencies. Individual specification sections 

may provide additional testing and frequency requirements. Contractor shall perform the more 

stringent testing frequency required in the event there is a contradiction between Table 1.10-1 and 

the individual material specification section. 

TABLE 1.10-1 

TESTING FREQUENCIES 

Material Testing Frequency Specification Section 

Recycled Aggregate Fill (Type 

A and B) 1 Sample/3000 Tons 2.3 

Topsoil One 10 Pound sample/Source 2.8 

Geotextile Type B 1 Sample/10,000 Square Feet 2.9 

Geogrid 1 Sample/10,000 Square Feet 2.9 

Fill I-11 1 Sieve Analysis / Proposed 

Borrow Source 2.10 

Fill I-13 1 Sieve Analysis and 1 Proctor/ 

Proposed Borrow Source 

1 Compaction Density 

Test/2,500 Square Feet of Each 

Lift 

2.10 

Concrete 

1 Set of 4 Cylinders per 50 

Cubic Yards with at least 1 set 

of Cylinders Collected for each 

day that Concrete is placed. 

First 5-25 Cubic Yards of Pour 

per day/ Composite Sample 

Each Additional 50 Cubic 

Yards of Pour per day/ 

Composite Sample 

2.12 

1.10.10 Measurement and Payment 

The cost of performing the required testing and sampling, including personnel, consumable 

supplies, power, utilities, and report preparation will be paid under the individual work items for 

Geotechnical Testing 1.10-5 
which testing is required. 

The State will pay the bid unit prices for the following additional ex-situ tests that pass which may 

be requested by the State Construction Manager. The State will not pay for tests that fail or for tests 

not requested by the State. 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

1.10.1 Sieve Analysis, (ASTM D422), if and where 

 Directed Passing Test 

1.10.2 Relative Density (ASTM D2922, Method B), 

 if and where directed Passing Test 

1.10.3 Modified Proctor (ASTM D1557), if and where 

 directed Passing Test 

1.10.4 Concrete Compressive Strength (ASTM C39), 

 if and where directed Passing Test 

END OF SECTION 

Geotechnical Testing 1.10-6 
Soil Borings 1.11-1 

1.11 Soil Borings 

1.11.1 General Description 

The Contractor shall perform two Soil borings to confirm slope stability investigations previously 

conducted at the site. The locations and depths of the additional proposed soil borings are as 

follows: 

• Along the proposed access road at Station 7+30, 80 feet deep 

• Along the proposed access road at Station 12+50, 80 feet deep 

• Along the proposed access road at Station 18+00, 80 feet deep 

• Along the proposed access road at Station 72+50, 80 feet deep 

1.11.2 Execution 

When the varved clay layer is encountered, the Contractor shall collect a total of forty (40) soil 

samples at depths as directed by the Engineer and NJDEP. A Denison Core Barrel shall be used 

for sampling with the cutting bit having a 1.5” minimum lead behind the sampler nose cone. 

Each Denison sample shall be a minimum of 24” long, with a minimum 4” diameter, and 

contained within a clear plastic liner. Sample ends are to be sealed with plastic caps and taped to 

prevent loss of moisture. The soil samples will be retained by wall friction and not with a basket 

type retainer. Samples will be turned over to the Engineer and DEP for testing. The State will 

not be responsible for the damage to the Denison Sampler during drilling or costs incurred due to 

delays caused by damaged or defective equipment. 

If borings are performed prior to construction of the access road, the Contractor shall be aware 

that access to boring locations is difficult due to very soft and unstable ground conditions. The 

driller is responsible to notify the NJ One call System to locate any buried utilities prior to any 

drilling. 

1.11.3 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Pay Unit

1.11 Soil Borings Linear Foot 

Payment for this work will be per linear foot of drilled boring. If a boring is abandoned, due to an 

obstruction as approved by the Engineer, Contractor will be paid the bid unit price per linear foot for 

drilling and abandonment. This includes mobilization, all costs involved with obtaining permits, 

drilling, sampling, cleanup, and demobilization. 

END OF SECTION 
2.1 Site Clearing and Grubbing 

2.1.1 General Description 

This work shall consist of clearing the site area of vegetation, debris and above-ground site 

improvements as indicated on the plans by the limits of disturbance in preparation for construction 

operations. 

2.1.2 Existing Conditions 

Variations to conditions or discrepancy in actual conditions as they apply to site preparation 

operations are to be brought to the attention of the Owner prior to the commencement of any site 

work. 

The Contractor is alerted that existing grades around the base of the landfill are soft, wet and offer 

poor stability. In addition, the Contractor will have limited access for turning. The Contractor shall 

familiarize himself with the existing conditions prior to the start of work. The Contractor shall 

anticipate difficulties with equipment maneuvering, material delivery, material installation, and all 

other items that may be encountered due to the site conditions. 

Later claims for additional compensation due to additional labor, equipment or material required on 

account of difficulties encountered or underground water conditions will not be considered. 

2.1.3 Protection 

Locate, protect, and maintain bench marks, monuments, and other reference points. Repair if 

damaged or destroyed, at no cost to the State. 

Locate and identify existing utilities that are to remain and protect them from damage. Protect 

existing utilities during clearing operations. Re-establish if disturbed or destroyed, at no cost to the 

Owner. 

Notify the New Jersey One Call System between 5 and 10 days prior to any excavation. Phone: 1-

800-272-1000. 

Conduct operations with minimum interference to public or private accesses and facilities. 

Maintain access and egress at all times and clean or sweep any roadways daily or as required by the 

governing authority. At such times as deemed necessary by the State, dust control shall be provided 

in accordance with the Dust Control Plan (Section 3.2.3). 

Locate and protect bench marks, property corners and all other survey monuments from damage or 

displacement. If a marker needs to be removed it shall be referenced by a Licensed Land Surveyor 

and replaced, as necessary, by the same. 

Provide traffic control as required and as indicated on the Traffic Control Plan, in accordance with 

the Contract Documents, the U.S. Department of Transportation "Manual of Uniform Traffic 

Site Clearing and Grubbing 2.1-1 
Control Devices" and the New Jersey State Department of Transportation requirements. 

2.1.4 Materials 

Protection Materials: May be new or used, suitable and adequate for the intended purpose. 

2.1.5 Erosion and Sedimentation Control 

Contractor shall refer to the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan for Staging of Construction 

Activities. 

If Contractor would like to revise the Staging of Construction Activities as shown on the E&S 

Control Plan, approval of revised staging must be obtained from the Hudson, Essex & Passaic 

County Soil Conservation District, and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. 

Costs for this work shall be borne by the Contractor. 

Submittals shall be in accordance with Section 1.3. 

2.1.6 Preparation 

Verify that existing plant life and clearing limits are clearly tagged, identified and marked in such a 

manner as to insure their safety throughout construction operations. 

The Contractor shall cut through the brush to provide easy access for their surveyors. While cutting 

through the brush, extreme care must be taken by the Contractor to avoid damaging the existing gas 

collection system. The Contractor should be aware of hidden debris in the brush that can damage to 

their equipment. 

2.1.7 Clearing 

Clear areas required for access to site and execution of work. The Contractor shall dispose of 

vegetative waste within the waste relocation area shown on the plans. 

Depressions caused by clearing and grubbing operations are to be filled with Common Fill to 

existing elevation to avoid water ponding. There is no separate payment item for materials and 

installation of common fill for this work. This cost shall be incorporated into the Site Clearing and 

Grubbing line item. 

All slopes of cuts, embankments, ditches, channels, waterways and all structures, both old and new, 

shall be cleared of all brush, hedge, weeds, heavy vegetation and other objectionable material 

growth. Clearing shall extend to a maximum of 5 feet beyond the top of slopes of roadway 

excavation and top of slopes of ditches and channels. No clearing shall be performed beyond the 

limits of disturbance indicated on the plans. 

The Contractor has the option of removing trees (above grade) from the site if they are to be 

recycled or processed for use. Any roots or stumps that are removed from below grade shall be 

considered waste and disposed of in the disposal area on top of the landfill, as indicated on the 

Site Clearing and Grubbing 2.1-2 
drawings. The Contractor shall remove grass, trees and stumps and all other debris from the site to 

the waste disposal area indicated on the drawings (except for as noted above). Trees, stumps, and 

other woody and compressible debris shall be chipped before disposal. All disposed debris shall be 

treated as waste material and the contractor shall ensure that it is placed under a soil cap. 

Contractor has option to fill over the existing landfill cap, using Common Fill or RA Type B, as 

approved by the Engineer, to provide stable access for trucks into the Waste Relocation Area. Cuts 

into the landfill cap are not permitted. Disposal of Waste Fill on existing roads will not be allowed. 

The fence removed from the north side of the landfill, and any other electrical poles and electric 

wires shall be disposed of off site at an approved NJDEP facility. All materials shall be reasonably 

cleaned and power washed of landfill material and debris prior to offsite disposal. 

Any exposed waste materials shall be covered with six (6) inches of clean soil or approved 

alternative cover material at the end of each working day (or more frequently if odors or vectors are 

a problem). A minimum of twelve (12) inches of clean soil shall be applied to all wastes exposed 

for any period exceeding 24 hours and extending up to six months. A minimum of two (2) feet of 

final cover shall be applied and maintained over the waste material upon project completion. 

The existing gas collection system shall not be damaged. The Contractor shall meet with the 

Operator of the Gas Plant to discuss the layout of the landfill gas collection system and make every 

effort to protect the gas system from their own truck traffic including placing markers, flags, cones 

and barricades. Any damage caused to the system shall be repaired immediately by the contractor at 

no charge to the State. In the event that there is damage to a well or pipe, the Contractor shall not 

make any repairs without first notifying the Operator so the plant can be shut down without damage 

to the system. Repairs shall not be made without the Operator’s concurrence. 

Appropriate health and safety measures shall be employed during the site clearing work, in 

accordance with Section 3.1 of these Specifications, since explosive gases and waste or 

contaminated materials may be encountered. 

Abandoned trailers located at station 53+00 on Lot 1C shall be removed and disposed off-site. The 

chain-link fence shall be removed from the north side of the landfill. Any such materials or scrap 

recycling which has salvage value MUST be documented and a credit given to the State. A receipt 

for the amount received by the Contractor for these materials, from the recycling facility where it is 

disposed, must be provided to the Engineer. This amount will be a credit for the State to be 

deducted from the Contractor’s payment invoices. 

Contractor shall provide bill of lading/manifests to the Engineer at the end of each work day for all 

materials disposed offsite. 

2.1.8 Pruning 

When pruning is required, prune tree branches injured during clearing operations, or when directed 

by Engineer by making clean cuts, free from splinters, flush with parent branch or trunk. 

Do not disturb branches or roots of any trees which are to remain. 

Site Clearing and Grubbing 2.1-3 
2.1.9 Tires 

Tires encountered within the limits of work shall be staged on top of the landfill, in a designed part 

of the waste relocation area, as approved by the Engineer. Tires shall not be reburied onsite but cut 

in quarters and pressure washed to remove all surficial dirt, as approved by the Engineer. Contractor 

shall assume 300 tires for bidding purposes. After staging and washing NJDEP will sample tires for 

disposal purposes. NJDEP will then negotiate a Change Order with the Contractor, or another 

vendor, for offsite disposal. 

2.1.10 Well Abandonment 

The Contractor shall abandon the existing groundwater monitoring wells where indicated on the 

plans. The Contractor shall abandon the wells as per NJDEP regulations for abandonment of 

monitoring wells, including obtaining permits. Existing well records are available in Appendix E. 

The following wells shall be abandoned: 

● MW-2D 

● MW-2S 

● MW-01D2 

● MW-1S 

● MW-1D 

● MW-4S 

● MW-4D 

● MW-04D2 

2.1.11 Wetlands 

The Contractor shall locate and mark out the wetlands situated along the south and east sides of the 

landfill prior to any clearing operations. The Contractor shall not perform any clearing of the 

wetlands located on or off site, except as noted in the paragraphs below. The Contractor shall 

protect the wetlands from damage due to clearing operations and shall be responsible to restore any 

damage to these wetlands from his operations as well as pay any fines that may arise due to failure 

to protect them. 

During the construction of the proposed perimeter access road, the Contractor will clear and grub 

wetland areas F1 and F2 which are located to north of the landfill (see plans). These wetland areas 

will eventually be filled to proposed roadway elevations. Therefore, it is not necessary for the 

Contractor to protect these wetlands during clearing and grubbing operations. Wetland disturbance 

shall be limited to the areas within the Limit of Disturbance as shown on the drawings. 

Site Clearing and Grubbing 2.1-4 
2.1.12 Measurement and Payment 

Payment shall be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.1 Site Clearing and Grubbing Lump Sum 

The Contractor shall be paid the lump sum bid price for Bid Item 2.1, Site Clearing and Grubbing, 

upon completion of clearing the areas as shown on the Drawings. Separate payment will be made 

for Common Fill or RA Type B according to Bid Items 2.3.2 and 2.10.2. 

A receipt for the amount received by the Contractor for the trailers, fencing, and any other materials 

to be removed off-site for which there is salvage value, from the recycling facility where it is 

disposed, must be provided to the Engineer. This amount will be a credit for the State to be 

deducted from the Contractor’s payment invoices. 

END OF SECTION

Site Clearing and Grubbing 2.1-5 
2.2 Erosion and Sedimentation Control

2.2.1 General Description

The Contractor shall employ soil erosion and sediment control measures during the life of the 

project to control erosion and minimize sedimentation of rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, wetlands, 

floodplains, bays, and coastal waters. This work shall consist of the construction and maintenance 

of various temporary soil erosion and sediment control measures, including relocating them as 

required for stage construction. The Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Permit has been obtained 

(the approval is included in Appendix B) and the Contractor is to comply with its conditions. 

The Contractor shall incorporate all permanent pollution control features into the project at the 

earliest practicable time. The Contractor shall install temporary sediment control devices in 

addition to those required to be installed in accordance with the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, 

including but not limited to silt fence, hay or straw bales, and rock filters, if and where directed by 

the Engineer. Silt Fence or hay bales shall include furnishing and installation of sediment barriers 

and the maintenance of the same in accordance with subsection 2.2.3. 

2.2.2 Materials 

2.2.2.1 General 

Wood stakes, posts and boards shall be solid, reasonably knot-free lumber conforming to the 

nominal size specified on the plans. 

Coarse aggregate #57 shall consist of broken stone or washed gravel. Broken stone shall be 

uniform in texture and quality in accordance to Sections 2.11 of these specifications. 

Other materials shall conform to the following Sections: 

 Mulch ........................................................................................................................................2.8 

 Seed Mixtures ...........................................................................................................................2.8 

 Geotextiles ................................................................................................................................2.9 

2.2.2.2 Silt Fence 

Silt fence shall consist of geotextile fabric, Mirafi 100X, or approved equivalent by the Engineer. 

Silt Fence height shall be at least 3 feet to provide for a 2.0 foot high fence after 1.0 foot of fabric is 

buried in the existing soil. Fence posts shall be installed at a slight angle toward the anticipated 

runoff source. Sections of fabric shall be overlapped a minimum of 1’-6”, then joined in such a 

manner that, when in operation, the sections work effectively as a continuous fence. 

2.2.2.3 Haybale Barriers 

Haybales shall be of timothy, redtop, or native grasses. Straw shall be stalks of oats, wheat, rye, or 

barley relatively free from seeds, noxious weeds, and other foreign matter, free from decay matter 

Erosion and Sedimentation Control 2.2-1 
and from organic matter soluble in water and shall be bound with wire or baling twine. The twine 

shall be an ultraviolet light stabilized polypropylene which has a knot strength of 170 pounds and 

straight break strength of 300 pounds. 

Haybale barriers shall be installed around the waste relocation pile, and, utilized by the Contractor 

on an as-needed basis as an emergency erosion control measure. Haybales shall be embedded 4 

inches into the ground and anchored in place with 2 wood stakes per bale. 

2.2.2.4 Stabilized Construction Entrance 

A temporary construction entrance constructed of aggregate on top of roadway geotextile type B 

shall be used to reduce or eliminate tracking of soils material onto paved streets and other paved 

areas. 

Contractor shall install the stabilized construction entrance at locations where construction traffic 

enters and leaves construction site from or onto paved street or paved area, as shown on the 

plans. 

Contractor shall place roadway geotextile, type B, over entire graded area and cover with a 

minimum 12” thick layer of 1 to 2-1/2 inch stone or recycled concrete. 

Contractor shall perform maintenance on Stabilized Construction Entrance as follows: 

a. Periodically and as directed by Engineer, apply layer of stone or recycled concrete 

to maintain entrance. 

b. Immediately remove soils material or debris tracked onto areas of adjacent street 

or paved areas. 

Contractor shall remove and restore stabilized construction entrance area following restoration 

schedule upon completion of project and when entrance is no longer required. 

2.2.2.4 Turbidity Barrier 

Contractor shall furnish, install, and maintain Floating Turbidity Barriers at the locations indicated 

on the plans. The intent of this work is to intercept silt caused by construction operations, so that the 

project can be completed. Barrier shall consist of 10 mil thick polyethylene plastic sheets suspended 

from floats as shown on the details in the Contract Plans. Contractor to submit catalog cut of 

Floating Turbidity Barrier for approval prior to installation as per the requirements in Section 1.3 

Prior to the commencement of construction operations and/or excavation activities the floating 

turbidity barrier must be installed at the locations indicated on the plans. The end stakes, bottom 

anchors, and associated anchor buoys shall be installed first. The end stakes shall be located well 

into the shoreline above the mean high water line, so as to fully enclose the area where sediment 

may enter the pond. When the anchors are secure, the furled fence should be secured to the 

upstream end point and then subsequently attached to the next downstream anchor point until the 

Erosion and Sedimentation Control 2.2-2 
entire curtain is in position and attached to the downstream end stake. Prior to unfurling, the lay of 

the barrier should be assessed, and anchors adjusted as necessary. The furling lines shall then be cut 

to allow the curtain to drop. 

Anchor buoys shall be employed on all anchors to prevent the current from submerging the flotation 

device at the anchor points. Care shall be taken to ensure that anchor points are of sufficient holding 

power to retain the curtain in the water. An anchor line shall run from the top load line (never 

attached to the bottom of the curtain) to a floating anchor buoy to the associated bottom anchor. The 

manufacturer’s recommendations shall be followed with regard to bottom anchor spacing. The top 

load lines must contain enough slack to allow the anchor buoy and curtain to float freely without 

being pulled down. 

A minimum gap of one (1) foot shall exist between the bottom of the curtain fabric and the bottom 

of the water body. An excessive number of joints in the curtain shall be avoided by using a 

minimum continuous span of fifty (50) feet between joints. The floating turbidity barrier shall be 

installed using a maximum span of one-hundred (100) feet between anchor or stake locations. 

The floating turbidity barrier is required to remain intact during the life of the contract at the 

location shown on the plans. 

The Contractor shall continuously maintain the integrity of the floating turbidity barrier, including 

providing all necessary labor, equipment and materials, until the earthwork construction is 

completed and permanent erosion control measures are in place. The Contractor shall inspect the 

barrier on a daily immediately after each storm event and at least daily during prolonged rainfall to 

determine if the barrier is functioning as designed. The Contractor shall immediately correct any 

deficiencies and make any repairs, replace any defective or damaged components and/or the entire 

turbidity barrier to the satisfaction of the Engineer to assure a fully functional floating turbidity 

barrier is in place until the completion of the work as described above. At the completion of the 

project the Contractor shall remove the floating turbidity barrier and restore the area. The turbidity 

barrier materials shall become the property of the Contractor and shall be removed from the site. 

2.2.3 Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Maintenance

Soil erosion and sediment control measures shall be maintained during the construction season as 

well as during winter months and other times when the project is closed down, throughout the life of 

the project, to ensure that the measures function properly. Soil erosion and sediment controls shall 

be immediately inspected after each rain and any corrective work shall immediately be performed to 

return the soil erosion and sediment control measures to proper function, as directed. Coarse 

aggregate, silt fence, or haybales damaged due to washouts or siltation shall be replaced as 

necessary or as directed by the Engineer. 

The Contractor shall install erosion and sedimentation control devices in accordance with this 

Section and the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. 

2.2.4 Submittals 

Erosion and Sedimentation Control 2.2-3 
Submittals shall be in accordance with Section 1.3. 

2.2.5 Measurement and Payment 

Payment shall be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.2 Erosion and Sedimentation Control Month 

2.2.1 Additional Silt Fence, if and where directed Linear Foot 

2.2.2 Additional Hay or Straw Bales, if and where 

 directed Each 

The Contractor will be paid the bid unit price for Erosion and Sedimentation Control, for each 

month, or fraction thereof, that soil erosion and sediment control is required. All temporary and 

permanent sediment control devices, labor, and equipment shall be considered part of Pay Item 2.2. 

Separate payment will not be made for maintenance, repair or replacement of erosion and 

sedimentation control devices or for relocation. Separate payment will be paid per Bid Item 2.2.1, 

and 2.2.2 for additional Silt Fence , Hay or Straw Bales installed, maintained, and removed, if and 

where directed. Refer to Section 1.2.29 for addition language regarding if and where directed items. 

END OF SECTION 

Erosion and Sedimentation Control 2.2-4 
2.3 Access Road 

2.3.1 General Description 

This work includes furnishing all material, labor and equipment necessary for providing the 

construction of temporary roadway embankment for the future construction of the perimeter slurry 

wall and leachate collection system. This work shall consist of subgrade preparation, construction 

of the subbase course of Recycled Aggregate Fill Types A and B to varying depths as shown on the 

drawings, and construction of the surface course of Recycled Aggregate Type B, 25" thick at the 

locations shown on the Drawings. 

2.3.2 Applicable Publications 

American Society for Testing of Materials (ASTM) 

• ASTM C 136 Test Method for Sieve analysis for Fine and Coarse Aggregate 

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) 

• M288-96 Geotextile Specification for Paving Fabrics 

2.3.3 Materials

Recycled aggregate can be produced by crushing concrete, pieces of concrete blocks, brick, tile, 

masonry material, and glass to reclaim the aggregate. Recycled aggregate shall be free from 

reinforcing bars, both plastic and metal pipes, tires, paper and cardboard, insulation, foam, windows, 

plumbing fixtures, cabinets, carpets, and other material of compressible nature. The longest 

dimension of any recycled material shall not exceed three times its shortest dimension. 

Acceptability of recycled aggregate will be determined by the recycling agency gradation/weight 

reports. The engineer reserves the right to require the contractor to retest the RA material if it 

appears to be in noncompliance with the specification during installation. If materials do not meet 

specifications they will be rejected and the contractor shall remove the RA from the site at no cost to 

the State. The minimum testing frequency shall be one (1) sample per 3000 tons yards of recycle 

aggregate as per Section 1.10. The Contractor shall submit source and test reports for approval. 

Recycled aggregate must be obtained from a NJDEP certified Class B recycling facility. The 

Contractor may substitute natural earth and rock materials of the same gradation for Recycled 

Aggregate, as approved by the Engineer. 

A. Recycled Aggregate Fill Type A: Roadway embankment subbase as shown on the Drawings 

shall conform to the following gradation requirements: 

Particle Size in Inches Percent Passing Weight (pounds) 

42 100 1,100 

36 85 750 

22 50 625 

18 15 375 

11 0 100 

Access Road 2.3-1 
B. Recycled Aggregate Fill Type B: Roadway embankment subbase, base and surface courses as 

shown on the drawings. The material shall conform to the following gradation requirements: 

Sieve Size in Inches Percent Passing 

4 100 

3 75-90 

2-1/2 40-60 

1-3/4 10-20 

1 0-5 

C. Infill Recycled Aggregate: Infill Recycled Aggregate shall be placed over the Recycled 

Aggregate Type A, and spread with a dozer, to a minimum thickness of 12 inches. After spreading 

the Infill Recycled Aggregate shall be compacted by 10 overlapping passes of a minimum 13 ton 

vibratory roller, as approved by the Engineer. Additional Infill Recycled Aggregate shall be added 

in 12 inch lifts, as described above, until the Recycled Aggregate Type A voids are sufficiently 

filled, and a level surface has been created for placement of the Recycled Aggregate Type B surface 

course. There is no separate payment item for the Infill Recycled Aggregate. The Contractor shall 

incorporate the costs associated with provision and installation of Infill Recycled Aggregate in the 

price bid per unit ton for Item 2.3.1 Recycled Aggregate, Fill Type A and Item 2.3.3 Recycled 

Aggregate, Fill Type A, If and Where Directed. 

Sieve Size in Inches Percent Passing 

2 100 

1 1/2 75-90 

1 40-60 

3/4 10-20 

1/2 0-5 

D. Separation Fabric, Geotextile Type B 

Separation Fabric (Geotextile Type B) shall be placed as shown on the drawings between the 

existing prepared subgrade and the proposed roadway. Refer to Section 2.9 for additional 

information and guidance. 

In the event that the Contractor encounters exceptionally soft soils, the Engineer or State may 

require the Contractor to provide and install a geogrid (refer to Section 2.9 for material description) 

between the separation fabric and the first lift of roadway material. Payment for installation of the 

geogrid shall be made under Item 2.9.5. 

2.3.4 Material Sources 

All imported recycled aggregate shall be from DEP licensed or approved recycling facilities. All 

material shall be selected from a commercial recycling center and shall meet the material 

description above. 

Access Road 2.3-2 
2.3.5 Requirements for Clean Fill 

Recycled aggregate shall come from a NJDEP Certified Class B recycling facility. Prior to the 

acceptance onsite of any recycled aggregate the Contractor shall allow the Engineer to visit the 

proposed source of the material. 

Natural earth and rock materials, if substituted for recycled aggregate, will be subject to the 

chemical testing requirements for clean fill specified in Section 2.10. Testing frequency will be one 

sample per 3000 tons. The Contractor shall allow the Engineer to visit the proposed source of the 

material and, if requested, obtain samples of the material for chemical analysis. Natural earth and 

rock materials shall not be brought to the site until the Engineer’s analysis of the material is 

complete and contaminant levels are found not to exceed requirements for clean fill in Section 2.10. 

2.3.6 Documentation 

The Contractor shall provide a Quantity Control Officer to document all material delivered to the 

site. The Quantity Control Officer shall provide the Engineer a copy of all certified scale tickets, 

and time of material delivery on site at the end of each work day. The cost associated with this 

work shall be included in the per Ton price bid for the recycled aggregate material. 

2.3.7 Execution 

2.3.7.1 Subgrade Preparation 

Prior to placement of recycled aggregate or geotextile, the contractor shall clear the site in 

accordance with Section 2.1. 

Separation fabric (Geotextile Type B) shall be placed as shown on the drawings between the 

prepared subgrade and the proposed roadway. It shall be placed longitudinally in runs from top of 

slope to toe, with downstream edge of the upstream run overlapping the upstream edge of the 

downstream run. Geoxtextile rolls shall be laid so there is 2 feet of overlap on all sides adjacent 

with another roll. Equipment is not allowed on unprotected Geotextile Type B. To protect the 

geotextile and prevent degradation due to exposure, the geotextile shall be covered with roadway 

material within 21 days of placement. 

2.3.7.2 Material Placement 

The intent of this work is to provide a stable work platform for a future slurry wall construction 

project. This will be accomplished by placing Geotextile Type B on the subgrade and filling over it 

with Recycled Aggregate Type B. On the downslope side, a compact layer of Recycled Aggregate 

Type A will be added, where required, for slope stabilization. 

Recycled Aggregate Type B shall be placed on the ground in front of the deployed geotextile, no 

material shall be dumped directly on the geotextile. Then the Recycled Aggregate Type B shall be 

spread over the geotextile to a thickness of 6 inches in order to create a cushion layer to protect the 

geotextile. 

Access Road 2.3-3 
Recycled Aggregate Type A and Recycled Aggregate Type B shall then be added to attain the top 

of subbase elevation in the manner shown on the drawings using equipment having a ground 

pressure that minimizes damage to the underlying geotextile and as approved by the Engineer. 

Type A and Type B of the Recycled Aggregate used for roadway subbase, shall be placed to their 

full course thickness in one lift, excluding the 6 inch cushion layer, and in such a manner as to avoid 

displacement of the underlying material except where shown on the drawings. In general, Recycled 

Aggregate shall be placed from the lower elevations to the higher elevations. Recycled Aggregate 

shall not be dropped onto the geotextile or the cushion layer. 

Infill Recycled Aggregate shall be placed over the Recycled Aggregate Type A, and spread with a 

dozer, to a minimum thickness of 12 inches. After spreading the Infill Recycled Aggregate shall be 

compacted by 10 overlapping passes of a minimum 13 ton vibratory roller, as approved by the 

Engineer. Additional Infill Recycled Aggregate shall be added in 12 inch lifts, as described above, 

until the Recycled Aggregate Type A voids are sufficiently filled, and a level surface has been 

created for placement of the Recycled Aggregate Type B surface course. 

After attaining subbase elevations, and before the roadway base and surface courses are placed, the 

subbase shall be proof rolled using a maximum 10 ton smooth roller, as directed by the Engineer. 

Next, the Recycled Aggregate Type B (i.e. base and surface courses) shall be placed in two lifts of 

equal thickness (for a total of 25”) until the final roadway elevation is achieved. Each lift of the 

surface course shall be compacted using a 10 ton dynamic smooth roller compactor with 2 to 6 

overlapping passes, as directed by the Engineer. 

Recycled Aggregate Type B shall be used as fill for grading between the proposed access road and 

below the Gas Blower and Flare concrete pads to achieve elevations to 6” below bottom of concrete 

pads. A 6” bedding layer of Coarse Aggregate #57 will then be placed as described in specification 

section 2.12 and in the Contract Plans. Recycled Aggregate Type B shall be placed in 12” lifts to 6” 

below bottom of concrete pads. Each lift of Recycled Aggregate Type B placed below the Blower 

and Flare concrete pads shall be compacted using a 10 ton dynamic smooth roller compactor with 2 

to 6 overlapping passes, as directed by the Engineer. 

2.3.7.3 Dewatering 

Prior to placing Recycled Aggregate Type B in ponds along the southern toe of the landfill or as 

backfill for the abandoned 12” PSE&G gas pipeline, the Contractor shall pump leachate 

contaminated surface water from the ponds and excavations onto the top of the landfill so it can 

percolate back into the waste as per Section 3.2.7. The Contractor shall ensure these waters 

percolate into the waste and not run off the landfill. The Contractor may need to perform this 

operation in stages by damming sections of the ponds due to the volume of water. The placement of 

Geotextile Type B and Recycled Aggregate Type B will be permitted when the area is sufficiently 

dry, as approved by the Engineer. 

2.3.8 Measurement and Payment 

Payment shall be made under: 

Access Road 2.3-4 
Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.3.1 Recycled Aggregate, Fill Type A Ton 

2.3.2 Recycled Aggregate, Fill Type B Ton 

2.3.3 Recycled Aggregate, Fill Type A, 

If and Where Directed Ton 

2.3.4 Recycled Aggregate, Fill Type B, 

If and Where Directed Ton 

The Contractor will be paid the bid unit prices per ton of in place material, as accepted by the 

Engineer, for Pay Items 2.3.1 and 2.3.2. The Contractor shall provide certified scale tickets for the 

recycled aggregate delivered to the site. No payment will be made for material brought on site 

without a certified scale ticket. Separate payment will not be made for analytical testing, subgrade 

preparation, compaction, and fill material installed and measured in place. Separate payment will 

not be made for temporary roads or for stockpiling, double handling, or roadway reworking that is 

performed. Separate payment will not be made for labor and equipment needed to repair the 

roadway during or after construction due to erosion from storm events. The Contractor is required 

to repair any damage he causes to the roadway during construction, as a result of not following 

these specifications, at no cost to the State. The Contractor is required to repair and maintain the 

roadway throughout the project in a condition as shown on the drawings and required in the 

specifications. Separate payment will not be made for repair and maintenance of the roadway after 

its construction, but before substantial completion of the project. 

Payment for installation of Geotextile Type B shall be made under Item 2.9.1. Payment for 

installation of the geogrid shall be made under Item 2.9.4. 

Separate payment will be paid per Bid Item 2.3.3, and 2.3.4 for If and Where Directed items. Refer 

to Section 1.2.29 for addition language regarding if and where directed items. 

Separate payment will not be made for dewatering of ponds and excavations around the toe of the 

landfill prior to backfilling or filling. The cost of dewatering shall be included in the costs of the 

respective bid items needing dewatering and at no additional cost to the State. 

END OF SECTION 

Access Road 2.3-5 
Fencing, Gates, and Bollards 2.4-1 

2.4 Fencing, Gates, and Bollards

2.4.1 General Description 

Fencing, gates, and bollards shall consist of the installation of a temporary and permanent chain link 

fence, including post holes, concrete, and posts, gates, and bollards furnished and installed in 

accordance with the plans and these specifications. Temporary fencing shall be installed around the 

trailers, as detailed in Section 1.4. Permanent fencing shall be installed as shown on the plans. 

2.4.2 Materials 

Materials shall meet the requirements of ASTM A491 for aluminum coated steel chain link fencing 

(9 gauge wire with 2 inch mesh); ASTM F900 or F1184 for gates; ASTM F1083 for posts; ASTM 

A824 for tension wire (9 gauge); and ASTM F626 for accessories. 

Fence shall consist of aluminum-coated 8' high chain link fence. 

Gates shall include aluminum-coated 8' high chain link fence gates (3 gates - 20' wide and 1 gate - 

30' wide). Gates shall be the same height as the fence to which the gates are attached. Contractor 

shall provide gate locks and six sets of keys which fit all gate locks. All locks should be keyed alike. 

Note: There is a quantity of four (4) twenty (20) foot wide gates for Payment Item 2.4.2. 

Bollards shall consist of 8” diameter steel pipe, extend 3’-6” above grade and be filled with 4,000 

psi concrete to be installed two at the 30’ wide site access gate by Harrison Ave to a depth of 4’and 

shall include post holes, concrete, pipe, primer, and paint (two coats of yellow exterior grade epoxy 

paint). Bollard footing holes shall have a 3 foot minimum diameter. 

Submittals shall be according to Section 1.3. 

2.4.3 Installation 

The chain link fence shall conform to The American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials (AASHTO) M181 and shall include, the following requirements: 

1. The fence shall be installed along lines and/or locations as specified by NJDEP. 

2. Installation of fence will include any alterations or modifications to the ground surface 

which must be performed and all necessary tools normally used in fence installation. These 

alterations may require the use of hand tools as well as hand-held power equipment such as 

chain saws, power augers, powered brush cleaning devices, etc. 

Alterations will also include the removal to ground level of stumps, rocks, etc. protruding 

above the ground surface and in the line of the fence. The Contractor is to perform the 

required work in such a manner as to minimize erosion that would occur as a result. 

3. The height of the fence shall be eight feet (8’) for line items 2.4.1, 2.4.2, and 2.4.4. The 8' 

fencing shall be all metal, constructed of wire fabric fastened to vertical line posts. 
Fencing, Gates, and Bollards 2.4-2 

4. The entire fence shall be installed within site boundary lines, and the fabric shall be installed 

on the side of the posts facing away from the area enclosed by said lines. 

5. All posts, frames and rails shall be round, hot dipped galvanized, Schedule 40, steel pipe per 

ASTM F 1083 with strength requirements in accordance with ASTM F 669. In addition, the 

fencing shall conform, at a minimum to the following sizes and lengths: 

Outside Diameter Length

Line Posts ........................2- 1⁄2 inches 11 feet 

Corner Posts ................... 3 inches 11 feet, 6 inches 

Gate Posts for gate leaves 

less than 8 feet ................ 3 inches 11 feet, 6 inches 

Gate Posts for gate leaves 

8 feet or larger ................ 4 inches 12 feet 

Top Rail ...........................1-5/8 inches 

Gate Frame ...................... 2 inches 

 Note: 

 1) Additional lengths for the above posts may be required when fencing is installed 

over channel crossings and other surface irregularities, and when fencing is installed 

with drive anchors, and for barbed wire installations. 

6. Line posts shall be spaced not more than ten (10) feet on centers. Line post footings shall 

have a minimum diameter of ten (10) inches and shall extend at least six (6) inches below 

the bottom of the posts. Corner and gate post footings shall have a minimum diameter of 

fifteen (15) inches and shall extend at least six (6) inches below the bottom of the posts. 

7. The bottom of the corner posts shall be a minimum of three and one-half (3-1/2) feet below 

finished grade; and the bottom of the line posts shall be at least three (3) feet below grade. 

Gate posts shall extend at least four (4) feet below grade level. 

8. All posts shall be plumbed vertical before holes are filled with concrete, and held vertical 

while concrete is installed so that finished posts shall be plumb. 

9. Concrete shall have aggregate no larger than one and one-half (1-1/2) inches and have 

minimum compressive strength of no less than two thousand (2,000) psi at twenty-eight (28) 

days. 

10. Post holes shall be completely filled with concrete which shall extend not more than three 

(3) inches above grade, and will be neatly crowned to shed water. 

11. When conditions require, and NJDEP personnel directs, drive anchors will be used in lieu of 

concrete filled post holes. The installation will require the complete assembly of the anchor 

shoes, fastening hardware and blades. Each drive anchor assembly will be complete for each 

post. 
Fencing, Gates, and Bollards 2.4-3 

12. Pull shall not be applied to posts set in concrete foundations until concrete has cured a 

minimum of seventy-two (72) hours. 

13. All parts of the fence shall be galvanized steel, except that fittings may be of galvanized 

malleable iron, wrought iron or steel. Posts, rails, braces, and gate frames shall be zinc 

coated at 1.8 oz. per square foot. 

14. Tops of posts shall be provided with caps to exclude moisture. Tension wire shall connect 

post tops and bottoms. Tension wire shall be seven gauge coil spring steel wire and shall be 

galvanized. 

15. Wire fabric shall be of No. 9 gauge wire helical wound and interwoven with a mesh of two 

inches (2"). The fabric shall conform to Fed. Spec. RR-F-191, Type 11, 1.2 ounce per 

square foot coating. Top of fabric shall have knuckled selvage, bottom shall have barbed 

selvage. 

16. Wire fabric shall be fastened to line posts with preformed clips of 9-gauge, zinc coated steel 

wire, spaced not more than twelve (12) inches on center. Fabric shall be fastened to top and 

bottom tension wires with wire ties or hog rings spaced at eighteen (18) inches. 

17. Wire fabric shall be installed in gate frames by means of high carbon steel stretcher bars. 

18. Wire fabric shall be securely fastened to all terminal posts using one-quarter (1/4) inch by 

three-quarter (3/4) inch tension bars and 11 gauge pressed steel bands spaced at twelve (12) 

inches. 

19. Barbed wire shall be furnished along the top of the fence, and shall be supported at the posts 

by arms inclining away from the area enclosed at an angle of forty-five degrees. Arms shall 

be strong enough to support a weight of two hundred pounds (200 lbs.) applied at outer 

strand of the bared wire. The arms shall have tongues to receive three (3) strands of double 

twisted 4-point thickest barbed wire, the barbs spaced about four (4) inches apart. The 

barbed wire shall conform to ASTM A2 1. 

20. End and corner panels, and panels adjacent to gates shall have intermediate horizontal rails 

and diagonal bracing rods which shall be at least three-eighths (3/8) inch in diameter and 

shall be provided with turnbuckles. Straight runs between braced posts (posts that have 

attached hardware including the intermediate horizontal rails and diagonal bracing rods) 

shall not exceed five hundred (500) feet. 

21. All gate frames shall be of welded construction. All rails used for gate construction shall be 

factory galvanized with 1.8 ounce zinc coating per square foot. Gate frames shall be 

galvanized after fabrication where possible or painted with suitable rust-preventative. Gate 

leaves more than eight (8) feet wide shall have either intermediate members as necessary to 

provide rigid construction, free from sag or twist. Diagonal bracing shall be at least three 

eighths (3/8) of an inch in diameter and shall be provided with turnbuckles. 
Fencing, Gates, and Bollards 2.4-4 

22. Three (3) twenty (20) foot wide gates and one (1) thirty (30) foot wide gate shall be 

provided for road openings. See plans and details for locations and additional dimensions. 

Note: There is a quantity of four (4) twenty (20) foot wide gates for Payment Item 2.4.2. 

The fourth gate is provided in the event that the Engineer determines a need. This is gate is 

not depicted on the plans. 

23. Gate hinges shall be of the double clamping offset type. Gates shall swing through ninety 

degrees from closed to open. To hold the gate in open or closed positions, each gate shall be 

provided with a keeper which automatically engages a gate shoe set in concrete. Gates shall 

have a drop bolt latch with provision for a padlock. Latches shall be arranged so that the 

padlock will be accessible from both sides of the gate regardless of the latching 

arrangement. 

24. Each gate shall be provided with a brass body padlock suitable for outdoor use. The lock 

shall have a hardened shackle, and shall be of the five (5) pin tumbler type, Master Lock No 

Pro Series 6321KA or 6125KALJ or NJDEP approved equivalent. Die cast locks are not 

acceptable. 

All locks on a site must be keyed alike and six (6) copies of the key must be provided to 

NJDEP. Chain of the appropriate gauge and length for site-specific conditions may be 

specified for use with the locks by the NJDEP. 

25. In the event unusual digging conditions such as rubble, cement covered areas, etc. are 

encountered, existing mechanical means must be used to dig holes for footings of the same 

dimensions as described in paragraphs 6 and 7 above. Core drilling of holes and embedding 

posts in pourable concrete or the use of bolted on plates will not be permitted without the 

express written approval of NJDEP. 

26. Bolts on gate hinges and stretcher bar bands shall be tack welded to prevent it from being 

taken down. Welded areas shall be recoated with a suitable rust preventative. The price for 

tack welding and corrosion protection shall be included in the price of the fence or gate to be 

welded. 

2.4.4 Temporary Fence 

In accordance with Section 1.4 Mobilization, temporary chain-link fence and pedestrian access 

gates will be required around the trailer staging area. The temporary fencing shall be erected 

before construction activity in the staging area. Temporary fence shall be constructed according 

to the requirements for permanent fence except used materials may be used. The fence shall be 

installed on stands made of hot dipped galvanized steel pipe at grade. This stand is intended to 

go on the ends of the fence. Temporary fence shall be maintained as directed during 

construction and shall be removed and disposed of/ recycled when no longer required on the 

Project. 
Fencing, Gates, and Bollards 2.4-5 

2.4.4 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.4.1 Chain Link Fence with Barbed Wire, 8’ high Linear Feet 

2.4.2 Chain Link Gate with Barbed Wire, 20’ wide Each 

2.4.3 Chain Link Gate with Barbed Wire, 30’ wide Each 

2.4.4 Bollards Each 

 

The Contractor will be paid the bid unit price per linear foot of permanent fencing installed per Bid 

Item 2.4.1, Chain Link Fence with Barbed Wire, 8’ high. These bid unit prices shall include the 

complete installation of fencing as specified. 

The Contractor will be paid the bid unit price per each of gates installed per Bid Item 2.4.2, Chain 

Link Gate with Barbed Wire, 20’ wide. This bid unit price shall include the complete installation of 

gates as specified. 

The Contractor will be paid the bid unit price per each of gates installed per Bid Item 2.4.3, Chain 

Link Gate with Barbed Wire, 30’ wide. This bid unit price shall include the complete installation of 

gates as specified. 

The Contractor will be paid the bid unit price per each of bollard installed per Bid Item 2.4.4, 

Bollard. This bid unit price shall include the complete installation of bollards as specified. 

END OF SECTION 
2.5 Waste Fill and Earth Excavation

2.5.1 General Description 

Waste Fill and earth excavation consists of excavation of Waste Fill, landfill cover and earth below 

existing grade (hereafter referred to as Waste Fill), other than temporary erosion and sediment 

controls, within the approximate extent of Waste Fill to the neat lines shown on the Drawings. 

Excavated Waste Fill will be relocated on top of the landfill and covered with a vegetated soil cover. 

The Contractor shall be responsible for surveying pre-excavation and post-excavation cross 

sections. 

Waste Fill and earth excavation does not include excavation for channels above existing grade, or 

for temporary erosion and sediment control structures. 

2.5.2 Construction 

The Contractor shall conduct this operation to minimize Waste Fill excavation and odors in 

accordance with Section 3.2. The Contractor will not be compensated for excavation beyond the 

lines shown on the drawings. 

Cross sections at the excavation surveyed by the Contractor pre- and post-excavation will be used 

for measurement and payment of Waste Fill and earth excavation, in accordance with these 

Specifications. The information on the cross sections and plans shall show final grades and any 

field adjustments. Contractor shall secure the services of a Professional Surveyor Licensed in New 

Jersey for completing this task. It is brought to the Contractor’s attention that existing grading may 

vary from that shown on the Plans. Therefore, Contractor shall “field confirm” existing grades 

before starting grading operations. When there are variations between the existing grade shown on 

the Plans and the “field confirmed” grades, the contractor shall immediately bring this to the 

attention of the Engineer. 

The Contractor shall employ appropriate health and safety procedures during the Waste Fill 

excavation, in accordance with the Health and Safety Plan to be prepared according to Section 3.1 

of these specifications, since explosive gases, drums, buried hazardous waste and contaminated 

materials may be encountered. Excavated Waste Fill material shall be contained and prevented 

from spilling onto cleaned or capped areas prior to disposal in uncapped areas on top of the Waste 

Fill. 

Large items of Waste Fill which extend across limits of excavation shall be cut or broken to avoid 

disturbance of waste below the excavation surfaces. Disinterred containers of hazardous substances 

shall be handled in accordance with Sections 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5 of these Specifications. 

All tires found within the regraded waste and on the surface of the regraded waste handled as per 

Section 2.1.9. 

Waste Fill and Earth Excavation 2.5-1 
2.5.3 Waste Fill Placement, Compaction, and Cover 

Waste Fill Placement and Compaction shall consist of: initial compaction to stabilize the existing 

waste materials in the waste relocation area, as noted in Section 2.5.3.2; placement and compaction 

of Waste Fill materials removed from the landfill and placed as fill in the waste disposal areas 

designated on the drawings; and soil cover provided for the waste relocation area daily and at the 

end of the project. 

2.5.3.1 Waste Fill Placement 

The Contractor shall place excess Waste Fill materials generated as part of the grading construction 

activities on the prepared waste disposal area shown on the drawings. The Waste Fill shall be 

placed evenly on the top of the landfill so that it conforms to the existing topography. The 

Contractor will not be allowed to pile the Waste Fill. Once placed, Waste Fill shall be covered with 

a soil cover as described in Section 2.5.3.3. At all times, Waste Fill shall be segregated from fill 

materials obtained from off-site. 

It will not be necessary to check the density and/or moisture content of placed and compacted Waste 

Fill material by use of nuclear/non-nuclear density equipment. However, if in the opinion of the 

Engineer, the Waste Fill materials or underlying Waste Fill is too wet to permit adequate 

compaction, the wet areas shall be stabilized by removing water or blending with Coarse Aggregate 

(#57). Water removed from the Waste Fill must be handled in accordance with Section 2.3.7.3 and 

the Contractor’s Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. 

2.5.3.2 Waste Fill Compaction 

Prior to waste placement, the existing Waste Fill in the designated waste relocation area shall be 

compacted to create a stable work platform with a non-vibratory, 20 ton compactor (non-rubber 

tired) with 2 to 6 overlapping passes, as directed by the Engineer. 

Waste Fill relocated to the top of the landfill shall be placed and compacted in lift thicknesses not 

exceeding 24”, and waste materials exceeding 12” in smallest dimension shall be buried within the 

previously compacted Waste Fill material so as to permit continuous fill layer placement. 

Compaction shall be with a non-vibratory, 20 ton compactor (non-rubber tired) with 2 to 6 

overlapping passes, as directed by the Engineer. 

2.5.3.3 Waste Fill Cover 

In accordance with the Landfill Disruption Permit requirements, relocated waste and any other 

waste exposed by the Contractor’s operations shall be covered with a 6” layer of clean soil (Fill, I13) at the end of each day. At the completion of this project the relocated Waste Fill shall be 

covered with a final cover of 24” thick layer of soil that consists of 18” Fill, I-13 as per Section 

2.10, and 6” of topsoil as per Section 2.8. The topsoil shall be vegetated as per Section 2.8. 

Waste Fill and Earth Excavation 2.5-2 
2.5.4 Measurement and Payment

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.5 Waste Fill and Earth Excavation Cubic Yard

2.5.1 Waste Fill and Earth Excavation, Cubic Yard 

 if and where directed 

Bid Item 2.5, Waste Fill and Earth Excavation, will be measured by the cubic yard of excavation as 

determined from the cross sections at the excavation, and paid according to the bid unit price per 

cubic yard. Separate payment will not be made for surveying, regrading, placement, and 

compaction of Waste and Earth Excavation. 

Fill, I-13, Topsoil 6" thick, and Revegetation, as required by the Landfill Disruption Permit for the 

final waste fill cover, will be paid in accordance with Bid Items 2.10.2, 2.8.1, and 2.8.2, 

respectively. Separate payment will not be made for interim daily cover of waste, and costs should 

be included in Items 2.5 and 2.5.1. 

END OF SECTION 

Waste Fill and Earth Excavation 2.5-3 
2.6 Gas Pipe

2.6.1 General Description 

The work to be performed in accordance with these specifications and shall include all work 

necessary for, or incidental to, the installing, testing, cleaning, drying and tie-ins of the proposed 

Algonquin Power Systems (a.k.a. Penn Energy; EcoGas; Landfill Gas Plant) 6" gas pipeline, 

removal, and off-site disposal of the existing Algonquin Power Systems 6” gas pipeline, and 

removal and off-site disposal of the abandoned 12” PSE&G gas pipeline, as shown on the 

Drawings and described below. Contractor shall provide all of the necessary insurance, labor, 

supervision, overhead, equipment, services, materials, and supplies for the construction. The 

contractor and all subcontractors are expected, in the performance of work as required by this 

Contract, to comply with the rules of PSE&G, Williams Transco, and Algonquin Power Systems, 

in addition to the requirements set forth in these specifications. 

The Contractor shall contact PSE&G and coordinate with them prior to pipeline removal and 

backfill operations. A PSE&G representative shall be on-site to verify actual location of the gas 

line. The Contractor shall excavate and expose the gas pipeline, as directed by PSE&G, and 

PSE&G will drill holes in it for venting. The pipeline will then be removed, to the limits shown 

on the Drawings, in sections short enough to ensure that removal will not damage adjacent active 

gas pipelines. The ends of the abandoned gas pipelines will be capped. PSE&G has indicated 

that a mechanical cap, such as a “Dresser” cap will be acceptable. Capping of the pipeline shall 

be as approved by PSE&G. 

Both the 6” and 12” gas pipelines to be removed have salvage value and MUST be documented and 

a credit given to the State. A receipt for the amount received by the Contractor for these materials, 

from the recycling facility where it is disposed, must be provided to the Engineer. This amount will 

be a credit for the State to be deducted from the Contractor’s payment invoices. 

The Contractor shall furnish all supervision, labor, tools and equipment to prepare all necessary 

work spaces, access roads, environmental measures, timber mats, platform, stringing, unload 

pipe materials from the pipe coating mill, excavate, shoring and de-water, fabricate, weld, HDD 

new sections of pipe. The Contractor shall also clean, sandblast wire brush, coat and wrap all 

weld joints, tamp backfill around gas main, perform hydrostatic test on the new pipe, make main 

tie-ins, cut & remove the designated pipe segments, appropriate restoration and install cathodic 

protection testing stations and pipeline markers as directed by the State. 

The Contractor shall obtain all necessary municipal construction permits, hot work permit, 

licenses, and approvals prior to mobilization to the job site. The Contractor shall comply with 

the soil erosion and sediment control permit and specifications. 

The Contractor or Subcontractor shall be experienced and qualified in performing the work as 

outlined in this specification and as such shall have a minimum of 5 years of experience in the 

fabrication and installation of 6” and larger diameter steel gas transmission pipelines. The 

contractor shall provide competent supervision of the work and shall employ competent labor 

skilled in their trade. 

Gas Pipe 2.6-1 
All of the Work is more particularly described on the Drawings, and is to be performed in 

accordance with all the provisions of the Contract Documents, and is to include by way of 

illustration, but without limiting the generality of the foregoing provisions: Unloading all 

materials at the project location; clearing, grading, soil erosion and sediment control measures, 

and all associated right-of-way work; shoring/sheeting, excavation and backfilling of the ditch; 

welding; field joint coating; lowering the coated pipe into the ditch; installation of temporary 

access roadway, and working platform; installation and protection of all crossings of foreign 

lines; installation of pipe bends; welding and coating of above-ground in-line valve assemblies; 

Installation and coating of fabricated piping and valve assemblies; completion of all specified 

tie-ins, including hot taps; construction of new valve sites; filling, pressure testing, emptying, 

cleaning and drying of the completed pipelines and fabricated piping; filling completed lines 

with nitrogen; installation of cathodic protection insulators, and test leads; installation of pipeline 

marker warning signs; cut and remove all sections of the existing pipelines labeled as “To Be 

Removed” on the drawings, and cap the ends of the existing pipe that is to stay in place; 

restoring or cleaning up the right-of-way, removing working platform, and other premises on 

which the Contractor has worked; and any and all other work necessary or incidental to a 

complete and satisfactory installation of said facility. 

Any material, equipment, or related work required to complete this installation which is not 

indicated or specified herein, shall be provided at no additional cost. 

2.6.2 Materials 

All material shall be of a commercially acceptable grade designated for their intended purpose in 

the designated end use environment. 

The Contractor shall be responsible for the coordination and layout of the work to be performed 

as part of this contract. 

All Contractor furnished material and articles incorporated into the work covered by this 

Contract shall be new and of the most suitable grade for the purpose intended. 

The Contractor shall be responsible for all required surface preparation and materials, working 

platform, temporary access roads, and application of all required field coatings. 

The Contractor, with a State representative, shall inspect material when transferred to 

Contractor's custody, and shall satisfy itself as to the quantity and condition of such material, and 

that it conforms to the specifications required by the Contract Documents. Results of this 

inspection shall be documented on material transfer records. 

2.6.2.1 6” Gas Pipeline 

The pipeline has been designed and will be constructed in accordance with Federal CFR 49, Part 

192, Transportation of Natural and Other Gas By Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety Standards, 

ASME B31.8, Gas Transmission and Distribution Systems and New Jersey State Administrative 

Gas Pipe 2.6-2 
Code (NJAC). The specification of the pipeline will be 6.25" OD x 0.28" Wall-thickness, A53 

Grade B coated pipe. 

2.6.2.2 Buried Warning and Identification Tape 

Polyethylene plastic warning tape manufactured specifically for warning and identification of 

buried utility lines shall be used. Provide tape on rolls, 75 mm 3 inch minimum width, Yellow 

color and identification imprinted in bold black letters continuously over the entire tape length. 

Warning and identification to read: "CAUTION, BURIED GAS LINE BELOW". Color and 

printing shall be permanent, unaffected by moisture or soil. 

2.6.3 Settlement Monitoring and 6” Gas Pipeline Construction 

The gas pipeline relocation involves the installation of new 6” gas pipeline and removal of the 

existing 6” gas pipeline, as shown on the Drawings. 

During construction of the proposed embankment in which the new 6” gas pipeline will be 

installed, 6 settlement platforms, as shown on the drawings, shall be installed in the Fill, I-11, as 

directed by the Engineer. Elevations of the settlement platforms shall be surveyed weekly to an 

accuracy of 0.01 ft, and the results provided to the Engineer. Installation of the new, 6” gas 

pipeline shall not proceed until settlements of the proposed embankment have decreased to 

acceptable rates, as determined by the Engineer. 

All girth welds of the pipeline are subjected to 100% non-destructive testing and hydrostatic 

testing prior to and after putting it back into service. Please refer also to the route drawings. 

The proposed pipeline alignment is within close proximity of the existing pipelines and utilities, 

which are currently under operation. The Contractor shall use caution when working near the 

20” active gas pipeline and shall not jeopardize the ground stability that could disturb the 20” 

active gas pipeline. Recycled Aggregate Type B will be used to backfill the excavated trench. 

The contractor will utilize an excavator bucket to tamp down the backfill to achieve the 

necessary compaction. The contractor must exercise all possible caution while working 

within/over the existing pipelines. All safety and construction standards and procedures of the 

pipeline owners must be followed. No excavation with mechanical equipment shall be allowed 

within 24" of the existing pipelines without clearly identifying the pipelines. All pipelines shall 

be field verified, by excavating to determine exact location and depth prior to any mechanical 

excavation. No more than 170 feet in length of open cut shall be opened at one time when a 

foreign pipeline is within 5 feet from the edge of the trench. This is to avoid any operational 

impact to the existing pipelines in services. It is also the responsibility of the Contractor to 

coordinate all construction activities with all pipeline/utility owners. 

Contractor shall comply with NJ one Call Law (1-800-272-1000) and notify all operators of the 

foreign utilities affected by the project. Contractor shall field verify locations and depths of the 

existing underground utilities prior to excavations. No mechanical equipment is allowed within 

12" of the existing pipelines. All excavations within 12" of an existing pipeline shall be 

Gas Pipe 2.6-3 
performed by hand digging. All shoring methods and procedures shall be designed and 

submitted by a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of New Jersey. 

The Contractor shall notify Williams Transco Company a minimum of 72 hours in advance of 

any work within their easement. A Williams Transco inspector will be on-site during the 

Contractor’s work on their easement and the Contractor will perform work according to their 

requirements as shown on the drawings, and as directed by the inspector in the field. A 

minimum clearance of 18” must be maintained between the new 6” gas pipeline and the existing 

Williams Transco Gas Pipeline. 

2.6.4 NOT IN CONTRACT 

2.6.5 Backfill 

All activities shall be confined to the provided work space. Contractor shall only clear an area 

within the right of way as necessary to install and remove the pipelines without comprising 

safety or pipeline integrity. Contractor shall offload the pipe at the site and may rack it within 

the work space. The pipe shall be welded, x-rayed, field joint coated, and lowered into the 

completed ditch. 

After testing, cleaning, and drying, the pipelines shall be tied into the existing pipelines. After 

tie-in, the pipelines shall be buried and backfilled. Refer to Contract Plans for details for 

backfilling relocated 6” pipeline. 

Following the removal of the 6” and 12” gas lines, the Contractor shall backfill the excavation 

with material excavated during the pipeline removal. Recycled Aggregate Type B can be 

installed into the excavation to meet the pre-existing grades. After attaining the pre-existing 

grades the backfill shall be compacted by 10 overlapping passes of a minimum 13 ton vibratory 

roller, as approved by the Engineer. The final 6” of backfill shall be topsoil which shall be 

revegetated. 

2.6.6 Trenching 

Minimum cover of the pipelines shall be 4'-0", with the exceptions specified in the Drawings, the 

ROW Restrictions, and the Permits. 

The Contractor shall notify the representatives of all lines to be crossed a minimum of 48 hours 

prior to beginning the crossing work unless otherwise stated in the attached Right-of-way 

Restrictions and Permits. The Contractor shall notify the landfill gas plant operator, NJDEP and 

Engineer immediately upon any damage to any pipeline or utility. 

Any section of ditch in which personnel will enter to perform work shall be constructed in 

accordance with OSHA standards. No additional compensation will be paid to Contractor for 

such construction. 

Gas Pipe 2.6-4 
Some hand ditching may be required near existing pipelines or other facilities in order to comply 

with permit or right-of-way conditions or to avoid damage to such existing facilities. No 

additional compensation will be paid to Contractor for such hand ditching. 

Excavation and disposal of unsatisfactory backfill and miscellaneous debris is the responsibility 

of the contractor and no additional compensation will be awarded for this function. It is the 

responsibility of the Contractor to have an OSHA competent person at the job site to determine 

the need for sheeting and shoring of the trench excavation. 

Sheeting and Dewatering. The Contractor shall be responsible for the design and installation of 

all sheeting and de-watering required for the installation and tie-ins. The sheeting methods shall 

be designed and submitted by a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of New Jersey. Any 

discharge of pumped water shall be filtered through an appropriate sedimentation filter set-up. 

2.6.7 Dewatering 

Dewatering shall be performed, as needed, to allow proper removal of the 12” PSE&G gas 

pipeline and the 6” landfill gas pipeline. Leachate contaminated water will be pumped from the 

excavation onto the landfill to percolate back into the waste. The Contractor shall confirm that 

these waters percolate into the waste and do not run off the landfill. 

2.6.8 Welding 

All welding shall be performed in accordance with the latest edition of API Standard 1104, 

"Standard for Field Welding of Pipelines", and the requirements set forth in Appendix X – 

Welding Procedures. 

All joints (100%) shall be x-rayed by the Contractor. Unacceptable welds will be removed or 

repaired at the contractor's expense. The contractor will provide adequate space to perform 

testing at the site of all welding operations. 

All welders testing shall be witnessed by the Engineer. All welder qualifications shall be 

destructive type testing including nick breaks. Contractor shall supply all equipment for welder 

tests and bear the cost of testing welders and qualifications. 

The Contractor shall provide for radiographic inspection and other nondestructive testing of 

production welds. 100% radiographic inspection of all welds is required. 

6" Pipelines - All welding and welder qualification testing shall be performed in accordance with 

the latest edition of API 1104 and Exhibit I. All non-destructive examinations will be performed 

and interpreted by qualified technicians, in accordance with API 1104. 

Contractor shall proceed with caution and in accordance with the approved Health and Safety 

Plan, during welding operations due to possible explosive gas conditions at the landfill. 

2.6.9 Coating 

Gas Pipe 2.6-5 
Pipe coatings shall be done in accordance with the requirements set forth in Exhibit B – Coating 

Requirements. 

Pipe for below ground installations will be supplied with 14-16 mils of Fusion Bonded Epoxy 

(FBE). Field applied FBE or equal of the same thickness shall be used for all field joints and 

repairs as described in the Specifications. Heat Shrink sleeves shall be used to coat the field 

welds. 

The contractor's prices shall include costs to apply and/or repair coating where necessary so that 

all coating will pass the holiday detector test. The contractor will make provisions so the coating 

can be checked prior to lowering the new section into the ditch. Any damage incurred to the 

coating during the lowering operation shall be repaired by the contractor. 

2.6.10 Hydrostatic Testing 

All pipeline facilities and their appurtenances will be hydrostatically tested in accordance with 

these specifications. Specifications require the successful completion of a 24 continuous hour 

test in accordance with the specifications. 

The test pressures will be as follows: 

Dia. ANSI 

class 

MAOP 

PSIG 

Max test 

Pressure (PSIG) 

Min Test 

Pressure (PSIG) 

All 600 600 1,575 1,525 

The proper time, method, and sequence of operation for the testing of the line shall be at 

PSE&G’s direction and under direct PSE&G’s Supervision. The contractor shall supply: 

1. Water to fill the facilities to be tested. Water shall be clean and free from deleterious 

minerals or suspended matter. 

2. The contractor shall be responsible for proper disposal of the water following 

completion of test. It is contractor's responsibility to take precautions to prevent water 

from freezing in any exposed pipe. 

3. All required small fittings, weld caps, valves, hoses, pipe, etc. to connect the test 

equipment 

4. Two (2) compressors to attain the required test pressures. 

5. Canvas or burlap to cover exposed piping. 

6. Qualified personnel and equipment required to install, operate, and remove equipment 

and temporary piping. 

A PSE&G representative will supervise the test after the piping is pressurized; the section under 

test should be allowed to reach equilibrium before the test is started. If a pressure loss is 

observed, the contractor shall be responsible for locating and repairing all leaks at his own 

expense. 

Gas Pipe 2.6-6 
Contractor shall run a 1/4-inch thick gauging plate, 1" smaller than the minimum I.D. of the 

pipeline, through the pipeline on the front end of a wire brush cleaning pig, prior to final 

hydrotesting of the pipeline. Should the gauging plate become dented while running through the 

pipeline, Contractor shall run a Caliper type pig through the pipeline to determine the exact 

location of the dent or obstruction in the pipeline which caused the dent in the gauging plate. 

Contractor shall then dig up the pipeline and make all necessary repairs to eliminate the dent or 

obstruction in the pipeline. After the dent or obstruction in the pipeline has been repaired, 

additional gauging plates shall be run through the pipeline repeating this same procedure until a 

gauging plate is successfully run through the pipeline without becoming dented. 

The disposal point of the test water shall be in compliance with the permitting agencies. Water 

shall be clean and free from deleterious minerals or suspended matter. Contractor shall be 

responsible for the proper disposal of test water at locations approved by and at a time 

satisfactory to the NJDEP. Any and all damage, including but not limited to the pipeline, the 

Right-of-way or adjacent property, resulting from such disposal shall be damage borne by 

Contractor. 

Contractor shall bear all costs of repair and the replacement of all damaged materials and 

installations resulting from test failures attributable to negligence of Contractor, inferior 

workmanship by Contractor and defective or inadequate materials or equipment furnished by 

Contractor. 

Contractor shall bear all costs for obtaining and disposing of water for cleaning and testing 

purposes. Contractor shall comply with all requirements of permits. Contractor shall also 

comply with all Federal, State and Local regulations governing the taking of the water used for 

testing and expulsion of the water from the pipeline following the tests. 

Test of Appurtenances - Fabricated assemblies that cannot be tested with the pipeline shall 

undergo the same test performed in the same manner as the pipeline to which it is welded except 

that the ambient temperature shall be recorded instead of the pipe temperature. Should such 

assembly contain valves or fittings, the test pressure shall not exceed one and one-half times the 

maximum operating pressure of the valve or fitting. If the section is entirely exposed to the 

atmosphere during the test, the minimum test period shall be eight (8) hours. 

Re-testing - If deficiencies are found, they shall be corrected and retested as soon as possible. All 

work and material required to rectify the deficiencies shall be performed at the contractor's own 

expense. 

2.6.11 Cleaning and Drying 

Following the dewatering of the pipe after the hydrostatic test, the pipelines shall be dried to a 

dew point of -40°F. Pigs may be propelled with air or nitrogen. Each displacement pig must be 

received before another is launched. Main Block and Side valves shall remain off the line during 

cleaning and drying of each pipeline. Cleaning and drying shall be in accordance with PSE&G 

specifications. 

Gas Pipe 2.6-7 
Upon completion of drying operations of drilling sections, Contractor shall install appropriate 

pressure gauges and supply and inject 10 psig of nitrogen into the pipelines. 

2.6.12 Cathodic Protection 

a. Cathodic protection test leads and stations shall be installed by Contractor as directed 

by the Engineer and / or Williams Transco. No test leads or anodes are permitted within 

the Williams Transco easement. 

b. Insulating joints, miscellaneous fittings, shrink sleeves, anodes, pipeline markers, etc., 

shall be installed as directed by the Engineer. There shall be no extra payment for this 

work. 

2.6.13 Pipeline Markers 

The Contractor shall install pipeline marker posts and warning signs every 100 feet and wherever 

the new 6” gas pipeline enters and exits the Williams Transco easement. 

2.6.14 Scheduling of Work and Interruption to Utilities 

The work to be performed under this contract requires special attention to the scheduling and 

conduct of work in connection with the existing operations of pipeline and utility owners. The 

contractor and its employees and subcontractors shall work in harmony with the same and all 

other trades, employees and contractors engaged in any work on the premises. 

a. The contractor shall perform the work as specified herein in a diligent and timely 

fashion so as to minimize any adverse impact with other activities at the site and/or the 

Algonquin Power Systems and PSE&G personnel. Hence, the contractor shall coordinate 

his operations with the Algonquin Power Systems and PSE&G and the public, affording 

all reasonable cooperation and taking all prudent precautions in order to prevent excess 

hardship, noise or other nuisance. 

b. Insofar as practicable, contractor operations shall be confined to the immediate area 

and all work shall be segregated from activities. The contractor shall not use any more 

space than reasonably required and shall perform the complete work returning each area 

to normal usage as soon as practicable. 

c. The Contractor shall maintain proper notifications to the agencies, residents, and 

property owners at all time. 

2.6.15 Tie-In and Gas Out 

Contractor shall provide labor, material and equipment for the final tie-in and gas out of the 

pipeline installation in the form of compressor, backhoe and operator, supervisor, laborers and 

welding personnel. The Contractor shall be responsible for coordinating with Algonquin Power 

Systems for the purging of the pipeline and for cutting and removing existing pipe, marking the 

tie-in, welding and passing x-ray examination. 

Gas Pipe 2.6-8 
The contractor shall coordinate with the landfill gas plant and PSE&G, Ms. Barbara Altenburg, 

973-430-7823, for a mutually agreeable gas pipeline switchover date. 

Provide all labor, material and equipment necessary to set up and proceed with cutout and tie-in 

of the new pipeline. 

First cut on the pipe shall be cold cut on all tie-ins. 

Contractor shall make and have available all material, equipment and personnel needed to make 

simultaneous cut-outs and tie-ins as described on the drawings. 

All tie-in work shall continue until the tie-ins are complete. 

The Contractor will supply a holiday detector and assure the integrity of the pipe coating and 

repair coating as required prior to installation. 

2.6.16 Owner’s Requirements 

PSE&G will locate the abandoned pipe to be removed. The Contractor shall be required to 

locate remove and dispose all abandoned pipe material within the limits shown on the drawings. 

2.6.17 Pipeline Crossing Protection Slab 

The construction activities proposed for this site involve vehicles traveling over an existing gas 

pipeline. To protect the piping from all vehicle traffic, a pipeline crossing protection slab made 

of concrete shall be installed. The contractor shall confirm the location of the gas lines and gain 

approval for the location from the pipeline owner and the Engineer prior to installation. The 

protection slab shall be installed as per details. A shop drawing shall also be submitted as per 

Section 1.3. 

2.6.18 Quality Assurance 

All work performed under this Section will be inspected by a representative of the PES&G. All 

work rejected because of defects or non-conformance with the drawings and/or specifications 

shall be corrected by the Contractor as directed, at no additional cost to the NJDEP. 

2.6.19 Measurement and Payment

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

 

2.6.1 Gas Pipeline Removal, 6” Dia. Linear Foot 

2.6.2 Gas Pipeline Removal, 12” Dia. Linear Foot 

2.6.3 Gas Pipeline Installation, 6” Dia. Linear Foot 

2.6.4 Pipeline Crossing Protection Slab Each 

Gas Pipe 2.6-9 
Bid Items 2.6.1, Gas Pipeline Removal, 6” Dia., and 2.6.2, Gas Pipeline Removal, 12” Dia., will be 

measured by the Linear Foot of gas pipeline removed and disposed, respectively. The contractor 

will be paid for Recycled Aggregate Type B under bid item 2.3.2. A receipt for the amount 

received by the Contractor for the gas pipeline, from the recycling facility where it is disposed, must 

be provided to the Engineer. This amount will be a credit for the State to be deducted from the 

Contractor’s payment invoices. 

Bid Item 2.6.3, Gas Pipeline Installation, 6” Dia., will be measured by the Linear Foot of gas 

pipeline installed, tested and approved. The cost for excavation, valves, connections, welding, 

tracing tape, testing, settlement platforms in the proposed embankment, surveying, and other 

work associated with Gas Pipeline Installation shall be included in the bid unit price for Linear 

Foot. Separate payment will be made for Fill I-13, (under Payment Item 2.10.2), revegetation 

(under Payment Items 2.8.1 and 2.8.2), and Recycled Aggregate Type B (under Payment Item 

2.3.2). 

Bid Item, 2.6.4, Pipeline Crossing Protection Slab, will be measured on an each basis. Such 

price shall include material, labor, and equipment required to furnish, install and inspect the 

protection slab. 

 

END OF SECTION 

Gas Pipe 2.6-10 
2.7 Signs and Jersey Barriers 

2.7.1 General Description 

Signs and jersey barriers shall consist of purchase, delivery, and installation of jersey barriers and 

construction and directional signs, including sign supports. The following signs shall be provided as 

shown on the Drawings and posted no later than two weeks prior to the initiation of field activities 

associated with the Site: 

One (1) project construction sign, is to be constructed at the entrance to the landfill along Harrison 

Ave, alerting people that there is a construction project underway if they attempt to access the utility 

rights-of-way that cross the property. The sign must have a NJDEP point of contact number to 

allow clear communication between the community and the person responsible for conducting the 

remediation. This number shall be provided to the Contractor by the NJDEP. The project sign shall 

meet the following specifications (see the drawings for sign content): 

1. Size - The project signs shall be 4 feet high x 8 feet wide x 3/4 inches thick. The entire 

surface of the sign shall be primed in white. The reverse side of the sign will be finished in 

white paint. 

2. Material - The sign will be exterior grade plywood with an aluminum overlay. The 

aluminum overlay will cover the entire front surface of the sign and its four edges. The 

aluminum overlay shall be type 040 with a factory-baked white enamel finish. 

3. Lettering - Lettering will be upper and lower case in Standard Block Fashion. Letter size 

and sign design shall be determined by the bidder with final approval by the NJDEP. 

4. Color - The sign will have a white background with blue letters and a blue border. The 

blue color shall be Sapphire Blue. All paint shall be high quality fade and weather resistant 

formulated for exterior applications. 

5. Posts - The posts will be 12 feet high x 4 inches wide x 4 inches thick pressure treated 

wood. They will be primed and finished in white paint. 

6. Hardware - All hardware will be first quality rust resistant cadmium plated. All hardware 

will be 3/8 inches in diameter. 

7. Life Expectancy - The sign and its components should have a life expectancy of at least 

five years. 

A total of twelve (12) "No Trespassing and No Dumping" signs (6 in English and 6 in Spanish) 

shall be posted at approximately equal intervals, as approved by the Engineer, along the proposed 

site perimeter fence. 

1. Size - The signs shall be sized as shown on the Drawings. The entire surface of the sign 

shall be primed in white. The reverse side of the sign will be finished in white paint. 

Signs 2.7-1 
2. Material - Signs shall be made from 0.080 inch thick flat aluminum with engineer grade 

reflective sheeting applied over the surface. Signs shall come with standard mounting holes 

centered top and bottom for easy installations. 

3. Lettering - Lettering will be upper and lower case in Standard Block Fashion. Letter size 

and sign design shall be determined by the bidder with final approval by the NJDEP. 

4. Color - The sign will have a yellow background with black letters and a black border. 

All paint shall be high quality fade and weather resistant formulated for exterior 

applications. 

5. Posts – The sign posts shall be (minimum) 6 ft. tall galvanized steel and tapered on end U 

channel posts. Minimum weight of 1.12lb/Ft. 

6. Hardware - All hardware will be first quality rust resistant cadmium plated. All hardware 

will be 3/8 inches in diameter. 

7. Life Expectancy - The sign and its components should have a life expectancy of at least 

five years. 

A total of twelve (12) "No Smoking" signs (6 in English and 6 in Spanish) shall be posted at 

appropriate highly visible locations near the gates, and projects signs, and the trailer staging, as 

approved by the Engineer. 

1. Size - The signs shall be sized as shown on the Drawings. The entire surface of the sign 

shall be primed in white. The reverse side of the sign will be finished in white paint. 

2. Material - Signs shall be made from 0.080 inch thick flat aluminum with engineer grade 

reflective sheeting applied over the surface. Signs shall come with standard mounting holes 

centered top and bottom for easy installations. 

3. Lettering - Lettering will be upper and lower case in Standard Block Fashion. Letter size 

and sign design shall be determined by the bidder with final approval by the NJDEP. 

4. Color - The sign will have a white background with red letters and a red border. All 

paint shall be high quality fade and weather resistant formulated for exterior applications. 

5. Posts – The sign posts shall be (minimum) 6 ft. tall galvanized steel and tapered on end U 

channel posts. Minimum weight of 1.12lb/Ft. 

6. Hardware - All hardware will be first quality rust resistant cadmium plated. All hardware 

will be 3/8 inches in diameter. 

7. Life Expectancy - The sign and its components should have a life expectancy of at least 

five years. 

Signs 2.7-2 
The contractor shall submit shop drawings showing the sign layout and material data sheets for all 

materials that will be used in constructing and erecting the signs. Submittals shall be in accordance 

with Section 1.3. 

The project construction sign shall be in English. All other signs and all other signs shall be in both 

English and Spanish. 

2.7.2 Jersey Barriers 

Jersey Barriers shall be pre-cast concrete traffic barriers meeting the requirements of NJDOT 

Construction Barrier Curb, Type 1. Jersey barriers shall be placed in the locations shown on the 

plans. The intent of Jersey barriers is to control construction traffic near steep slopes and barriers do 

not need to be bolted or permanently secured to the ground. The Contractor is responsible for 

maintaining the integrity of Jersey barriers during the duration of construction. 

2.7.2 Measurement and Payment 

Payment shall be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.7.1 Signs Lump Sum 

2.7.2 Jersey Barriers Linear Foot 

The Contractor shall be paid the lump sum bid price for the purchase and installation of signs 

required for the project under Bid item 2.7.1. The Contractor shall be paid the linear foot bid price 

for the purchase and installation of jersey barriers under Bid item 2.7.2 only after the perimeter road 

is installed and the jersey barriers are in place as shown on plans. 

 

END OF SECTION 

Signs 2.7-3 
2.8 Revegetation 

2.8.1 General Description 

Contractor shall be responsible for revegetation of the proposed landfill gas pipeline area and waste 

relocation area disturbed during construction and as noted on the drawings. 

2.8.2 Materials 

A. Topsoil: Topsoil shall be imported from off-site and certified as clean. Topsoil shall not 

contain stones, lumps, roots, or similar objects larger than 50 millimeters in any dimension 

and shall have not less than a 6.5 pH value. Topsoil shall have a minimum organic content 

of not less than 2.75 percent by weight. Materials with the following qualities shall not be 

considered suitable for use as topsoil: 

1. Soils having less than a 4.1 pH value. 

2. Chemically contaminated soils (including all on-site topsoil). 

3. Areas from which the original surface has been stripped and/or covered over such as 

borrow pits, open mines, demolition sites, dumps, and sanitary landfills. 

4. Wet excavation. 

The gradation of the topsoil will be determined using ASTM D422. 10 pounds from each source of 

topsoil shall be tested for soil gradation. The gradation of the topsoil shall be within the following: 

1. Not more than 20 percent of the material submitted from an off-site sample shall be 

retained on a #10 sieve. 

2. If more than one-half of the sand is smaller than #35 sieve: 

 Percent

Sand (2.000 to 0.050 mm).................................................................................... 40 - 80 

Silt (0.050 to 0.005 mm)......................................................................................... 0 - 30 

Clay (0.005 mm and smaller)................................................................................. 0 - 30 

3. If more than one-half of the sand is larger than 0.5 millimeters: 

 Percent Percent

Sand (2.000 to 0.050 mm)....................................... 40 - 80 or 40 - 75 

Silt (0.050 to 0.005 mm)........................................... 0 - 30 or 0 - 30 

Clay (0.005 mm and smaller)..................................15 - 30 or 0 - 30 

B. Sewage Sludge: A stabilized, screened mixture of wood chips and sewage sludge processed 

in accordance with NJDEP Interim Guidelines on General Conditions for the Processing and 

Distribution of Sewage Sludge Compost. Sewage sludge shall not have less than a 6.5 pH 

value. Stabilized sewage sludge products commonly called Marketable Residuals Products 

(MRP) and Water Treatment Plant Residuals (WTP) is also acceptable. These products 

shall be obtained from facilities operating in compliance with a New Jersey Pollutant 

Revegetation 2.8-1 
Discharge Elimination System Permit or under a NJDEP Permit Exemption – General 

Distribution Approval. Sewage sludge will not be tested provided it comes from an NJDEP 

approved facility. 

C. Lime: Ground limestone (Dolomite) containing not less than 85% total carbonates as 

determined by ASTM C602. Lime will be ground to a fineness that will pass through the 

following sieves: 

Sieve No: Percent Passing:

#20 90% 

#100 50% 

D. Fertilizer: 10-20-10 complying with FS O-F-241D, Type I, Grade (b). 

E. Seed: Seed shall consist of a mixture of the following grasses: 

 50% Rebel II Tall Fescue 

 20% Plamer Perennial Ryegrass 

 5% Alsike Clover 

 5% Streaker Red Top 

 20% Reliant Hard Fescue 

 Seed germination shall have been tested within 12 months of the planting date. No seed 

shall be accepted with a germination test date more than 12 months old unless retested. 

F. Mulch: Cereal straw free of objectionable weeds or other deleterious materials. 

G. Tackifier: Organic and Vegetable Based Binders complying with the requirements of the 

New Jersey Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control. 

H. Water: Meeting the standards for drinking, and free of substances harmful to plant growth. 

2.8.3 Submittals 

Submittals shall be according to Section 1.3. 

2.8.4 Application 

The Contractor shall apply topsoil to all areas disturbed by construction and as noted on the 

drawings, other than permanent roads and structures. Six inches of topsoil shall be applied to the 

wastefill cover and to other disturbed or designated areas. Topsoil stripped from on-site waste fill 

construction areas and re-grading/excavation areas is considered contaminated and will not be 

reused as topsoil. On-site topsoil will be disposed of at the waste fill disposal area. 

All topsoil brought from off-site must meet the following requirements (from NJAC 7:26D): 

1. Fill shall be uncontaminated pursuant to the more stringent of DEP’s Non-Residential Direct 

Contact Soil Remediation Standards or DEP’s Default Leachate Criteria for Class II Ground 

Revegetation 2.8-2 
Water found in DEP’s Guidance for the use of the Synthetic Precipitation Leaching 

Procedure to Develop Site-Specific Impact to Ground Water Remediation Standards and 

shall be free of extraneous debris or solid waste. Additional testing, sampling, and 

laboratory delays will result for all changes of source of imported fill. 

2. Documentation shall be provided by certification stating that it is virgin material from a 

commercial or noncommercial source or decontaminated recycled soil. 

3. All proposed sources of fill must be pre-approved by the Engineer. Bills of lading shall be 

provided to the Engineer to document the source(s) of fill. The documentation shall include: 

(1) the name of the affiant and relationship to the source of the fill, (2) location where the fill 

was obtained, including the street, town, lot, block, county and state and a brief history of 

the site which is the source of fill, and (3) a statement that to the best of the affiant’s 

knowledge and belief the fill being provided is not contaminated pursuant to #1 above and a 

description of the steps taken to confirm such. 

4. The Engineer will acquire samples for analytical testing for compliance with the NJDEP 

Standards and Guidance for clean fill as described in Item (1) above. No fill may be brought 

to the site until the Engineer confirms that it meets the NJDEP Standards and Guidance. 

The Contractor should allow adequate time in his project schedule for the sampling, 

analysis, and review of analytical data. 

When the organic content of the topsoil is less than 2.75 percent, it shall be increased by adding 

composted sewage sludge or another product approved by the Engineer, at a rate necessary to attain 

this minimum organic content. The organic content of soils will be determined in accordance with 

AASHTO T194 except that the sample is to be taken from oven-dried soil passing a #10 sieve. 

Shipments of composted sewage sludge, if used, shall be accompanied by delivery slips with the 

certified weight and the name of the producer or supplier. 

A minimum of 2 tons lime and 500 pounds of 10-20-10 fertilizer per acre is to be applied. 

Incorporate the lime and fertilizer into the soil to a depth of 4" by discing across the slope to 

minimize erosion and runoff. Apply additional lime and fertilizer according to soil test 

recommendations such as offered by Rutgers Cooperative Extension. Soil tests should be 

conducted at a rate of 1 test per 2,500 square yards. 

All seedbeds should be raked lightly to level the seedbed. All permanent seed should be applied 

during March 1 to May 15 or from August 15 to October 15. Good seed to soil contact must be 

obtained. Flat areas should be seeded with a drop seeder, drill, or cultipacker seeder, and rolled with 

a corrugated roller. The permanent seed mixture should be applied a rate of 220 pounds per acre. 

Slopes may be seeded with a hydroseeder. A one step hydroseeding operation will not be 

acceptable. All seeding shall be suspended when wind velocities exceed 5 miles per hour or as 

directed by the Engineer. Seeding on all areas shall be accomplished within 5 days after final 

grading and topsoil placement has been completed. 

Mulching must be completed within 7 days after seeding on all seeded areas. All slopes of less than 

15% must be covered with straw mulch which will be anchored by overspraying with a tackifier. 

Revegetation 2.8-3 
Mulch shall be applied at a rate of 1.5 tons per acre and spread such that approximately 85% of the 

soil surface is covered. The tackifier shall be applied at a rate of 194 gallons per acre and applied 

uniformly across the site. 

Following applications of mulch, the seed bed shall be moistened by the Contractor. A muddy soil 

condition is not acceptable. Seeded areas shall be watered by the Contractor at no additional 

expense to the State as often as required to obtain and maintain a satisfactory stand of grass, 

practically weed free, and containing plants in reasonable proportion to the various kinds of seed in 

the grass seed mixture. Deficient areas shall be mowed, refertilized, reseeded and remulched at no 

cost to the State until a satisfactory stand of grass is established. Seeded areas shall be maintained 

until final acceptance of construction. Deficient, damaged or otherwise unsatisfactory areas shall be 

re-fertilized, re-seeded, and re-mulched at no additional cost to the State. 

2.8.5 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.8.1 Topsoil 6” Thick Square Yard 

2.8.2 Revegetation Square Yard 

The Contractor shall be paid the Bid Item No. 2.8.1 at the unit price per square yard of topsoil 

installed (6”), as measured in the horizontal plane, according to 1.2.16. Such price shall be 

considered full payment for excavation and/or delivery, stockpiling and installation of topsoil. 

The Contractor shall be paid under Bid Item No. 2.8.2 at the unit price per square yard for 

fertilizing, seeding, mulching, and watering as measured in the horizontal plane per Section 1.2.16. 

Separate or additional payment will not be made for areas of fertilizing and seeding disturbed by the 

Contractor, outside of the construction operations area or areas of deficient stands of grass. 

Fertilizing and Seeding shall include purchase, delivery, and application of lime, fertilizer, and seed 

to all areas where topsoil has been placed in accordance with the Soil Erosion and Sediment Control 

Plan. Straw Mulching shall consist of purchase, delivery, and placement of straw mulching on all 

areas to be seeded in accordance to these Specifications and the Soil Erosion and Sediment Control 

Plan. Watering shall include purchase, delivery, and application of water as needed to sustain 

vegetation. Contractor will not be paid separately for watering but is included in the cost of 

Revegetation. 

Payment under bid items 2.8.1, Topsoil and 2.8.2, Revegetation, will be made only for the following 

areas: 

• Within the limits shown on the drawings, over the proposed 6” landfill gas line. 

• A maximum of four acres in the waste relocation area on top of the landfill. 

Separate payment will not be made for Topsoil or Revegetation needed due disturbances caused by 

the Contractor’s operations. 

END OF SECTION

Revegetation 2.8-4 
2.9 Geotextiles 

2.9.1 General Description 

Geotextiles shall include the purchase, delivery, and installation of Type B geotextile 

(separation/stabilization/filter) in accordance with Appendix A5 of the Standards for Soil Erosion 

and Sediment Control in NJ; and as shown on the drawings. It shall also include the purchase, 

delivery and installation of geogrid if and where directed by the Engineer. The contractor shall 

submit manufacturer data sheets and test results for proposed materials, in accordance with section 

1.3. 

2.9.2 Materials 

Geotextile Type B

Geotextile Type B, Typar 3601 or equal, as approved by the Engineer, and shall meet the 

requirements of roadway separation/stabilization geotextile as indicated in Table 2.9-1. The 

material, shall be 6 ounces/yard non-woven type configuration with a minimum apparent 

opening size of US sieve 140, conforming to AASHTO Specification M 288-96. The testing 

frequency shall be 1 sample per 10,000 square feet as per Section 1.10. Geotextile rolls shall 

be laid so there is 2 feet of overlap on all sides adjacent with another roll. To protect the 

geotextile and prevent degradation due to exposure, the geotextile shall be covered with 

roadway material within 21 days of placement. 

Geogrid

Geogrid shall be Tenax MS 330 biaxial-oriented polypropylene geogrid or Tensar-BX-1200 

geogrid, or equal, as approved by the Engineer, and shall meet the requirements of Geogrid 

as indicated in Table 2.9-1. The testing frequency shall be 1 sample per 10,000 square feet 

as per Section 1.10. Geogrid shall be placed under the fill in the Transco Easement area. 

Heavy equipment or vehicles shall not be operated on top of the easement geogrid to avoid 

damage. Geogrid shall be used “if and where directed” between the separation fabric and 

the first lift of roadway material as per the manufacturer’s recommendations in the event 

that exceptionally soft soils are encountered. 

2.9.3 Submittals 

Manufacturer product data sheets and test results for parameters listed in table 2.9-1 shall be 

submitted to the Engineer and NJDEP for approval, prior to the delivery and use of geotextiles on 

the site. 

Submittals shall be in accordance with Section 1.3. 

2.9.4 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Geotextiles 2.9-1 
Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.9.1 Geotextiles, Type B Square Yard 

2.9.2 Geotextiles, Type B, If and Where Directed Square Yard 

2.9.3 Geogrid Square Yard 

2.9.4 Geogrid, If and Where Directed Square Yard 

The Contractor will be paid the bid unit price per square yard of Bid Item 2.9.1, Geotextiles, Type B 

(separation/stabilization/filter) installed at the site (not including overlap). The Contractor shall be 

paid the bid unit price per square yard for Bid item 2.9.3, Geogrid, installed at the site (not including 

overlap. Payments shall include purchase, delivery, installation, testing, and protection. Payment 

will not be made for waste or overlap. 

Separate payment will be paid per Bid Item 2.9.2 and 2.9.4 for If and Where Directed items. Refer 

to Section 1.2.29 for addition language regarding if and where directed items. 

Geotextiles 2.9-2 
TABLE 2.9 - 1 

QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN 

GEOTEXTILES 

TESTING FREQUENCY 

PROPERTY REQUIRED TEST/ 

TEST METHOD 

ACCEPTANCE/REJECTION 

CRITERIA (Minimum) 

Type B

Grab Tensile 

Strength (lbs) ASTM D4632 240 

Grab Elongation 

(%) ASTM D 4632 60 

Trapezoidal Tear 

Strength (lbs) ASTM D4533 90 

Puncture Strength 

(lbs) ASTM D4833 67 

UV resistance @ 

500 hrs ASTM D4355 70 

Apparent Opening 

Size (US Sieve) ASTM D4751 140 

Permittivity (sec-1) ASTM D4491 0.1 

Water Flow Rate 

(gal/min/ft2

) ASTM D4491 15 

Mass Per Unit 

Area (oz/yd2

) ASTM D5261 6.0 

Geogrid

Thickness (in) ASTM D1777 Junction 0.16 

Rib-MD 0.059/Rib-TD 0.059 

Mass Per Unit 

Area (oz/yd2

) ASTM D5261 9.7 

Peak Tensile 

Strength (lb/ft) ASTM D6637 MD: 1,370 TD: 2,100 

Flexural Rigidity 

(mg-cm) ASTM D1388 750,000 

MD – Machine Direction (longitudinal to the roll) 

TD – Transverse Direction (across roll width) 

END OF SECTION 

Geotextiles 2.9-3 
2.10 Common Fill

2.10.1 General Description 

Common fill designated as Fill, I-11 and Fill, I-13 shall be used for embankment construction, 

grading, and backfilling of excavations. Fill, I-11 shall be placed underwater and to within one foot 

above mean water line. Common fill shall be placed so as to not cause any damage to the 

underlying layers. Common Fill shall include purchase, excavation, stockpiling, hauling, 

placement, and compaction of pre-qualified material from an off-site borrow area. 

2.10.2 Material 

Common fill shall consist of bank-run sand and gravel, commercial sand and gravel combined, blast

furnace slag, or stone, except that blast furnace slag will not be permitted when in contact with 

concrete. 

Common fill from a single source shall be used in any one construction item, unless otherwise 

submitted and approved by the Engineer. Common fill from different sources may be considered, if 

the sources are of the same geological classification and have similar specific gravities and color. 

Fill, I-11 will be used to create the new Williams-TRANSCO gas pipeline easement for filling 

below the mean waterline and up to 12” above the waterline. The gradation requirements shall 

apply to material prior to placement. The contractor shall provide one sieve analysis (ASTM D422) 

per proposed borrow source as per Section 1.10. Fill, I-11 shall conform to the following gradation 

requirements: 

I-11 Gradation Designation 

Sieve Size weight passing square mesh sieves 

4” 100 % 

2” 80-100 % 

3⁄4” 60-100 % 

#4 40-100 % 

#50 0-75 % 

#200 0-9 % 

The gradation requirements for Fill, I-13 shall apply to material prior to placement. The contractor 

shall provide the results of one sieve analysis (ASTM D422) and one Modified Proctor (ASTM 

D1557) test per borrow source as per Section 1.10. If bank-run or other materials conforming to 

these requirements are not available, materials that conform thereto may be produced by combining 

and mixing. Such combining and mixing shall not be performed on-site. 

I-13 Gradation Designation 

Sieve Size weight passing square mesh sieves 

#4 100 % 

#50 30-100 % 

#200 0-12 % 

Common Fill 2.10-1 
All common fill brought from off-site must meet the following requirements (from NJAC 7:26D): 

1. Fill shall be uncontaminated pursuant to the more stringent of DEP’s Non-Residential Direct 

Contact Soil Remediation Standards or DEP’s Default Leachate Criteria for Class II Ground 

Water found in DEP’s Guidance for the use of the Synthetic Precipitation Leaching 

Procedure to Develop Site-Specific Impact to Ground Water Remediation Standards and 

shall be free of extraneous debris or solid waste. Additional testing, sampling, and 

laboratory delays will result for all changes of source of imported fill. 

2. Documentation shall be provided by certification stating that it is virgin material from a 

commercial or noncommercial source or decontaminated recycled soil. 

3. All proposed sources of fill must be pre-approved by the Engineer. Bills of lading shall be 

provided to the Engineer to document the source(s) of fill. The documentation shall include: 

(1) the name of the affiant and relationship to the source of the fill, (2) location where the fill 

was obtained, including the street, town, lot, block, county and state and a brief history of 

the site which is the source of fill, and (3) a statement that to the best of the affiant’s 

knowledge and belief the fill being provided is not contaminated pursuant to #1 above and a 

description of the steps taken to confirm such. 

4. The Engineer will acquire samples for analytical testing for compliance with the NJDEP 

Standards and Guidance for clean fill as described in Item (1) above. No fill may be brought 

to the site until the Engineer confirms that it meets the NJDEP Standards and Guidance. 

The Contractor should allow adequate time in his project schedule for the sampling, 

analysis, and review of analytical data. 

2.10.3 Submittals 

Submittals shall be according to Section 1.3 and shall include the source location, copy of the 

borrow area permits, and results of analysis indicating material meets the criteria of these Technical 

Specifications. 

2.10.4 Placement and Compaction 

Embankments of Fill, I-11 in swamp or wet areas shall be constructed as follows. Fill, I-11 may be 

end-dumped and spread by a dozer. Fill, I-11 shall only be placed and spread to such an elevation 

that permits the use of compacting equipment, but not more than 1 foot above water elevation, 

unless otherwise directed by the Engineer. Fill, I-11 shall be placed and spread to full thickness and 

then compacted in 10 overlapping passes using a minimum 13 ton static weight roller. 

The manner of filling and advancing the Fill, I-11 wedge shall be such as to displace any underlying 

soft and wet material laterally to the sides and not entrap it under the fill. If Fill, I-11 is spilled or 

otherwise deposited on the top or sides of the embankment during this operation, it shall be entirely 

removed without additional compensation. The formation of the embankment shall proceed 

Common Fill 2.10-2 
continuously from one end to the other in such manner that soft and wet underlying material is not 

entrapped under the new embankment. 

Fill, I-13 will be used for the following purposes/locations (1) as fill material above the Fill, I-11 for 

the new gas pipeline easement embankment, (2) the final 12” of fill over the installed gas pipeline, 

and (3) as directed by the Engineer for backfill on other portions of the project. Note, Fill, I-13 

cover material on the landfill is intended to provide a relatively high bearing capacity for future 

development, and should be well compacted. 

Fill, I-13 shall be placed in maximum 12” loose lifts and compacted to 92% of the maximum dry 

density as measured using the Modified Proctor test (ASTM D1557). In place Fill, I-13 shall be 

within 5% of the optimum moisture content after compaction. Compaction density testing shall be 

conducted at a minimum rate of one (1) test per 2,500 square feet of each lift. 

Precautions shall be taken to prevent settlement or dislocation of, or damage to, any existing 

structures. If structures are damaged by or as a result of the work, they shall be repaired, replaced, 

or otherwise restored, without additional compensation, to a condition as good as prevailed at the 

time the Project started. 

2.10.5 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.10.1 Fill, I-11 Ton 

2.10.2 Fill, I-13 Ton 

2.10.3 Fill, I-11, If and Where Directed Ton 

2.10.4 Fill, I-13, If and Where Directed Ton 

The Contractor will be paid the bid price per ton for Pay Item 2.10.1 and 2.10.2 for the purchase, 

excavation, Proctor and particle size testing, stockpiling, handling, placement, compaction, and 

compaction testing of Fill, I-11 and Fill, I-13. Costs for obtaining off-site material shall be included 

in the Contractor’s unit price(s) for the specific use proposed. Separate payment will be made per 

Bid Item 2.10.3 and 2.10.4 for If and Where Directed items. Refer to Section 1.2.29 for addition 

language regarding if and where directed items. 

The Contractor will NOT be paid under Item 2.10.2 Fill, I-13 for fill associated with daily cover to 

cover the relocated waste. The cost for daily shall be included in Pay Items 2.5 and 2.5.1. The 

Contractor will be paid under Item 2.10.2 Fill, I-13 for fill associated with the final waste cover. 

END OF SECTION

Common Fill 2.10-3 
2.11 Coarse Aggregate (#57)

2.11.1 General Description 

Coarse Aggregate (#57) shall be used for a variety of applications for this project, including;, fill 

under the gas blower and gas flare pads, and general fill in wet areas. Aggregates from a single 

source shall be used in any one construction item, unless otherwise authorized. Aggregates from 

different sources may be permitted, if they are of the same geological classification and have similar 

specific gravities and color. The coarse aggregate shall include purchase, stockpiling, hauling, and 

placement of pre-qualified material from off-site. 

2.11.2 Material 

Coarse aggregate (#57) shall be broken stone, washed gravel, blast furnace slag, and boiler slag 

graded as shown in the following table. Broken stone shall be uniform in texture and quality and 

shall be free of organic matter, wood, garbage, metal, debris, or lumps of clay. Blast furnace slag 

will not be permitted when in contact with concrete. 

The gradation requirements shall apply to material prior to placement. 

Coarse Aggregate (#57) Gradation Designation 

Sieve Size Weight passing square mesh 

sieves 

1 1⁄2” 100 % 

1” 95-100 % 

1⁄2” 25-60 % 

#4 0-10% 

#8 0-5% 

Requirements for Clean Fill 

All Coarse Aggregate (#57) brought from off-site must meet the following requirements (from 

NJAC 7:26D): 

1. Fill shall be uncontaminated pursuant to the more stringent of DEP’s Non-Residential Direct 

Contact Soil Remediation Standards or DEP’s Default Leachate Criteria for Class II Ground 

Water found in DEP’s Guidance for the use of the Synthetic Precipitation Leaching 

Procedure to Develop Site-Specific Impact to Ground Water Remediation Standards and 

shall be free of extraneous debris or solid waste. Additional testing, sampling, and 

laboratory delays will result for all changes of source of imported fill. 

2. Documentation shall be provided by certification stating that it is virgin material from a 

commercial or noncommercial source or decontaminated recycled soil. 

Coarse Aggregate 2.11-1 
3. All proposed sources of fill must be pre-approved by the Engineer. Bills of lading shall be 

provided to the Engineer to document the source(s) of fill. The documentation shall include: 

(1) the name of the affiant and relationship to the source of the fill, (2) location where the fill 

was obtained, including the street, town, lot, block, county and state and a brief history of 

the site which is the source of fill, and (3) a statement that to the best of the affiant’s 

knowledge and belief the fill being provided is not contaminated pursuant to #1 above and a 

description of the steps taken to confirm such. 

4. The Engineer will acquire samples for analytical testing for compliance with the NJDEP 

Standards and Guidance for clean fill as described in Item (1) above. No fill may be brought 

to the site until the Engineer confirms that it meets the NJDEP Standards and Guidance. 

The Contractor should allow adequate time in his project schedule for the sampling, 

analysis, and review of analytical data. 

2.11.3 Submittals 

Submittals shall be according to Section 1.3 and shall include the source location, and results of 

analysis indicating material meets the criteria of these Technical Specifications. 

2.11.4 Placement and Compaction 

Material used for structure foundations within the blower pad area shall be placed in 8 inch loose 

lifts and then be compacted by 1 pass of a minimum 13 ton vibratory cylinder roller, as approved by 

the Engineer. 

Within other confined areas, Coarse Aggregate (#57) shall be hand placed in layers 6 inch loose 

layers and each layer shall be compacted with flat-face mechanical tampers. 

2.11.5 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.11 Coarse Aggregate (#57), Cubic Yard 

 if and where directed 

The Contractor will be paid the bid price per cubic yard including material, labor, placement and 

compaction of Coarse Aggregate (#57) fill, if and where directed by the Engineer. 

Separate payment will not be made for Coarse Aggregate (#57) included and paid under other pay 

items such as gas blower and flare pads. 

END OF SECTION 

Coarse Aggregate 2.11-2 
2.12 Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 

2.12.1 Related Documents 

Drawings and general provisions of the Contract, including General and Supplementary 

Conditions and Specification Sections, apply to this Section. Additionally, the NJDOT Standard 

Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction (Revised December 2006) shall apply to this 

Section for all items associated with concrete work. 

2.12.2 General Description 

The gas blower, transformer, and flare pads shall be constructed in accordance with the Drawings 

and these specifications. In the future the gas blower pad will house a mechanical blower for the 

landfill gas venting system, a transformer station, and a flare. The pad is to be built on the piles 

which are described in Section 2.13. Construction of the Gas Blower Pads should be completed in 

the following general steps: preparation of subgrade, installation of piles, placement of base course, 

and finally construction of reinforced concrete pad. 

2.12.2 Submittals 

Mix Design: Submit proposed concrete production facility qualifications for acceptance by the 

Engineer prior to commencement of work. Concrete production facility qualifications can be found 

in section 2.12.9. 

Ready-Mix Delivery Tickets: ANSI/ASTM C94. 

Shop Drawings and Product Data: Submit in accordance with project documents. 

Shop Drawings: Prior to fabrication and delivery, submit shop drawings clearly indicating: 

1. Reinforcing bar sizes, spacing, location and quantities of reinforcing steel and wire fabric, 

bending and cutting schedules, and supporting and spacing devices. 

2. Reinforcement Details: Details, splices, and lengths of laps shall be in accordance with ACI 

315; CRSI - Manual of Standard Practice, and in accordance with Contract Drawing 

requirements. 

3. Construction and control joints not shown on drawings. 

Product Data: Submit manufacturer's descriptive literature and application/installation instructions 

and recommended procedures. 

2.12.3 Environmental Requirements 

Allowable Concrete Temperatures: 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-1 
1. Cold Weather: Conform to maximum and minimum requirements of ANSI/ASTM C94 and 

ACI 306. 

a. Do not use frozen materials or materials containing ice or snow. 

b. Do not place concrete on frozen subgrade or on subgrade containing frozen 

materials. 

Note: Use only specified non-corrosive, non-chloride accelerator. Calcium chloride, 

Thicyanates or admixtures containing more than 0.05% chloride ions are not 

permitted. 

2. Hot Weather: Maximum concrete temperature of 90° F, conform to requirements of 

ANSI/ASTM C94 and ACI 305. 

a. Prevent rapid drying during hot weather. 

Do not place concrete during rain, sleet, or snow unless protection is provided. 

2.12.4 Form Materials 

Form work: Conform with requirements of ACI 347, Chapter 3, Materials and Form Work. 

1. Material: 

a. Use either steel forms, designed specifically for the purpose, or wood forms of 

plywood or lumber not less than 3/4" thick. 

b. Non-Architectural Concrete: Unlined lumber or plywood may be used. 

Corner Forms (when Applicable): 3/4" chamfer or profile indicated, made of plastic, rubber, or 

wood. 

Ties: Snap type, carbon steel where not exposed and stainless steel for exterior or exposed concrete. 

Nails, Spikes, Lag Bolts, Through Bolts, Anchors: Sized as required; of sufficient strength and 

character to maintain formwork in place while placing and curing concrete. 

Form Release Agent: Colorless mineral oil which will not stain concrete or impair natural bonding, 

or color characteristics, or other coating intended for use on concrete. 

1. Coating must be applied prior to placement of reinforcement. 

2.12.5 Reinforcing 

Fabrication: In accordance with CRSI - Manual of Standard Practice, ACI 315, and the drawings. 

Reinforcing Steel: ANSI/ASTM A615, ANSI/ASTM A616, ANSI/ASTM A617, 60 ksi yield grade 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-2 
steel bars; uncoated finish, sizes as indicated. 

Tie Wire: FS QQ-W-46G, annealed black steel, 16 gauge minimum. 

Chairs, Bolsters, Bar Supports, Spacers: Adequately sized and shaped for strength and support of 

reinforcing during concrete operations. 

No welding of reinforcing bars will be permitted without approval of Engineer. 

All reinforcement shall be continued across joints, except for slabs-on-grade. 

2.12.6 Concrete Materials 

Concrete (Ready-mixed): Shall conform to requirements of ACI 301, ACI 318, and ANSI/ASTM 

C94. 

Cement: ANSI/ASTM C150, normal Type I or II, Portland, gray color. Cement for concrete 

exposed to view shall be of one manufacturer. 

Coarse Aggregate: ANSI/ASTM C33, with a maximum size limited to requirements of ACI 318. 

Fine Aggregate: ANSI/ASTM C33, washed, hard sand. 

Water: Fresh, clean, potable, and not detrimental to concrete. 

2.12.7 Admixtures 

Water Reducing Admixture: ANSI/ASTM C494, Type A, containing no more chloride ions than 

present in municipal drinking water, "Eucon WR-75", as manufactured by the Euclid Chemical 

Company, Cleveland, OH; "Pozzolith 200" by Master Builders; or "Plastocrete 160" by Sika 

Chemical Corp. 

Water Reducing, Retarding Admixture: ANSI/ASTM C494, Type D, containing no more chloride 

ions than present in municipal drinking water, "Eucon Retarder-75" as manufactured by the Euclid 

Chemical Company; "Pozzolith 100XR" by Master Builders; or "Plastiment" by Sika Chemical 

Corporation. 

Air Entrainment Admixture: ANSI/ASTM C260. 

Prohibited Admixtures: Calcium chloride, thiocyanates or admixtures containing more than 0.05% 

chloride ions are not permitted. 

Certification: Written conformance with the above mentioned requirements, and the chloride ion 

content of the admixture will be required from the admixture manufacturer prior to mix design 

review by the Engineer. 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-3 
2.12.8 Curing Materials 

Liquid Membrane Forming Compound Type: Do not use curing and sealing compounds which are 

not compatible with adhesives and cements for finish materials when scheduled to go over concrete 

substrates, and where concrete is scheduled to receive special coatings or toppings. 

1. Type: Clear styrene acrylate type, 30% solids content minimum. Sodium Silicate 

compounds are prohibited. 

2. Moisture Loss: Test data from independent testing laboratory indicating a maximum 

moisture loss of 0.030 grams per sq. cm. when applied at a coverage rate of 300 sq.ft. per 

gallon. 

3. Manufacturer: "Super Rez Seal" as manufactured by The Euclid Chemical Co.; "Vulkem 

2101" by Mameco International, Inc.; or "Masterkure 30" by Master Builders. 

4. Certificate: Manufacturer’s certification required. 

Non-Liquid Membrane Type: When Liquid Membrane Type curing compounds are not compatible, 

or specified not to be used, use one of the following materials. 

1. Regular concrete "CURING PAPER", ANSI/ASTM C171. 

2. Polyethylene film, ANSI/ASTM D2103, 6 mil thick, "WHITE" opaque type. 

a. Black or Clear-type polyethylene-type films will not be acceptable. 

2.12.9 Accessories 

Expansion Joint Material: Preformed asphalt, ANSI/ASTM D994; or FS HH-F-341F, Type II, 1/4" 

thick by full depth of concrete. 

Control Joint Materials: Use for exterior sawed control joints. 

1. Joint Sealant: ASTM C290, Type M, Grade NS, Class 25, two component type, urethane 

sealant, requiring no primer, "Eucolastic II" by Euclid Chemical Co., or "Vulkem - 922" by 

Mameco International. 

2. Joint Filler: Compatible with sealant, closed cell polyethylene foam, PVC foam or other 

fillers not containing asphalt or tar, as approved by Engineer. 

Waterstops (as applicable): Rubber or polyvinylchloride; type and width as indicated by maximum 

possible lengths, with electrically welded splice joints. 

Splash blocks (as applicable): Precast concrete type, of size(s) indicated and as required to properly 

collect and remove storm water. 

2.12.10 Concrete Mix 

Mix concrete only in quantities for immediate use, and in accordance with ANSI/ASTM C94. 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-4 
The concrete shall be poured within 90 minutes from leaving the plant. 

Mix Proportioning: Concrete design mixes are based on a minimum 28 day compressive strength 

as follows: 

Location Req'd 28 day 

Compressive 

Strength P.S.I.

Max. Water 

Cem. Ratio

Air 

Content

Exterior site concrete unless noted 

otherwise on the Drawings 

4,000 0.40 4.0%-6.0% 

Notes: All coarse aggregate size shall be AASHTO #57. 

Proportions for concrete mixes shall be selected by ACI 301, Section 3.9. All mixes will be 

permitted without prior approval of the Engineer. 

Where the concrete production facility can establish the uniformity of its production for concrete of 

similar strength and materials based on recent test data, the average strength and materials based on 

recent test data, the average strength used as a basis for determining mix design proportions shall 

exceed the specified strength by the requirements of ACI-318-83, Section 4.3 or ACI-301-84, 

Section 3.9. 

When a concrete production facility does not have test records for calculation of standard deviation, 

the required average strength shall be at least 1200 psi greater than the specified design strength. 

All concrete shall have a maximum slump of 3" for slabs and 4" for other members. This maximum 

slump may not be exceeded. 

A. Ready-Mixed Concrete: Measure, batch, mix, and deliver concrete according to 

ASTM C 94/C 94M and ASTM C 1116, and furnish batch ticket information. 

1. When air temperature is between 85 and 90 deg F, reduce mixing and delivery 

time from 1-1/2 hours to 75 minutes; when air temperature is above 90 deg F, 

reduce mixing and delivery time to 60 minutes. 

2.12.11 Subgrade Preparation 

Grade area to where concrete gas blower pad it so be installed. Grading shall be done in accordance 

with methods described in Section 2.5. Area shall be compacted in accordance with compaction 

method described in Section 2.3.7.2, before placement of base course. Place and compact 6” coarse 

aggregate #57 base course over prepared subgrade. Unsuitable areas identified during compaction 

shall be repaired before placement of concrete. All compaction testing must be completed before 

pouring base course. 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-5 
Surface Preparation: Remove loose material from compacted base material surface to produce a 

firm, smooth surface immediately before placing concrete. 

2.12.12 Formwork Erection 

Placement: Conform to requirements of ACI-347 

Verify lines, levels and centers before proceeding with formwork. Ensure that dimensions agree 

with drawings. 

Construct formwork, shoring and bracing to meet design and code requirements accurately so that 

resultant finished concrete conforms to shapes, lines and dimensions indicated on drawings. 

Arrange and assemble formwork so as to permit easy dismantling and stripping, so that concrete is 

not damaged during form removal. 

Align form joints and make watertight, to prevent leakage of mortar and disfigured appearance of 

concrete. Keep form joints to minimum. 

Arrange forms to allow stripping without removal of principal shores, where these are required to 

remain in place. 

Provide bracing to ensure stability of formwork as a whole. Prop or strengthen all previously 

constructed parts liable to be overstressed by construction loads. 

Apply form release agent on formwork in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations. 

Apply prior to placing reinforcing steel, anchoring devices and embedded parts. Do not apply form 

release agent where concrete surfaces are to receive special finishes or applied coverings which are 

affected by agent. 

2.12.13 Inserts/Embedded Parts/Openings 

Provide formed openings where required for pipes, conduits, sleeves and other work to be 

embedded in and passing through concrete members. 

Accurately locate and set in place items which are to be cast directly into concrete. 

Coordinate work of other sections and cooperate with trade involved in forms and/or setting 

openings, slots, recesses, chases, sleeves, bolts, anchors and other inserts. Do not perform work 

unless specifically indicated on drawings or approved prior to installation. 

Install all concrete accessories in accordance with drawings and manufacturer's recommendations; 

straight, level, and plumb. Ensure items are not disturbed during concrete placement. 

Install waterstops, when appropriate to project, continuous without displacing reinforcement. Heat 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-6 
weld all joints watertight. 

Provide temporary ports or openings in formwork where required to facilitate cleaning and 

inspection. Locate openings at bottom of forms to allow flushing water to drain. Close temporary 

ports or openings with tight fitting panels, flush with inside face of forms, neatly fitted so that joints 

will not be apparent in exposed concrete surfaces. 

2.12.14 Cleaning Forms 

Clean forms as erection proceeds, to remove foreign matter. Remove cuttings, shavings and debris 

from within forms. Flush completely with water to remove remaining foreign matter. Ensure that 

water and debris drain to exterior through clean-out ports. 

During cold weather, remove ice and snow from within forms. Do not use de-icing salts. Do not 

use water to clean out completed forms, unless formwork and concrete construction proceed within 

a heated enclosure. Use compressed air or other means to remove foreign matter. 

2.12.15 Reinforcing Placement 

Placement of Steel Bar Reinforcing: 

1. Conform to CRSI - Manual of Standard Practice. 

2. Place reinforcing as indicated on drawings, adequately supported and secured against 

deplacement. 

3. Do not deviate from true alignment. 

Adjustment: 

1. Move within allowable tolerances to avoid interference with other reinforcing steel, 

conduits, or other embedded items. 

2. Do not move bars beyond allowable tolerances without approval by Engineer. 

3. Do not heat, bend, or cut bars in the field without approval by Engineer. 

Splices: 

1. Lap Splices: Tie securely with wire to prevent displacement of splices during placement of 

concrete. 

2. Splice Devices: Install in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. 

3. Do not splice bars except at locations shown on approved shop drawings. 

a. If splice locations are not shown, then only at locations and types as directed by 

Engineer. 

Cleaning: 

1. Remove all dirt, grease, oil, loose mill scale, excessive rust, and foreign matter that will

reduce bond with concrete. 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-7 
Protection: 

1. Keep reinforcing steel in proper position during concrete placement and operations. 

2.12.16 Placing Concrete 

Place concrete in accordance with lines and levels indicated on drawings and in accordance with 

requirements of ACI 304. 

Ensure all expansion joint material, anchors, sets, plates, and other items to be cast into concrete are 

in place and held securely. 

Ensure reinforcements, inserts, embedded parts, formed expansion and contraction joints, and other 

items are not disturbed during concrete placement. 

Convey concrete from mixer or transporting vehicle to place of final deposit as rapidly as practical 

by methods which will prevent separation or loss of the material. 

Regulate rate of placement so concrete remains plastic and flows into position. 

Do not deposit concrete that has partially hardened. 

Deposit concrete in continuous operation until panel or section is completed. 

Place concrete in continuous horizontal layers. 

Slabs-On-Grade: Place slabs in "long strip pattern", in accordance with ACI 302.1R, Chapter 6. 

Pattern shall be formed by use of prefabricated tongue and grooved metal key joints. Divide placed 

concrete strips into approximate square sections by making transversed "control joints" as specified 

below. 

2.12.17 Concrete Joints 

Control (contraction) Joints: Provide control joints for sectioning concrete into areas to eliminate 

shrinkage and thermal cracking. 

1. Form weakened-plane control joints to a depth equal to a minimum of 1

/4 the concrete 

thickness, using one of the following methods: 

a. Tooled Joints: Form joints in fresh concrete by hand grooving top portion of 

surface. 

b. Insert Joints: Form joints by inserting preformed plastic or metal control joint strips 

into the top surface of freshly placed concrete. 

c. Sawed Joints: Form joints by using power saw equipped with shatterproof or 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-8 
diamond-rimmed blades. Cut joints into hardened concrete as soon as surface will 

not be torn, abraded, or otherwise damaged by the cutting action. 

1) Soft-Cut Saw: Shall be used immediately after final finishing and to 

a depth of 1 1

/4". 

2) Conventional Saw: Shall be used as soon as possible without 

dislodging aggregate, to a depth of 1

/4 slab thickness. 

3) Immediately after saw cutting, clean and dry joints, place joint filler 

and apply sealant in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. 

2. At all construction joints of slabs on grade, discontinue slab reinforcement. 

3. Place vertical wall construction joints at 20' intervals for walls over 30' in length. 

Isolation Joints: 

1. Separate floor slabs from vertical surfaces with 15 lb. roofing felt paper. 

2. Isolate structural columns, when applicable, by forming diamond-shaped isolation joints. 

a. Install joint filler around diamond shaped formwork, placing floor slab before 

placing diamond around column. 

b. Extend joint filler from bottom of slab to within 1/4" of finished slab surface. 

3. Install isolation joints at all locations as may be indicated on drawings. 

Construction Joints (Bonding): 

1. Clean and roughen surface of hardened concrete, and remove laitance. 

2. Dampen surface, if required. Surface shall be prepared in accordance with the bonding 

material manufacturer's directions. 

3. Bonding compound, bonding admixture, or epoxy adhesive shall be used in strict 

accordance with the directions of the manufacturer. 

a. Type shall be as approved by Engineer. 

4. Fresh concrete shall be placed after bonding compound has dried and while bonding 

admixture grout or epoxy adhesive is still tacky. 

2.12.18 Consolidating Concrete 

During and immediately after depositing, all concrete shall be thoroughly consolidated by means of 

suitable tools, as recommend by ACI. 

2.12.19 Concrete Finishing 

Formed Concrete: 

1. Tops of Forms: 

a. Strike off concrete smooth at tops of forms. 

b. Float to texture comparable to formed surfaces. 

2. Formed Surfaces: 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-9 
a. Spade Finish: Surfaces not exposed to view shall be given a spade finish. 

1) Patch tie holes and other defects after form removal. 

2) During placement of concrete, force spade or similar device into 

concrete adjacent to form and then pulling away from form, to bring mortar 

to form surface. 

3) Remove fins from finish surface. 

b. Rubbed Finish: Surfaces exposed to view shall be given a rubbed finish. 

1) On patched surface specified above, rub surface with carborundum 

stone to eliminate fins and irregularities, but not to cut the general surface of 

the concrete. 

2) Brush finishing or painting with grout or neat cement will not be 

permitted. 

3) Corners or edges shall be slightly rounded by use of the 

carborundum stone. 

Flatwork: 

1. Tolerances: Place, consolidate, strike off level, float and trowel smooth, and maintain 

surface flatness with maximum variation of 1/8" in 10'. Pitch to drains 1/4" per ft. unless 

noted otherwise on drawings. 

2. General: 

a. Place, consolidate, strike off and level concrete. 

b. Do not work surface until ready for floating. 

c. Power float surface on disappearance of water sheen. 

d. Hand float areas inaccessible to power float. 

2.12.20 Curing and Protection 

Beginning immediately after placement, and final finishing, cure and protect concrete from 

premature drying, excessively hot or cold temperatures, and mechanical injury. 

Liquid Membrane Curing Compounds: Curing shall be by application of specified curing and 

sealing compound, the specified dissipating resin-type compound, or by application of waterproof 

sheet materials conforming to ASTM C171. Liquid membrane-forming curing and sealing 

compounds shall be applied in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. Curing 

compounds must be applied immediately after final finishing. For curing by the waterproof sheet 

material, the concrete must be continually moist-cured for a minimum of seven days. The curing 

process must begin immediately after final finishing. 

The curing period shall be continuous for a minimum duration of seven days when the ambient 

temperature exceeds 50° F. 

When concrete slab placement is subject to high temperatures, wind and/or low humidity the 

Engineer may require the use of the specified evaporation retarder to minimize plastic cracking. 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-10 
The compound may be required to be applied one or more times during the finishing operation. The 

initial application is usually made after the strike-off operation. 

2.12.21 Final Sealing 

Sealer Finish: Apply a coat of the specified water-based acrylic emulsion compound to all new 

slabs which are scheduled to be left exposed. The compound shall be applied just prior to 

completion of project. 

2.12.22 Form Removal 

Do not remove forms, shores and bracing for a minimum of 12 hours, and until concrete has gained 

sufficient strength to carry its own weight, construction loads, and design loads which are liable to 

be imposed upon it. Verify strength of concrete by field cured compressive test results. 

Remove formwork progressively and in accordance with code requirements and so that no shock 

loads or unbalanced loads are imposed on structure. 

Loosen forms carefully. Do not wedge pry bars, hammers or tools against concrete surfaces. 

Reshore structural members where required due to design requirements or construction conditions 

and as required to permit progressive construction. Remove load supporting forms only after 

concrete has attained 75% of required 28 day compressive strength, provided construction is 

reshored. 

Remove forms not directly supporting weight of concrete as soon as stripping operations will not 

damage concrete. 

Backfilling: Do not backfill against concrete walls for a minimum of seven days, or until the 

concrete has attained 70% of its design strength. 

2.12.23 Defective Concrete 

With prior approval of Engineer, as to method and procedures, all repair of defective areas shall 

conform to ACI 301, Chapter 9, except bond shall be achieved by use of one of the specified 

bonding materials. 

All structural repairs, with prior approval of Engineer, as to method and procedures, shall be made 

by use of the specified epoxy adhesive and/or epoxy mortar. 

2.12.24 Concrete Testing 

Testing will occur as per Section 1.10. The Contractor will take a minimum of one set of four 

cylinders per 50 Cubic Yards, with at least one cylinder collected for each day that concrete is 

placed. Test one cylinder in compression at 7 days and two at 28 days in accordance with ASTM C 

39; keep one cylinder in reserve for additional testing. 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-11 
2. Testing Frequency: Obtain one composite sample for each day's pour of each 

concrete mixture exceeding 5 cu. yd., but less than 25 cu. yd., plus one set for 

each additional 50 cu. yd. or fraction thereof. 

a. When frequency of testing will provide fewer than five compressivestrength tests for each concrete mixture, testing shall be conducted from at 

least five randomly selected batches or from each batch if fewer than five 

are used. 

3. Slump: ASTM C 143/C 143M; one test at point of placement for each composite 

sample, but not less than one test for each day's pour of each concrete mixture. 

Perform additional tests when concrete consistency appears to change. 

4. Air Content: ASTM C 231, pressure method, for normal-weight concrete; one 

test for each composite sample, but not less than one test for each day's pour of 

each concrete mixture. 

5. Concrete Temperature: ASTM C 1064/C 1064M; one test hourly when air 

temperature is 40 deg F and below and when 80 deg F and above, and one test for 

each composite sample. 

6. Compression Test Specimens: ASTM C 31/C 31M. 

a. Cast and laboratory cure two sets of two standard cylinder specimens for 

each composite sample. 

b. Cast and field cure two sets of two standard cylinder specimens for each 

composite sample. 

7. Compressive-Strength Tests: ASTM C 39/C 39M; test one set of two laboratorycured specimens at 7 days and one set of two specimens at 28 days. 

a. Test one set of two field-cured specimens at 7 days and one set of two 

specimens at 28 days. 

b. A compressive-strength test shall be the average compressive strength from 

a set of two specimens obtained from same composite sample and tested at 

age indicated. 

8. When strength of field-cured cylinders is less than 85 percent of companion 

laboratory-cured cylinders, Contractor shall evaluate operations and provide 

corrective procedures for protecting and curing in-place concrete. 

9. Strength of each concrete mixture will be satisfactory if every average of any 

three consecutive compressive-strength tests equals or exceeds specified 

compressive strength and no compressive-strength test value falls below specified 

compressive strength by more than 500 psi. 

10. Test results shall be reported in writing to the Engineer, concrete manufacturer, 

and Contractor within 48 hours of testing. Reports of compressive-strength tests 

shall contain Project identification name and number, date of concrete placement, 

name of concrete testing and inspecting agency, location of concrete batch in 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-12 
Work, design compressive strength at 28 days, concrete mixture proportions and 

materials, compressive breaking strength, and type of break for both 7- and 28-

day tests. 

11. Nondestructive Testing: Impact hammer, sonoscope, or other nondestructive 

device may be permitted by Architect but will not be used as sole basis for 

approval or rejection of concrete. 

12. Additional Tests: Testing and inspecting agency shall make additional tests of 

concrete when test results indicate that slump, air entrainment, compressive 

strengths, or other requirements have not been met, as directed by Engineer. 

Testing and inspecting agency may conduct tests to determine adequacy of 

concrete by cored cylinders complying with ASTM C 42/C 42M or by other 

methods as directed by Engineer. 

13. Additional testing and inspecting, at Contractor's expense, will be performed to 

determine compliance of replaced or additional work with specified requirements. 

14. Correct deficiencies in the Work that test reports and inspections indicate does not 

comply with the Contract Documents. 

2.12.25 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.12 Concrete Pad for Gas Blower and Gas Flare Lump Sum 

The Contractor shall be paid Lump Sum for the Bid Item No. 2.12 - Concrete Pad for Gas Blower. 

This includes all labor and materials for the concrete pad for the gas blower. This also includes the 

installation of the condensate drain pipe, electric conduit, and the Coarse Aggregate #57 bedding for 

the condensate drain pipe, reinforcing steel, formwork, and the 6” layer of Coarse Aggregate #57 

bedding for the concrete pad as shown on the Contract Drawings. Separate payment will not be 

made for any other site concrete work. 

END OF SECTION 

Concrete Pads for Gas Blower, Transformer and Gas Flare 2.12-13 
2.13 Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles 

2.13.1 General 

Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles will be installed in order to support the concrete pad for the blower 

and gas flare. 

2.13.1.1 Related Documents 

 A. Drawings and general provisions of the Contract, including General and Supplementary 

Conditions and Specification Sections, apply to this Section. 

 B. The provisions of the AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges and the 

New Jersey Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge 

Construction, Section 505 relating to Pile Foundations shall in general govern the work of 

this section, except that where more severe requirements than those contained in the 

Specifications are given in this section, the more severe requirements shall govern. 

2.13.1.2 Summary 

A. This Section includes the foundation pilings for the Concrete Pad for Gas Blower. 

B. Types of driven Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles include the following: 

1. 7.875 in. diameter, 0.500 in. wall thickness, closed end steel pipe piles filled with 

concrete 

 C. Site Conditions: The work shall be performed at a former landfill, near the existing gas 

plant. Contractor shall be familiar with all existing site conditions and health and safety 

concerns (Reference Section 3.1, Health and Safety Plan). 

Contractor shall fully examine the existing site conditions to ensure that his equipment 

can operate without damage to or relocation of existing utilities, structures or structural 

members. The Contractor shall provide all required equipment, modified if needed to 

accommodate site conditions. 

In order to alleviate concerns of vibration induced malfunctioning, vibration monitoring 

shall be performed during pile driving operations. 

 

2.13.1.3 Submittals

A. Driving records of each pile shall be submitted to Engineer within 24 hours after driving. 

Include the following data: 

1. Project name and number. 

2. Name of Contractor. 

Piles 2.13-1 
3. Pile location, number and date driven. 

4. Type and size of hammer used. 

5. Type of pile driving cap used. 

6. Rate of operation of pile driving equipment. 

7. Pile dimensions. 

8. Elevation of point. 

9. Elevation of butt before and after cut-off. 

10. Ground elevation. 

11. Vibration velocity measurements at existing structures within 200 feet of the pile 

12. Continuous record of number of blows for each foot of penetration. 

13. Pile deviation. 

14. Pile uplift and reaction. 

15. Unusual occurrences during pile driving. 

 B. Pile location survey. See section 2.13.1.4 B for details. 

 C. Certificate of welder’s qualifications. 

2.13.1.4 Quality Assurance 

A. The Contractor shall ultimately be responsible to insure and verify the Closed-End Steel 

Pipe Piles are installed in accordance with design and specifications’ requirements and as 

per the approval of the Engineer and State. 

B. Pile Location Survey 

1. The installed location of each pile shall be established by a licensed surveyor and 

shown on drawings. Copies of which shall be submitted by the Contractor in 

accordance with the provisions as hereinafter specified in this paragraph. 

2. Survey information may be submitted on several drawings, each covering a partial 

area only, as the job progresses, in order to expedite the approval of the pile cap 

work, but upon completion of all pile driving, the Contractor shall submit to 

Engineer drawings, showing installed locations of all Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles, 

including obstructed, damaged and compensating Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles, as 

related to their respective design centers, percentage out of plumb and the cut-off 

elevations and length below cut-off for each pile. 

 C. Welder Qualifications: Qualify welders, welding processes, and procedures in accordance 

with American Welding Society (AWS) D1.1 “Structural Welding Code – Steel.” 

2.13.1.5 Delivery, Storage, and Handling 

A. All submittals related to the pile order should be approved before placing the order; 

otherwise the Contractor may order the Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles at their own risk. 

Piles 2.13-2 
 B. Store pile in orderly groups above ground and blocked to prevent distortion of 

members. 

2.13.1.6 Project Conditions 

A. Site Information: The proposed Concrete Pad for Gas Blower is adjacent to the 

existing Gas Plant. Prior to start of any site construction activity, the Contractor shall 

perform a Pre-construction condition survey with video documentation, which shall be 

used as the reference in case the building sustains damage during pile driving activities. 

The Contractor shall also perform a post construction survey for filing and comparison 

purposes. These survey documents shall be the main reference in case of any 

discrepancy. 

B. Data on indicated subsurface conditions are not intended as representations or 

warranties of continuity of such conditions. It is expressly understood that NJDEP or 

Engineer will not be responsible for interpretations or conclusions drawn by the 

Contractor. The data are made available for convenience of Contractor. 

 C. Protection: Protect structures, underground utilities, and other construction from damage 

caused by pile driving operations. 

 D. During installation of the Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles near the existing Gas Plant and 

buildings, vibrations shall be monitored continuously, and observe the conditions in the 

vicinity of the construction site on a daily basis. In case the vibration velocity (as peak 

particle velocity) exceeds 1 in/s, and/or frequency is less than 2 Hertz, all pile driving 

operations should be stopped. An alternative method should be developed to reduce 

vibration velocity and frequency to below set levels. No additional payment will be made 

for delays due to pile installation means and methods or changes in pile installation 

methods. 

2.13.2 Materials and Equipment 

2.13.2.1 Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles 

A. Pile: 7.875 in diameter by .500-in wall thickness Grade III Steel with a minimum yield 

stress of 50 ksi or better (complying with ASTM A 252), concrete filled, closed- end with 

welded end closure plates (boot). 

B. Closure plates: shall be equal to pile outside diameter with a tolerance of plus or minus 1/16 

inch and shall be 1.0 inch minimum thickness. The closure plates shall be made of similar 

or better grade material and shall be welded all around. 

C. Splices: Splices shall be made of similar or better material than the Closed-End Steel Pipe 

Piles. Splices where required shall be of internal type and full penetration butt welds shall 

be made all around. 

Piles 2.13-3 
D. Steel: Hot-rolled, carbon steel structural shapes and plates, complying with ASTM-A36. 

E. Each pile shall be filled with 4,000 psi concrete within 24 hours of it being driven to its full 

length. Concrete shall not be placed until the driven pile has been approved by the 

Engineer. The maximum allowed size of coarse aggregate in concrete shall be 3⁄4-inch. 

Provide vibration to, at least, the top 25 feet of each pile. A temporary pile cap shall be 

placed on top of each installed pile and maintained until the pile is approved by the 

Engineer and is filled with concrete. 

2.13.2.2 Driving Equipment 

 A. General: Provide pile driving equipment of type generally used in standard pile driving 

practice, operated at manufacturer’s specified rate, to develop required rated energy per 

blow. The energy required to drive the pile shall be based on one PDA testing and 

Wave Equation Analysis. The PDA should show an ultimate capacity of 60 tons, 

(equal to 2.5 times the design capacity of 24 tons). 

B. Hammer: Provide pile driving hammers of sufficient capacity, size, and type to be able to 

deliver consistently effective dynamic energy, suitable to Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles to 

be driven, and to sub grade material into which they are to be driven, when operating at 

not more than 75 percent efficiency of rated driving energy. 

 C. Driving Caps: Equip hammer with cast steel or structural steel driving cap with grooved 

base conforming to pile shape. Keep bearing surfaces of grooves true and smooth. The 

cushion cap or cap block shall be a solid block of hardwood with its grain parallel to the 

axis of the pile, and enclosed in a tight fitting steel housing. Cap blocks shall be replaced if 

burnt, crushed or otherwise damaged. Change packing often to ensure that the hammer 

energy is transmitted to the pile efficiently. 

 D. Leads: Use fixed or rigid-type pile driver leads that will hold pile firmly in position and 

alignment and in axial alignment with hammer. Extend leads to within 2 ft. of elevation at 

which the pile enters ground. 

2.13.3 Execution 

2.13.3.1 Preliminary Work 

A. Site Conditions: Do not drive Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles until earthwork in area in 

which Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles are to be driven has been completed, as follows: 

 1. Pre-boring (if required): Near surface obstacles shall be pre-bored using nonvibratory tool/ equipment. 

 2. Leveling excavations: Level excavation will be stopped at an elevation of 6 to 12 

inches above bottom of pile cap before Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles are driven. 

Final excavation of required elevation of footing bottoms will be done as part of 

Piles 2.13-4 
earthwork for building, after Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles have been driven and 

tested. 

 3. Fills: Fills will be constructed and compacted to elevation of grade indicated. 

B. Pile Length Markings: Mark each pile length with horizontal line at 1-foot intervals, and 

the number of feet from pile point at 5-foot intervals. Mark the final pile section at 1-0 

inch intervals to verify pile installed capacity by hammer blows. 

C. Splices: Clean surfaces to be spliced of rust, scale, oil, paint, and foreign material. Use 

only pile members with identical cross-sections for splicing. No splicing shall be provided 

in the upper ten (10) feet of the pile section. All splices, unless welded, shall be checked 

and tested for tightness. 

Make splices before starting driving operations wherever possible. 

Splices shall produce straight pile alignment through splice and developing full strength of

pile in both bearing and bending. 

2.13.3.2 Driving Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles 

A. General: Continuously drive Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles at locations indicated. The load 

 bearing capacity of Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles shall be demonstrated by a PDA test. The 

 pile length is estimated to be on the order of 60 feet. The Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles 

 shall be driven to an ultimate axial capacity of 60 kips in compression. The refusal, 

 defined as at least 36 blows foot per the final foot and a minimum of 3 blows for the last 

 two inches, to be verified by a PDA test, using a 15,000 ft-lbs hammer (nominal energy). 

 If a heavier hammer is used, the contractor shall obtain approval of the Engineer who will 

 re-define the refusal criteria. Any waste/refusal generated shall be handled in accordance 

 with Section 2.5. 

B. Obstruction to Driving: In parts of the site, obstructions may be encountered in soil above 

the accepted bearing stratum, making it difficult to drive Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles, in 

locations shown, to proper bearing strata. In such cases, the contractor shall overcome the 

obstruction by pre-boring, or other methods agreeable to Engineer. 

The Contractor shall have on hand suitable equipment for spudding through buried 

timbers, cribbing and similar obstruction and shall employ this equipment, when directed, 

in a manner satisfactory to the Engineer. 

C. Driving Tolerances: Drive Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles within following maximum 

 tolerances: 

1. Location: 3 inches from location indicated for center of gravity of each single 

 Pile. 

 2. Plumbness: Maintain 1 inch in 10 feet from vertical, or a maximum of 4 inches, 

measured when the pile is above ground in leads. 

Piles 2.13-5 
D. Heaved Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles: Provided recorded instrument observations made 

during pile driving to determine whether driven pile has lifted from its original seat during 

driving of adjacent Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles. If uplift occurs, redrive affected ClosedEnd Steel Pipe Piles to point of elevation at least as deep as original point elevation with a 

driving resistance at least as great as original driving resistance. 

E. Defective or Damaged Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles: When any pile that has been driven 

exceeds the tolerance hereinafter specified it may be rejected. When any driven pile has 

been so injured in driving (due to causes other than obstructions encountered) as to be, in 

the opinion of the Engineer, unsuitable or otherwise does not conform to the requirements 

of the contract, such Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles may be rejected. Additional Closed-End 

Steel Pipe Piles shall be installed in locations designated by the Engineer to replace 

rejected Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles. If practical the Contractor shall remove the rejected 

pile. In the event that subsurface obstructions are encountered and methods such as predrilling or “spudding” cannot penetrate the obstruction, additional piles should be driven in 

new locations as specified by the Engineer. The State will pay the “per foot” unit price for 

piles unable to penetrate waste. 

F. Cutting-Off: Cut-off tops of driven Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles with pile axis and at 

elevations indicated. Dispose of excess materials off site. Prior to any cut-off, the 

contractor shall ventilate the Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles to remove any gases that may 

have accumulated during/after pile driving operations. 

2.13.3.3 Corrective Measures 

A. It is intent to secure such conditions that the load on any pile shall not exceed the 

maximum load allowed by the design, and that any excessive lateral forces at the level of 

the pile cap due to lean in the pile caps themselves shall be resisted by properly designed 

concrete members. 

B. No forms for any pile caps shall be placed until the survey affecting the pile cap has

 been analyzed and approval to proceed with the formwork is given to the contractor. 

2.13.3.4 Concrete Fill 

Each Closed-End Steel Pipe Pile shall be filled with 4000 psi concrete, after it has been 

driven to its full length. Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles that have been met refusal and have 

been abandoned must also be filled with 4000 psi concrete. Concrete shall not be placed 

until the driven pile has been approved by the Engineer. A temporary pile cap shall be 

maintained at all times. Place concrete within maximum 24 hours after driving the pile. 

The maximum allowed size of coarse aggregate in concrete shall be 3⁄4-inch. Provide 

vibration at least to the top 25 feet of each pile. 

2.13.3.5 Pile Load Test 

Piles 2.13-6 
A minimum of one (1) PDA test is required to an ultimate capacity of 60 kips on the first 

pile. If the PDA test fails to meet the acceptance criteria, the design shall be modified to 

increase the pile length. Except for the additional payment for increased length at the 

given unit price, the contractor shall not be entitled for any other payment. At the 

completion of PDA testing, test results shall be submitted to the Engineer for his review 

and its acceptability as a production pile. 

2.13.3.6 Methods of Measurement 

Measurement will be made for quantities, as specified or directed by the 

Engineer, as follows: 

 Each closed-end steel pipe pile that is installed, and accepted. 

 Linear foot of piles unable to penetrate waste. 

 Each PDA Test (including CAPWAP) conducted 

 Additional length including splice welding (per linear foot). 

The final pay quantities will be the design quantity increased or decreased by any 

changes authorized by the Engineer. 

The Cost for mobilization and demobilization for the Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles 

installation shall be incorporated into the Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles Item Bid. 

2.13.3.7 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.13.1 Closed-End Steel Pipe Piles Linear Foot 

2.13.2 Closed-End Steel Pipe Pile Testing Each 

The bid price shall be deemed to include the estimated aggregate installed pile length below the cutoff elevations indicated on the Drawings, as specified on the Drawings for Item 2.13.1. 

The Contractor will be paid the bid unit price per pile for Bid Item 2.13.2, Closed-End Steel Pipe 

Pile Testing for all Closed-End Steel Pipe pile testing required, including PDA testing and 

CAPWAP analysis. No additional payment will be made for the following: 

1. Re-driving 

2. Delays, including weather, site conditions, equipment breakdown etc. 

3. Waste excavated will be paid as per Section 2.5. 

END OF SECTION

Piles 2.13-7 
2.14 Pavement Section at Site Entrance

 

2.14.1 General Description 

During Initial Site Operations, the Contractor shall install a 60’ by 30’ pavement section, as shown 

on the Contract Drawings, at the entrance to the Site along the proposed access road during initial 

site operations. The pavement section shall consist of with 2” of NJDOT Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) 

12.5H76 Surface Course, over 4” HMA 25M64 Base Course, over 18” of NJDOT Dense Graded 

Aggregate (DGA). The access road shall be placed so as to not cause any damage to the underlying 

layers. Access Road Pavement shall include purchase, excavation, stockpiling, hauling, placement, 

and compaction of pre-qualified material from an off-site borrow area. 

2.14.2 Material 

Access road material shall consist of NJDOT Standard DGA and HMA. Only NJDOT Standard

DGA and HMA from a single source and geological classification shall be allowed unless otherwise 

authorized. Test methods for gradation shall be used according to the appropriate provisions of 

AASHTO T 11 or T 27, unless otherwise stated. The Contractor shall submit the NJDOT Standard 

DGA and HMA material sheets to the Engineer for approval as per Section 1.3. 

DGA

Use a source of NJDOT Standard DGA that is listed on the NJDOT Qualified Products List (QPL). 

The Contractor shall sample the NJDOT Standard DGA according to AASHTO T 2. The 

Contractor shall apply the gradation requirements to the material after it has been placed and is 

compacted. Virgin DGA can be produced from broken stone conforming to NJDOT 901.03.01, 

crushed gravel conforming to NJDOT 901.03.02, or blast furnace slag conforming to NJDOT 

901.04, except that at least 90 percent of all fragments shall contain at least 1 fractured face. The 

contractor must ensure that the NJDOT Standard DGA conforms to the following requirements and 

gradation: 

1. Moisture Content 

• The moisture content of the DGA immediately before placement is 6% +- 2% based on dry 

weight. 

2. Plasticity and Gradation 

• When tested according to AASHTO T 90 ensure that the portion passing the No. 40 sieve is 

non-plastic. Ensure that the gradation conforms to the requirements specified in Table 

901.10.01-1 provided below. 

Pavement Section at Site Entrance 2.14-1 
Table 901.10.01-1 NJDOT DGA Gradation Requirements 

Sieve Size Percent Passing Square Mesh Sieves 

1-1/2” 100 % 

3⁄4” 55-90 % 

#4 25-50 % 

#50 5-20 % 

#200 3-10 % 

Hot Mix Asphalt

Ensure that NJDOT Standard HMA soil aggregate is free from elements of chemicals which, in the 

presence of water, would produce detrimental effects to pavements, structures, or utility lines, and is 

free of organic matter, garbage, metal, debris, lumps of clay, or other deleterious matter. HMA shall 

conform to NJDOT Section 903. Asphalt binder shall conform to NJDOT Section 904.01. An 

approved HMA conforming to NJDOT Section 903 may be used, provided the material has a 

nominal maximum size of 3⁄4 inch or less and remains hot enough to compact. Only soil aggregate 

that conforms to the gradations specified in NJDOT Table 920-1 for HMA shall be used. These 

requirements shall apply to the material after it has been placed and compacted. If the source 

contains oversize material, the Contractor may be required to eliminate this oversize material. 

Other materials shall conform to the following Subsections: 

Prime Coat: 

 Cut-back Asphalt, Grade MC-30 or MC-70...............................................NJDOT Section 904.02

Tack Coat: 

 Cut-back Asphalt, Grade RC-70 or RC-T................................................. NJDOT Section 904.02

 Emulsified Asphalt, Grade RS-1, SS-1, or SS-1h..................................... NJDOT Section 904.03

 Cationic Emulsified Asphalt, Grade CSS-1 or CSS-1h............................ NJDOT Section 904.03

Tack Coat 64-22: 

 PG 64-22................................................................................................... NJDOT Section 904.01

Joint Sealer, Hot-Poured............................................................................ NJDOT Section 908.02

Backer Rod................................................................................................. NJDOT Section 908.02

The Contractor shall sample NJDOT Standard HMA according to AASHTO T 2. 

NJDOT Table 920-1 Superpave HMA Mixtures 

Nominal Maximum Size of Aggregate - Grading Of Total Aggregate 

Pavement Section at Site Entrance 2.14-2 
Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size – Control Point (Percent Passing)

Sieve Size 37.5 mm 25 mm 19 mm 12.5 mm 9.5 mm

Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max.

2" 100 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

11⁄2" 90 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

1" -- 90 90 100 100 -- -- -- -- --

3⁄4" -- -- -- 90 90 100 100 -- -- --

1⁄2" -- -- -- -- -- 90 90 100 100 --

3/8" -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 90 90 100

No. 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 90

No. 8 15 41 19 45 23 49 28 58 32 67

No. 200 0 6 1 7 2 8 2 10 2 10

2.14.3 Submittals 

Submittals shall be according to Section 1.3 and shall include the source location, copy of the 

borrow area permits, and results of analysis indicating material meets the criteria of these Technical 

Specifications. 

2.14.3 Placement and Compaction 

Placement and compaction shall be performed in accordance with NJDOT Specification Section 

302.03. Any changes in procedure must be approved by the Engineer. A tack coat will be required 

where new paving abuts the existing Harrison Avenue paving. A prime coat will be required on the 

DGA before placing HMA Base Course. 

2.14.4 Measurement and Payment 

Payment shall be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

2.14 Pavement Section at Site Entrance Lump Sum 

The Contractor shall be paid the lump sum bid price for Pay Item 2.14 for the subgrade preparation, 

purchase, excavation, Proctor and particle size testing, stockpiling, handling, placement, 

compaction, and compaction testing of the pavement mix consisting of the DGA and HMA asphalt 

mix. 

Pavement Section at Site Entrance 2.14-3 
3.1 Health and Safety Plan

3.1.1 General Description 

General: This Section describes the minimum safety, health and emergency response requirements 

for remedial activities at the MSLA 1-D Landfill Site. Requirements of the Occupational Safety and 

Health Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Site Activities, and applicable publications of this 

Section provide the basic safety program for this project. The responsibility of development, 

implementation, and enforcement of the Health and Safety Plan (HASP) lies with the Contractor and 

his health and safety personnel. The HASP developed by the Contractor shall include programs for 

accident prevention, personnel protection, emergency response/contingency planning, and air 

monitoring. The Contractor's HASP must include contingency plans for alerting the adjacent 

occupants of the surrounding buildings and evacuating them if necessary. 

Documents to be Supplied by Contractor 

• Site-specific Health and Safety Plan. The site-specific HASP shall be furnished as a 

separate document and shall pertain only to the named site activity. A corporate 

safety and health manual may be furnished along with the HASP but this shall not 

satisfy the site-specific HASP requirement. The Contractor shall supply four (4) 

copies of the Health and Safety Plan to NJDEP for comment and approval and one 

(1) copy to the Engineer in accordance with Specification Section 1.3. 

3.1.2 Applicable Publications 

Occupational Safety and Health Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Site Activities: NIOSH, 85-

115. 

OSHA Safety and Health Standards: 29 CFR 1910 and 1926. 

USEPA Standard Operating Safety Guides: November 1984. 

NJDEP: Health and Safety Plan - Minimum Requirements (see Volume 4) 

3.1.3 Health and Safety Plan Minimum Requirements 

The Contractor will follow the Health and Safety Plan Minimum Requirements provided in Volume 

4, Appendices, for preparation of the Health and Safety Plan. 

3.1.4 Health and Safety Plan (HASP) Closeout Report 

At the completion of the project, the Contractor shall provide the NJDEP and the Engineer with a 

HASP Closeout Report, as per specification section 1.3. The HASP Closeout report presents the 

NJDEP and the Engineer with an overall safety summary. In this report, the Contractor shall provide 

documentation confirming adherence to the HASP requirements set forth in section 3.1.3. At a 

minimum, the HASP Closeout Report shall include, but not be limited, to the following. 

Health and Safety Plan 3.1-1
1. Health and Safety Officer’s (HSO) Daily Report. 

2. During potentially hazardous work, such as hazardous substance container removal and 

staging, Contractor is to provide health and safety field notes and a write-up summary. This 

shall include: 

a) Contaminants encountered, conditions present, and practices applied in the 

specific operation. 

b) Confirming proper adherence to HASP and proper protection equipment. 

c) Affirmation that proper decontamination methods, as required by the HASP, 

have been met, refer to section 3.1.3. (decontamination certificates if 

applicable). 

d) Summary of the necessary engineering and/or work practice controls 

incorporated to reduce and maintain employee exposures during potentially 

hazardous tasks. 

e) The PPE program incorporated by Contractor shall be included. 

3. Copies of employee Healthy and Safety training records and safety program certifications 

shall be included. This also includes respirator fit testing certificates. 

4. OSHA Occupational Sampling Results 

5. Daily air monitoring report/results. 

6. Medical Clearance Forms for each worker involved in on-site operations shall be included. 

7. If any incidents, accidents, injuries, or other emergencies occurred on site, OSHA 300 logs 

(accident and exposure reports), and the implemented emergency response plan are to be 

included in the HASP closeout report. The implemented emergency response plan in HASP 

closeout report should be consistent with the approved HASP. 

3.1.5 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Pay Unit

3.1.1 Health and Safety Plan Lump Sum 

3.1.2 Implementation of Health and Safety Plan Month 

Payment for the development and final approval of the Health & Safety Plan (HASP) shall be made 

under Bid Item 3.1.1. Payment for the implementing of the Health & Safety Plan (HASP) shall be 

made under Bid Item 3.1.2 on a monthly basis for each month or fraction thereof, measured to the 

nearest week from Notice to Proceed with mobilization until substantial completion. No change in 

price will be allowed for changes in level of protection required for field personnel during 

construction. This also includes payment for the collection and analysis of all air quality samples 

and production of the Health and Safety Closeout Report. 

The Contractor will not be paid for Bid Item 3.1.1 until the Health and Safety Plan is complete and 

approved by the NJDEP. No field work can begin until the HASP is approved. 

END OF SECTION 

Health and Safety Plan 3.1-2
3.2 Construction Plan

The Construction Plan shall address, at a minimum, the following items: site operations plan and 

schedule, environmental pollution protection, dust and vapor control, spill and discharge control, 

security, traffic control, stormwater pollution prevention and control, contact water management, 

and construction quality control. 

3.2.1 Site Operations Plan and Schedule 

The Contractor shall provide a schedule for the tasks needed to complete the remedial construction. 

The Construction Schedule shall be submitted in accordance with Article 2 of the Terms and 

Conditions. Separate payment for this task will not be made. 

 3.2.1.1 Work Included 

 

This item includes the preparation of the Project Construction Schedule and the Site 

Operations Plan. The Contractor shall perform all work to complete the job within the 

approved construction schedule. Also, construction operations shall be sequenced and 

scheduled to give consideration to site conditions, disposal of contaminated material, 

seasonal effects and any other factors considered relevant by the Contractor. 

 3.2.1.2 Site Operations Plan 

The Contractor shall develop and submit a Site Operations Plan, describing all major site 

construction activities and showing the sequence of the activities in accordance with the 

Project Construction Schedule. This Plan shall describe all major construction activities 

including preparation and submittals of plans, permit applications, shop drawings, materials 

testing, product data sheets, and operating and maintenance instructions in accordance with 

Section 1.3 – Submittals. 

The Site Operations Plan shall include provisions for daily pre-work safety/progress 

meetings with the NJDEP Construction Manager and/or the Engineer and the Project 

Construction Schedule. 

Drawings, diagrams, and sketches should be included in the Site Operations Plan as well as 

references to the Plans (Health and Safety Plan, etc.) in Section 3 to convey how 

construction will be coordinated with site operations. 

3.2.1.3 Project Construction Schedule 

1. The Project Construction Schedule developed as part of this contract shall be included in 

the Site Operations Plan. The schedule shall be prepared by the Critical Path Method. 

2. The Contractor shall provide the Engineer with two copies of the Project Management 

Software used to develop the Project Construction Schedule. 

3. The network shall include, as a minimum, one activity for each discrete component of 

Construction Plans 3.2-1
each Pay Item scheduled in the Proposal. The Engineer may allow grouping of similar 

Pay Items: The system shall consist of network diagrams and accompanying 

mathematical tabulations as described hereinafter. 

4. Diagrams shall show the order and interdependence of activities and the sequence and 

quantities in which the work is to be accomplished. The basic concept of network 

scheduling shall be followed to show how the start of an activity is dependent on the 

completion of preceding activities and how its completion may affect the start of 

following activities. No activity duration shall be longer than 20 working days without 

prior approval. The critical path shall be distinguished from other paths on the network. 

5. In addition to construction activities, network activities shall include the submittal and 

approval of samples of materials and drawings. It shall include all documents and proofs 

of compliance required by the Plans or Specifications needed for completion. 

6. The mathematical tabulation of the network diagram shall include a tabulation of each 

activity shown on the detailed network diagram. The following information shall be 

furnished as a minimum for each activity on this tabulation. 

a. event nodes numbered 

b. activity description 

c. estimated duration 

d. earliest start date (calendar date) 

e. earliest finish date (calendar date) 

f. latest start date (calendar date) 

g. latest finish date (calendar date) 

h. percentages of activity completed 

i. critical path activities 

7. This mathematical tabulation can be either a computer printout or one manually prepared 

with a column for each of the above requirements. The Contractor shall update the 

mathematical tabulation on a monthly basis and shall provide the Engineer with updated 

copies along with any revisions to the network diagrams on the day the monthly 

Engineer’s Estimate is prepared. The updated tabulations shall reflect the current status 

of activities as outlined on the network diagram. If any delays have occurred, these shall 

be noted for time consideration. The updated tabulation sheet shall reflect all changes in 

dates, durations and float times. 

Conditions may develop which require network logic revisions to the original diagram. If 

during the process of the work, major changes develop which necessitate changes in the 

original plan, the Contractor shall make such changes so as to depict the current mode of 

operation and shall provide the Engineer with a revised network diagram. 

The Project Construction Schedule shall be reviewed monthly and updated as needed. 

Updates (hardcopy and electronic versions) shall be included in the Monthly Invoice. 

8. The Project Construction Schedule shall take into consideration the effect of any 

Construction Plans 3.2-2
physical constraints or time constraints posed by the Contract Documents or regulatory 

permits including, but not limited to, the requirements of Temporary Erosion and 

Sediment Control Plan; Construction Water Management Plan. 

3.2.1.4 Major Construction Activities 

The Contractor shall describe all major construction activities. Sequencing, crews, size and 

type of major equipment, and special considerations or conditions shall be described. 

3.2.1.5 Permits 

The Contractor shall show a schedule for obtaining all necessary permits including those to 

be obtained by others, in accordance with Section 1.2.23 and Section 3. This schedule shall 

be reflected in the Project Construction Schedule. 

3.2.2 Environmental Pollution Control 

The Contractor shall prepare an Environmental Pollution Control Plan and comply with its 

provisions. The Contractor shall prepare an Environmental Pollution Control Plan describing how 

environmental pollution from the construction activities will be prevented. The Contractor shall 

perform all work in such manner as to minimize the pollution of air, water, soil, or land, and shall, 

control noise, the disposal of trash and debris, as well as other pollutants. The Contractor shall 

comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules, and regulations pertaining to 

environmental pollution control. 

Prior to commencement of the work at the site, the Contractor shall submit in writing a detailed plan 

in accordance with Section 1.3 for implementing the requirements for environmental pollution 

control specified herein, and meet with representatives of the Engineer to review and alter the 

proposal as needed for compliance with the environmental pollution control requirements. 

3.2.2.1 Implementation 

Prior to the start of any on-site construction activity, the Contractor and the Engineer shall make a 

joint condition survey after which the Contractor shall prepare a section of his Work Plan indicating 

on a layout plan the arrangement he proposes in using areas immediately adjacent to the site of the 

work and adjacent to the designated storage area and access route(s), as applicable. 

The land areas outside the limits of clearing under this Contract shall be preserved to allow 

restoration to their present condition. The Contractor shall confine construction activities to areas 

defined for work on the Drawings or specifically assigned for his use. Where, in the opinion of the 

Engineer, trees and/or shrubs may possibly be defaced, bruised, injured, or otherwise damaged by 

the Contractor's equipment or by his other operations, the Engineer may direct the Contractor to 

provide temporary protection of such trees/shrubs by placing orange snow fence or silt fence. 

The Contractor shall assure the proper disposal of fuels, oils, bitumens, calcium chlorides, acids, 

alkalis, or other potentially harmful construction-related materials, both on and off the site premises 

at no additional cost to the State. Special measures shall be taken to prevent such materials from 

Construction Plans 3.2-3
entering public waters. 

As part of the Environmental Pollution Control Plan and prior to on-site construction, the Contractor 

shall submit a description of his scheme for controlling and disposing of trash and debris generated 

as a result of the work under this Contract. The Contractor is responsible for disposal of garbage 

generated by the State and the Engineer. Provision of a dumpster, if needed, shall be addressed in 

the Plan. 

The Contractor shall maintain all excavations, backfill areas, stockpiles, and all other work areas free 

from excess dust as in accordance with the Dust and Vapor Migration Control Plan. Approved 

temporary methods consisting of sprinkling, approved dust palliatives, or similar methods will be 

permitted to control dust. Dust control shall be performed as the work proceeds and whenever a dust 

nuisance or hazard is imminent in accordance with the Dust Control Plan. 

The Contractor shall, upon receipt of notice in writing of any non-compliance with the foregoing 

provisions, take immediate corrective action. If the Contractor fails or refuses to comply promptly, 

the NJDEP may issue an order stopping all or part of the work until satisfactory corrective action has 

been taken. No part of the time lost due to any such stop order shall be claimed as damages by the 

Contractor unless it was later determined that the Contractor was in compliance. 

3.2.3 Dust and Vapor Migration Control Plan 

The Contractor shall conduct all site operations in such a way to minimize dust and vapor 

generation. The Contractor's attention is directed to the fact that the site contains contaminated soils, 

explosive and malodorous gases, and possibly asbestos. 

The Contractor shall prepare and submit for approval by the Engineer a Dust and Vapor Migration 

Control Plan in accordance with Section 1.3 which will present the Contractor's procedures for 

control of dust and vapor generation and measures to prevent off-site dispersion. 

3.2.3.1 Implementation 

The Contractor shall conduct his operations to minimize the generation of dust or vapors. In general, 

action is required to control dust whenever the three (3) hour average concentration in air exceeds 5 

mg/m3

, as measured at the property boundary. At a minimum the Contractor shall also conduct dust 

suppression actions at least twice a day during excavation and regrading activities. Additional 

actions may be needed if dust reduces site visibility or if directed, by the Engineer. 

During excavation and regrading operations, the Contractor shall sample the air as specified in the 

H&S plan to determine the dust and explosive vapors concentration. Monitoring for asbestos fibers 

will be conducted when work in Construction and Demolition waste is conducted. When the dust or 

vapor concentration exceeds the action level identified in the HASP, the Contractor shall reduce the 

concentration by changing his operations to control or minimize the production of dust and vapors. 

The dust may be controlled by water or non-toxic chemical spray, or similar means. The Contractor 

shall cease operations if he is unable to control the dust or explosive or malodorous content of the 

site air. 

Construction Plans 3.2-4
After the site excavation has commenced, and the site soils or waste is exposed, dust may be lifted 

and carried by the wind. The Contractor shall develop a plan to reduce such wind entrainment, by 

covering the exposed soils or waste, or coating them to reduce the hazard. 

The Contractor shall maintain the vehicles and equipment necessary for control of dust at or near the 

site of the work, so that minimum delay occurs when dust control operations become necessary. 

The Contractor shall also observe the dust, explosive gases, and malodorous gases concentrations at 

the perimeter of the site, to avoid creating hazards on neighboring properties. The Contractor shall 

report the results of the Air Sampling data to the Engineer within 24 hours of obtaining results. Any 

action level results shall be reported verbally immediately. 

3.2.4 Spill and Discharge Control Plan 

Spill and Discharge Control Plan shall include the preparation and implementation of a Spill and 

Discharge Control Plan and compliance with its provisions. The Contractor shall develop a Spill 

and Discharge Control Plan prior to the start of any site activities. The Plan shall include 

contingency measures for potential spills of construction-related materials such as diesel fuel and 

discharges from dewatering of contaminated surface water pits or ponds on or surrounding the site. 

3.2.4.1 Implementation 

The Contractor shall implement, maintain, supervise, and be responsible for the Spill and Discharge 

Control Plan. The Contractor shall provide methods, means, and facilities required to prevent 

contamination of soil, water, atmosphere, equipment, or material by the discharge of materials from 

spills due to Contractor's operations. 

The Contractor shall provide equipment and personnel to perform emergency measures required to 

contain any spillage and to remove spilled materials and soils or liquids that become contaminated 

due to spillage. This collected spill material shall be disposed properly at the Contractor's expense. 

The Contractor shall provide equipment and personnel to perform decontamination measures that 

may be required to remove spillage from previously uncontaminated structures, equipment, or 

material. Decontamination residues shall be disposed properly at the Contractor's expense. 

The Contractor shall submit a Spill and Discharge Control Plan in accordance with Section 1.3, 

containing the following: 

 1. Procedures for Containing Dry and Liquid Spills. 

 2. Listing of Absorbent Material available on-site. 

 3. Procedures for Storage of Spilled Materials. 

 4. Decontamination Procedures. Decontamination procedures may be required after 

cleanup to eliminate traces of the substance spilled or reduce it to an acceptable level. 

Acceptable level shall be determined by the Engineer. Complete cleanup may require 

Construction Plans 3.2-5
removal of contaminated soils. Personnel decontamination shall include showers and 

cleansing or disposing of clothing and equipment. All contaminated materials such as 

soil and wood that cannot be decontaminated or disposed on top of the wastefill must be 

containerized properly, labeled, and disposed properly as soon as possible, at no 

additional cost to the State. 

 5. Spill Incident Report. A written report detailing the spill or discharge shall include, at a 

minimum, the cause and resolution of the incident, outside agencies involved, and date 

the incident occurred. The report shall be submitted to the Engineer within 48 hours of 

the incident. The Contractor shall document the location of all spills on the Site 

Drawings and submit the Drawings to NJDEP at project completion. 

 6. Notification. The State shall be notified immediately of a spill or discharge that impacts 

the environment by contacting the NJDEP 24-hour Hotline (1-877-WARNDEP). The 

US Environmental Protection Agency, Region II shall be notified if the spill exceeds the 

designated reportable quantity. 

3.2.5 Security Plan 

Security Plan shall consist of preparation and implementation of a plan for site security during the 

construction. The Contractor shall prepare a Security Plan that describes the security measures to be 

employed during the construction to prevent site entry by unauthorized persons. The Security Plan 

shall include at least the following items and be submitted in accordance with Section 1.3: 

 1. Identification. Procedures for identifying those persons authorized to enter the site. 

 2. Personnel List. A list, kept current throughout the project that identifies personnel 

authorized to enter the site. 

 3. Entrance Procedure. Proper procedures for granting access to the site and providing for 

proper training if required. 

 4. Vehicles. A plan for maintaining a list of vehicles entering and leaving the site. 

 5. Visitors. Identify procedures to be followed in maintaining a visitor log, escorting 

visitors to the site, and providing for prior approval by the Engineer. 

 6. Liability Releases. Explain procedures for obtaining signed liability releases from 

visitors to the site. 

 7. Access Control. Outline the procedures to be implemented to ensure that all site access 

is through the main gate, unless authorized otherwise by the Engineer. 

 8. Non-Working Hours Security. Provide explanation of non-working hours security 

measures. 

The Contractor shall be responsible for maintaining security. The Contractor shall provide sufficient 

Construction Plans 3.2-6
security personnel to accomplish the work outlined in the Security Plan. The Engineer or NJDEP 

shall have the right to approve or reject security personnel assigned to the project site at any time 

during Contractor activities. Designated security personnel must have access to a telephone 24 

hours a day. The State’s review and approval with regard to the security plan will be limited to 

public safety and control of waste. 

The Contractor shall ensure that all security personnel entering exclusion/ contamination or 

contamination/ reduction zone, as defined by the Health and Safety Plan, have received the OSHA 

40 hour health and safety training for hazardous site operations. 

The Contractor shall furnish and install the security fence, including gates, at mobilization for the 

project in accordance with the appropriate sections of these specifications and the drawings. 

3.2.6 Traffic Control Plan 

This work shall consist of the planning for and the carrying out of maintenance and protection of 

vehicular or pedestrian traffic and to provide for the safe and convenient passage of such traffic, 

within the scope of the Project. Maintenance and protection of traffic includes furnishing, 

assembling, placing, and relocating traffic control devices, including pavement markers, and 

removing them when they are no longer required. The Contractor shall prepare and implement a 

Traffic Control Plan. 

Traffic control devices need not be new but must be in good condition as approved. Traffic 

control devices, other than those shown on the Plans, or as directed by the Engineer, shall 

conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The traffic control devices will be 

placed as per the approved Traffic Control Plan. 

An allowance has been provided in Bid Item 1.4.1 for Town of Kearny Police to assist with traffic 

control. With the consent of the Engineer and NJDEP, the Contractor may request assistance 

from the police with traffic control. This in no way is meant to relieve the Contractor from the 

responsibility for traffic control. 

The number and location of traffic signage shall conform to the “Manual for Uniform Traffic 

Control Devices.” When construction signs conflict with existing signs, the existing signs shall be 

covered. When construction signs are no longer required, they shall be removed. If they are 

temporarily not required, such as overnight, they shall be either temporarily removed or covered. 

Signs covered from view of the traveling public shall be completely covered with opaque material 

securely fastened so that it does not blow in the wind. Burlap shall not be used. 

Prior to beginning construction, traffic control devices shall be placed where shown on the Plans 

or directed by the Engineer. Traffic control devices shall be kept clean and maintained in good 

condition until no longer required for the Project, at which time they shall be disposed of. 

Traffic control devices shall also be placed as directed to provide traffic control for personnel 

doing inspections, sampling, testing, or taking measurements required for the Project. 

When the construction involves improvement of an existing roadway, the roadway shall be kept 

Construction Plans 3.2-7
open to traffic unless otherwise approved or shown on the Plans. The portion of the Project 

which is opened to traffic shall be kept in such condition that traffic is adequately 

accommodated. Temporary approaches or crossings and intersections, and access to trails, 

roadways, businesses, and parking lots shall be provided and maintained in a safe condition. The 

owners of adjoining properties shall be given a written notice at least three days prior to the 

beginning of any Work which interferes with the owners' normal passage. 

Equipment or machinery having crawler tracks or other treads that may mar or damage 

pavements shall not move over or operate from newly constructed or existing pavements unless 

precautions are taken to prevent such damage. 

Any damage to newly constructed or existing pavements within the limits of the Project or 

adjacent thereto, which in the opinion of the Engineer was caused by the Contractor's operations, 

shall be repaired as directed, at the Contractor's expense, or the repairs will be made by the 

Department and the cost of such repairs will be deducted from any monies due or that may 

become due the Contractor. 

Any restrictions of required traffic lane widths or diversion of traffic at any time are subject to 

approval. Except as necessary during actual working hours, and then only with approval, 

equipment, materials, personnel, or employee vehicles shall not occupy any traveled way, 

shoulder, median, or sidewalk area within or adjacent to the Project that is open to traffic. 

The Engineer shall be notified one month in advance of a tentative date for establishing new 

traffic patterns. This date shall be finalized ten working days prior to the establishment of the 

new traffic patterns resulting from stage construction, and 15 working days prior to the 

establishment of a detour for the closing of any roadways. 

Removable pavement marking tape shall be applied at designated locations. The tape shall be 

white or yellow and shall be applied in single or double lines, as designated. 

The Contractor shall remove, immediately prior to striping or marking the pavement surface, all 

dirt, oil, grease, existing types of traffic stripes or traffic markings, and other foreign material, 

including curing compound on new portland cement concrete, from the surface areas on which 

the various traffic stripes or traffic markings are to be placed. The pavement shall be cleaned 

one inch beyond the perimeter of where the stripe or marking is to be placed. 

The Contractor shall apply a primer-sealer conforming to NJDEP volatile organic content (VOC) 

requirements to the areas of bituminous concrete surfaces, when recommended by the 

manufacturer, and to the areas of portland cement concrete surfaces where long-life 

thermoplastic traffic markings are to be placed. 

Marking tape shall be applied on dry surfaces, when the surface temperature is between 10 and 

66o

C and when the ambient temperature is 10oC and rising, and when the weather is otherwise 

favorable as determined by the Engineer. The tape shall not be overlapped, and only butt splices 

shall be used. 

To ensure maximum adhesion, the tape shall be tamped and a truck shall be driven slowly over 

Construction Plans 3.2-8
the tape several times. The tape shall be removed when no longer required for traffic control. 

Tape that has become damaged and is no longer serviceable shall be replaced. Tape that is 

damaged by construction operations shall be replaced without additional compensation. 

Work which closes or alters the use of existing roadways shall not be undertaken until adequate 

temporary or permanent provisions for traffic have been approved. 

Where it is necessary for pedestrians to cross or walk within the limits of the Project, temporary 

sidewalks shall be provided, maintained, and removed as directed. 

Construction above vehicular or pedestrian traffic shall not be performed unless there is explicit 

provision made in the Special Provisions or specific written permission given. Subject to such 

provision or permission, necessary devices and means to protect such traffic from falling 

construction materials or other objects, and from painting operations shall be provided at no cost 

to the State during the time that construction is performed above traffic. The precautions to be 

taken for the protection of traffic are subject to approval. 

The traffic control plan provides for the treatment of conditions caused by or encountered during 

the Work on the Project. The Work shall be performed in accordance with the traffic control 

plan. 

The Contractor shall provide Jersey Barriers as indicated on the plans as a part of the 

Contractor’s Traffic Control Plan. The cost for this item shall be included under Pay Item 2.7.2. 

3.2.6.1 Traffic Control Coordinator 

Prior to the start of construction operations, the Contractor shall assign a supervisory-level employee 

to be the traffic control coordinator. The Engineer shall be notified as to the name and method of 

contacting the traffic control coordinator on a 24-hour basis. 

The duties of the traffic control coordinator shall include, but shall not be limited to, the 

responsibility for ensuring the following: 

1. Set-up and removal of all traffic control devices in accordance with the Contract Documents. 

2. Correction of deficiencies of traffic control devices within two hours of discovery or 

notification by the Engineer. 

3. Repositioning traffic control devices displaced by traffic or construction equipment. 

4. Covering or uncovering signs as appropriate. 

5. Repairing or replacing damaged traffic control devices. 

6. Replacing batteries, light bulbs, control panels, and other electrical components. 

7. Keeping all traffic control devices clean. 

8. Adding fuel and oil to power units for traffic control devices. 

9. That all Contractor equipment and vehicles are properly stored and packed so as not to create 

a traffic hazard. 

10. Properly storing traffic control devices when not in use. 

Construction Plans 3.2-9
Trained flaggers shall be in good physical condition, including sight and hearing, mentally alert, and 

shall have a courteous but firm manner, neat appearance, and a sense of responsibility for the safety 

of the public. Trained flaggers shall wear an orange or fluorescent orange garment such as a shirt, 

jacket, or vest. This garment shall be reflectorized for nighttime operations with reflective material 

that shall be orange in color. When controlling traffic, trained flaggers shall be equipped with 

STOP/SLOW paddles, and shall follow the procedures stipulated for flaggers in the Manual on 

Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The Traffic Control Plan will also include traffic control 

personnel and devices, as needed. 

3.2.7 Construction Water Management Plan 

The Contractor shall manage and dispose of water generated during construction. The Erosion and 

Sediment Control Plan requires prevention of run off from the site, and prevention of run on from 

areas adjacent to the site. The Contractor shall continue to maintain that separation of the site from 

adjacent areas under storm conditions. Contaminated water and non-contaminated water shall be 

managed separately. 

Construction water generated during activities at the MSLA 1-D Landfill shall consist of: 

Contact Water - Stormwater runoff that has been in contact with solid waste materials. Leachate is 

included in this category. 

Decontamination Water - Water from personal and equipment decontamination activities. 

Non-contaminated Water - Water not in contact with contaminated material, or may be run-on from 

clean areas adjacent to the site or run-off from non-contaminated areas. 

Measures shall be taken to minimize generation of contact water. Contact water shall be re-routed 

to the top of the waste mound which is encircled by the perimeter access road. 

1. Contact Water - Contact water generation shall be limited to prevent contamination of "clean 

areas" from run-off and to reduce the quantity of contact water for disposal. Measures to 

limit, control, and manage contact water include, but are not limited to the following: 

 a. All surfaces with exposed waste shall be covered with six (6) inches of imported soil 

when excavation operations are halted for periods in excess of eight (8) hours. An 

intermediate cover of up to twelve (12) inches of cover material shall be applied 

when work is halted for one month or more. 

 b. Non-contaminated surface water shall be prevented from entering areas of exposed 

refuse or other known areas of contaminated material for all flows up to peak 

discharges from at least a 25-year, 24-hour storm. 

 c. For areas of exposed refuse or MSLA 1-D-type waste, the contact water 

management system shall be designed to collect and control the water volume 

resulting from a 25-year, 24-hour storm. Contact water shall be collected prior to 

leaving the contaminated area. 

Construction Plans 3.2-10
 d. Contact water collected from a contaminated area shall be discharged back onto the 

landfill. Contact water shall not be allowed to enter gas collection manifold piping. 

 e. In the event, surface run-off is the cause of existing clean areas or subsequently clean 

areas becoming contaminated above cleanup standards, the affected areas shall be 

cleaned. Unless the Contractor can demonstrate that the applicable design storm was 

exceeded, the cost of cleanup will be at the Contractor's expense. 

2. Disposal - Contact water shall be disposed within the waste mound encompassed by the 

perimeter access road. No separate payment will be made for on-site disposal of the contact 

water since this disposal cost is incidental to the work and its cost should be included in the 

price of work associated with the generation of contact water. 

3. Non-contaminated water shall be prevented from entering areas of open excavation or 

suspected contaminated materials. 

Prior to mobilization to the site, a Construction Water Management Plan shall be submitted to the 

NJDEP for approval in accordance with Section 1.3 showing complete details of systems to be 

implemented pursuant to the requirements of this section. No work will be permitted until this Plan 

has been approved. Modifications to the Plan which may become necessary as a result of the 

Contractor's method of work or which may be required by other agencies shall be submitted to the 

NJDEP for approval. 

The Construction Water Management Plan shall include a plan of the site showing sub areas and the 

sequences of construction activities. Based on these sequences, the Plan shall indicate construction 

water routes, collection and diversion features, and disposal or discharge locations for each phase of 

construction. The Construction Water Management Plan submittal shall be in accordance with 

Section 1.3. 

The Plan shall show or describe measures to control decontamination water, control the origin of 

construction water and to maintain separation of contact (potentially contaminated) water from

uncontaminated water during each phase of construction. 

3.2.8 Construction Quality Control Plan 

The Contractor shall prepare a Construction Quality Control Plan that will include the following: 

• Identify the project organization 

• Responsibilities 

• Construction Quality Assurance (CQA) officer 

• CQA Support personnel 

• Personnel qualifications 

• Project meetings 

• Inspections 

• Testing 

• Daily Record keeping 

Construction Plans 3.2-11
• Inspection documentation 

• Final Documentation 

• Storage of records 

The Contractor shall ensure that Construction Quality Plan conforms with the requirements of the 

plans and specification. 

3.2.9 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Pay Unit

3.2.1 Construction Plan Lump Sum 

3.2.2 Adherence to Construction Plan Month (or fraction of, 

 to the nearest week) 

The Contractor will not be paid until the Construction Plans are complete and accepted by the 

NJDEP and no payments for any line item work will be processed until these plans are completed 

and the Notice to Proceed has been issued. Project Management Software (2 copies), to be provided 

to the Engineer, shall be included in the price for Pay Item 3.2.1. 

Payment for Implementation of all water management plans, as discussed in Section 3.2.7, shall be 

paid under Bid Item 3.2.2. The Contractor shall be paid on a monthly basis as per Bid Item 3.2.2 for 

each month, or fraction thereof, measured to the nearest week, from notice to proceed with 

mobilization until substantial completion. The Contractor will not be paid for any month or fraction 

thereof that liquidated damages are assessed. 

END OF SECTION 

Construction Plans 3.2-12
3.3 Hazardous Substance Container Removal & Staging

3.3.1 Description 

Hazardous Substance Container Removal & Staging shall consist of excavation, removing, staging 

and transporting containers discovered during site excavation operations. These actions shall occur 

at the direction of the Construction Manager/Engineer after the Contractor has notified the 

Construction Manager/Engineer that a hazardous substance container may have been encountered. 

A hazardous substance container shall be defined as drums, cans, cylinders, and lab packs suspected 

to contain hazardous substances, hereafter referred to as containers. This also includes backfilling 

and compaction after removing the container. Empty drums or carcasses are not included in this 

line item. Any empty drums or carcasses encountered will be replaced in the landfill as part of the 

work for which it was encountered. 

Drum disposal is not included within this Contract, and this task will be handled as a change order. 

3.3.2 Excavation of Hazardous Substance Containers 

Containers encountered during fill/refuse relocation and other construction operations shall be 

removed if directed by the Construction Manager/Engineer. The container shall be classified a 

hazardous substance container for the purpose of this contract. If directed to remove the 

container(s), the Contractor shall take all steps necessary to remove the container(s) intact to 

preserve any evidence of ownership. Only containers identified for removal by the Construction 

Manager/Engineer will be paid under this item. 

Following inspection and testing of contents, the containers shall be overpacked, if necessary, and 

staged at suitable locations on site. Subsequent to removal of containers from the area of 

excavation, the Contractor shall backfill the excavation to grade. 

 A. Hazardous Substance Container Handling, Removal, and Opening 

Manual handling of hazardous substance containers shall be minimized. Handling shall be 

by suitable mechanical equipment such as a grappler-equipped backhoe or front end loader. 

Manual handling of hazardous substance containers in locations other than designated 

storage areas will not be permitted. 

Prior to handling, the condition of each container shall be determined by the Drum 

Inspector (designated by the Contractor) and categorized as either open, leaking, bulging, 

empty, a combination, or intact. Containers shall not be moved or opened unless an 

external/gross gamma scan is negative. The containers shall be removed to the designated 

lined drum staging area as shown on the Contract Initial Site Operations Plan. See Section 

3.4 for hazardous substance container staging area requirements description. 

Hazardous substance containers which the Drum Inspector determines cannot be moved to 

the initial staging area or opened without risk of explosion, fire or spilling of contents shall 

be designated as unsound containers. Unsound non-bulging containers shall either be 

Hazardous Substance Container Removal & Staging 3.3-1 
overpacked or the contents shall be transferred to a DOT approved container using handoperated non-sparking drum pumps. Containers which are bulging or appear to be under 

pressure shall be remotely sampled in place. Openings shall be plugged and bung holes 

shall be fitted with pressure venting caps set at 5 psi release. After overpacking or relieving 

pressure via sampling, the containers may be moved to the initial staging area. 

Hazardous substance containers which are not the subject of special handling and removal 

procedures shall be exposed fully by carefully removing surrounding material and placed in 

the initial staging area. Hazardous substance containers which the Drum Inspector 

determines can be opened safely manually shall be placed upright in the initial staging area 

and the top opened using non-sparking tools. 

 B. Hazardous Substance Container Inventory 

As subsurface containers are exposed, each container shall be subject to the following 

inventory procedures: 

• The location of each container shall be temporarily staked and permanently located 

by GPS and plotted accurately on a reproducible copy of a topographic plan of the 

site. 

• An information sheet shall be developed upon which the Contractor shall record 

information such as container size, condition, type of materials, and any identifying 

characteristics of the container. 

• Each inventoried item will be indelibly marked on top and two opposite sides with a 

numeric code corresponding to the information sheet prepared for that item. 

 • Copies of the information sheets and location plan shall be provided to the Engineer. 

 

3.3.3 Hazardous Substance Container Staging 

The containers may be staged temporarily on-site in the drum staging area until the State completes 

additional analyses and arranges for off-site disposal. The cost of additional analyses and disposal 

is not a part of this contract and shall be handled under a change order. 

3.3.4 Measurement and Payment 

Payment shall be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

3.3 Hazardous Substance Container Each 

 Removal and Staging 

Hazardous Substance Container Removal & Staging 3.3-2 
The Contractor shall be paid the bid unit price for Hazardous Substance Container Removal for 

each hazardous substance container removed, overpacked (if needed), and staged in the designated 

area. Bid Item 3.3 allows for handling of fifty hazardous substance containers. For purposes of the 

work, hazardous substance container is defined as a container with a volume capacity greater than 

35 gallons including drums, cans, cylinders, and lab packs. 

END OF SECTION 

Hazardous Substance Container Removal & Staging 3.3-3 
3.4 Hazardous Substance Container Staging Area 

3.4.1 Description 

Hazardous Substance Container Staging Area shall include the preparation and maintenance of a 

hazardous substance container staging area. 

The Contractor shall construct a 10’ x 50’ hazardous substance container staging area upon 

mobilization. This staging area shall consist of common fill (Reference Section 2.10) over 

Geotextile Type B (Reference Section 2.9) and 40 mil geomembrane. It shall be located at least 

100' from any active working areas or underground utilities and protected with at least a 2.5' high 

earthen berm to help contain any leakage and the blast from a potential explosion. 

3.4.2 Measurement & Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Unit

3.4 Hazardous Substance Staging Area Lump Sum 

The Contractor shall be paid the bid under the unit price Bid for each preparation and 

maintenance of the Hazardous Substance Container Staging Area that would be constructed 

under Bid item 3.4. 

END OF SECTION 

Hazardous Substance Container Staging Area 3.4-1 
3.5 Hazardous Substance Container Sampling and Analysis 

3.5.1 Description 

Hazardous Substance Container Sampling and Analysis shall consist of sampling and analysis of 

containers discovered during site excavation operations. These actions shall be completed by the 

Engineer after the Contractor has notified the Construction Manager/Engineer that a hazardous 

substance container may have been encountered. These tasks will be completed in accordance 

with the Engineer’s pre-approved Quality Assurance Plan. A hazardous substance container 

shall be defined as drums, cans, and lab packs suspected to contain hazardous substances, 

hereafter referred to as containers. This also includes backfilling and compaction after removing 

the container. Sampling and analysis of cylinders will be handled through a Change Order. 

3.5.2 Hazardous Substance Container Sampling and Analysis 

Manual handling of hazardous substance containers shall be minimized. Handling shall be by 

suitable mechanical equipment such as a grappler-equipped backhoe or front end loader. Manual 

handling of hazardous substance containers in locations other than designated storage areas will 

not be permitted. 

One sample will be collected by the Engineer for each container and analyzed for TCL/TAL 

Metals, TCLP on a 4 week turnaround, and RCRA Disposal Parameters (ignitability, corrosivity, 

sulfides, and cyanide reactivity) by a New Jersey Certified Laboratory. 

Temporary storage of the containers on site in the drum staging area until the State completes 

any additional analyses and arranges for off-site disposal. The cost of additional analyses and 

disposal is not a part of this contract and shall be handled under a change order. 

3.5.3 Measurement and Payment 

Separate payment will not be made for Sampling and Analysis. The Contractor shall 

accommodate the Engineer who will conduct the Sampling and Analysis. 

END OF SECTION 

Hazardous Substance Container Sampling and Analysis 3.5-1 
 

4.0 Operational 

4.1 Operations and Maintenance 

Operations and maintenance of the MSLA Landfill Site Improvements project shall be performed 

by the Contractor for a period of one year following Substantial Completion, with an optional 

additional year (on a month by month basis). O&M under this contract includes operations, 

maintenance, mowing, weed whacking, snowplowing, monitoring, inspecting, and reporting 

services associated with erosion and sediment control and stormwater management structures, 

fencing, bollards, signs, erosion on regraded areas, concrete pads and all roads and parking areas. 

Contractor can perform additional O&M work if needed. 

A. The Contractor shall maintain all erosion and sediment control and stormwater management 

structures, including but not limited to removing blockages due to ice, snow, sediment, and 

straw. Excavated material will be graded into the site adjacent to the areas it is removed 

from. 

B. The Contractor shall maintain fences, gates and locks in good condition so that the site is 

secure from trespassing. 

C. Materials shall meet the quality requirements of its applicable specification section. 

Submittals shall be in accordance with Section 1.3. 

D. Operations and Maintenance shall begin upon written notice of substantial completion of the 

construction phase from NJDEP. 

The Contractor is required to provide all labor and overhead, materials, equipment, transportation, 

etc. necessary in performing the tasks listed in this section. The Contractor will be responsible for 

all costs for the first year. The NJDEP may elect to use the Contractor on a monthly basis for a 

second year of O&M services. 

4.1.1 General 

Occupying Private Land

The Contractor shall not (except after written consent from the NJDEP) enter or occupy with 

personnel, tools, materials, or equipment, any land outside of the landfill properties. 

Catastrophe or Vandalism Repairs

Repairs of damage caused by catastrophe or vandalism shall be accomplished by the Contractor 

either: 

 • At Contractor's expense if covered under his warranty, or caused by his negligence, or 

Operational 4.1-1 
 

 • The Contractor will prepare Change Order request documents for major repairs which shall 

be paid for by the State. 

Documentation

The Contractor shall be responsible for documenting all operation and maintenance activities 

performed during the course of the work. Documentation shall include the following: 

• Maintain an operation and maintenance log book, recording all data generated at the facility 

(i.e., meteorological readings, names and hours for all personnel used in operation and 

maintenance efforts and tasks performed, security problems, and communications with 

agencies and/or personnel). 

• The Contractor will be required to submit a completed daily inspection/ maintenance log after 

each site visit. Site inspections shall occur on a weekly basis. All inspection efforts are to be 

documented in detail in the daily log. The daily log (reports) shall break out what was 

inspected that day. The daily log shall list potential future problems with the system. The daily 

log is to be filled out after every site inspection and is to be submitted and received by the 

NJDEP either via mail or telefacsimile no later than two (2) working days after a site 

inspection. Delays in meeting this submittal schedule shall be the basis for a Contractor 

Complaint, filed by NJDEP with the Department of Treasury. 

• Prepare and submit to the State, semiannually, a report consolidating data into charts and 

graphs providing an overview of all aspects of the operation and maintenance effort. A written 

report summary shall also be included in this report. 

• Prepare report of the annual cost of operation and maintenance of the MSLA landfill facility, 

upon completion of the 12-month operation period. The annual cost report should be 

summarized by month to show seasonal differences. 

• Provide a record of all personnel utilized in the annual operation and maintenance of the site. 

Include baseline and annual medical records for each person working on the site. 

• The Contractor shall be responsible to perform all the monitoring and/or reporting required for 

the following permits and/or plans: 

• NJDEP Landfill Disruption Permit 

• Hudson/Essex County Soil Conservation District Erosion and Sedimentation Control 

Plan Approval 

• NJDEP Tidelands License 

• NJDEP Coastal General Permit Number 24 

• USACE Jurisdictional Determination and Nationwide General Permit No. 38 

Operational 4.1-2 
 

• NJDEP Freshwater Wetlands Permit / Water Quality Certificate 

 NOTE: It is the Contractor's obligation to contact the Regulatory Enforcement 

Officer to determine the procedures required in maintaining/processing 

logs/reports. 

Materials shall meet the quality requirements of its applicable specification section. Submittals 

shall be in accordance with Section 1.3. 

4.1.1.1 Management and Administration 

The Contractor shall be responsible for management and administration of the operation services 

and activities specified to be conducted at the MSLA Landfill. The Contractor shall provide 

supervisory and management staff to direct the daily activities of its work force and establish and 

update work schedule and assignments. The Contractor shall provide all site communications to the 

appropriate NJDEP staff and other entities as directed by the NJDEP. NJDEP shall have full access 

to all records of the Contractor pertaining to operation and maintenance. 

4.1.1.2 Staffing 

A. The Contractor shall provide management, operations, and maintenance personnel required 

to operate, maintain, and administer all necessary facilities and programs. The Project shall 

be staffed as necessary to ensure continuous compliance with all specified permits, rules, 

and regulations in addition to the performance of all necessary related tasks (maintenance, 

repair, process monitoring, etc.) to effect the proper operation of the project. 

4.1.1.3 Materials and Supplies 

Acceptance of Specified Materials

Only new materials and equipment shall be incorporated in the work (as specified in the appropriate 

technical specification sections of the Contract relating to construction). All materials and 

equipment furnished by the Contractor to be incorporated in the work shall be subject to the 

inspection of the NJDEP. No material shall be processed or fabricated for the work or delivered to 

the work site without prior acceptance by the NJDEP. 

Prior to the commencement of the work, the Contractor shall submit samples of materials necessary 

to demonstrate that they conform to the Specifications. Such samples shall be furnished, taken, 

stored, packed, and shipped by the Contractor. 

The Contractor shall submit samples sufficiently early to permit inspection before the materials and 

equipment are needed for incorporation in the work. The consequences of his failure to do so shall 

be the Contractor's sole responsibility. 

Operational 4.1-3 
 

Storage of Materials and Equipment

All material and equipment to be incorporated in the work shall be placed so as not to damage any 

part of the work or existing facilities and so that free access can be had at all times to all parts of the 

site and to all public utility installations in the vicinity of the site. Materials and equipment shall be 

kept neatly piled and compactly stored in such locations as will cause a minimum of inconvenience 

to public travel and adjoining owners, tenants, and occupants, and as approved by NJDEP. 

Any and all Contractor owned materials and/or equipment stored on the site is stored at the 

Contractor's risk. The State is not liable for any damage to or theft of the Contractor's equipment, 

material, etc. 

Material shall meet the quality requirements of its applicable specification section. Submittals shall 

be in accordance with Section 1.3. 

4.1.1.4 Operation and Maintenance Tasks 

This section summarizes the tasks to be performed under the O&M portion of this Contract. In 

general, the tasks are organized as general tasks to be performed for the entire site. 

Task 1 - Project Plans

Several plans are required to be prepared for the O&M portion of this Contract. They include a 

Work Plan specific to O&M tasks, a HASP for post-construction O&M, and 6-Month Reports. 

Costs for this work shall be included in the 1st Year lump sum O&M bid item and/or the 2nd Year 

monthly O&M fee as identified below. 

 Work Plan (1st Year)

The Contractor shall submit a detailed Work Plan for the completion of all the O&M elements 

which shall consist of a schedule for the implementation of the O&M program. Included in the 

work plan shall be an estimate of manpower and equipment which may be necessary to complete 

each task. Any other considerations necessary to ensure the completion of each element shall also 

be included in the work plan. The work plan shall describe in detail how work tasks will be 

completed. 

In addition, the schedule within the work plan must be evaluated and updated every 6 months and 

be included in the 6 month report (described below). 

 Health and Safety Plan (1st Year)

The Contractor shall submit a detailed Health and Safety Plan for Post-Construction O&M that 

assures compliance with all applicable OSHA standards under 29 CFR parts 1910 and 1926 and the 

NJDEP minimum requirements for Health and Safety Plans and Section 3.1 of these specifications. 

The HASP shall include a listing of all Contractor or subcontractor personnel scheduled to work on 

Operational 4.1-4 
 

the project for Post-Construction O&M. The Contractor or subcontractor shall also provide proof 

that appropriate employee training and medical surveillance physical examinations are current for 

employees assigned to the project prior to their initiating any work under the Contract. 

 O&M Manual (1st Year, 2nd Year - Update)

The Contractor shall prepare an O&M Manual for this construction project. Thereafter, the 

Contractor shall provide updates and revisions to the O&M Manual every year based on field 

changes, future needs and recommendations. 

The O&M Manual shall include at a minimum: recommended maintenance procedures and 

manufacturer spare parts list. The parts list shall also include the name, address, and phone number 

of local suppliers, from which the original equipment/material was purchased. Materials can be 

designated by construction specifications or by a substitute approved by NJDEP. 

The activities report (described below under “6 Month Report”) shall be incorporated into a separate 

section of the O&M Manual, in order to maintain a historical account of the entire project and in 

order to keep the revision of the original O&M Manual to minimal level of work for the Contractor. 

 6 Month Report (1st and 2nd Years)

A 6 month report shall be submitted to the NJDEP no later than 15 days after each 6 month period, 

which commences with the Construction Final Acceptance Conference. This report will include an 

updated Work Plan schedule, an activity report, and photographs of the current site conditions. 

The activity report shall consist of documentation all site activities during a 6 month period. The 

documentation of the activity report shall include at a minimum: routine O&M activities, any 

emergency response activities, equipment replacement, changes or upgrades made during the 

reporting period, and a narrative describing the effectiveness of the systems. In addition, the 

activity report shall evaluate the O&M program and recommend modifications as needed. Also, the 

activity report shall include information regarding how permit requirements were met, include 

copies of any reports the Contractor was required to file per permit requirements, all sampling data, 

etc. 

Photographs of the current site conditions shall be taken at locations and frequencies sufficient to 

document the entire site. Photographs shall document material or system failures, equipment 

changes, or other important events. 

Any recommendations that will result in an increase of effectiveness or represents a saving to the 

State shall also be included in this report. 

 Deliverables

 1. The draft O&M Work Plan and HASP shall be prepared and submitted before the 

first year of O&M, at least 15 days prior to obtaining a Certificate of Substantial 

Completion. Three (3) copies of each of these documents shall be submitted for the 

Operational 4.1-5 
 

Draft and Final Copy. NJDEP shall have ten (10) working days to review and make 

comments on the Work Plan and HASP. The Contractor shall have five (5) working 

days to submit a Final Copy of the above documents which will incorporate 

NJDEP's comments. These documents must be completed, and approved by the 

NJDEP, prior to issuance of the Certificate of Substantial Completion. The payment 

for these items will be made on a lump sum basis, upon NJDEP approval of the 

deliverables. 

 2. The Contractor shall submit a draft revised/updated O&M Manual at the

Construction Final Acceptance Conference. Three (3) copies are to be submitted for 

both draft and final copies. Revisions of the draft by NJDEP will be incorporated 

into the final copy. The final copy of the revised O&M Manual is to be delivered to 

NJDEP within 30 days of the date that the Contractor received draft comments. 

Task 2 - Repair of Roadways (1st and 2nd Years)

The Contractor is required to maintain all roadways to allow access to the site for operations and 

maintenance. The NJDEP expects that these roadways will incur damage as a result of use and/or 

erosion. 

Work under this task will be done on an as needed basis, as determined by NJDEP. 

If road repairs are required, as determined by NJDEP, the Contractor shall supply and install the 

same type aggregate gravel material (Recycled Aggregate Type B, Dense Graded Aggregate Base 

Course, and Hot Mix Asphalt) which will be installed for the access road surface under the site 

improvements construction, and Type B Geotextile if needed. 

Delivered material will be installed at agreed upon areas. Any repairs containing an area to be filled 

which is greater than either 3' wide or greater than 1,000 square feet shall be compacted to meet the 

specifications in this RFB for that particular material using a small drum roller. Any other repair for 

areas smaller than those outlined above may be performed using a non-vibratory plate compactor. 

The material will not be placed until the area has been shaped and dressed and approved by the 

NJDEP Construction Manager. Shaping and dressing shall include grading to the required lines and 

elevations, and the removal of all debris or unsuitable material. Debris will be spread on the landfill 

in an area designated by NJDEP. 

Task 3 - Erosion Control (1st and 2nd Years)

The Contractor shall inspect erosion control structures monthly. The Contractor shall provide 

aggregate or topsoil, as necessary, to stabilize the slopes and fill in eroded areas, in those sections of 

the landfill that were disturbed and/or created during this Site Improvements Contract. The access 

road aggregate used shall be as specified in Section 2.3 of the construction specifications and 

designated by the NJDEP. 

Topsoil shall be in accordance with Construction Specification Sections 2.8. Areas not covered 

Operational 4.1-6 
 

with Recycled Aggregate shall be revegetated as specified in O&M Task 9. Wetlands areas are not 

to be cleaned of sediment or disrupted. 

Costs for this work shall be included in the 1st Year lump sum O&M bid item and in the 2nd Year 

monthly O&M bid item. 

Task 4 - Sediment Excavation (1st and 2nd Years)

The Contractor shall inspect the run-on, run-off control channels, the culverts, the inlets, pond, and 

the access road monthly for accumulation of sediments/foreign materials. Accumulated sediment 

shall be excavated to restore the required erosion and sediment control and stormwater management 

capacities. The excavated sediment shall be dewatered to increase the solids content to at least 20% 

solids by weight and placed in low spots or on high spots on top of the wastefill or as directed by 

NJDEP. 

Costs for sediment excavation shall be included in the 1st Year lump sum O&M bid item and in the 

2nd Year monthly O&M bid item. 

Task 5 - Snow Plowing (1st and 2nd Years)

To ensure access for site operations, the Contractor may be required to plow the site access roads. 

The Contractor may also plow roads for his convenience. However, the Contractor must plow the 

roads when sample collection is scheduled or an emergency condition exists. 

The Contractor shall include the costs for this task in the 1st Year lump sum bid item for O&M and 

in the 2nd Year monthly O&M bid item. NJDEP anticipates that the Contractor will have to plow 

the roads a maximum of four (4) times/year. 

 NOTE: Plowed snow shall not be deposited on/across any private property or 

emergency or regular exit/entrance. 

Task 6 - Security Fence (1st and 2nd Years)

A well maintained security fence is integral in assuring that the site is not vandalized or used for 

illegal dumping. The fence, gates, bollards, and signs shall be inspected weekly. Damage shall be 

repaired within 24 hours of discovery. Repair materials shall be in accordance with specification 

Section 2.4 and 2.7. 

Costs for this shall be included in the 1st year lump sump bid item for O&M and in the 2nd Year 

monthly O&M bid item. 

Task 7 - Vegetative Control (1st and 2nd Years)

To ensure clear access to the work areas, the Contractor will be required to perform cutting around 

structures using a weed-whacker (including the use of handsaws, gas powered chainsaws or pruning 

Operational 4.1-7 
 

shears) and pruning of trees and shrubs around roadways and access points. This shall include 

cutting and pruning the areas listed below: 

 1. Clear a 4' swatch around all fencing and gates. 

2. Maintain existing road width. 

 3. Clear any other areas where access to mowing is limited. 

 4. Maintain the access road from the landfill gas plant to the top of the landfill. 

Mowing will also be performed, as needed, along the perimeter access road and access road from 

the gas plant to the top of the landfill to maintain it weed free. 

General 

The Contractor, as part of his operations, shall not be responsible for picking up and removing the 

cut vegetation except along the entrance gate area. Vegetation removed from the entrance gate area 

will be deposited on site. The NJDEP anticipates that the above areas will require mowing/pruning 

a maximum of six (6) times/growing season. 

The Contractor shall include all costs for this work in the 1st Year monthly O&M bid price and 2nd

Year monthly O&M bid price, as appropriate. 

Task 8 - Erosion Repair and Regrading (1st And 2nd Years)

The Contractor shall inspect the access road and landfill areas disturbed by waste relocation 

monthly for erosion rills and gullies, ponded water, and other damage. 

Various types of material are required to perform the necessary erosion repairs including: top soil 

as specified in Construction Specification Section 2.8, off-site fill as specified in Section 2.10, and 

Type B geotextile as specified in Section 2.9. The soil shall be prepared as in Section 2.8 prior to 

placing repair materials. Soil shall be placed in 6 inch lifts and shall be compacted between layers. 

Compaction with a non-vibratory plate compactor shall be adequate. The area shall be revegetated 

as specified in O&M Task 9. 

Costs for this work shall be included in the 1st Year lump sum O&M bid item and in the 2nd Year 

monthly O&M bid item, as appropriate. 

Task 9 - Revegetation (1st and 2nd Years)

Revegetation is necessary in order to maintain the vegetative cover which protects the cap system 

from erosion. It shall be accomplished by putting down lime, fertilizer, seed, and mulch twice a 

year in areas which are bare or damaged. 

Soil shall be shaped and prepared as described in Section 2.8 of these specifications. Fertilizing, 

seeding and mulching shall be performed in accordance with Section 2.8. 

Operational 4.1-8 
 

The finished seeded area shall be smooth and shall conform to the prescribed lines and elevations. 

Seeded areas shall be protected and maintained until final acceptance of the work. Any damage to 

the seeded area caused by the Contractor shall be repaired at no additional cost. 

All costs for this work shall be included in the 1st Year lump sum O&M bid item and in the 2nd Year 

O&M monthly bid item. 

Task 10 - Final Lockout Inspection (2nd Year)

Thirty (30) days before contract expiration, the Contractor and NJDEP shall have a joint inspection 

of the site to prepare a punch list of items that shall be completed prior to the Contractor’s departure. 

In general, the Contractor shall, unless otherwise directed or permitted in writing, tear down and 

remove all temporary buildings and structures built by him; shall remove all temporary work, tools, 

and machinery or other equipment furnished by him; shall remove all rubbish from any grounds 

which he has occupied; and shall leave the roads and all parts of the premises and adjacent property 

affected by his operations in a neat and satisfactory condition. 

The Contractor shall thoroughly clean all materials installed by him and his subcontractors, and on 

completion of the contract shall deliver it undamaged and in fresh and new-appearing condition. 

The Contractor shall restore or replace, when and as directed, any public or private property 

damaged by his work, equipment, or employees, to a condition at least equal to that existing 

immediately prior to the beginning of operations. To this end the Contractor shall do as required all 

necessary highway or driveway, walk, and landscaping work. Suitable materials, equipment, and 

methods shall be used for such restoration. The restoration of existing property or structures shall 

be done as promptly as practicable prior to contract expiration. 

4.1.2 Measurement and Payment 

Payment will be made under: 

Pay Item No. Pay Item Pay Unit

4.1.1 Operations and Maintenance, (Year 1) Lump Sum 

4.1.2 Operations and Maintenance, (Year 2) Month 

For Operations and Maintenance, 1st Year payment shall be a lump sum bid price paid out in 12 

monthly payments. For Operations and Maintenance, 2nd Year, payment shall be on a per month 

basis. 

Thirty (30) days prior to contract expiration, NJDEP will perform an inspection of the site and 

adjacent property. Based on the inspection, the Contractor will be informed of any deficiencies. 

The deficiencies must be corrected prior to issuance of final payment.

END OF SECTION 

Operational 4.1-9 
Burt2U ur Office ~

In V

o21A/!1/88 TIme _

0U1 _

, ~~

.... " ..,.

BAGOOUU35

"., ," ..

A::iO:l !'!.r::Jmmrndej _--:. _

R-~

TIERRA-A-018305

&tau of N£1U JJersell

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES

..:~METRO BUREAU OF REGIONAL ENFORCEMENT

2 BABCOCK PLACE

WEST ORANGE, NEW JERSEY 07052

. DIRK C. 'HOfMAN. P.E.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR

February 10, 1989

CERTIFIED HAIL

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Mayor and Council

Town of Kearny

402 Kearny Avenue

Kearny, NJ 07032

Re:

Gentlemen:

A Compliance Evaluation Inspection of your facility was conducted by a

representative of this Division on January 18, 1989. A copy of the completed

inspection report form is enclosed for your information. . / .

Your facility received a rating of "UNACCEPTABLE" due to the followh~ deficiencies: .

1. The permittee is not sampling the six (6) ground water

monitoring wells and submitting Monitoring ,Report Forms as

required by Part I, Page 7, Condition g(lJ of the site's

NJPDES permi t. .

2. The permittee has not submitted a plot plan of the site

including the location of all ground water monitoring wells

and methane gas vents as required by Part II, Page 1,

Conditions 3(a) of the site's NJPDES permit.

3. Ground Water Monitoring Well Certification Forms A and B

for each existing ground water monitoring well have not been

New Jersey Is An Equal Opportunity Employer

BAA000068

TIERRA-A-018307
- 2 -

submitted as required by part II. Page 2, Condition 3(c) of

the sites NJPDES permit.

4. The permittee is not conducting weekly inspections of

the monitoring wells or maintaining an inspection record

as required by Part II, Page 3, Condition 9 of the site·s

NJPOES permi t • .

5. The permittee has not delineated all leachate discharges

to the surface waters of the State as required by Part II,

Page 4, Condition 18 of the site's NJPDES permit.

6. The seven (7) wells located during the inspection did not

have well permit numbers attached to the casing. The five

{5} wells believed to be Monitoring Wells 1 through 5 did not

have well permit numbers attached to the casing as required

by Part II, Page 3, Condit ion 8 of the NJPDES s1te' s permi t.

7. The permittee failed to report the damage to Monitoring

Wells 1, 2 and 6 as required by Part II-F. Page 2 Condition

10 of the site's NJPDES permit. Monitoring Wells 1 and 2

have bent casings that may cause sampling difficulties,

Monitoring Well 6 could not be located during the inspection

and may have been demolished by the construction crew

installing the methane recovery system.

8. Contaminated run-off and leachate from the landfill

collects in several locations around the base of the landfill

and discharges to the surface waters of the State. This

~discharge is a unpermitted discharge to the surface waters of

the State, the Town of Kearny must cease this discharge.

/ Deficiencies 1 through 6 were noted in the directive letter to the Town

of Kearny dated February 10, 1988. The Town of Kearny has failed to correct

these deficiencies as stated in Mr. Norman Doyle's letter to the Department dated May 13, 1988. .' .

The deficiencies noted above ~re significant Violations of the terms and

conditions of your NJPDES permit and/or the Water Pollution Control Act

Regulations (N.J.A.C. 7:14A-l et seg.) .. You are therefore DIRECTED to

institute corrective measures. A written report concerning specific details

of remedial measures to be instituted, as well as an implementation

timetable, must be submitted to this Department and USEPA, Permits

Administration Branch within thirty (30J calendar days of the date of this

correspQndence.

TIERRA-A-018308
- 3 -

Yair are advised that the New Jersey Water 'Pollution 'Control Act

(N.J.S.A., 58:10A-I et sea.) provides for substantial monetary and

Griminal penalties in cases of permit violations.

Please direct all correspondence and inquiries to Deborah R. Ford, the

Environmental Specialist responsible for this case, who can be reached at

(201) 669-3900, or by letter through this Division.

'Failure to fully comply with the above will result in the initiation of

enforcement action by this Department. This shall in no way be construed,_

however, to indicate any exemption on your part from possible penalties for

violations indicated by the Compliance Evaluation 'Inspection, as stated above.

..'

V~ry truly yours,

/.-/'/ .-."'e /~ ..

'/~ ///'4,£;:,

Stefan D. Sedlak

Section Chief

Metro Bureau of

Regional Enforcement

E14:G25

c: Dr. RichardA. Bak~r, USEPA

Mr. Paul Molinari, USEPA

Health Official

Mr. Scott lyre 11, BAP

Enclosure

. )Jc: Zaheer Hussain, Enforcement

Criminal Justice

Central File /1"

, ,", j:"

, '<~r'!

, -

iF"·

TIERRA-A-018309
",Own·053

r, Page ] of 3

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRO~MENT AL PROTECTION

DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES

eN 029; Trenton. N.J. 08625

DISCHARGE SURVEILLANCE REPORT

~

.".,

);. :" . - ;;:. :\:,

~,I.~""'''''''''''' ,' .• , ",,'v'I,: ,,". iJI ,~ :,"j/

. PERMIT # tJ..,\ 0 0 -) I 5?' :5 7 NO. OF DISCHARGES C TY14..J ':;>

DISCHARGER keart11 I» L-a~d.£; J(

OWI\ER -(Of";'1 a!;;J' ki/ arVl1

~IUMCIPALlTY' ~l1r~1 , COUNTY .!-I()c\"-.,o/v WATERSHED CODE 0'0

lOCATlO~ ~r1-k<5ec4.:e·4 at; IVj ---rZ>r.-vpii?< cl."'-e,) ,Ve"-k'''izl" ··b...... rAJp."I(p

\ I !~/1A.- RECEIVING WATERS C:7 .-...oO"'-V :=-< &t;~- STREAM CLASS L~ , -&.....>0<.....;

LICENSED OPERATOR & PLANT CLASS _

TRAI~EE/ASSJST.-\:\J --- . OTHER INFO.

...

2-0') q39- S'l{O ~

(IVeci

{;q

DEFICIEKCIES OR CO'lMENTS

OVERALL RATING D Acceptable o Conditionally Acceptabie ~naccePtable

EVALU~TOR "De.hzrc::.hj5. -;::-o,-,,~ TITLE E::,.,v.'rvnmenU 5pec;G /.5.!

ISFORMATIONFUR.,\]SHEDBY (Name) t1'1r. ?nrc'q SL......Jk.L--/o. ... c} / --,::> E..

(TItle) b.'N"c-±nr 0{) £n.c7''vl{i~I·~ (Organization) Nec,Lo E>lCJI\qeq-;~ A::t'i:?C~

DATE OF INSPECTION ---..JOrJVQC'1 }'8" I '9srct

TIERRA-A-018310
"-"Q§-.. -.., .... ~< ...... ~ •• -.;~ .o:4 •.• u..U"U"'~.'i..u.rkO~' ,:::ON ,::::~.::: DIVISIONOFWA1EIUtESOURCES ;:::,:::

~':' CN029~n-tva" NJ. 08615 '. '.

DISCHARGE SURVEIl..LANCE REPORT

118&.

I'..

'C.eA-r IVV " ,-,..,

-.

Pa~ 2 of 3 (G)

Permit'# Ml OC>5"T8:.3-:'

I J t~/L1

CROUND WATER DlSrHARGF.: EV'"

Date

TYPEDGW

)(. u- UmatisfactcirY. NA. Not Amllic:ablf: N :;-Ita1 ~~-=>t' •••lc<f

RATlNC COMMENTS.,

1

RCRA FACIllTY

~ D~GE~R

~ WASTEWAl'Ell SOURCE/FRED.

~, PUMPS AND PIPING

~ ALTERNAT£ POWERiALAlUI

o BYPASS

/ ead.,r:.[p

WATER SUPPLY/MONlTORING

:r AQUIFERS 1l0NITORED

~

In- UPGRADIENT WELLS

>. DOWNGRADIEm' WE1.LS

~ I-=s:::;:AMPLIN==:.;:.;:G:..P1.AN:.=:.:.:. -+--=~+~::::.:.~-..._-----_r""""':""----__".-"""T"_--.:..,...._--~

:z: SAMPLING PROCEDURES =:

o LAB CERnFICAnON

!:: RECORDS

a REPORTING

::E ~~;c;.~ L 'A'4

•

~ Or-a"lrn.'T tYbt ~C(e,7~~ ~ ~~_~.:n".IL .. Me.!r~Q<~~

U ;.V~/7,(7'p;~ '1.,:.".J"~_e ..j ,

r J

U (\C)'" ~

LJ ::5o.vnO/-e-:::, OtU ...,.ry/- h....:."'"...(>.j/<,c..L- __J)

'" / ,

At

III ,..~ .

'oJ

...+..

1\: A,.-

DRILLING PERllIT NUMBERS

WELLS NUMBEREDIIDENTIFIED

LQCKS'IN Il!.URlTY

ABANDONMENT PLAN

ELEVAnON INFolUofA nON

WATER T 1:Vl:'T

TURBIDITY FREE

SUFFIl"JPWT TIEl n

\-').,.c •. ~ -) ~ t...l ~. - Ai',d.,..... t J ... ,.J

I"..r-,.,.",,) - - J-~ __ ~I-,.., _~. ,.iy',,~,Jt:~ T..J..t:.

,1/1'" I" - - "'R,c..... ".,..'?- _~....... .J.:..,..,

,

6« ~~~~ .

-rt~ "'5r!1X;.) 1'1 ) ~".:1/:< i/YJ'"~.k-~ C-<..,;Q(V ''4--;.-(- A,X._ b~-.

~ ~ .... -II ..... "'0:-"" 1Ct:'~ AJ...., Ju ....~ OL'('I-:I",h<p

rT' ON

PER'"IT - : --G PRnB'EM~

u SOLv AIRS MAnE

5 MA.X P c!; V

Ml'\Sl:n' usnw~"-y WE',L~

upnt1:U nVAT.

._-

z SOUD

:J BEl 2 ..-_

a!

M • -, ~/;.. _ r'"c.J!'.~{') _l-,:=",

111 t.A.r~ ·7 ? /.. -r~KC(?'I -u

"1 ("v,~ "',r:, - D<t: ,"YJ<". 2.

fl-} ",,' -.:., Zte -MDOG -I

0'11 u,..' - 5"''2 fr, _ o~'"?O I .Cl

.Jr • ~ ",.,; "cP 7 I':. ./)-:-D:x.-r -"?

N

ON

FF

,

t.. VENJ •...:,_ ",1).11 ~ L: - -" J2.~e---..~..J

• -'...L. --'- i..... he',~ ''''ls-/.n.II~..P

TIERRA-A-018311
i,

..... /!1SLA l-/)-,kf!~w

MJDSCW ..C'OU.v~

"

',. '.

<, , . ',.'

'~. I I.'

I. . .. ~,,.

"

, I . ',; "

.. ''-.

, : j: "I , ,

, , .'1, ,

"

",

, '" ..' .

0', ....

; . ~"i '. '. ",. " ,

'I : I :'

';:, ','.

:J) j •

I:

I'III

..•.... ~ fI1ONITb,t1. WCI.I., L.OcAr/ON

........NoT. 70 SCAl-E .

'" ','". ".

,

. '- .•. .r

.";~\, .

:': ""

'. ~, , ,

.', -,

,

"

"

"

',." . " . '~ .., " .

- l ", ," " ' , "

.' -;'~

t',: "

'\'. '. ';'t,@)

"; ...

f ' , "

I," •

~: ..

'\' ,
·.,"

-, &..-._--

~ta:tt otJh1D 'cue}!

DEPARTMEl'.'T OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES

METRO BUREAU OF REGIONAl. ENFORCEMENT

2 BABCOCK PLACE

WEST ORANCE. NEW JERSEY 01051

(201) 669·3900

February 28, 1990

CERTIFIED MAIL

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Mayor and Council

Town of Kearny

402 Kearny Avenue

Kearny, NJ 07032

Re: Compliance Evaluation Inspection

MSLA l-D Kearny Landfill

NJPDES No. NJ0051837

Kearny/Hudson County

Gentlemen:

A Compliance Evaluation Inspection of your facility was conducted by a

representative of this Division on January 10, 1990. A copy of the completed

inspection report form ~s enclosed for your information.

Your facility received a rating of "UNACCEPTABLE" due to the following

deficiencies:

1. The permittee is not sampling the six (6) ground water

monitoring wells and submitting Monitoring Report Forms as

required by Part 1, Page 7, condition gtl) of the site's

NJPDES permit.

2. The permittee has not submitted a plot plan of the site

including the location of all ground water monitoring wells

and ~thane gas vents as required by Part II. Page I,

conditions 3(a) of the site's NJPDES permit.

3. The permittee is not conducting weekly inspections of

thB monitoring wells or ~intaining an inspection record as

required by Part II, Page 3. condition 9 of the site's

NJPDES permit.

Nno Icrst'J is "'" Eq"al Oppart"";,., EmpIoJcr

)~

-·--

T1t1K at-:

L

8~.G00001 0

TIERRA-A-018313
-

·2-

4. The permittee has not delineated all leachate discharges

to the surface ~8terS of the state as requ1red by Part II.

Page 4, condition 18 ~f the sile's NJPDES permit.

5. The four l4) ~ells located during the inspection did not

have ~ell pennit numbers attached to the casin8 as required

by Part I, Section 10 and Part II-F, section B of the site's

NJPDES permit.

6. The permittee failed to report the damage to Monitoring

wells 1.2,5 and 6 as required by Part lI-Y. Page 2.

condition 10 of the site's NJPDES permit. Monitoring wells

1 ~nJ 2 have bent casing that m~y cause sampling

difficulties. Monitoring \/ells 5 and 6 could not be located

during the inspection and are helieved to have ~een

accidentally demolished.

7. Contaminated run off and leachate from the landfill

collects in several locations around the basp. of the

landfill and discharges ro the land and surface waters of

the State. This discharge is a unpermitted discharge to the

land and surface waters of the State. The Town of Kearny

must cease this discharge.

B. The permittee has failed to repair or replace the

Jalnaged wellS as required by Part 1. section 10 and Part

II-F, section 10.c of the site's NJPDES permit. Unusable

wells must be sealed as required by Par~ I, section 10 of

the permit.

9. The permittee failed to ~u~it a completed permit

renewal to the Department 180 days prior to the expiration

date of the permit as required by Part I, section 1.A.

Deficiencies 1 through 5 were noted in the directive lerters to the Town

of Kearny dated February 10, 1988 and February 10. 1989. The Town of Kearny

has f4iled to correct these deficiencies as stated in Mr. Norman Doyle's

letter dated March 20, 1989. Deficiencies 6 and 7 ~ere noted in the

directive letter to the Town of Kearny dated February la, 1989. The Town of

Kearny has failed to correct these deficiencies as stated in Hr. Joseph E.

Neglia's letrer to the Department dated Harch 20. 1989.

The deficiencie5 nored above have placed your facility in significant

violation of the terms and conditions of your NJPDES permit aod/or the Water

Pollution Conrrol Act Regulations \N.J.A.C. 7:14A-I !! ~.). You are

therefore directed to institute corrective measures. A written report

concerning specific details of remedial measures to be instituted. a5 well as

an implementation timetable, must be submitted to this Department and USEPA.

Permits AdministrAtion Branch, within thirty (30) calendar cays of the date

of this correspondence.

-~-----.-- ,

L

..,. .•.<"~

•n

\

\

l

,

I

t

..-.....-.._--.-

TIERRA-A-018314
l

/'

I

lj!

!~

"•

~ 3 -

Y~u are advised that the New Jersev ~ater Pollution Control Act

(N.J.S.A. 58:10A-l ~t ~") provides fo~ .ubstantial monetary and criminal

penalties in cases of permit violations.

Pleas. direct all correspondence and inquiries to Oeborah R. Ford. the

Env1ronmental Specialist responsible for this c•••• who can be reached at

!(20l) 669-3900. or by letter through this Bureau.

Very truly your •• ~*se~ Section Chief

~ndfill/uST's Enforcement Section

Metro Bureau of

Regional Enforcement

E14:G26

c; Chief. Permits Administrative Branch. USEPA

Hr. Patrick H. Durack. USEPA

Hr. Edward Grosvenor. H.O.

Hr. narry Sutherland. F.E. Neglia Engineering A.so.

"Be: ZAHEER HUSSA: II

,JA1·IES LYKO

~NTRAL FILE

._.-- ·- m - ----- __ _ ~.-.~-' --..,-_ - -

L -.J.

J

TIERRA-A-018315
L

Pa.. I o( 3

NEW JERSEY DEPARTIAn.. OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEcnON

DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES

CN029.Trmton.NJ.08625

DISCHARGE SURVE1LLANCE REPORT

p£JU{IT. We)();,:) I«37 NO. OF DlSCHARGES &z fr1 LJ

DlSOiARGER 1v\61- 1+ I D IU-.4r,,'1 ~ "',')(; If

O'il-'NER --z::~ -.J oD ~e A j ..'j1

wtlMC1P AIm' k.e ,4-.0' >11 COUNTY ---l:J.ud~N WATERSHED CODE -=-

LOCATION Ne...xu-L- o~P--: .. .f-, -r;'",rlJo-l ~-L ...-J~!ZS-<:'·' • tv.,j .,-.....,..,_./.,

RECEl\1NG WATERS (.., ro.>vtJ ~,.l..:r STREA.l,l CUSS -----

CUSS' _

t

I

1

II

:

~

\,

t

!

,

UCENSED OPERATOR'" PL..JJI,'TCLASS -------------------

TRAIN'EEfASSIST A.."IT O1HER INFo.(ZOJ ) 939 -!,?,O S-

(Nec;I.c, )

DEFlCIENCIESORCOW,tENTS fi) (no;.,L.....- u.Jdl~ oac yI,c.7~. b~:",,=, ~2H O....J

fib" kx-::, {2q.f1;:oo,zJ -Q..·~6 Ofl..- ~ he :......""'l,-;bn-.~/kJ. ® (Jcc/l ('7

y.xf!J ;..... -~c+-,~s o"".vdc"'1~l."Jc..J' (I~.( ;(".>/.'«)~ (0-Cc"~O (i7/l:'7.J.c,~

lYhft:?104=''"?~J -b,~ I;L,-S-o--J (, nv-l A;fS?{L.--(, (£)b~~

~(2J'5 L,a..>-<j,u::.~t b?e-J (V,plC' ~_J.. <0 cJ-ef!';~ "::;4.-;--1 IVU,",');)CK'--Z

(f) £10-1 'P1q.v ltI~ 1'\9+ ba.-.l:;ub,..;,.JJJ d>{P~c~~ o;'«.k1 '}cij e s·

h?~:t'r~ o,.o!"/IIcteJVI c?cJ~-i @ ficWI'.l ce.y,.J /yy ?Cd b~o1l:1hn~.jJ. @ ()~h??=:rI7.~j? c1;~ ~:-e ,.t. 1~.AcL.. ~ -Ie -f:.- &=J? p . ; e

0-'- ju-rCec <! \.€,J.:r.",:> c.t. f6 5-1c.-k,.

o

OVERAll RATING o Acceptable o Conditionally Acaptable ~naceeptable

EVALUATOR ~brGL, 'is, r:'od TITLE E!'nv:'-Vr1,..,l"(!W :Spc=t:'.bR.:,+

INFORMAnON FURNlSHEIHY (Name) fu""r '1 :5v+b <-..- /0. ..,rJ , ""A E .

(TItle):UiCl"L:bcof C?"'l:t;rVC'cc, .....; (Orpnlution) Mec;/,'s 6-ryt;.." ....,:''''1Ih~o)

TIERRA-A-018316
Pap 2 o( .3 (G)

f;nnJt /# C()'::J-/ «3 "7

Due 1/,0 lCi()

!fEW 1'£' ~ Y OD',UnlDIT OF ENVIllONlraHTA1. nOTT" 'ON

OlV1Sl0N OF ",,,nil. RLSOUlla.,

01 029. n-101l, NJ. 0162.3

DISCHARGE SURVDlJ...\NCE REPORT I

GROUND WATER DISCHARel' ~v., rlATrn"! i

I M .... .,n~1 u· U.... tl.Jf •• ,0,.." NA' No' A""liabl. I RATING CODES: s oil Sat.W'.IC1Qry

RATIl'IG COMME ....TS

TYPE DCW

ReRA FACIl.ITY

"ASTEW ATEll SOURCE/FIlEO,

ALTERN ATE PO WERI A 1.AR}I(

BYPASS

wATER. SUPPl. Yn.IONITORING

A 0 I.Jl.FERS MONITO RED

UPGRADlENT WEl.LS

DOWNCRADIENT WEl.l.S

SAMPLING PLAN

SAMPl.ING PRnrErlURES u " I

l.AB rERTlFJrATlnN

RECORDS

REI"O RTING

~c'".:" '"rl...-:{ncJ

uJe II-~ AJn-l N ...' _b~ .......f

q,. c., or <~.""'-;C~, , .• /"""T .....·(' c;,.,,--"JC.>-.. ")~ """h"" ~.?,.>,

I

t }

rn··, t.., •.r <vi /1-,

rn .......I ;.1 (., - C""<e-,c.;' ~> - "-

7H..,J ~ u· L> ...·v<.>1 -"1

''''w ~ '1(;, -O"J'00-)-7 .

...........( :((. ·c~·OO~ - I

".., .......<"" tlJ_ -(.'1jo.'7 - "J

M.vi, 7/. -<:.' ......"y.'1l- -, \

4 ",tJ!t .... <:'- J~'\C/j.,. 1rc.·,J...l'(1't11,!~~)." ,,,.) ...• ;~..(',

:!",,-00/.[1'.., a.t..' k v<~'r.. ••·"'",-." A''-/ b<" ..-.'" (, /

~~ E'...EV.l"ON =~-

Vi 0 WATl'R IFV n, •• -

~~ Tllll E

~ Yll'ID

\.

(-0 Immr.

% ~o<_

I

:;::!~~.tJ:K~----h{,..-+--------------~

,., ~ SYS

~nr rn~ "..... VAl.

~'''A

--

(-OW

.0<1- ~E rnVl'Rr"Rnp t>-~~;=====~t=~==============j ~~~~~Tl"J:l'~~R7~nm.~-iiiij;L====f=~+======================:j %5\

j

'V

l

IJ

I ~/" L r,J, r) ;..., l-,~ -Jo 5u~l,,-<. l~"""-fe./.

rr1,..-I-£.o<J ....... t"_.( rJ""".~_,.R ~~ ,...~~ 0_" NC o,~..,{,

L

TIERRA-A-018317
P.p J or 3

NEW JE: -...." DEl A1tTMDlT OF EHVtJ.ONWEl'lT.u non -'M

. 1lM$IOH OF_'II'ATEI.I.ESO~~

eN on.Y_l ....HJ •. D"~

DISCHARGE SURVEILL.ANCE RUORT

PLANT DIAGRAM AND FLOW SEQUENCE:

:

:

DIS PAllA

SAMPLE PER.Nrr LlMrrS DATA DIS PAllA

SAMPLE ,liuaT I..DOTS

mE TYl'! DATA

- .

i

MONITORING DEPlCIENCIES: _

----O·---_.-..ilIIIIlW

L

....

'..

',' .

,

i

I

I

I

I

i

I

TIERRA-A-018318
,I

L

.._---,.._..__ ..._~-----.-- ~-........ -",... --.

/15LA I-D - .kEMw

HUDSoN Coumy

MSLA

l ..D

•

.

~~

'"..

f

f

e MOIJI1bIZ WELL LOCArtou

Nor fu SCAl-£

--..- .----.- ..---_ ..._--- ..... _--_. __ ._-_.... ......--.._,_._-_._----------_ .

•

. - -

:;·:-~='-~:{~~;~I:tf~:-.>: l",

I

.- ..

\..

)
IT. l~~-·

'~

.;.,. J

6tau ~f :ftetD ""S'q DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

,. DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES

METRO BUREAU OF REGIONAL ENFORCEMENT

2 BABCOCK PLACE

WEST ORANGE, NEW JERSEY 07052,

(201) 669·3900

'Harch 8, 1991

CERTIFIED HAIL·

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

/

Mayor and Council

Town of Kearny

402 Kearny Avenue

Kearny, NJ 07032

Re: Compliance Evaluation Inspection,

MSLA I-D· Kearny landfill

NJPDES No. NJ 0051837

Kearny/Hudson County

Gentlemen:

A Compliance Evaluation Inspection of your'fa~nity was conducted bya'

representative o,f this Division on February IS" 1991. A copy of the

completed inspection report form is'£nclosed for your information. '

Your facility received a rating of "UNACCEPTABLE" due to the following.

deficiencies: '.

1. The permittee is not sampling the six {E} ground water

Monitoring Wells a.nd submitting Monitoring Report Forms as

required by, Part I, Page 7', Condition gll) of the site's

NJPDES permi t. ' .

2. The permittee is not conducting weekly inspections of

the J:10nitoringWells or maintaining.aninspection.record as

requlred by Part II, Page 3, Conditlon 9 of the slte's

NJPDES permit. "

3. The permittee has not delineated all leachate discharges

to the surface waters of the State as required by Part II,

Page 4, Condition 18 of the site'·s NJPDES permit.

BAAOOOC 7 'I

NeW Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer

~-""'-'" .. -'-' -.. _ .. _. -- .... --, . --_ ....... _----------_ .._--------------------

TIERRA-A-018320
,..

'""2'" ,"

\

- 2 -

4. The two (2)- wells located during the 'inspection did not

have well permit numbers attached to the casing as required

by Part II-F,.Section Sof the, sttets NJPDES. permit.

'I ;,

5. The permittee failed to.report the damage to Monitoring

Wells 1, 2, 5 and 6 as requlred .by Part II-F, Page 2, '

.Condition 10 of the site~s NJPDES permit. Mon.itoring Well 1

.has a bent casing that may cause sampling d'ifficulties, .

Monitoring Wells 2, 3, 5 and 6 could not be located during

the i~spection and are believed to have been accidentally

demollshed.. , " . '

6. Conta~i n.ated runoff and ieachate from the 1andfi11 co11ects

in several locations around the base of the landfill and.

discharges to the surface waters of the State.' This discharge

is a unpermitted discharge to the surface waters of the State.

The Town of Kearny must cease this discharge.' .

7. The permittee has fai1ed to repair or replace the damaged

wells as required by Part I Section 10 and Part II-F,Section

10.c of the site's NJPDES permit. Unusable w~lls must be

sealed as required by Part I, SEction 10 of the permit.

S. The permittee failed to submit· a completed permit renewal

to the Department. ISO days prior to the expiration date of the

permit as required by P~rt I, Section 2.A. -

9. The two (2) wells located during the inspection were not

locked and dld not have water tight inner caps as required by

Part II-F, Section 5 and the Departments monitor well .

specifications. .

/' Deficiencies 1 through 8 were'noted in the directive letters to the

.Town of Kearny dated February 10,.1988, February 10, 19S9 and February 28,.

1990. As of this date the Town of Kearny has failed to correct these .

deficiencies. '

The deficiencies noted above have ~laced your f~cil ity 'in significant

violation of the terms and conditions of your NJPDES permit and/ort~e.

Water Pollution Control Act Re~ulations (N.J.A.C.· 7:14A-I etseg.). You.

are therefore DIRECTED to instltute corrective measures. A written report'

concerning specific details of remedial measures to be instituted, as well

as an. implementation timetable, must be submitted to this Department and

USEPA~ Permits Administration Branch within thirty (30) calendar days of

the date of this correspondence. .

........ _._._ .... _ .._-_._._-------------------------~--~.

TIERRA-A-018321
"

- 3 -

., . You are advised that the New Jersey Water Pollution Control Act

(N.J.S.A. 58:10A-l et seg.) provides for substantial monetary and criminal'

penalti~s in cases 01 permit violations.

,.'. . Please direct all correspondence and ·inquiries to Deborah R. Cowell,

·the·Senior Environmental Specialist responsible for this case, whocan·be

reached ~t (201~669-39000rby letter through this ,Bureau. .

'. .

Failure to fully comply with tt)eabove will result in'the initiation

of enforcement action by this Department. This shall in no way be .'

construed, however~ to indicate any exemption on your part from possible

penalties for violations indicated by the Compliance Evaluation Inspection

as stated above.. . I

Very truly yours,

"~- .....£d2~.

--;;~~sedlak .

Section Chief

landfill and Underground

Storage Tank Enforcement

Metro Bureau of

Regional Enforcement

El4:G25

c:· CKief - permits Administration Branch, USEPA

Mr. Patrick M. Durack, USEPA

Mr. Edward Grosvenor, Health Official

Mr •.Barry Sutherland, Neglia Engineering Associates

Mr."·Scott Tyrell, BAP". .

/ .Enclosure

bc:' Zaheer M. "Hussain, Enforcement

James lyko, Criminal Justice

.Central F.i1e

TIERRA-A-018322
•.... "' ..

~ . . .

, . '

~

~ . - .

.' ~ .

c", •

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION - '

DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES

CN 029. Trentoo. NJ. 08625

DISCHARGE SURVEILLANCEREroRT

•

"

(

.'

Pmum# NJ0051?r37 -NO. OF DISCHARGES t J11v.J

. DIScHARGER . a1.;sL-'.4 ,-" J1> k.~eA-~CL..::n~· ''1q..... _.,,-=La~~::::;.' ~~.:..=.;'.:....1 -------

OWNER .~ez;~, ~:.:;:.e.~a..;..r..;..I1;..;1-+--·-,-"-.-------------

CLASS-_' _

MUNlClPAIirY ~O.:::::;;..;...;..;...;;+_-----

- LOCATION _ AbU4e _.- '

REcEIVING WATERS C')~,,;,,~ __ ._;.... _ STREAM CLASS ---,----

UCENSEDOPERATO~.t PUNT CLASS,---------------------~

-

"

OVERALL RATING o Acceptable' o Conditionally A~table ~unacceptable

EVALUATOR Jx,b ~K.~ II TITLE'5:: El-fu,'ranMa-,uSeec,~fINFORMATION FllRNISHEDBY (Name) '3:-trr'1 6v-JUa -A ?E.' ..'

(Title)>>~~ ErFj'Yieenv-y , (~tion) ,~/'Q EIfj<heeGkr vh:sq

/&-. ' --

. DATEOFINSPECIlON /7(/07 .l~ / /11(

TIERRA-A-018323
NEWmJji?OErAanlEltTOF~~.u.~~1 " " : ' DIVISlOK OF1JATERRI!SOUBCES 0 ,',~-

, "cH02t~,~~~~~.~"

, ,I)JScBARGI soRvEit.LANcE REPoRT ' lb

Page 2 of- 3 (G)

,Permit # tw°~-'~j7

Date ~ 1'5"/9 ~ '

:AnNGCODES: s • Sa.tiIfartorY '

GROUND WATEa DISCBARGE'EV" I" •--~. -

M" .. ' u'·uDsatisfaetofy. NA • Not ADDtieable

RATING 0 COMMENTS

o

R.CRA,FACILITY

~DISCBARGE NtJMBEJl

~" WAS'TEWATEllSO

:= PUMPS AND PIPING !' ALTERNATEroWElUALAltM

BYPASS .-

,- '0, ,

"

WA1'ER. SUPPLY/MONlTORlNG

,r

::E' AQlJIFERS MONITORED =

,tlPGRADIENT WELLS E DOWNGRADJENTWELLS

SAMPLING PLAN' , ,

T)rc:z::u-,tc. AlII A&.o':.~..i;. ~.'U" J..II"·ICItFNSoC(.JJA..,-,ch·~~

'!!J.....£. ". JPIJ_ ...,~e lo"&~l.-P.- 1h4.e)c.. bt-~.AJ-f c...~.":-

-=- ~ .":,',,. ,..v-~,A.h""H.1.b:':"'" . {I-tol,.~I'<e~ '~.;" ....<l!-~

/lie> :::>c.~n/~~ -... b'~:___.14 \ ..c.k-.1J, , c:!.q,Pj

~ SAMPLING PROCEDURES

D2 : ~ CER.'I1FICAnON

g RECORDS

~ REPORl1NG

,:It ~"'6_1.. ~o .J!

"

J IJo 1'110,,-' ,. ~ 'J ~ Go T ...... ~c ...A-.~ ..~, /J

j) i'Y1arr.-L-..- .v.a ~.. .l (""' , ~ .-vo-----:f-7;-e.r-.- ~-.h_ .. 0

, ( ) Wel(~ e--e v,;"-I- ,....~n e-c.-.L::.-P .:. -e.LJ_ Lie-' ,

7

0' ct' I ,I

" '

':1 DRILLING PERMIT ~tZ.- he lo.-J ,

~.!t!II...... n",€ ~-J- ..vv ........ h,~ ~ J/

0, t J

A.,L:-- ,

, ,

f"he., •., -;J.-,- ~ c. f f<.

YIll.N I ~~-OYoO"3 - -6

"'tI.l.2 -2- z,(pO~C\Cl7 ' '1

,lfw..3 ~b - O~",").5 - ?

44.14 :2-c. --OYCOf,- I

/ltc....>b-::z.& .....;.n§oo, ~

4tt:.Jb a~ ~c..r3~_';

,

PERr- n.EAMnNG PR.OBt..:m.f~

9 SO - - U' ..ftE

:;)' MAX. PRES~'R ~ V

l:I:oiOuW y.'II":iT -; C!

N~

iVAL

,

_-_~ ....._-----_ ....._----,.---l

"

,

EVEND N Ai.4-

-Z G FF e::E ,--_. !-~ SPRAY H~AUS

~'t; DJ~G

:l?4 COVER CR.OP

~ >0 APPEA D ..VI'"V '

~: BUFFER ZONE Zgj ~T ITnr-E 'J:n =t- t------------1hb-'-r--......;...--------------......----'

.

,

L

,

t11t.'.ft/h AN' o-d r.lA.·••;~ I J i: ~~ "'i -Q.£ .......~c :-c-c: k...:-. -Kr C t1 '(..

_5-/---n:? ...'.... 0'<"""--00

',.C ._C.,. ".-< .. ' _ E. •. tt. ..... • . ,~~~ .•.•. "<"'"

TIERRA-A-018324
~ .

)IAGRAMAND FLoW SEQUENCE:

,,~~~-~~~r~~~~~, '

-. - -- - .. _-"Qf029~''f__ ;iiJ::0862f''-- -- --

. . - -,' _.

- D~GE·suRvEu.I:.ANcE·IWORT.

Page 3. of3 '.

_ --I-I:>

..

Permit '# (tJ.l CX:67f'3 7

,'Dat~ .'./ .z../t11C'(ll

I'1SLA -l·D -kEMw

:.~tJDS~~IC~~·

e MoNlrbfl ()/eLL LOCAr/OAJ

Nor 10 Sct~

MSLA ..

l~D "

"'~p"--'----~--;~- ~j

;

1fI.v,

•

DISCHARGE DATA

E:_-+- ·

;

-PERIOD: --.:_--.;... _

SAMPLE SAMPLE -

AU TYPE PEltllII' LDm'S DATA DIS PARA T'lPE ~!RMIT LIMITS' , .DATA .-

,

--

-

- -, . .

.

I

'ORING DEFlCIENCJES: -----------------.,....-------------

TIERRA-A-018325
· .-'

~"TO'-t ~ ~E)~ iAJS~~'" ;Ak'1fI..tlotJ op ~/'~bJ.

At,i\\o~ '\Ir "1'to\E j or.

/fu.,,;- If"" ~7H"E:

'3. T-...r .,.. o~....... #.4 'rt. .

6c ~-".aJ-Uf (ltl ~.

+. Tww- .,....- AI '""Y ."~,,.u ..

~ T~ k"""'~Ti/II ... '..... hRM ~

~D 0'" ~'i.

",ftlC..4,.s· ~ I$CJC'D ~ Ne ,.~,~ ,..,.T lIE MIiwu» 7b To

.1. 1>c:~ AIo&J77 P.5. "-~~-~-~. f~.D=~' .

'i...~ .•.N4T ~ -.. iflhL6fyl' b

,,~ ...:o.....~. ~~ .f'-lt'~·

£............. poU lIE ~ -taT' ~o

~.,. "rI".a~ -'10 ~,""fJ

,..,....~ _.,..

4. ... "

BAA000011

I ,

~Ii Irtof.Jf ().~. Wto 70 It"

¥"~
BAA000011

TIERRA-A-018327
/5

Hackensack Meadowlands DeoeJopment Commission

1099 WALL STREET WEST • LYNDHURST, NEW JERSEY 07071 • (201) 935-3250

PATRICIA Q. SHEEHAN

Chuirman

WILLIAM D. McDOWELL

Executive Director June 18, 1976

Mr. Roger Generazzo

Municipal Sanitary Landfill Authority

1500 Harrison Avenue

Kearny, New Jersey

RE: MSLA,FILE 71-175

Dear Mr. Generazzo:

On June 17, 1976, this Office conducted inspections of the MSLA Sites

I-A, I-C and I-D, in Kearny. Based on the above, this Office found

the following disturbing conditions;

(1) All work has ceased on the drainage and leachate

control system along the southerly property line of Site

I-D. Specifically, since our last joint inspection, no

further covering of the slopes or drainage area has been

completed. In addition, the new drainage ditch has been

only partially dug and abandoned. Further, the clean

fill piled up just south of the new ditch is ineffective

as diking, since it is dumped directly over the demo fill.

As a result, leachate continues to escape the site through

the demo material, and by way of ditches that have been

dug to the property south of the PSE&Gright-of-way.

We anticipate that work will immediately resume in

order that this problem may be corrected as soon as possible.

(2) Active filling on Site I-C has progressed.to the easterly slope of the site, along the PSE&Gpowerline right-ofwpij~· However, the required 50I plateau is not being main-

.;1ained along that slope and the stakes marking the setback l

; -j,,, .....:;..:..."

,.-../ J

,..-

.0'

BAA000015

i .. 1; .. '\.,

TIERRA-A-018328
Mr. Roger Generazzo - 2 - June 18, 1976

have been removed. Therefore, you are hereby ordered to

cease all dumping in the vicinity of the east slope, to

innnediatE:!lystake out a 50' wide plateau from the top of

the existing slope and to adhere to the required setbacks

during all future filling.

Further, enclosed is a copy of the approved cornplaince schedule which has

been marked to indicate those additional items with which this Office has

found deficiencies. We anticipate that you will give all these items your

prompt attention in order that they may be resolved as soon as possible.

If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this Office.

Sincerely,

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER

GEORGE D.

~?

CASCINO, P.E., P.P.

CHIEF ENGINEER

~A/jo

cc: Dennis Backus, P.E.

Kenneth D. McPherson, Esq.

Mark L. First, Esq., DAG

TIERRA-A-018329
START

2/1/76

2/1/76

DEADLINE

COMPLETE

4/1/76

7/1/76

7/1/76

8/1/76

1/1/77

1/1/77

• monKS sr.

THOSE DEADLINES UNDERLINED HAVE NOT BEEN MET

\ it ••

'MUNICIPAL SANITARY LANDFILL AUTHORITY C0r1PLAINCE SCHEDULE

SITE I-A

Bimonthly to 1/1/79 - Water Sampling (bi-monthly)

Complete final cover (2') entire site should be comp1etin~.

Construct and/or recondition swales for drainage ~hould be

completing.

Seed entire site

Install methane vents -:should be starting.

Submittal of diking plan, if necessary.

SITE I-D

2/1/76

IMMEDIATE IMMEDIATE Water and methane sampling (monthly)

Re-install leachate pumps 1 and 2 pump on southwest corner removed.

2/1/76

2/1/76

2/1/76

2/1/76

2/1/76

7/1/76

3/1/76

3/1/76

7/1/76

7/1/76

7/1/76

7/1/76

8/1/76

9/1/76

Construct collection and recharge basins - must be reconditioned.

Construct barrier berms.

Site shall become Inactive.

Final covering shall be complete (2') - not started.

Construct new south swale and ditch - has been abandoned

Install methane vents - not started

Seed entire site.

DEADLINE SITE I-C

IM:."'IEDIATEIMMEDIATE No filling within 200' of P.S.E., & G Company right-of-way (50'

plateau) or within limits of ID1DC Sawmill Park Landfill Extension.

(both limits should be staked immediately) Has been violated .••

shall be re-sta.'<edand maintained.

2/1/76

2/1/76

3/1/76

4/1/76

4/1/76

Clean drainage ditch along Belleville Turnpike side of site - only

started recently.

Water sampling (monthly)

Block all drainage pipes under P.S.E.& G. towers

TIERRA-A-018330
MUNICIPAL SANITARY ~~DFILL AUTHORITY CO~LI~~CE SCHEDULE CONTINUED

START _ COMPLETE

3/1/76 4/1/76

3/1/76 4/1/76

4/1/76 -6/1/76

2/1/76 7/1/76

7/1/76

6/1/76 7/1/76

9/1/76

1/1/77

2/1/76 1./1/77

4/1/76 4/1/77

4/1/76 4/1/77

9/1/76 5/1/79

5/1/79

SITE I-C

Install leachate pumps (along P.S.E. & G side)construct collection

and recharge basins.

Construct dikes 3 & 5 (P.S. side-south and north of site).

Construct flood gates 1,2,3,&4 (southeast corner Under P.S. line for

Belleville Ditch)

Construct swales P.S. side (clean ditch?)

Construct new bridge from Belleville Pike.

Install leachate pumps #3 & #4 (Dike #6 at north tip should be

complete - no deadline established).

Methane samples - monthly

Revised topos due.

Install methane vents

_Elevate dike #4 (or construct new dike on property)

Construct Dikes 1 & 2

Construct barrier berm (Belleville Side)

Construct barrier berm (P.S.E.&G Side)

TIERRA-A-018331
TIERRA-A-018332
tHwE N~,- 8e:N jAE'I Y ....- - - - '" -----

"2,./ ' !-,t,

;

J:1 J /-"

zl' hi.

z.!'{)(

'L" h'

zoq

COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE (MSLA)

Deadline

SITE I-A

c:'J..IAaI!

4/1/76 Bimonthly to 1/1/79- Water Sampling (Bi-Monthly)

7/1/76 Complete Final Cover (21

) Entire Site '51h>-Jc..o M" GOIJPtST1MT

7/1/76 Construct and/or Recondition Swales for Drainaqe "S/'kJVt..O &e c..DI-fPc.ETrNq.

9/1/76 Seed Entire Site

1/1/77 Install Methane Vents ~J+oVc...o .. e ~,...nNt:;

1/1/77 Submittal of Diking Plan, if necessary.

SITE I-D

- - I ~""Jl'\f)JJ EO

TIERRA-A-018333
.....

DECLARATION STATEMENT

REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN

MSLA 1D LANDFILL SITE

SITE NAME AND LOCATION

MSLA ID Landfill Site located in the Town of Kearny, Hudson County, New Jersey

STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE

This Remedial Action Plan presents the selected on-site remedial action for the MSLA ID Landfill

Site located in the Town of Kearny, Hudson County. The investigations which led to this

Remedial Action Plan were developed pursuant to the Spill Compensation and Control Act,

N.J.S.A. 58:10-23.1 la et. seg. (Spill Act). This Remedial ActionPlan explains the factual and legal

basis for selecting the remedy for this site.

The information supporting this remedial action decision is contained in information repositories

which have been established for this site. This Remedial Action Plan contains a Declaration

Statement and Decision Summary.

(

ASSESSMENT OF THE SITE

Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from this site, if not addre:.sed by

implementing the response action selected in this Remedial Action Plan, present an unacceptable

risk to public health, welfare, and the environment.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY

The remedial actions described in this document for on-site contamination are divided into two

operable units. The first will address landfill leachate. Contaminated leachate has been identified

as posing the greatest threats to the human health and the environment. In order to stop the

uncontrolled flow of leachate from the landfill into the ground water and adjacent wetlands, a

subsurface barrier wall with a leachate collection system will be constructed. The barrier wall will

contain the leachate within the footprint of the landfill and a collection system will convey it to the

sewage treatment plant for disposal.

This second operable unit will involve capping of the landfill in order to minimize leachate

production, manage landfill gases, and to encapsulate contaminated materials on the landfill. The

cap will include a methane gas collection system and storm water management controls.

The major components of the proposed remedial actions include the following:

• Construction of a subsurface barrier wall :::-~undthe lanlifill to contain leachate.

BABOOQ003 8\

TIERRA-A-018334
(

• Construction 0f a leachate collection trench on the inboard side of the barrier wall to convey

leachate to pump stations and the sewerage treatment plant.

• Regrading of the landfill to promote stormwater runoff.

• Covering the waste materials with an impermeable. solid waste type cap.

• Implementation of stonn water management and soil erosion controls.

• Collection of landfill gas under the cap for processing or flaring.

• Fencing and posting of the site.

• Long-tel111 performance monitoring and maintenance of the remedy to msure its

effecti veness.

DECLARATION OF STATUTORY DETERMINATiONS

The selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment and complies with Federal

and State requirements that are legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the remedial action ..

The remedy will employ technologies that are routinely used at landfills in the area. and throughout

New Jersey. Once implemented, the goals of the remedy will be achieved inunediately. The most

cost-effective methods and materials that meet design criteria will be utilized. Construction

controls will also be put into practice that to minimize impacts to the surrounding community and

the environment.

(

c_

TIERRA-A-018335
DECISION SUMMARY

MSLA 1D LANDFILL SITE

1. INTRODUCTION

This Remedial Action Plan presents the selected remedy for onsite contamination at the MSLA ID

Landlill Site located in the Town of Kearny, Hudson County. This document is issued by the New

Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) and presents the factual and legal basis

for the actions proposed herein to address contamination at the site.

This Remedial Action Plan is being issued under the authority of: NJ.S.A. 58:1O-23.11a et. ~,

entitled the Spill Compensation and Control Act; N.J.S.A. 58:108-1 et. seg. concerning the

remediation of contaminated properties; and N.J.S.A. 58: lOA~l et. seq., entitled the Water

Pollution Control Act. The remedy presented in this Plan was developed pursuant to N.J.S.A.

13:1E-l et. seg., entitled the Solid Waste Management Act, and in accordance with: N.J.A.C. 7:26-

2A et. ~ which governs the closure and post-closure care of sanitary landfills, and N.J .A.C.

7:26E, entitled Technical Requirements for Site Remediation, which governs the selection of

remedial actions. The remedy selected in this Plan is, to the extent possible, in accordance with the

Federal National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 C.F.R., Part 300

The information supporting this remedial action decision is contained in the record repositories for

( this site. This Remedial Action Plan contains a Decision Declaration and a Decision Summary.

2. SITE DESCRIPTION.

The MSLA ID Landfill is located near Exit 15 W of the NJ Turnpike, at 1500 Harrison Avenue, in

the Town of Kearny, Hudson County (Figure 1). It is situated primarily on a 93.8 acre tract ofland

designated as Block 285, Lot 2, which is owned by the Town of Kearny (Figure 2).

The MSLA 1D Landfill lies within an area classified as the Hackensack Meadowlands District.

Within the District are over 400 acres of wetlands that provide valuable habitat for a wide variety

of fish and wildlife species. They also provide for flood control, filtering of pollution, recreation,

and educational opportunities. Development within the District is governed by the Hackensack

Meadowlands Reclamation and Development Act. The Hackensack Meadowlands Development

Commission (HMDC) has planning and zoning authority within the District to the end of

promoting a balance between economic growth and the environment. The landfill property is

currently zoned SU-3, Special Use. SU zoning is designed to accommodate special uses of

regional importance.

The landfill property is triangular in shape. It is vacant except for a landfill gas recovery and

processing facility operated by GSF Energy, Inc, a Division of the EcoGas Corporation. The

landfill is boarded on the east by wetlands, a TRANSCO gas pipeline easement, and the NJ

1

TIERRA-A-018336
Turnpike Passaic River Viaduct. To the south are PSE&G and TRANS CO gas pipelines and a

wetland that is connected to the Passaic River by culverts under NJ Transit Rail Lines. Wetlands

and a NJ Department of Transportation right-of way bound the northwest side of the triangular lot.

On thc west side, the adjacent property is being used for storage of heavy and construction

equipmcnt.

Dark-colored, odorous leachate can be observed flowing from seeps in the landfill into adjacent

wetlands on the south and east sides. On the north side, leachate seeps discharge along the curbline

of Harrison Avenue. The flow of leachate out of the landfill is estimated to be several hundred

thousand gallons per day. Leachate contaminated water in the wetlands is free to flow through a

culvert on the south side of the site into the Passaic River which flows into the Newark Bay. The

distance from the Passaic River to the site is less than 1000 feet.

GSF Energy, Inc. operates a number of gas extraction wells on top of the landfill. Gas is piped

(i'om the wells to their plant at the toe of the landfill, processed, mixed with gas extracted from

other nearby landfills, and then conveyed along the eastern side of the landfill to a cOIUlectionwith

a Public Service Gas and Electric Company Pipeline.

Subsurface conditions at the site can be described in terms of six strata. The refuse fill material

rises some 110 feet above the surrounding land. Under the refuse is a thin stratum of organic peat

which is considered to represent the original wetland soils. Based on soil boring information, the

organic peat is underlain by a gray sand stratum which is 20 to 30 feet thick. Below this is a

stratum of finely-layered (varved) sand and silt, approximately 25 feet thick, which is underlain by a

stratum of clayey silt, sand and gravel, approximately 20 feet thick. Underlying the overburden

soils is red brown shale bedrock (e.g. the Brunswick Formation).

\

Presently, ground water usage in the area is limited to industrial purposes. All municipalities

within 3 miles of the site draw their drinking water from the Wanaque Reservoir, located in

northern Passaic County, or from other reservoirs. There are nine industrial wells within 3 miles

of the site, the nearest being approximately 0.8 mile southwest. This later well withdraws water

from the stratum overlying the bedrock. Seven other wells within a 3-mile radius of the site draw

water from the Brunswick Formation. Reported yields·of these wells are as much as 600 gallons

per minute (gpm), and the median yield is reported to be 100 gpm.

3. SITE HISTORY ANDENFORCEMENTACTIVITIES

A 1955 topographic map and aerial photographs from 1961-1962 of the area around the site show

it to be primarily wetlands. A 1971 aerial photograph shows landfilling of construction and

demolition debris in the southwestern portion and sanitary waste in the northeastern portion of

the site. Portions of the site have been filled to accommodate connections between Route I-280

and Harrison Avenue. Inthe 1970s, the landfill property was leased by the Town of Keamy, who

owned the land, to the Municipal Sanitary Landfill Authority (MSLA). In 1977, the MSLA

obtained Certificate of Registration No. 0907C from the NJDEP allowing the site to be used for

landfilling. By 1978, aerial photographs show that the majority of wetlands had been filled. It is

2

TIERRA-A-018337
documented that more than 4 million tons of solid waste were disposed at the landfill between

1977 and 1979, at which time it was closed. A significant volume of waste oil, estimated at

approximately 1.5 million gallons, was also disposed of in the landfill. In addition, a variety of

industrial-type wastes were reportedly disposed of and are listed as follows:

Sludge Waste (unknown content)

Pharmaceuticals

Plastic Resins (solid)

Activated Charcoal Sludge

Construction Debris

Wet Gas Scrubber Sludge

Filter Cake (lime-based)

Asphaltic Bottoms

Filter Cake (sewer sludge)

Fuel Oil

Dredge Material

Insecti cides

Deodorants

Wax (solid)

The landfi II was reopened again between 1981 and 1982, but was never properly closed. The

final cover was insufficient and the leachate collection and monitoring systems were not

operating. Throughout its operation of the landfill, the MSLA was cited with various violations.

Under administrative order from the NJDEP the landfill ceased operations in 1982 due in part to

the fact that it had reached its maximum allowable height and that the MSLA had failed to

maintain the leachate collection system.

Since the end of the 1980s up to the present, GSF Energy, Inc has operated a landfill gas extraction

and processing facility at the site. In addition to processing gas from the 1D Landfill, gas is

extracted and piped to the facility from two other MSLA Landfills nearby. Once processed, the gas

is piped along the eastern side of the landfill and into a PSE&G pipeline line in the southeastern

corner of the site.

(

There have been a number of problems at the landfill since it ceased operations 1982. In 1987, a

NJDEP site inspection observed large, open cracks in the top of the landfill. There was

immediate concern that a possible slope failure was underway. Monitoring and slope stability

analyses by the State, PSE&G and the New Jersey Turnpike Authority lead all to conclude that

the landfill was stable and surface cracks were due to internal settlement. Later, in 1995, a fire

developed at the site covering a 10 to 20 acre area. The Town of Kearny estimated their cost to

extinguish the fires at up to $500,000 and requested State aid from the Governor. Vegetation at

the site is not mowed or maintained and the potential for fires is always present.

In 1986, the USEPA's contractor, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc, performed a Preliminary Assessment of

the site. The Report recommended a site inspection to assess the quality of the leachate. In 1990

the USEPA's contractor, NUS Corporation, performed sampling and investigations and issued a

Site Investigation Report. The findings of this Report are summarized in Section 5 of this

Remedial Action Plan.

Berms are present along the toe of the landfill on all sides. Apparently, these were constructed

by MSLA to contain leachate seepage out of the landfill. Leachate would pond behind the berms

and then be pumped up onto the landfill or discharged into wetlands flowing into the Passaic

River. Since the MSLA ceased operations at the landfill, the leachate overflows the berms into

the adjacent wetlands. '

3

TIERRA-A-018338
( Due to lack of a viable party at this time to undertake the proper closure measures, the NJDEP is

proceeding to perfonll the work described in this Remedial Action Plan using public funds.

4. PUBLIC NOTICE

The NJDEP has provided public notice in the Jersey Journal newspaper of its intent to remediate

the site. A toll-free telephone number and mailing address is provided for questions and further

infoffilation.

The selection of the remedy in this Plan is based on three key documents: (1) "Potential Hazardous

Waste Site Preliminary Assessment", dated May 22, 1986, by Malcolm Pimie, Inc; (2) "Final

Draft Site Inspection Report", dated June 29, 1990, by the NUS Corporation, which provides

background information and the results of sampling at the site; and (3) "Background Investigation

and Design Recommendation Report", dated July 1999, by Louis Berger and Associates, Inc, which

also provides background information and describes the remedial measures to be implemented.

These documents, and other site-related information, can be found at the following location:

(

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

P.O. Box 413,

401 East State Street

Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0413

Contact: Ms. Mindy Mumford, Community Relations Coordinator

Bureau of Community Relations

Phone: 1-800-253-5647

The NJDEP has also established information repositories that contain the most important siterelated documents at the following locations:

Kearny Public Library

318 Kearny Avenue

KeamY,NJ

Contact Nancy Smith, Reference Librarian

201-998-2666

Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission

One DeKorte Park Plaza

Lyndhurst, NJ

Contact Mr. Thomas R. Martarano, Director of Solid Waste and Engineering

201.460-1700

The NJDEP encourages the public to review these documents in order to gain a more

comprehensive understanding of the site, the activities that have been conducted, and the basis for

the remedy selected herein.

4

TIERRA-A-018339
(

5. SITE CONTAMINATION

Infomlation about the nature and extent of contamination at the site can be found in the "Final Draft

Site Inspection Report", dated June 29, 1990, by the NUS Corporation (NUS). NUS personnel

collected ground water, surface soil; surface water, sediment, and leachate samples for the US

Environmental Protection Agency. Samples were analyzed for priority pollutant organic

chemicals and metals.

The Sample Location Map is included as Figure 3. Sampling results from the NUS Report are

presented in Tables 1 through 5 and are compared to NJDEP standards.

5.1 GROUND WATER

The aquifers underlying the site are classified as Class II-A in the New Jersey Ground Water

Quality Standards (GWQS), N.J.A.C. 7:9-6. Class II-A ground water aquifers are designated as

suitable for potable water supply. Hazardous organic and inorganic compounds were detected in

the ground water at the site at concentrations above Class II-A GWQS as shown in Table 1.

One ground water sample was obtained from an existing well (Well No. MW-3 in the NUS Report)

installed in the shallow, overburden aquifer on the west side of the site. Two volatile organic

compounds were detected above GWQS as follows: chlorobenzene at 58 parts per billion (Ppb)

and total xylenes at 1,100 ppb. Inorganic analyses also detected aluminum, barium, chromium,

( iron, lead, manganese, nickel, and sodium at levels exceeding GWQS.

The depth to ground water at the site is relatively shallow. Water levels in on-site monitoring

wells installed along the base of the landfill ranged from 2.5 to 9 feet below ground surface

during the NUS sampling events. This shallow, unconsolidated aquifer is composed of recent

organic sediments at the top and glacially deposited material with depth. The shale bedrock

aquifer begins approximately 70 feet beneath the ground surface. Although the primary

permeability of the shale is low, appreciable amounts of water are found in joints and fractures.

The shallow ground water flow direction at the site is radially outward due to the large mound of

leachate in the landfill. Shallow ground water discharges locally into adjacent wetlands and

surface water bodies. There is no evidence that the landfill Was constructed with a bottom liner,

therefore, leachate is free to drain out of the waste materials and directly into ground water.

5.2 LANDFILL LEACHATE

Five samples were taken from leachate ponds or seeps along the toe of the landfill. Sample

analytical results are presented in Table 2 and compared to New Jersey Surface Water Quality

Criteria (SWQc), NJ.A.C. 7:9-4 et ~ for Saline Estuary, SE-type waters. Levels of polynuclear

aromatic hydrocarbons (ie. pyrene, flouranthene, benzo(a) anthracene, chrysene;

benzo(b)flouranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, and indeno(I,2,3~cd)pyrene) were detected at levels

above SWQC which are protective of human health. The pesticides beta-BHC, 4-4'-DDD, 4-4'-

5

TIERRA-A-018340
(

(

DOE, and 4-4'-DDT were all detected in leachate at levels above SWQC which are protective of

human health. Analyses for inorganic compounds also detected metals at levels exceeding

SWQC for protection of human health or aquatic life including: arsenic at 7.3 ppb, lead at 1250

ppb to 1,250 ppb, zinc at 2360 ppb, chromium at 262 ppb, copper at 490 ppb, and mercury at 2.6

ppb (concentrations are qualified as estimated).

5.3 SURFACE WATERS AND SEDIMENTS

The Passaic River in the vicinity of the site is classified as Saline Estuary (SE) in the New Jersey

Surface Water Quality Standards (SWQS), NJ.A.C. 7:9-4 et~. SE-type waters are designated

for the maintenance and migration of fish populations, the migration of diadromous fish,

secondary contact recreation, the maintenance of wildlife, and any other reasonable uses.

Only one surface water sample was taken from the wetland on the northeast side of the landfill.

Sample analytical results are presented in Table 3. Benzene and chlorobenzene were the only

organic contaminants detected, both at concentrations of 3 ppb. Inorganic contaminants were also

detected. Arsenic and mercury were detected at levels exceeding saltwater SWQS for the

protection of human health. The following metals were also detected at concentrations exceeding

saltwater SWQC for the protection of aquatic life: copper at an estimated 1,500 ppb; lead at 1,050

ppb; mercury at an estimated 2.0 ppb; nickel at an estimated 222 ppb; and zinc at an estimated

1,070 ppb.

Sediment samples were taken from two locations as shown in Figure 3. Sample analytical results

are presented in Table 4. No promulgated standards exist for sediment quality. Sediment results

were compared to published criteria in the "Guidance For Sediment Quality Evaluations",

NJDEP, dated November 1998 .. A sediment sample taken in the wetland northeast of the landfill

detected the following semi-volatile organic compounds at levels above "Low Effects Range"

screening level where adverse benthic impacts have been observed in 10% of the studies:

fluoranthene at 1,700 ppb; pyrene at an estimated 2,400 ppb; benzo(a)anthracene at 1,600 ppb;

chrysene at 2,000 ppb; benzo(a)pyrene at 2,200 ppb; indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene at 1,800 ppb; and

benzo(g,h,i)perylene at 1,600 ppb. Also detected above the sediment screening criteria was the

following pesticide 4,4'-DDT at an estimated 67 ppb. Inorganic analyses also detected arsenic,

cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc above NIDEP sediment screening

criteria.

5.4 SOILS

Analytical results are available in the NUS Corporation's Site Inspection Report for five surface

soil samples taken around the perimeter of the landfill. Table 5 lists the compounds detected and

compares them to NJDEP Soil Cleanup Criteria (SCC). The SCC are guidelines used by the

NJDEP to determine if remediation is necessary. The non-residential SSC and the SSC for

protection of ground water are applicable to the site at the present time. The non-residential

criteria were developed to be protective of human health based on an ingestion pathway. The

ground water SSC were developed to protect the potability of the underlying aquifer from

6

TIERRA-A-018341
,contaminants that might leach out of the soi Is.

Three volatile organic compounds were detected in the soils: chlorobenzenc, ethylbenzene, and

xylenes. Polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were also detected, including benzo(a)pyrene at

750 ppb. which exceeds the SSC for non-residential direct contact. Pesticides were detected

including: beta-BHC; 4.4'-DDT, methoxychlor, and 4,4'-DDE. Metals were detected in soil

samples including: arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc.

In addition to chemical compounds detected in the soils, previous site investigations have

observed wastes on the surface of the site. These include medical wastes, chemical drums, and

large tanks.

5.5 Air

Gaseous emissions from the landfill are controlled to some degree by the gas extraction system in

operation on top of the landfill. During site visits by NJDEP personnel in 1999, foul odors were

noted in areas where leachate is seeping from the side of the landfill or where it is ponded.

6. SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS

(

The remedy selection rationale in this Remedial Action Plan follows the Presumptive Remedy

approach presented in the USEPA Directive No. 9355.0-49FS, entitled "Presumptive Remedy for

CERCLA Municipal Landfill Sites." This streamlined approach, as used herein for municipal

landfills, consists of identifying chemicals present in ground water, sediments, and surface water,

and comparing them to standards for those media which may be applicable or relevant and

appropriate requirements (ARARs). Those chemicals that exceeded ARARs for a given pathway

are considered to require remedial action. A detailed calculation of risk factors to human health

or the environment was not performed. Under the Presumptive Remedy approach, any

contaminant exceeding a chemical-specific ARAR is assumed to result in a site risk.

Tables 1-5 compare the levels of contaminants detected in ground water, leachate, surface water,

sediments, and soils with State ARARs. As shown, the ground water quality at the site is

contaminated above levels determined to be protective of human health based on potable use.

Surface water and sediments in the wetlands are also degraded by landfill leachate above

standards established for the protection of human health andlor aquatic life. Actual or threatened

releases of hazardous substances from this Site, if not addressed by implementing the response

action selected in this Remedial Action Plan, may present an imminent and substantial

endangerment to public health, welfare, or the environment.

7. REMEDIAL ACTION SELECTION

This Remedial Action Plan was developed with the goal of attaining the following objectives for

on-site contamination:

7

TIERRA-A-018342
• Prevent leachate contamination of the ground water above New Jersey Ground Water

Quality Standards for Class ll-A aquifers.

• Prevent leachate contamination of adjacent wetlands and surface water bodies.

• Control landfill gas emissions

• Prevent human or animal direct contact with contaminated materials

The rationale for this remedy selection follows the USEPA Presumptive Remedy approach for

municipal landfills. Title 40 C.F.R. Section 300.430(a)(iii)(B) of the National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) contains the expectation that engineering controls,

such as containment, will be used where treatment is impracticable. The preamble to the NCP

identifies municipal landfills as a type of site where treatment of the waste may be impracticable

because of the size and heterogeneity of the contents (55 Federal Register 8704, 1990). Because

treatment is usually impracticable for a landfill, containment is considered to be the appropriate

response action, or the "Presumptive Remedy." The presumptive remedy for municipal landfill

sites consists primarily of the containment of the landfill mass, collection and/or treatment of

landfill gas, and measures to control leachate. Use of the presumptive remedy also eliminates the

need for an initial identification and screening of remedial alternatives.

(

Landfill capping upon closure is standard engineering practice in New Jersey. The construction of

a subsurface barrier wall in combination with a leachate collection system is a proven method of

leachate control at other landfills in the area, such as the MSLA lA Landfill and the MSLA IE

Landfill. These measures have been constructed by the HMDC and have been operating

successfully for several years. The successful implementation and performance of these barrier

wall projects in nearby areas of similar geology, with comparable landfills, is a factor in the

NJDEP's selection of this remedy.

8. SCOPE AND ROLE OF REMEDIAL ACTIONS

As with many hazardous waste site cleanups, the problems are complex. As a result, the NJDEP

has organized the work into two separate actions or operable units.

Operable Unit I:

Operable Unit 2:

Leachate control to mitigate contamination of surface water and ground

water.

Landfill capping to control gas emissions, prevent direct contact with

contaminated materials, and reduce leachate generation.

Before landfill capping, leachate control measures will be implemented. The landfill is daily

discharging thousands of gallons of contaminated leachate into the ground water and the

surrounding wetlands. This represents the most visible and direct threat to human health and the

environment. Leachate control measures are considered to be a first priority. Also, historically,

there has been concern about the stability of the MSLA ID Landfill. The initial installation of a

leachate collection system will allow the landfill to dewater to some degree and increase in

stability prior to adding the additional weight of a cap. Excavations for the barrier wall will

generate considerable volumes of soil which will be disposed of on top of the landfill and will

l

B

TIERRA-A-018343
require proper grading and capping which will follow under Operable Unit 2 - Capping.

The second operable unit will consist of a low permeability cap over the landfill, including a

landfill gas collection system. A cap will control stonnwater infiltration into the landfill which

results in leachate production. Additional benefits include the control of gas emissions and

prevention of direct contact of humans and animals with exposed, contaminated materials. Design

of a landfi IIcap can begin once the leachate control measures are under construction.

Once these mcasurcs are implemented, on-site contamination will be contained fTOIll impacting offsite areas. Remediation of off-site contamination is not considered in this Remedial Action Plan

and will be studied and handled separately, if necessary.

9. REMEDIAL ACTION DESCRIPTION

The two operable units which are proposed for on-site remediation are described in detail in this

section.

9.1 LEACHATE CONTROL

(

A subsurface barrier wall is proposed to enclose the waste material. The wall wi11be keyed into the

varved sand, silt, and clay formation at depths of approximately 50 feet. On the landfill side of the

wall, a leachate collection trench will be installed at a level below the ofT-site ground water table

elevation. It will convey leachate contained within the wall to a pump station to be built onsite.

From there the leachate will be piped to a pump station at the MSLA IA Landfill which is owned

by the Kearny Municipal Utilities Authority (KMUA). There it will be combined with leachate

from the MSLA IA and MSLA IE Landfills and disposed of into the sewer system for conveyance

to the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission's (PVSC) treatment plant. These actions will contain,

collect, and dispose of the landfill leachate to prevent its migration into ofT-site ground water and its

discharge into surface waters and wetlands.

Construction and quality control requirements for subsurface barrier walls and leachate collection

systems are provided in New Jersey Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste Regulations, NJ.A.C

7:26-2A.7. The wall will be keyed into the underlying low-permeability formation to a depth of at

least three feet. Based on available geological information, this formation, in combination with the

barrier wall, will effectively cut off any lateral or downward leachate migration.

To facilitate construction of the subsurface wall and leachate collection system, clearing and

grading of portions of the site will be required. A stable, level, working platform for the equipment

used to install the subsurface wall will be constructed around the base of the entire landfill. Upon

completion of the wall, this platform will be converted into an access road to allow for operations

and maintenance. In addition, a construction laydown area will be established for the processing

and storage of barrier wall materials. Excess waste and soils from wall construction and other work

will be taken to the top of the landfill, graded out, and covered in accordance with Division of Solid

and Hazardous Waste Regulations. This material will be capped when construction of the second

9

TIERRA-A-018344
operable unil occurs.

During construction, some wetlands around the site may require filling to allow access for

equipment. - A wetlands mitigation plan will be developed to address wetlands impacted by the

remedial measures.

To further protect human health from contact with contaminated materials on site, the property will

be fenced and posted. This will also safeguard the remedial measures from vandalism.

All necessary pennits and approvals will be obtained for construction including, but not limited to,

those from: HMDC. Hudson-Essex-Passaic Counties Soil Conservation District, State of New

Jersey, Kearny Municipal Utilities Authority, Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission, and the Town

of Keamy. NJDEP pemlits include those for wetlands disruption. sewer connection, well drilling,

treatment works approval, and landfill disruption.

Post-closure care is required for a minimum of 30 years. Maintenance work would be scheduled at

regular, periodic intervals. At a minimum, fencing, monitoring wells. and the leachate collection,

pumping and conveyance systems would require periodic inspection. To insure that the barrier wall

and leachate collection system. once constructed, continue to function properly over time. a

network of monitor wells will be installed on either side of wall. Water levels in wells on either

side of the wall will be monitored to insure that an inward hydraulic gradient is developing (after

initial installation of the wall) or is maintained (during long-term monitoring). Under these

conditions, any leakage through the wall will consist of clean ground water from outside the wall.

Locations, parameters, and frequencies for monitoring will be developed in detail during the

design of the remedy.

The construction, operation and maintenance, and total present worth (over a 30 year period, using

a 5% discount rate) costs for the subsurface barrier wall and leachate collection system were

estimated as follows, assuming that the cutoff wall can be constructed of soil mixed with bentonite

clay:

Capital Cost

Annual O&M Costs

Total Present Worth Costs

$ 12,000.000

$ 550,000

$ 20.500,000

If, during design. it is determined that physical constraints. such as limited workspace, or the

incompatibility of the leachate with the soillbentonite mixture require the use of more expensive

techniques, such as a watertight sheet piling wall or a geomembrane panel wall, the costs are

estimated as follows:

Capital Cost

Annual O&M Costs

Total Present Worth Costs

$ 17,000.000

$ 550.000

$ 25,500.000

10

TIERRA-A-018345
(

The construction materials and methods to be used for the subsurface wall will be determined

during the design phase. The most cost-effective solutions that meet design criteria will be

selected.

The proposed landfill cap will be a solid waste type cover with a low permeability liner. The

existing landfill cap is inadequate as evidenced voluminous amounts of leachate that flow out of the

landfill. The New Jersey Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste Regulations, N.J.A.C 7:26-

2A.7, require that the final cover system be designed and constructed to minimize long-term

infiltration and percolation of liquid into the landfill throughout the closure and post-closure

periods, which is not the case at this site. Also, N.J.A.C. 7:26-2A.7 and Federal RCRA Subtitle

o RegulatiOlls require that the permeability of the cap be less than or equal to that of the bottom

liner system or natural subsoils. Once a subsurface barrier wall is installed under the first

operable unit, the wall, and the low permeability soils it will key into, will form a bottom liner

system with a permeability expected to be no more than I x 10.7 em/sec. This will require

construction of a landfill cap having a similar or lower permeability.

The extent of the cap will be determined during the engineering design phase based on slope

stability considerations and cost. Cap construction will be in accordance with the New Jersey

Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste Regulations, N.J.A.C 7:26-2A.7 for solid waste type

landfills.

( There are several components to the landfill cap. Initially the site will be graded to minimize soil

erosion and maximize storm water runoff. The construction of the cap will begin with the

installation of a gas collection system and a cushioning layer for the overlying liner. A liner, such

as a 40-mil synthetic plastic membrane or two feet of clayey soil, will be placed above the gas

collection layer to prevent the infiltration of stormwater into the underlying waste. The liner will be

chemically compatible with materials it may come in contact with and be able to accommodate

stresses caused by settling. Over the liner will be a drainage layer to allow stormwater to drain off

of the top of the liner. The uppermost layer of the cap will consist of topsoil capable of supporting

vegetative growth. The thickness of the cap above the liner will be sufficient to prevent frost,

animal, and root damage to the liner.

ill order to manage gases generated by the decay of material in the landfill, the existing gas

collection system will be evaluated for compliance with State and Federal requirements. If

necessary, further gas extraction wells or other modifications will be made to the system during

capping. It is anticipated that the collected gas would be piped to the existing processing plant

operated by GSF Energy. Otherwise, a flaring station would be constructed to bum the gas.

To facilitate construction of the landfill cap, clearing and grubbing of the site wouldbe required.

Access road improvements may be needed to accommodate the construction equipment that would

be traveling to the site. Dust control measures (e.g:, the use of water trucks) would be taken to

minimize the off-site migration of dust. To prevent soil erosion and reduce off-site sediment

11

TIERRA-A-018346
transport, a soil erosion and sediment control plan would be prepared. These plans will identify the

measures to prevent soil loss and off-site damages, measures to establish proper vegetation, and

post-closure maintenance procedures. Stormwater management controls may also be required.

All necessary penn its and approvals will be obtained for construction including, but not limited to,

those from: HMDC, Hudson-Essex-Passaic Counties Soil Conservation District, State of New

Jersey, and the Town of Kearny. NJDEP pernlits include those for wetlands disruption, well

drilling, air pemlitting, and landfill disruption.

Post-closure care is required for a minimum of 30 years. Maintenance needs would be determined

by periodic site inspections. At a minimum, the vegetated cover, side slopes, fencing, gas

collection system, and storm water management systems would require periodic inspection and

maintenance.

The construction, operation and maintenance, and total present worth (over a 30 year period, using

a 5% discount mte) costs for landfill capping were estimated as follows, assuming that the cap will

cover the entire wastefill (approximately 94 acres):

Capital Cost

Annual O&M Costs

Total Present Worth Costs

$ 13.000.000

$ 430.000

$ 19,600,000

If, during design, it is determined that the stability of the landfill will be compromised by capping

( the entire landfill, or that the benefits realized in terms of reduced leachate production are not equal

to the additional costs of capping the entire landfill, a partial cap on the top of the wastefill

(approximately 20 acres) will be. constructed. The construction. operation and maintenance. and

total present worth (over a 30 year period, using a 5% discount rate) costs for partial capping were

estimated as follows:

Capital Cost

Annual O&M Costs

Total Present Worth Costs

$ .3.000.000

$ 90,000

$ 4,400,000

10. REMEDIAL ACfION PERFORMANCE

This section evaluates the performance of the remedial action presented in Section 9 in terms of

regulatory criteria for selecting remedial alternatives. These include requirements for protection of

human health and the environment. implementability, time for remediation, and cost (ref. NJ.S.A.

58:10B-12). The New Jersey Spill Compensation and Control Act (NJ.S.A. 58:10-23.11 et.~)

states that any cleanup shall be, to the maximum extent possible. in accordance with the Federal

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan (NCP). The NIDEP Technical

Requirements for Site Remediation (NJ.A.C. 7:26E-5) contain four criteria for the initial

evaluation of remedial alternatives that are in accordance with the NCP and are presented below.

Any remedy should meet these criteria in order to be considered for the site.

12

TIERRA-A-018347
CRITERIA I considers protection of human health and the environment. N.J.S.A. 58:10B-12

requires that remediation standards be protective of human health to the level of one additional

Iifetime cancer risk per million people for carcinogens and to a Hazard Index Level of less than one

for noncarcinogens. The remedy selected in this Plan provides protection of human health and the

environment by means isolating the landfill contaminants within a subsurface cutoff wall and under

a landfill cap. The barrier wall will prevent contaminated leachate from coming into contact with

ground or surface waters. Leachate collected from the landfill will be pumped off-site to a

permitted disposal facility. The cap will serve to reduce the infiltration of stormwater through the

wastefill that causes the generation of leachate. Direct-contact risks associated with contaminated

materials and soils will be reduced through the placement of the cap, and implementation of soil

erosion and sediment controls. Exposure to gaseous emissions from the landfill will be prevented

by the gas collection system.

The remedial action will comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, and regulations.

During the construction of the subsurface barrier wall and cap, some short-term impacts on the

environment are antic~pated. Some disruption of the surrounding wetlands may occur to allow

space for construction equipment andlor the barrier wall or cap. A wetlands mitigation plan will be

developed to address these areas. Soil erosion and sediment control measures will be implemented

to minimize any impacts from construction on the surrounding environment. Odors from the

excavations for the subsurface wall are also anticipated. All work will be performed according to

an approved Health and Safety Plan. The air will be monitored for hazardous chemicals and odors.

CRITERIA 2 is implementability, which is the technical feasibility of a remedy including the

availability of materials and services needed to implement the chosen solution. Solid waste type

caps and gas collection systems. are routinely constructed for closure of landfills. Many firms are

familiar with the equipment, specialists, and materials required to construct these cap systems.

Subsurface barrier walls to control ground water flow have been used successfully since the 1940s

on civil works projects. Since CERCLA legislation in the 1980s, subsurface barrier walls have

been used more frequently to control contaminated ground water. Considerable information now

exists on the design, testing, construction, and monitoring of subsurface barrier walls of various

types, for these purposes. The HMDC has constructed subsurface barrier walls in combination

with leachate collection systems at the MSLA lA Landfill and the MSLA IE Landfill, which are

both nearby. Based on discussions with the HMDC, these remedies have been operating

successfully for several years.

The construction of this remedy will require temporary and permanent easements from a number of

property owners. Based on past experience, access agreements and easements have been obtained

in the past by the NJDEP for environmental cleanup work and should be negotiable for this project.

CRITERIA 3 is timeliness or how quickly an alternative will achieve remediation standards.

NJ.S.A. 58:10B-12 and the Federal NCP requires the consideration of whether a remedial

alternative can be implemented within a reasonable time frame without endangering human health

13

TIERRA-A-018348
or the environment.

(

Operable Units 1 and 2 are each expected to take two years to construct after completion of their

designs. The beneficial effects of preventing leachate migration into the ground water and surface

waters, the control of landfill gas, and prevention of direct contact of humans and animals with

waste materials, will begin upon completion of construction.

CRITERIA 4 is cost. The cost of a remedial alternative, excluding "No Action", should not be

grossly excessive compared to the other alternatives evaluated. The Background Investigation and

Design Recommendations Report evaluated three subsurface wall alternatives, and partial and full

capping. The type of barrier wall to be deployed at the site will be determined by design studies of

the compatibility of the leachate with the wall material, by the physical constraints of the site

(utilities, topography, wetlands, etc), and by health and safety issues. Similarly, the extent of

capping will be determined based on engineering and costlbenefit studies. The most cost effective

construction methods and materials that meet design criteria will be selected.

The remedy selected in this Plan addresses all of the four criteria of concern discussed above. It

provides for protection of human health and the environment, is technologically feasible, pro:vides

for immediate relief from continued pollution of ground and surface waters. Every attempt to

minimize short-term impacts to t~e surrounding community from construction of the remedy will

be made.

14

TIERRA-A-018349
(

ATTACHMENT 1- FIGURES

TIERRA-A-018350
... - .

e

N.J. Deportment

of Environmental

Protection

MSLA-10 LANDFILL, KEARNY, NEW JERSEY

SITE LOCATtON MAP

NJOEP CONTRACT No. A-8S149

Louis 8erger &: Assoc.

L\ 30 Vreelond Rood

\..111 Florham Par"-. NJ

FIGURE 1

TIERRA-A-018351
• M2

o

z

ct

-' 0.

=>

PASSAIC RIVe-R .,

Ctrr OF ESSEX NEWARK COfJNrr

PATUIIl- U. S. toAST 100.00 fUT • arOO[TIC l'UIl FIG..FE 2

NEGLIA (N(; JOS~ I. H(::;ERIHG ASSOCIATES

AUIOUST-;'~w~ ("4IH[I~

~ MSLA It> LA\Jl)~II.L

TIERRA-A-018352
.... -. ........

•

•

+

*

.--:::;. .

--~

LEACHATE RUNOFF

MONITORING wELL /WELL SAMPLE

LANDFILL ROAD

NOTE: AU SAM PI E NUMBERS

PRECEDED BY NJCl

PROPERT Y LINE I PROPERTY LINE

• S-7

WETLANDS

PASSAIC RIVER

I TIDAL WATER I

__ ~ ..~: ~l OW.......

- --- --_ _._--

:

._--=-. -'-

TO INDUSTRIAL STACK I

SOUTH OF PASSAIC RIVER!

SAMPLE LOCATION MAP

MSLA, 1-0 LF, KEARNY, N.J.

ISCALE UNKNOWN I

METHANE A'

RECOVERY

PLANT

S-1 •

_.---"

fJGURE 3,

Lc.If/NUSCCAFORATCN

TIERRA-A-018353
(

AIT ACHMENT II - TABLES

(

TIERRA-A-018354
(

TABLE 1

MSLA 1-0 LANDFILL

SITE INSPECTION SAMPLING RESULTS-GROUND WATER *

QUANTIFIED

COMPOUNDS

u Il

SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION NJDEP

CLASS IIA GWQS

ug/l)**

4

700

1000

40

NO

NO

NJCl-GW1

PESTICIDES/PCBS

METALS

Aluminum

Arsenic

Barium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Co er

Iron

Lead

Ma nesium

(

Man anese

Nickel

Potassium

Sodium

Vanadium

Zinc

200

8

2000

NP

100

NP

1000

300

10

NP

50

100

NP

50,000

NP

5000

NOTES:

Sampling performed by NUS Corporation and analyses performed by Keystone Environmental, 1190.

•• GWQS Ground Water Quality Standards (N.J.A.C. 7:9-6)

ug/L - micrograms per liter

J - Estimated value for compound present below CROL but above IDL

E • Estimated value

NP - Not published for this constituent

\

TIERRA-A-018355
r

TABLE 2

MSLA 1.[) LANDFILL

SITE INSPECTION SAMPLING RESULTS· LEACHATE'

QUANTIFIED

COMPOUNOS

ulL

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMOUNDS

2-Hexanone

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

Phenanthrene

Flouranlhene

ne

8enz a antlY8cene

C ene

8anzo b Fluoranthene

Be a ne

Inde 1 2 3-ed ne

Benz hi ene

PESTlCIDESlPCBS

be/a-BHC

44'-DDO

44'-DOE

44'-DOT

MelhO Of

METALS

A1umlrlJlll

Anti

Arsenic

Barlum

B llum

cadmium

calclum

Chromium

CObalt

CO

Iron

Lead

M ne,lum

Me

Nickel

Potassium

Vanadium

Zinc

SAMPLE IOENTIFICATION SWQC

AQUATIC LIFE

NJCL-l5 ulLNO NP NP

NP NP

370 NP

8970 NP

0.031 NP

0.031 NP

0.031 NP

0.031 NP

0.031 NP

NP NP

0.460 NP

0.000837 NP

0.000590 NP

0.000590 NP

NP 0.03

NP NP

4300 NP

0.138 38

NP NP

NP NP

NP 9.3

NP NP

3230 SOa

NP NP

NP 5.• D

NP NP

NP 8.1

NP NP

0.14. 0.025 b

3900 8.2

NP NP

NP NP

NP 81

12200 E 9310 E

NO 1.2OJ

NO

"9E 210E 330E

0.47J 0.71J 0.25J

O.78J 2.1 U8J

24100 e 13 eoo E 12600 E

20E 121

e.2OJ 1.3OJ 21.5

NOTES:

Sampling pelformed by NUS Cofpatallon and analyse. perfonned by Keys10nt Environmental, January 1990 .

•• SWQC Surface Water Quality Crit.rIa· Saltwater. HlIITlIn heallh etlterla, totaI_rabi. NJA.C 7:98-1.14

... SWQC Surface Water Quality Crit.rla - Saltwater, CIYonIc effects aQuatic 11ft aIIerla, dissolved

a • CI'lnlnlC elfectl for Cr"

b • Total recoverable

lIIliL • rnlcragramt per Iher

J • E.timated value for co~ presel'll beI_ CROl but above IDL

E • Esllmaled willi

NO • Not Detected

TIERRA-A-018356
(

TABLEJ

MSLA 1-0 LANDFILL

SITE INSPECTION SAMPUNG RESULTS. SURFACE WATER.

QUANTIFIED

COMPOUNDS

u IL

NJDEP

HUMAN HEALTH

SWQC u IL··

SAMPLEIDENTIRCATION NJDEP

AQUATIC

SWQC u

NJCL-5W2

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

71 I 21,000

Benzene

Chlorobenzene NP

NP

3J

3J

I SEMI.VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

I PESTICIDESIPCBS

ND

ND

IAlumlnum 25,100E .,~1"'- Np

22.9E 36 n 1~C:

v..... ..,

1240 ..,.., n..- Nt" 6.9

233000E

NP 9.3

Chmmium n.

292E 3,230 Cobalt 50a 30.4J NP I

Nfl 1c...l'per "·1. ,;,1.550E."- T" ' " :~:-:. NP 5.6 b

GO.800E ! NP un,,,.-

Iron

, ~ .~.

" "

NI) NP

1....t:ilU

NP e.1

108,OOOE I

IMercucy

NP NP 1,710E 100

3,900 8.2

NP NP

(

NP NP

NP NP

NP 81

NOTES:

sampling pertormed by NUS Corporation and analyses pertormed by Keyslone Envilonmenlal, 1190.

•• SWQC Surtace Water Qualily Crileria • saltwater, Human heallh aiteria, lotal recoverable NJAC 7:98-1.14

••• SWQC Surtace Water QuaUIy Criteria· Saltwater, Chronic effects aquatic life aiteria, dissolved

a • Chronic effects for Crot

b· Tolal recoverable

uglL • micrograms per liler

J • Estimated value for compound presenl below CROL bul above IOL

E • Estimated value

NP • Nol published for this constituent

NO • Not Detected

I

TIERRA-A-018357
TABLE 4

MSLA 1·0 LANDFILL

SITE INSPECTION SAMPLING RESULTS-SEDIMENTS.

QUANTIFIED

COMPOUNDS

(mglkgl

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION l MARINE/ESTUARINE

SEDIMENT CRITERIA"

NJCL-SED1 NJCL-SED3

Low Effects Level Medium Effects

Level

lmglkgl I VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

~nO<1e

12·He~anone .

nn..:='1 v.u....)

O.014J

0.095

ND

0.240

0.600

0.665

NP

NP

NP

0.261 1.60

l.iiO

t\ ~llII.

.......... 2.BO

n"''llA v ....",..,

NP

rbons

45.0

0.17

4.0

320.00

320.00

PESTICIDESIPCBS

44'·000

(

\

.... "....,... ~ .... "VUE:.

A.AI nt"lr.T -.~-"'UI

METALS

Aluminum

Arsenic

Barium

Cadmium

Caldum

Chrc:r.ium

0.005

NP

0.0022

0.0016

NP

8.2

NP

1.2

NP

I~

0.0460

21

NP

70.0

NP

9.6

"'0nr

Iron

Lead

370.0

270.0

81.0

34.0

Ma nesium

NP

47.0

NP

NP

218.0

NP

Nidee!

NP

Sodium

0.15

no

0.71

Vanadium

Zinc -NP

150.0

NP

NOTES:

Sampling performed by NUS Corporalion and analyses performed by Keystone Environmental, January 1990 .

•• NJDEP Guidance For Sediment Quality Evalualions, November 1998

mglkg - rrilligrams per kilogram

J - Estimated value for COC'I1pClUn(j present below CROl but above IOl

E - Estimated value

NP - Not PUblished for this constituent

NO - Not Detected

NP

410.0

TIERRA-A-018358
TABLE 5

MSLA 1.[) LANDFILL

SITE INSPECTION SAMPLING RESUL TS-SOIL·

QUANTIFIED

COMPOUNDS

(m!!lkll!

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION NJDEP

NROCSCC··

NJCi.oSa (m;!kg)

NJOEP

ROCSCC-

!mglks!

NJOEP

IGWSCC····

ImaJlca\

NO 0.150 660 I

37

100

NO NO 0.0111 1.000 1,000

NO 0.059 1,000 410 67

NO NO

NO 1,700

NP

100

100 NO

1.20.

NO 190

NO 4 I 0,9 50

NO

NO

. 0.66 I

0,66

4 I

0.9

0.9 soo

I

-,- .-

4,4',[)OT 0.0027J 0.100 I NO T NO

'I

9

" I :2 I: 500

r

IMelhoxychior 0.040J O.030J O.200J I NO 5,200 260 50

C:::..

I ....n O.051J I NO I NO

~

9 2 ""

I:5.:E

I I "'" I

METALS

7840E I ~/Sj!e~~\ I 8240E 13000 E NP NP

Arsenic 2 4.1 8.1 8.7 20 ..... ....,

Barium 28.4J 157E 78.9E 193 47000 700 ISite SNldfie\

Cadmium O.74J 1.1 1.lI 1.OJ 100 39 ISile SDeCifrel

Ch/OITIlum 11.4 80.8 8S.2E 34E - ISlte SMclliCl" 120 000· NP

CnnnIIt 37.3E 58.9E 59.1 E 137 E 800 600 jSlteS 'fie

Lead 40.8 218E 71.4 E 200E 600 400 jSlteS fie

MereuIV' NO a.38E 1 E O.82E 270 14 jSltaS 'Iie

Nickel I NO 120 17.7 18.8 2400 250 jSlteS 'flC

Vanadium 12.2 27.5 22.6 16.7 7.100 370 JSite SDeCilic

Zinc 28.3E 200E 132E 211 E 1,500 1,500 jSite SDflCiflC

NOTES:

. SamplillQ petfooned by NUS Corporation and analyses petformed by Keystone Environmental. January 1990.

.. NROCSCC Non.Residenlia! Direct Contad Soil Cleanup Crileria (Lesl Relllsed·513199\

... ROCSCC Residential Direct Contad So/I Cleanup Crlleria (Last Revised·513199)

.... IGWSCC Impact la Ground Watet Soil Cleanup Criteria Clasl Revised·513199)

• Trivalenl Chromium

mglkg • mlnigrams pet kilogram

J • Estimated value lor compound prasent below CRDL but above IDL

NP • Not published lor this constituent

NO • Not Detected

E.EsUmaled value

0076E N: I NP NP

TIERRA-A-018359
•

~...·~',~-I; I ~:.,.~'--~l'(, "~,

..;:. ~~!,,: .•

" )NAL HEALTH COMMISSION ~

WE. HARRISON, NEW JERSEY 07029 PAGE I of (

--- ---'---

~-;,;-·,.~:'~.;li~, Jnc.

INVESTIGATION

H.R.H.C. CASE:t _

RRIVED .;2. .: 0 ~ DEPARTURE :3:0 ~ KAHBOURS'--

LOCATION: tl.Vt I'~ V-~l&~P:--- _

ADDRESS: ISO/ ~ a. . ;

.!~ t/-p,

LOCATION PH~NU6 i77 - 4S".:2 7 OTHER: _

NOTIFICATION REC'D FROM: P¥

DATE: ¢J/93 TIME:';; _.Co /'.111-

NATURE OF ltl/;rnENT' ~".tfJ~,...J /,(j~

OTHER RESPONDING AGENCIES: ~--- __ -_---

VIOLATIONS ISSUED :--;----:-------=---:::--~--------::::-:o-----::----

B A E0 DO 0 OAI...-----

SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE

. ~Y. Ii) 'In "

TIERRA-A-018360
HUDSON REGIONAL HEALTH COMMISSION

215 HARRISON AVE, HARRISON, NEW JERSEY 07029 PAGE of

--- --~

INVESTIGATION

INVESTIGATION DATE: .) /;/ /il/ H"~~ CASE# 11.1- 2 - J-{ - illcr - ()]

INVESTIGATOR '-I)"~ I ~KE ARRIVED ,it:' l[ DEPARTURE I;} (-I' , KANHOURS

'.""'> "---

LOCATION: J"~~'c \ ,-",,-1.( L5 RP: _

ADDRESS: / 'ft' ( /L':';'lsn. 11<

K' ((\S' 1"'1I

7

LOCATION PHONE. CfQ 2 -£5~)7

FROM :--l-'-=;..........>---'-~~~

DA TE : _~_I__.L..L..---!-...l----T lME : _--"-.:=..:..----'--=-- __

OTHER: -:- _

OTHER RESPONDING AGENCIES: ---'- __

VI OLATI ONS ISSUED: __ --:- -:- .,---__

FINDINGS: C. -:-~"k...rl (i~ . (((~1-,-:d

"- ... ,~_... ..-L ... .., ~ .'" ··C

t·"If.

SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE

qq

TIERRA-A-018361
HUDSON REGIONAL HEAL TJ; COMMISSION

215 HARRISON AVE. HARRISON, NEW JERSEY 07029

TEL. 201-485·7001 FAX 201-485-1251

REPORT OF PHONE CALL OR VISIT ...

Bure3U or Office _

In Out _

Date Time _

Affiliation -----"0:...-'-'-.:..-......:...'-'-"--'--'-''-'''-=-=...<.--.7 _

.V5 46"(- N. I I'CG S ci ~o. C (. / c c c-; L l t; e-x.,/",t/r.:·U C- Phone No. f q 7 "t, -;- ..1 7 I <{ 31 ?

GS,-' Aft;' P~cOv<...( "-

:;0

Person Contacted

Call

Subject of Visit

..

- -A#.·t~c1,\-

l·

. (

() .

Action Recommended -r-/...,:. ,-",-::::d;;.;._.:..' ":;.:.- "~'..:.- r:;..;-t::;.;' '--<..::;.;' ~f:='~~..;....:;:~.::.::.;':.F-=-:..:...-::...:~:....:::::=-----=-~-:::::.;;;;;:::::..:::~~.Jao::::~~-

A'/ cJjvi-f.!- {4;1./L.':' C A >l

TIERRA-A-018362
/'

.

.>

HUDSON REGIONAL HEALTH COMMISSION

MEA DOWVIEW CAMPUS

595 COUNTY AVENUE, BUILDING I, SECAUCUS, NEWJERSEY 07094

PAGE I of i --'---

(

INYESTIGATION

OTHERAGENCIES:---I-J./fi..L..£'.J:::.tJ ..L-~,J_J_I_&=!O'--.:.·---------L..L~~~l.>--...:--------

FINDINGS:-----".rl--_---,..-1-----,---"L-----------

YIOLATIONS:

SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE

",--.'-/ '-

INVESTIGAT

FILE: SITE «

EX:

SIGNATURE

LOeJ:4-

Y NU'

IO{

-------v---~-

TIERRA-A-018363
!: '3S :Z:S8 FR NJDEP HAZ W~G~E 1 60S 583 244~ TO 9120122~O:22

\,

"

p.02/02

ACTIVE: REFERRED: X

NOV ISSUED:

J

CLOSED: .

ASS'!'. REQUEST_:

REFERRAL/:

NORTH: X

COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE REPORT CENTRAL:

SOUTH:

COMPLAINT NOTIFICATION REPORT MGT.REF:

DATE REC'D: DATE DUE:

CASE NO.: 1999-03-11 # 1404

Yr. Mo. Day

DATE: 1999-03-11 RECtD BY: COHH.CTR.

INCIDENT REPORT BY

TIME: 11:17

Last Name: OPERATOR 3

Street:

City: KEARNY

First Name: Phone: (201)991-1400

County: HUDSON State: NJ Zip:

Affiliation/Title: KEARNY FIRE DEPT.

INCIDENT LOCATION TranSpo~Lation:

site Name: D LANDFILL

Street: HARRISON/2S0 RAMP

City: KEARNy

Date of Incident: 1999-03-11

Facility: x Other:

Phone:

county; HUDSON

Time: 10:01

State: NJ Zip:

RESPONSIBLE PARTY Suspected: x

Company Name: D LANDFILL

Contact:

Street: HARRISON AVE

City: KEARNY

OFFICALS NOTIFIED --------------------------------~- (Name/Title)

NJSP;

COUNTY HEALTH: HUDSON CO CERA

LOCAL HEALTH : KEARNY H.D.

USEPA:

OTHER: NO.HAZ.WST.

Unknown:

County: HUDSON

Phone:

Title:

state: NJ Zip:

Phone:

Phone:

Phone:

Phone:

Phone:

Date:

(201)223-1133 Date:

Date:

Date:

Date:

Time:

Time:

Time:

Tillle:

Time:

Assigned to: Date Assigned: Date Closed:

Violations cited NJAC:

COMMENTS: LEACHATE FROM LANDFILL RUNNING OFF SITE ONTO ROADWAY,LOCAL

HEALTH DEFT ON SCENE.

COMMENTS CONT'D:

~* TOTAL P~GE,002 ~*

~

i

TIERRA-A-018364
__ -- 0_-,.,,- _1 ,_, '-' ~_ 1-: ·..·n.....

......, "-'''''''' ........ " ..,.....' ~"'I' ~....,

... 0-;::,.'::; "::-0.:,;. .c;:~ J. ( 1 U r-'-IJ..J~L:N f"';,C.L..l ~ UN~ r·. ~~_.""-l1.s:'

,"-"- ,,,-,, ......,,-.;;:""--"-'Ol~ '1','''+= t-H\;t.: 1/1

DEP-090

5/95 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

caHJNICA!rIONS CENTER NOTIFICATION REPORT 1!!2

?

F1et::elved fuilllm TOL09~ 399361

Rev!ew(ld By D case#; 199-03-11-1117-15 ] 0pGratcr t,,;,!!nm,;;;;.;;;;;;..... _

Nc~i:icat'cn Type IMunitipalit)· I

Reported By Affiliatio:'\ P~one IOPlR J I [KEUNYFD 1 ]201-991-1400 :J ----------'

str~ Address MunicipalitY Stattl' I i l I 0

I"eiden! Loca~jon: [Otlxr I

Site: tAREAOF I Phone I

! Street Addre£s UUr'icipaily Co Li:1!y State IHAlUUSO.N1260 RAMP 11 KEARNY TOWN I IHUDSON IINJ I

Locaticr. Type IComlllerml ]

Ircident Date I031]1/[999 I Time I UH1 I

Substince Released ILEACHAI£

Ar'r.ount RS!eilsed (I 1): I UJliIC'qOWNI

Additional

IJ I ~lJ

SUbstanc~r

] State I LIquid I CAS#I T Reiease Is rContinuous 1

Substance Contained? r No I H~ardous Maleria:? ~ TePA') .~ A31D Lel1er? LoN J

COMO Cede t 0'07 :=J Refe'Tal Corie ili!=:J Is Hmrdouse Wasle Involved' INo J

Inc,cer.! Description jSpill

I

Injl,.r,tls?E3 Public Eva::? E3 Facility Evae? I No I

Public Exposure"

~

Police On Scene? Yes Flre"er On Scene? Yel DEF' Requested? !No I

, I Road ClosJ'e? :\0 Wire SpeedJDirecton Contilminatio~ or Receiving Water

Status at Sce.,e C : [Land I ! I

:UAK FROM UNDFILL TO ROADWAY. LoCAL HEALTH DEPARTM£.NT ALSO ON SCENE I

I

Re:>t::on,ibJe Party [!Do\\'\) I

Party I» LANDFllL

!

Phone j

i Contar;t:

Tille I

Street Address :=J

Munici!'ality IIiARR!SON AYE County S:ata 'LKEA.lt~TOWN JIHUDSOl'i I[@

OFFlCIAl.S NOTIFIED

"'aM€' Affilla:ion Pnone lGB NJS?L

JE IF MJNI:C

OiH::RL

Name ,G,ffiliatio:" Method Da:ll -;-,me

~ j

=1 BFO-CAS DRPSR Fu~d, Malle~ J 03/111[999 §

I

2.[

~ ~orlhrn HAZ-WST Flied , OJIW199? .,r

~, I HQ DSWM Fu:d 03/1111t99 !

I

-- COMMENTS I

I

i

-

NT~P ~~~Dv ~c n, ** TO-AL FACiE. 02

*"

~

TIERRA-A-018365
HUDSON REGIONAL HEALTH COMMISSION

MEADOWVIEW CAMPUS

595 COUNTY A VENUE, BUILDING 1, SECAUCUS, NEW JERSEY 07094

~-""-~~--\

/,/

FOLLOW HP/CONIINlTATION DATE: HOURS: I

ADDRESS: /

1/

/

(

./ ,- /" \

\ -----. -

INVESTIGATOR SIGNA TURE

.~~

FILE: SJTE , LOG ~ -~,---

TIERRA-A-018366
~R :1 '88 12:56 ~R NJDEP HRZ WRSTE

'''',

1 603 588 2444 TO 91Ze12Z30122 ~. ;...... . . J

\E~LL~'

1~.'hl·11 C. Shjlll~, rl

( ·cn1UlJl, ..·...'.,~If·.. •t,t'c"ll,ll

.I'I,/:'.-1.\'HFAX nnsINC/D EN 'J"FOL lJ) W-UI' .""lfE/~T 1'0 (()09).)88-2444

WITHIN T/::N (l()) WOUKll'./O 1)/1YS OF RECEIPT.

C7

u/tAIL?') zi;?e--J:J

(J z:::y

VIOLATION(SjlSSUED: ---- .---YES ---------2v

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATfON

~'d/jyt/

I / r

(If still ongoing. p/fa$e up/air. ...~l' with all a1ricipa:cd dct( 01compic/ion)

/{~O

M: ..'kn<:-y 'UI' &1&Ul/~"'IY fmpb,'("f

;.:~·~lcd '~Jl\i""

TIERRA-A-018367
, '.

'.:

"

.\

'.

9ilf/1

I,

1

1 !"ll "T •'I- '1:1r:~11}.il Ul~l~i t

n

Hudson Sup.;ror COl,,'t Judge

Theodor.: 1. Botler sig;:cd :m

order yesterday d:rcetin::: Jl\\-

nieipal Sanitary Landfiil ,'>uthority, Harrison av.. Kearny. to (,

show ca,lse on Sept. H why it "

should not be pe:;alized for air

pollution. .

D.;;luty Ally. Gen. )[ichacl J.

Gross obtair.ed the order. According i.O Lb'.,} cOiljp!aint f~lcd.

the defendant was ordcl"cd on

July 17, 1£<39, to ce::;se -jloiluting

the air, Subsoqt:emly t1;(, defendant paid;:: $200 pe"alty for

OPC~1 a:r burning of rci'us~ Cin

Apr. 19, 1972, Now. tpe N. J,

Department of Environm"ntal

Protection alleges the c:c:eildam committed another offonse.

Apl'. 11 of t;~:5 year. burniDg

rciuse ir. the open. The state

seeks a $2,500 pe:lalty this .time.

s

~

(

t

",

<,

,,,,

,r

I.

;.

TIERRA-D-009052 t
--

-,

~

~0-

-0

c:

tlJ' -,

~-..

:./I':J :;,eCJ ''::I

'f~~~]fl~'n

---- ~>'I-""'='

~

:>-o.~~=---

~~~-;~ ~ ~.2:~' -==-~~.~c::=.&:

~'g~.~~ ~~ ~i

'.' ~ is 0 ..c:A '=

~HP~ai '~:.r..;",I. ;."c.,.,J _-::J

.....-0~

-&10

~ 0

0..0

c.nu

cnV1 .~> "700-

(J) c:

V') 0

I

.

,.-

}

r

~:J;!::~ •..

, :;~w ~ 0 ~~~z !fif.~':il i'~I

'" - ... ~ __ . - .. ,_ a",,"

'E

TI ERRA-D-009053
HUDSON REGIONAL HEALTH COMMISStON

313 Harrison Avenue

Harrison, New Jersey 07029

REPORT OF FIELD INVESTIGATION

10 : 30 a. m Fll E,

REFERENCE TO CHAPTER .... -

5.1

FULL BlJSINESS NAME Municipal Sanitary Landfill --=- ----=:........ _

loca1ion __ -;;==-=.=.:::;;.;.....:.:..::...;;..~ __ _;=--..:.:.::.::.::.:.::L.:......:.:..:..:.------::--:=~--------- "Harrison Ave.,

lID

Kearny, N.J

«

~

Mailing A.ddress __ --.::-- as abotle -;::=- -;:=-:;:==- ~--

...

Person(s) Interviewed_~ ~ _

Comments _

..

•

Repor. ~eques:ec by Ed. Grosvenor ---::::-- _

Kearny Departn~nt of Health

Purpose of Investigation _

"*

To determine if dumping of drums or chemicals prevalent

- I

Observations Complaint received that possibly Carbone Trucming Co, Passaic

, ~ ..J. may be dropping off 55 gallon drums po§.sibly filled with toxic

chemicals or waste.

-

Continued surveillance of above location for any trucks entering landfill

that may be of a suspicious nature and carrying drums

Conclusions No trucks at time of inspection entering landfill

;

Recommendations Continue peri Qdj c ins};?ectionand surveillance of general area .

.

CAAOOOOO5 Chet potoczny

In~es~i_a1e~ by

" -

~ TIERRA-D-009054

- "

.- ~.
-{P, I.

~. ~~rl;..'-_'_' _;;"';':";''';':''''':'''_';''';;;;';;';'''::'::::'::::==;;;;';';;;;;;;;;;;;;;';;_;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;,;o;iiiI

as. "

nin, 'the .:. '

!!river or " '

-JpOn and

The state'

es for the'

- -;Z---,--..

'"'to ,"'7"~ .. :-

~'.' ..

abJed can

rprivilege .

lIours of'·

Vi 'transit ',; ."'<'.• :By DO~'NA LEUSNER .:' :Xearny, 'generating~duStriaJ ;d~Y~JOP:·.

Its. " . ., . . . . meni worth millions of dollars and ereat- ~r;~~~~~:. Kearny offiCials, :oppos~a. state 'ing thousands of jobs." . . '1 ,. '

·order to open another landfill In the .' .E. Robert Bakirn, cbairman'ol'the

. ,gar.bage-cho~ed meadowlan~, pleaded . l<earny Industrial Commission.:' urged

-- .............the~~case ~lOre state authontles yest~r~'En~li~h to rescind the dumping: or~er,.

dapn Tremon. -:.', ". :clalrmng Kearny has made lts.conmbu·

· Although the 20 ?fhcl~ls who gather· .. eLion·tothe state over fr,e past 60 yea~ 'by

ed for a roundtahle dISCUSSIOnwl~hme:n- takine garbage. ' . ! ::- .

bers of the ·state ;Department :of ", ' 'flean'! imagine creating.thousands

EnVironmental ProtectIOn (DEP) got no of jobs and industrial development amid

" .'. c.oncrett answers! .'Kearn~ .representa-a sea of garbage," said .Hakim.~If .they ..

" . ~!ves called "the. IDformat!on exchange ·.(the state) rescind the directive,1Kearny

~...' '';, , 'productive. '. ,. . , .will behappy " ' i

, ': '. Kearny is seeking-tci ha~ rescinded . . , .1 " ' "

'a Jan, Hi order from the state to open·" ~, • ".. . ~., ,

2" . 'iemporary landfills in Newark ana ·Kear- ., Margaret Hallaway, ,who has'been

., ny bY,'July 1to.handle a combined total of , ..fighting open dumP.lng in Kearny for'12

" , _,3,500tons daily of Essex County garbage. " 'vears, also called the meeting profitable .t . . DEP _Commissioner .Jerry English - because 'jnow the' state ·knows howdras·

'. '. ,. 'directed' the Hackensack Meadowlands . tic the situation is and bow hard fiNe must·

.,....::;...;~;:~08~~~~0:f'n~~~~~~~~ ::>~,o~~~~~¥:~~!Jg~O~HU~~),

;date the garbage ·tlntil EsSex:''County '" ,demanded an answer from Enghsb after

~: -. opens a recycling plant ~n19B5,:': " ,;.' .. : the. bourlong meeting o~ wheth~r :·tbe·

,,, . ..' '. , ' "". . state' would seek other sltesoutslde ,(If

: ." . • '~". , - . '. Hudson and Esse'x counties to place We '

_.... ':', "The town, arguing that anotherland- :. garbage. ,,~.: ',. ':'" ;,(" .

.~~',.:. "fill 'will discourag~ ·\proposed"industr.ial .' :DEP a~istant·com.mission,er ~rge

:::;:~:,development in the.'region and ~r-eate a:'~;TYler'aho called.the meetir!t p~uctive.

·";.health hazard1

hasvowe<! to fight the .:' "We beard the 'legitimate concerns ex-.,)

order in court. "_.. '.. . pressed by the people of Kearny an.~~iJ.O~

· Kearny Mayl'" Henry Hill said the . take these into consideration, as we har

...". :region slated fora third landfill is the . -since the public has been offering th~ ~1

:'gateway to a revik.~~2ed:economy for .11&:".' .~ i' '_.' ,:~:,. :,,~',~;, . ~~~~:u,~~~ '.~', ~,I.D"),

'). '~(j""

'~...... ~ ,;~-<,- •• , .. ~ .~~~

-Kearny, .:OEP.confern

'on aump"confroversy :

. ~ .: .'

....

...,. , ,

/.'.,. .,

CAA000001

TI ERRA-D-009055
·J

-'---;....:..--;;....;...... .......;.;;..,.----_ .. - ..• _ ..

DEQ..(J62 215 Harrison Avenue DATE STATS 1188 \

HaJ::rison, N.-J. 07029 ASSIGNED uns

PLANT iNSPECTOR:

nt-h "ID# ASSIGNED FIELD INVESTIGATION ASSIGNMENT REPORT DATE

COMPLETED ReIns

HRHCi 5/3/89 ;ER

KeeganLandfill - Roselli Landfill area

CaMP ANYNAME . . . . TYPE OF ASSIGNMENT WEATHER

LOCATION

NJ Turnpike' Exit lSW -~y .0Complaint 0 APEDS SKY

DOrd.crfollowup lEMP

CONTACT: TEL.#: oOther(by code)

.. ri.I:ND

Other_

COMPL-\lNANT NAME _

COMPL-\lNANT ADDRESS _

DATE RECEIVED _

C A A a 0 0 0 1 4 mJDSON REXiIONAL HEAL'IH CCH«SSICN

/

(201)485-7001"':2

PHONE 1# _

TIME RECEIVED _ RECORDED BY _

ASSIGNMENT _

PL.;NT CONT Acr SUBCHAPTER Iif INS? I 1 TYPE: NUMBER I

COMPL-illIT I

TIrLE I I

I

Tlnll:IDare :It

ARRlV AL TTh1E .\T ?L.\NT C.:lmpiain3I1t I,

TOTAL ASSIGNME:'lT1IME Verified: [J Yes CINo

S7 Aces INSPEC:CD TEMPS 1 Give de::ills below

I TOTAL SOURCES INSPECED VIOU..TION FCLLOWUP [NSPE·30N

DEQ·01: COMPLETED FOR SUBC1:APTERS I I Vioiation Lag #

OTHE?- I I ~j)ared

SucciI~u:r Vioiated

TYPE SA.lV1PLECOLLECTED

:: OF SAMPLES COLLECTED

Co.lmpiianceAchieved [J Yes QNo

"- Give decils beiow

COMME:'ITS (by code)

DETAILS OF TNSPECITON MUNICIPAL CODE

10: 30 a.m. MikeBeard called "Town of Kearny wants a

, I

! I

SECTION .II.

't FEE AMI'

detemratl0n of property lines where underground fires

are located and order fran DEPto put fires out. II

Remindedhim of 7/2/87 letter franthe Division of Solid

waste Mariagerrentsuggesting proper closure requirenents 120*

7.9A 300

9.8 30

120

9.9

10:50 a.m.: Advised Metro Office of request received 10.2 60

11:15 a.m.: Advised Solid Waste Divisianof the under und

TII1.E: __ ._.._.__.-_- ..-----

~51.f.1L8L9..:.....Brt.....Eer::GrrcL.Sft4-...waL.itinc~~~~~H:i:jH::is4:;-;jEre~HMI:~ SUPERVISOR'S REvIEw

INITIALS: DATE: _

TIERRA-D-009056

fires and the r

"shot gun" type letter to all

R. Ferraluo 0;

SEE ATTACHED FOR ADDmONAL INFORMATION: 0 YES 0 NO

150

MUNICIPAL VIOlATION

INSPECfOR'S SIGNATURE
eflNII.

11

i\~

, \

\ ;

TIERRA-D-009057
· /..-

HUDSON REGIONAL HEALTH COMMISSION

215 HARRISON AVE., HARRISON, NEW JERSEY 07029

TEL. 201-485-7001 FAX 201-485-1251

Richard Censullo, President Robert Ferraiuolo, Director

.MEMO

TO: Edward Grosvenor, Health Off'ce

FROM: Robert Ferraiuolo, Direct r

DATE: September 18,1995

RE: Keegan Landfill

Landfill ID (Southeast

Over the past several days we have been monitoring conditions

at both sites referred to above. lthough the Fire Department and

Cali Contracting have done an exc llent job in extinguishing and/or

controlling the fires, I am conc rned about potential long term

consequences of not properly closing both sites.

We are aware that a number of historical, legal and political

factors have served to severely complicate long term remediation

scenarios. We are further aware that proper closure could potentially

cost tens of millions of dollars for the ID site alone, thus beyond

the financial capability of the Town of Kearny.

We made inquiry into possible sources of funding assistance

for which the Town might be eligible. The results were not

encouraging.

We contarited Pat Ferrara of the DEP as well as other

knowledgeable parties and were advised that there were generally

no such funds available for such assistance, most particularly where

there was a responsible party. There is a Bill (#1111), presently

pending, which would provide assistance for the closure of municipal

landfills where such landfills were not operated for a profit. From

what I understand about the operation of the ID site under the terms

of a lease with the Town, this legislation, if adopted, would probably

not apply. To the best of our knowledge, neither the 'Keegan' nor

'ID' sites were ever on the 'Superfund List'. Neither are on the

most current listing of known contaminated sites maintained by the

NJDEP.

CAA000028

·SERVING BAYONNE, EAST NEWARK, GUTTENBERG, HARRISON. HOBOKEN.

JERSEY CITY, KEARNY, NORTH BERGEN, SECAUCUS,

UNION CITY, WEEHAWKEN, WEST NEW YORK:

TIERRA-D-009058
" .... . 1o.r~.

RECOMMENDATIONS

It would seem of enormous economic benefit to the Town to have

the HMDC assume responsibility for closure of both sites. While

it is not within my purview to influence the outcome of

negotiations and litigation which have arisen from their proposal,

the HMDC might be on top of a short list of entities capable of and

willing to take on the substantial burden of closure.

Another option might be to seek assistance from our legislative

representatives.

We will continue to monitor conditions at both sites and hope

that the Fire Department and contractors engaged by the Town can

have continued success in controlling outbreaks. However, even these

actions can be quite costly and might ultimately prove futile.

In my opinion, the landfills are an unfortunate legacy of

shortsighted environmental management. Only through proper closure

will their potential consequences be obviated.

For your further information, I have enclosed a copy of a study

of the 'Keegan Site' done by the NUS Corporation in September of

1989.

If I can be of further assistance, please advise.

TI ERRA-D-009059
EXHIBIT I

BBARING OFFICBR'S R.PORT

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The HMDC, through it's enabling legislation, has been involved

with regional disposal of solid waste since our inception. We

recognize at this time, that there are certain regulatory processes

in the making, that will in all likelihood have a serious impact on

the State's ability to send solid waste out-of-state. Proposed

federal legislation will make out-of-state disposal for New Jersey

either prohibitively expensive or legally impossible. Individual

states have imposed restrictions over the past several years that

have added to the cost of solid waste transfer operations. More

importantly, the reliance on out-of-state disposal as a solution to

the State's solid waste crisis will keep solid waste costs on their

upward spiral, while increasing truck traffic and air pollution.

In 1988, officials from the HMDC, Hudson County, Bergen

County, Essex County, New Jersey Department of Environmental

Protection, and the State Board of Public utilities met to discuss

several regional solid waste disposal initiatives.

Over a period of a year, data was gathered and several

regional options were explored. The most cost effective option

pointed towards establisbing a regional non-processable landfill in

the Meadowlands. Computer modelling indicated "that there would be

a savings on the order of $500 Million to the region over a twenty

year planning period. Proportionate savings would occur with the

proposed Keegan site with it's minimum ten year estimated life.

One of the assumptions included in the regional study,.was

that the non-processable landfill had to be approximately 100 acres

in size and have a capacity of at least ten years. A review of the

other potential ·orphan- landfills (inactive but not closed sites

in the District), indicated that the Keegan site was the only site

large enough to satisfy the criteria. Other sites under

consideration were the Malanka Landfill in Secaucus, the MSLA 1-0

Landfill in Kearny, the Erie Landfill in North Arlington, the

Avon/Viola Landfill in Lyndhurst, and the old Rutherford Landfill

in Rutherford.

The Keegan site also has excellent regional access to service

the targeted solid waste districts not found with the other sites.

Finally, the remediation of this site will stop the environmental

degradation of the adjacent Fresh Water marsh. It should be noted

that this is the largest fresh water marsh in the District, and

that it was formally protected by the Commission in 1985.

1

CAA000029

TIERRA-D-009060
After discussions and site visits with representatives of the

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, the

HMDC decided to proceed with the first step towards formally

proposing the Keegan site as a regional materials handling complex

that would include the non-processable landfill as well as a

construction/demolition recycling facility. This action was also

prompted by the recommendations included in the Governor's Task

Force report on solid waste, particularly concerning

regionalization and construction & demolition waste recycling.

The fir~t of two public hearings was held on January 7, 1992

at the offices of the Commission. A second pUblic hearing.was held

on February 19, 1992 in the Kearny High School.

1. 1 WRIng COMMENTS

Prior to the pUblic hearings, written comments were received

that requested that the record be held open, another hearing be

held, and that the HMDC should consider alternative development for

the site. Additional written comments were received from the Bergen

County utilities Author ity(BCUA) , the Hudson County Improvement

Authority (HCIA) ,and the Town of Kearny. Responses to these comments

are addressed at length in the full Report.

The BCIA commented that the HMDC must include any proposed

solid waste facility in the Hudson County Solid Waste Management

Plan. The HMDC believes that the Solid Waste Management Act is

clear and that as a Solid Waste Management District, facilities in

the HMDC do not have to be entered into the Hudson County Plan, nor

are Interdistrict'Aqreements required as they had described.

The BCOA comments related to financial impact, waste flow

orders, and facility capacity. Responses are addressed herein.

The Town of Kearny passed a resolution on March 11, 1992 ".•.

that the Mayor and Council of the Town of Kearny do formally, and

unequivocally, oppose any further landfill operations within the

Town of Kearny including specifically the proposed regional solid

waste materials handling complex which has been the SUbject of the

proposed amendment to the HMOC solid waste management plan •••"

The alternative development proposal by Bu4aon ••• 40.8 Urban

Develop.eD~ Corpor.~ioD included an office complex, shopping mall,

hotel, etc. The developer owns approximately 34 acres, and has a

developmental lease for another 384 acres with the Town of Kearny.

A portion of the proposed development would occur on top of the

landfilled portions of the Keegan property, roughly the same area

designated by the HMDC for the non-processable landfill. It should

be noted that Hudson Meadows has had this property under lease for

more than 13 years. No response to a nine-page preliminary findings

letter from the HMDC dated May 15, 1987 was ever received.

2

TIERRA-D-009061
To date, no action has been taken to develop or remediate this

site. The financial implications of remediating, financing, and

developing an old landfill site of this size are obvious and help

explain why no development has occurred. The HMDc could simply wait

no longer to stop the degradation of the surrounding area.

Hudson Meadows had extensive questions, and provided lengthy

testimony as to why their proposal should go forward. This included

that the public notice process was defective for several reasons.

The HMOC has in fact complied with the public hearing process as

specified in the Solid Waste Management Act.

In addition, it was stated that the HMDC failed to consider

alternative sites for the proposed facility along with an impact

assessment. The HMDC response is that after evaluating the existing

"orphan" landfills in the District, the Keegan site offers the most

capacity of any of these "orphan" landfills. This is·based on staff

knowledge of the District. Further, access to the site is ideal

since the Keegan Site is located adjacent to two major State

highways, with the proposed access along a major Hudson County

route.

The HMDC has designated 421 acres for the proposed facility.

However, the bulk of the property is the Kearny Freshwater Marsh

which. cannot be disturbed. Landfilling would only occur on top of

the existing landfilled portions of the site, or about 110 acres.

The landfill would accept bulky wastes (Type 13), and nonhazardous industrial wastes (Type 27) which includes asbestos. The

majority of the waste flow is anticipated to be the non-processable

wastes that are redirected from resource recovery facilities,

transfer stations, and recycling operations. No incinerator ash

will be accepted at this facility, which by design will not be able

to accept ash. Waste will only be accepted from New Jersey sources.

A March 3, 1992 letter from Bu4son .ea40 •• Urban Development

corporation attached additional comments that were supposed to be

submitted in evidence at the February 19, 1992 pUblic hearing. Many

of these issues were repeated from earlier correspondences and/or

testimony. One question, was whether reopening the landfill was the

only means to achieve the HMOC's environmental objective. clearly,

our proposal is the only means to close both the Keegan and MSLA 1-

·0 landfills ADd maintain them for a minimum 30 year post closure

period.

An interesting comment, was that " •••if a commercial

development were constructed, the Kearny "closure" would not likely

require an income stream greater than $1.5-2.5 million/year over a

ten year period. This revenue stream could easily be generated from

local taxes on the commercial development that could be dedi~ated

to closure costs." Obviously, this would reduce the potential

ratables by 50 percent from what has been promoted by Hudson

3

TI ERRA-D-009062
Meadows.

Another comment was that development of other areas of the

Meadowlands has been at the expense of Kearny. The Kearny portion

of the Meadowlands is somewhat unique in that a large percentage of

the area is wetlands. The next largest area, unfortunately, has

been landfills that predated the existence of the HMDC. Because of

the disparities for Kearny as well as areas that have received the

bulk of the development over the years, the HMDC set up an intermunicipal tax sharing formula. In 1992, Kearny will receive

$2,568,471 from the tax sharing fund, ~nd to date has received

$21,215,252. Host community benefits from the landfill operations

have totalled $1,512,741 since the host community benefits began to

be collected.

While Hudson Meadows stated that we have no basis to conclude

that significant adverse environmental impacts are occurring, one

only has to walk the site to see that there is leachate flowing

from the site, that the color of the water in Frank's Creek gets

progressively greener as it flows through the site, and that

numerous underground fires over the years have scarred site

vegetation. Further evidence of site contamination was found by the

USEPA in their investigation of the site.

1.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS

Traffio that would be generated by this proposal was one of

the most frequently voiced concerns. Kearny residents believe that

their roads are already at capacity, and that there is too much

truck traffic. The HMDC has estimated that site operations would

generate 200 trucks per day, the majority of which occurs at offpeak hours. The HMDC prepared a traffic modelling report that

enables us to predict the impact from a proposed development. Use

of this model indicated that the proposed facility would not change

the Level of Service of the feeder routes (Harrison Avenue or

Belleville Turnpike). In addition, the site is located about onehalf mile west of the intersection of Route 280 and the New Jersey

Turnpike at the 15W Interchange. It is anticipated that trucks will

utilize the major arteries, ie. Harrison Avenue and Belleville

Turnpike to access the site. The estimated 200 trucks per day are

in stark contrast to the development proposal which would have in

excess of 7,000 vehicles per day. It should be noted that the only

current access to the site is via a dirt road.

Many residents asked why the sit. u•• could not simply be a

park instead of either a landfill or another development. The HMDC

responded that based on the history of underground fires at the

site, leachate emanating from the site, etc. there would have to be

a substantial cleanup of the site before any park development, with

no viable funding source available.

4

TI ERRA-D-009063
I I "

A September 29, 1989 report commissioned by the USEPA

Superfund Division recommended the site for Medium Priority for

further action. Further, that a fence should be installed around

the site to limit access, and that additional sampling was needed

to assess the full extent of pollutants from the site.

Cleanup could not be effected by simply covering the site with

several feet of dirt. A perimeter cutoff wall and leachate

collection system, as proposed by the HMDC, would be required along

with adequate capping of the site before any recreational uses

could be contemplated. Obviously, these improvements would require

a substantial investment that neither the Town nor the HMDC could

make.

The financial impacts of the proposed project were also

questioned by several people at the hearings. The HMDC has

projected that the landfill will accept 1500 tons per daY,300 days

per year, with a tipping fee of approximately $75 per ton. Using

the current State taxes of $24.35 per ton, taxes would account for

33 percent of the tipping fee. Assuming that the operations at the

proposed facility cost the same as the present Baler contract, 28

percent of the funds collected would go towards operations. Closure

and post-closure costs for the Keegan and the MSLA 1-0 site would

account for an additional 36 percent. This would leave 3 percent

for contingencies and administration.

Property value. were of great concern to the residents of the

Town, and especially nearby residents. The HMDC has seen a number

of large and small scale developments near landfills in the

District and elsewhere. Hudson Meadows pointed out at the pUblic

hearing that the Loew's Glenpointe development in Bergen County was

built adjacent to an old landfill. The Bellemead Development Corp.

has built a number of office buildings in the Meadowlands near old

landfills. Housing continues to be built near landfills, most

recently in North Arlington within several thousand feet of the

Bergen County Landfill.

In addition to the above, and.' the fact that the area

surrounding the Keegan site is largely heavy industrial in nature,

the HMDC does not believe that the proposed landfill will

negatively impact Kearny properties.

Asbestos will be disposed at the non-processable landfill much

the same as it is today at the HMDC Baler. To date, there have not

been any incidents of asbestos spills from solid waste vehicles.

Asbestos is one of the most highly regulated industries and solid

waste streams in the country.

Prior to any asbestos being removed from a demolition project,

the licensed asbestos removal company must certify that· all

asbestos has been removed from the building. At that point, the

removed asbestos is wet down and packaged in two 6 mil plastic bags

5

TIERRA-D-009064
prior to disposal. At the Baler, the asbestos hauler must make

specific arrangements for the time and place of disposal. The same

procedure would be followed at this facility. Providing a

reasonably priced in-s_tate method of disposing of asbestos is

critical to the safe timely removel of this material from our

environment.

1.3 RECOMMENDATION

Tbe BKDC .taff recomm.ndation, based on our review of the

available information, the submitted documentation and pUblic

testimony, is that the proposed use of the site as a materials

handling complex is the best use of the site.

6

TIERRA-D-009065
2.0 I'IIIDIBG8

The HMDC is proposing to establish a regional materials

handling complex in Kearny with access from Harrison Avenue through

Bergen Avenue, to be located on Block 205, Lots 18, 19, 24,27, 28,

29, 30, 31,32, and 33. This facility would include a nonprocessable landfill and construction/demolition recycling

.operation which would accommodate wastes that have traditionally

been landfilled, and which have more recently been transferred outof-state. These wastes either cannot be recycled or cannot be

processed in a resource recovery facility.

The HMDC has discussed the feasibility of establishing such a

facility over the last several years with the NJDEPE, Bergen,

Hudson and Essex Counties. A Tri-county initiative study conducted

in 1988, indicated that if such a facility were established, that

the region would stand to save an estimated $500 Million over a

twenty year period.

The proposed non-processable landfill would be located on top

of the existing landfilled portions of the lots noted herein. This

site is generally referred to as the old Keegan Landfill, or the

MSLA 1-8 Landfill. The goal of the HMDC is to remediate the old

landfill thereby containing and controlling the existing pollutants

from the site, while siting a much needed non-processable landfill

for the region. Only New Jersey waste would be accepted at this

facility.

Tipping (disposal) fees would pay for site remediation and

landfill design, construction, operation, closure, post-closure and

end-use plans. Additionally, the Hackensack Meadowlands Development

Commission intends to collect funds for closure and post-closure

for the MSLA l-D landfill in Kearny.

The proposed construction and demolition recycling facility

would accept concrete, wood, brick, etc. from construction and

demolition sites. Thi. facility would also serve as a consolidation

center for this material. Concrete and brick would be processed

into gravel for road base, admixtures, fill, etc. pursuant to state

specifications. Wood would be processed, shipped to a secondary

processor, or landfilled if it is non-processable (such as pressure

treated or creosoted wood). Metal would be magnetically removed and

brought to a scrap metal processor. Residual soils would be used as

landfill cover whenever possible. Accessory uses may also include

a tire shredding/chipping operation.

The old Keegan landfill is approximately 110 acres and this

defines the lateral site limits. However, the ultimate capacity of

the facility will be determined by extensive geotechnical

investigations, wetlands delineation, and design constraints. If

certified by the NJDEPE, this amendment to the HMDC Plan would

J

7

TI ERRA-D-009066
permit the HMDC to pursue the required engineering and

environmental studies necessary to develop the site, to remediate

the site, and to develop the new landfill on top of the site.

On January 7, 1992, the HMDC held the first of two pUblic

hearings. Public notices were placed in the Bergen Record and the

Jersey Journal pursuant to the Solid waste Management Act.

This document will address the two pUblic hearings, written

comments etc. separately. It should be noted that Classic

Sanitation/Industrial Haulage removed their application for an

amendment to the Plan shortly before the pUblic hearing due to site

plan problems.

2.1 JARUARY 7, 1"2 SZARIBG

written comments were received from:aary aennett, attorney for

the Town of Kearny requesting that the pUblic hearing be adjourned

or that the record be left open and the pUblic hearing be continued

at a later date due to a conflict with a Town council meeting;

1lU4.on .ea40.8 urban Development corporation submitted a

preliminary soils report prepared for HUdson Meadows by MelickTully and Associates dated March 30, 1987; a January 2,1992 letter

from Hudson Meadows to Mayor Kenneth Lindenfelser objecting to the

proposed facility; a January 6,1992 letter fro. Melick-Tully and

Associates to Hudson Meadows ;and a letter from Tho... 8tukane of

DeCotiis ·and Pinto, attorneys for Hudson County Improvement

Authority requesting that the pUblic comment period be held open

until January 20, 1992.

Hudson Meadows Urban Development corporation

Hudson Meadows submitted written comments on January 7,1992

along with several attachments. Among these attachments was a

January 6, 1992 letter from Melick-Tully , Associates that

highlighted their March 30, 1987 soils report. Their study

"•••revealed that the majority of •••(the site) ••• had been

previously filled with trash containing wood, grass, newspapers,

rags, organic materials and other refuse. The fill had been placed

directly over the original surficial organic marsh deposits. The

total thickness of the fill and organic deposits varied from

approximately 8 to 23 teet. Medium dense to dense sandy silt and

sandy silt were encountered beneath the organic deposits and ranged

from approximately 28 to 36 feet in thickness. The silt/sandy soils

were underlain by soft to very stiff varved silt and clay which

extended to depths ranging from approximately 75 to 150 feet

beneath the qround surface. Dense competent glacial till and/or

shale bedrock was encountered beneath the varved silt and clay.

The development of the site as proposed by Hudson Meadows

includes an office complex, shopping mall, hotel and other related

8

TI ERRA-D-009067
and support structures.

necessary improvements

following:

1) All high-rise structures must be supported on piles.

Piles would have to be driven to depths ranging from 90

to 150 feet below the existing ground surface. Low to

mid-rise structures could be supported by either a

controlled fill alternative, or low to moderate capacity

piles. '

This report recommends a variety of

for construction. This includes the

2) Excavation and disposal of unsuitable materials from

within areas to be developed, controlled fill

installation "within building areas, the importation of

general fill to raise grades within building areas if

piles are utilized.

3)' Design techniques that include ramps to enter structures;

exaggeration of surface slopes to develop surface sheet

drainage and minimize construction of drainage piping;

the use of flexible connections for all utilities.

4) The construction of either a passive of active methane

venting system for all structures depending on the

concentrations of methane found in the fill materials.

Hudson Meadows also submitted the following major written

objections to the proposed amendment:

1) The site designation by the HMDC constitutes a taking.

2) The site designation denies Hudson Meadows due process.

3) The pUblic notice is defective because it fails to tell

the pUblic about the Hudson Meadows proposal.

4) The public notice is defective due to the HMDC reversing

its historical opposition to regional facilities and a

shift in waste flows.

5) There is no substantial evidence.

6) The HMDC fails to consider alternative sites in the

District, and elsewhere in the county and state. t,

"

7) The HMDC failed to assess impacts to wetlinds, surface

water, groundwater, and ambient air quality.

8) The site designation is premature because the HMDC cannot

obtain a Clean Water 404 permit, nor comply with

state wetlands and buffer zone requirements.

9

TI ERRA-D-009068
RESPONSE

The HMDC provided adequate pUblic notice in two daily

newspapers in the region and in the format and timing pursuant to

the state Solid Waste Management Act. There are no provisions that

require the HMDC to list other potential developments on the

effected properties.

As this site is a former landfill operation, there are certain

known environmental and engineering liabilities. The HMDC is

proposing to absorb all these liabilities through collection of

closure. and post-closure funds with the tipping fees.In addition,

the HMDC will also absorb all liabilities for the MSLA 1-0

landfill.

For the HMDC to .undertake detailed engineering or

environmental studies at this time, would be inappropriate.

Sufficient background data exists to support the planning process

as conducted to date. This work is proposed to be performed after

the NJOEPE certifies this HMOC Amendment. Preliminary discussions

with the Army Corps ot Engineers indicate a willingness to

cooperate with the HMDC in order to eliminate the degradation of

the Kearny Freshwater marsh by the leachate from the Keegan

Landfill.

For the reasons noted above as well as the other environmental

concerns with this site, the HMOC has proposed what we believe to

be the only alternative tor site development. The development of

this site as a landfill will remediate the site, while providing

the region the much needed landfill capacity for non-processable

solid waste. Additionally, the HMOC proposal addresses the closure

of the 1-0 landfill as well. .

Hudson Meadows has not demonstrated, either in written or oral

presentations that they intend to remediate the site to the level

that the HMDC is proposing and which we believe will contain the

pollutants leaching into the adjacent Kearny freshwater marsh.

. The January 2, 1992 letter to Mayor Lindenfelser of Kearny

dealt solely on the benefits of the proposed Hudson Meadows

development and does not require a response in this document.

PUBLIC COMMENT

The responses to the major questions raised at the pUblic

hearing are as follows:

Traffic and Access

There were several questions and concerns raised about

traffic and access to the site. The residents wanted to avoid

10

TIERRA-D-009069
compounds in various sediment samples. Several inorganic compounds,

including mercury, lead, and chromium were detected in surface

water samples collected in Frank's Creek.

It was also noted that a member of the Kearny Police

Department had worked as a truck driver for DuPont Chemical in

Newark in the 1960's. He reported that every morning a least one

truck with approximately forty 30-gallon drums went to the Keegan

tract. These wastes included chromate and bichromate slurry,

pigment wastes, and organic wastes. However during site

investigations by the NUS Corporation, no drums were found.

The summary report concluded that the site poses a potential

threat of contamination to surface waters. Downstream water samples

indicated concentrations of chromium significantly greater than

upstream samples. The same could be said for the sediment samples.

It was also indicated that there was a potential for direct contact

with hazardous substances present on site. In fact during recent

inspections with the NJDEPE on the site, there were always people

fishing or hunting on the site. Further, there is significant

evidence of routine dumping throughout the site.

. The report went on to say that "•••based on recreational

tarqets from the Hackensack River and the potential for direct

contact, the site is recommended for a MEDIUM PRIORITY for further

action. A fence should be installed around the site to limit access

to the landfill. Note that this report is on file with the NJDEPE

Hazardous waste Division.

A JUly 2, 1987 letter from Edward Londres, Assistant Director

of Enforcement for the NJDEP required that as an immediate, short

term remedial measure, be prepared to mitiqate the constant fires

at the site. Next, a closure plan for the site was to be

SUbmitted, to preclude similar events from occurring in the future.

It was further recommended that fire access roads be constructed to

facilitate fire vehicle entry. Finally, it was recommended that

measures to prevent public access to the site, such as fences

and/or periodic patrols be put in place. To date, none of the

improvements recommended by either the NUS Corporation or the NJDEP

were implemented, including submittal of either the conceptual

proposal or closure plan.

ownership

The majority of the site is owned by the Town of Kearny (384

acres), with the remainder of the site in private ownership. Hudson

Meadows Urban Development Corporation also has a leasehold interest

in all of the Kearny owned land, as well as having direct ownership

of about 34 acres. The total area that the HMDC has designated for

this facility is 421 acres. Of that amount, only 110 acres are

proposed for landfilling. The remaining acreage ,isthe fresh water

marsh which will Ultimately be incorporated into the reuse of the

12

TIERRA-D-009070
additional traffic on locai roads which they feel are already

congested. The HMDC has proposed that the access to the site be

limited to a feeder road on the south of the site, ie. from

Harrison Avenue, a major County road that links Harrison to Jersey

City and where Route 280 and the New Jersey Turnpike meet at

Interchange 15W •.This intersection is approximately one-half mile

east of the proposed site entrance. We have estimated that about

200 trucks per day will use this facility.

Another question raised related to the proposed extension of

Route 17 south from Lyndhurst to the 15W interchange and/or Route

280. This proposal has been talked about for the last 20 years. The

final alignments proposed by the NJDOT would not interfere with our

proposed facility. In addition, we understand that the NJDOT has

abandoned this project due to environmental concerns.

Present Site Conditions

It is believed that landfill operations began on the site in

the 1940's or earlier. Operations continued until 1972 at which

time disposal was concentrated onto a number of other larger sites.

The site was operated by Municipal Sanitary Landfill Authority (a

private company) as the MSLA 1-B Landfill under a lease arrangement

'with the Town of Kearny.

Since the landfill was closed prior to the Solid Waste

Management Act, there are no environmental improvements at the

site. The HMDC has estimated that there are approximately 65

million gallons of leachate being produced on-site each year. This

leachate enters either the Kearny Freshwater Marsh, or Frank's

Creek which bisects the site and flows south to Newark Bay. Frank's

Creek has often been described as an open sewer, that usually has

a green color. Leachate seeps are evident along the banks of the

creek and the perimeter of the site.

The site has had a series of underground fires over the years

that have caused air pollution problems for local residents. This

has forced the town to hire outside contractors to put out the

fires at a cost of about $40,000 per year. The method of putting

out the fire is fairly standard. A bulldozer or other heavy

equipment are brought in to dig up the fire. Then large quantities

of water are pumped onto the exposed area until the fire is out.

The last fire in November, 1991 required an area the size of a

football field to be disturbed, with water being pumped onto the

site for over a week. Obviously, where there are underground fires

there is methane, and there are no controls to prevent lateral

migration of methane into adjacent structures.

A September 29 , 1989 report prepared by the NUS

Corporation/Superfund Division for the United states Environmental

Protection Agency indicated the presence of mercury, lead,

chromium, polychlorinated biphenols (PCBs) and several semivolatile

11

TI ERRA-D-009071
site as a pa.saiv. wildlife refuge.

Waste F10y Components

The HMDC is proposing to accept bulky wastes (10 13), and nonhazardous industrial wastes including asbestos (1027). In addition

any non-processab1e wastes directed from either resource recovery

facilities, transf.r stations, materials recovery facilities, etc.

will also b. accepted (these are assume~ to fall into an 10 13 or

27 cat.gory). It is anticipated that much of the cover material

that will be used on the landfill will b. soil generated from an

on-site demolition recycling operation, or from similar sources

from the state sponsored Soil Reuse Program.

Waste will be accepted only from New J.rsey ~ources. It is

anticipat.d that the four or five north.ast.rn counties that

historically dumped in the Meadowland. will send their nonprocessabl •• to this facility. No incinerator a.h will be accepted

at this facility. In fact, by State requlation, a landfill must be

sp.cifically d•• i9O.d and operated to accept incin.rator ash. The

propo ••d non-proc.ssabl. landfill will not be able to meet those

requir.ment. which includ. dual synth.tic lin.r., double leachate

collection sy.tem., .tc.

"Operations

Th. HMDC i. proposinq to operate this facility Monday through

Saturday, from 6:00 AM to 4:30 PM. The landfill operations will be

conducted in accordanc. vith standard industry practic.. Asbestos

op.rations will be conducted separately fro. oth.r landfill

operations, but asbestos waste will only be accepted between the

hours of 7:30 AM to 1:30, Monday through Friday.

Th. .it. life i. ..timated to b. a "minimum of 10 years to an

elevation of about 100 f••t.

Uti1iti ••

Th.r. are curr.nt1y no sewers in this area of Kearny. The HMDC

has, how.v.r, built. leachate force main from the l-E landfill on

the north of th. K.egan .ite, to the l-A landfill on the east. This

force main vill .v.ntua11y be hooked up to the Kearny south pumping

station that will f••d directly into the Passaic valley Sewage

Commission facility in N.wark, New Jersey. Th. HKDC is proposing

to construct a fore. main from the Keegan sit. that would also

s.rvic. the adjac.nt indu.trial buildings in Kearny that are now on

septic or holding tank ••

13

TIERRA-D-009072
Closure Costs

The closure costs for the Keegan site are estimated to be $30

million, with the post-closure costs estimated to be an equal

amount. The HMDC has also proposed to collect enough funds through

the tipping fees to provide for the equally costly closure and

post-closure of the former MSLA 1-0 landfill, owned by the Town of

Kearny, and located about one-mile east of the Keegan site. It this

proposal is approved by the NJDEPE, the HMDC would absorb all

liability from the Town of Kearny for these two sites.

Wetlands

The HMDC proposal includes the Kearny Freshwater Marsh because

it is within Block 205, Lot 19. However, the HMDC does not have

plans to fill in any portion of the marsh. In fact, in 1985 the

Commission passed a resolution forever protecting the marsh from

development.

This proposal by the HMDC will have a positive impact on the

marsh because it will stop leachate from entering the marsh, as

well as the upland pollutants that enter via Frank's creek. This

Creek will be rerouted around the landfill to its present terminus.

Hearing Process

There were several references made that the pUblic hearing

process did ••••not meet the minimum standard for the process as

envisioned by to Solid Waste Management Act and the implementing

regulations.· This included not having an available record for the

pUblic to review.

Pursuant to the Solid Waste Management Act, the HMDC did in

fact provide all required notices in two papers in general

circulation in the area, specifically the Jersey Journal and the

Bergen Record. Notices were placed in these papers once a week for

two weeks, with the second notice at least ten days prior to the

date of the hearing as prescribed by law.

The record at the time of the pUblic hearing, included site

aerial and topographic maps, listing of effected property owners,

basic site information, and substantial quantities of background

documents. This information included several borings and test pits

on the site. Traffic data was also available from a proposed

development on Harrison Avenue about one-half mile east of the

proposed access road to the Keegan site. Additionally, the HMOC has

a traffic model of the entire District which was used to evaluate

potential impacts.

14

TIERRA-D-009073
The HMDC has maintained that t~ conduct extensive engineering

and environmental studies prior to the initial public hearings and

prior to any NJDEPE approvals would be inappropriate. Non sitespecific data from other landfills in the District provides

adequate baseline data for the Commission to render a decision as

to the preliminary acceptability of this site, costs involved with

closure and post-closure, traffic and other impacts. The HMDC will

proceed with the extensive geotechnical, environmental and other

related engineering studies only after the NJDEPE has certified

this site for the uses as described in our proposed amendment.

15

TIERRA-D-009074
2.2 ~IB.UARY 1', 1"2 PUBLIC BEARING

A second pUblic hearing was held at ~e Kearny High School

aUditorium on February 19, 1992. Public notices were placed in the

Jersey Journal, Bergen Record and the Kearny Observer.

Many of the speakers and the questions raised were covered in

the original public hearing and were already addressed in this

report or Findings. The following topics then relate specifically

to the second pUblic hearing_ Written comments will be addressed

first:

Town of Kearny

The Mayor and Council of Kearny passed a resolution on March

11, 1992, "•••that the Mayor and Council of the Town of Kearny do

hereby formally, and unequivocally, oppose any further landfill

operations within the Town of Kearny inclUding specifically the

proposed regional solid waste materials handling complex which has

been the subject of the proposed amendment to the HMDC solid waste

management plan •••"

The resolution also stated that" •••the Town has conducted an

independent evaluation of the sUbject site disclosing that it is

possible to develop this property using current construction

practices; however, this would involve substantial closure

costs •••". In addition, that "... the Town of kearny would prefer

commercial development as opposed to the continued obliteration,

devastation and ruination of the Kearny Meadowlands area •••"

Hudson Meadows Urban peyelopment corporation

A January 10, 1992 letter from. Hudson Meadows requested

information relative to the proposed amendment under the New Jersey

Right to Know Law. This information included: environmental impacts

of past landfill operations; site remediation costs; site

remediation alternatives; economic benefits analysis; feasible

commercial development alternatives; traffic impacts; Town of

Kearny liability; and wetlands impacts.

In addition, there were eight specific items that were

mentioned in the January 10, 1992 letter which the HMDC responded

to in a February 5, 1992 letter. They are addressed separately as

follows:

1) ••tlaD4. CODtaaination The HMDC estimates that

approximately sixty-five (65) million gallons of leachate per year

are contaminating the groundwater and surrounding wetlands on the

Keegan site. This figure is based on a depth of twenty to thirty

feet of putrescible and industrial waste on site, 40 inches of

16

TIERRA-D-009075
precipitation per year, the fact that there are no environmental

controls on site and relatively gentle topography.

The quantity of leachate has a particularly detrimental effect

on-the adjacent fresh-water marsh because it is not tidal and does

not exchange large volumes of water twice a day. These con~aminants

tend to stay in the system. Evidence of site contamination can be

seen by the results and recommendations in the USEPA report.

2) Site a_e4iation Costs - The HMDC has estimated site

remediation costs on the order of $31 million, not including any

post-closure costs. These conflicted with the estimates of Hudson

Meadows engineers Who stated that costs were more on the order of

$4-5 million. A copy of all correspondences are attached to the

HEARING OFFICER'S REPORT including a detailed breakdown of

estimate4 costs. (It should be noted at this point, that these same

engineers stated at the second pUblic hearing that the HMDC closure

costs were accurate).

3) aevenue. to Kearny - Hudson Meadows stated that the

development that they proposed for the site would generate about $5

million per year in revenues to the Town. The HMDC stated that the

proposed Materials Handling Complex and landfill would generate

about $2 million per year. This is based on the landfill operating

300 days per year accepting 1500 tons of non-processable waste per

day, and with a host community benefit of $4.50 per ton. It should

also be restated that the HMDC will absorb all closure and postclosure liability for this site and the MSLA 1-0 landfill , a

number that is not figured into the revenues to the Town.

A final letter received on March 3, 1992 also stated that the

tax revenues to the Town of Kearny would in fact be $1.5-2.5

million less per year to cover site remediation costs.

4) Co..ercial Site Development - This comment was directed to

the HMDC Engineering Division which oversees development in the

District. Hudson Meadows has never submitted the required

environmental, engineering, traffic, and financial data to support

their development. No response to our nine page preliminary

findings letter dated May 15, 1987 was ever received. This letter

requested information which would be necessary to proceed with the

first phase of our zoning application process.

5) ~affic - A December, 1990 traffic modelling report

prepared for the Commission enables us to predict the traff ic

impact fro. a proposed development onto existing roadways. The

result of the analysis indicated that there would be no impact on

the roadway from truck traffic.

6) 'lOWD of Kearny Liability - The HMDC stated that as the

property owner of the majority of the Keegan site, the Town would

be jointly and severally liable for the closure and post-closure

17

TI ERRA-D-009076
costs. This is consistent with the position taken by the State on

other landfills.

7) Slurry .all aem.diation - The engineering consultant for

Hudson Meadows questioned whether the slurry wall containment as

proposed by the HMDC is the only viable remediation control for the

Keegan site. While there may be other technologies that have been

used elsewhere, the HMDC believes that slurry wall technology

coupled with a perimeter leachate collection system, is the most

cost effective remediation control available. This system as

employed at other similar sites with great success, and creates an

inflow condition the precludes the outward flow of

leachate. Geotechnical data from several landfills within the

District, indicate that a naturally occurring clay layer extends

beneath these landfills to bedrock. This clay, up to 300 feet thick

in some places, has a very low permeability on the order of lX10-8

em/sec. This permeability is less than that generally recommended

in standard engineering practice. With the "keying in" of the

slurry wall to the underlying clay layer, you essentially create a

bathtub to collect leachate.

8) •• tlaDd. - Hudson Meadows questioned the designation of an

area that included the Kearny Freshwater Marsh within the Lots

designated for the facility. As noted earlier, the Marsh is part of

Block 205, Lot 19 which includes a portion of the Keegan Landfill.

The HMDC has absolutely no intention to fill in any portion of the

Marsh. In fact one of the goals of the reopening of the Keegan site

is to stop the uncontrolled release of contaminants from the site.

since the Keegan site ceased op~rations before the Solid Waste

Management Act, there are no monies available for closure and postclosure. The HMDC is proposing to collect this money through

. tipping fees at the site. Additional money will also be collected

for the nearby MSLA 1-D Landfill that is owned by the Town of

Kearny, and was leased out to MSLA for landfill operations.

Bergen county Utilities Authority

A February 19, 1992 letter from Larry J. McClure, Executive

Director of the BCUA had the following questions with respect to

the project:

1) ~iDaDcial - Requested information on projected tipping fees

and closure and post-closure costs. Tipping fees are projected to

be in the $75-$80 per to range. Closure costs are estimated to run

about $30 Million, with post-closure costs expected to run about

the same. Estimates for the cost at the MSLA 1-D landfill are about

the same, or a total of $60 Million.

2) .a.t. ~lo. - Questioned whether or not a generic waste flow

order to the facility would be prepared. At this time, the HMDC is

not proposing any waste flow orders to this facility. It may be

18

TIERRA-D-009077
necessary, however, that controls· such as waste flow orders be

implemented so that the counties can track non-processable waste

flow through their designated disposal facilities.

Additionally, the origin of the waste was questioned. The

facility will be only available for waste generated from within the

State. It is anticipated that the Northeast counties will be the

primary users of this facility.

3) ~inancing - The HMDC will float environmental improvement

bonds in order to remediate the site before accepting any waste.

Should waste flows fall below the quantity needed to provide

adequate closure and post-closure funds for the site, the HMDC will

seek waste flow designations to the site.

4) ••• idual 80il. - The HMDC will accept residual soils under

the State Soils Reuse Program for landfill cover in addition to the

soil generated from the proposed construction/demolition waste

recycling operations. Soil reuse quantities have been as high as

85,000 cubic yards per year.

5) Ord.r of Magnitud. study - Has a study of this nature been

prepared to address the capacity of the facility taking into

account geotechnical, wetlands, and design constraints? The HMDC

has not done the full scale investigations that would be required

by the NJDEPE. However, using available data for this site and

other District landfill sites, the HMDC has projected that the main

portion of the landfill could reach a height of 100 feet. This

should provide a site life of at least ten years.

Hudson County Improvement Authority

A February 11, 1992 letter was received from Thomas J. Stukane

of Decotiis , Pinto, attorneys for the Hudson County Improvement

Authority with the following comments:

1) Prior to obtaining a permit, the proposed facility must be

included in the Bud.on county Solid Wast. Manag ...nt Plan.

The HMDC disagrees with this statement insofar as the HMDC is

a Solid Waste Management Distr ict pursuant to the Solid waste

Management Act and the facility would be within the District. This

is why Hudson County was not required to enter· into an

Interdistrict Agreement with Bergen County to utilize the HHDC

baler and balefill.

2) No waste may be accepted at the proposed facility from

other counties without obtaining an Int.rdistrict Agr ....nt with

Hudson County.

19

TI ERRA-D-009078
For the same reasons noted above, the HMDC disagrees with this

statement.

PVlLIC COMMENTS

Mayor Lin4enfe1.er of the Town of Kearny stated that the Town

has " .••had enough dumped in Kearny, regardless of the financial

impact and the financial consequ~nces."

COUDcilvo ••n Kaqenbeimer questioned how the proposed facility

would fit in with plans proposed by the Hudson County Improvement

Authority for regional construction and demolition recycling

facilities. The HMDC response is that it would complement the

facilities proposed by the County because these facilities need a

place to take their residuals. Also questioned was the traffic

flow to this facility and the impact on Kearny streets. The HMDC

response is that there will be no change in the level of service on

streets leading to this facility. If necessary, the HMDC will

designate specific truck routes, much the same way they are

designated for a resource recovery facility.

Asbestos

There were several questions raised about asbestos coming into

the proposed facility and whether or not it is mixed in with the

demolition material. Also, how releases of asbestos would be

controlled from incominq vehicles, what would happen if there was

an accident involving a vehicle carryinq asbestos, the

carcinoqenicity of asbestos, etc.

_As noted at the pUblic hearing, asbestos removal is one of the

most highly requlated operations in the country. -No demolition can

take place until all asbestos is removed from a building. The

asbestos is then wet down and packaged in double bags as required

by the Federal Government prior to it being shipped to the disposal

facility. In fact, recent Federal legislation requires that the

licensed asbestos removal company put the full address of the

origin of the asbestos on the bags.

All asbestos removal companies must be licensed by the state,

-and are required to complete courses in asbestos removal and

control. The air is monitored after an asbestos removal project and

sampling performed to be certain that there are no residual

asbestos fibers in the building. Then and only then can the

demolition of a buildinq commence. 'To date, there have never been

any episodes where vehicles containing asbestos waste overturned

and/or presented a threat to the health and safety of residents

near a landfill. The HMDC has been registered to accept asbestos

waste since we began operating the Baler 1980.

20

TIERRA-D-009079
"

\ '

~ somewhat related issue was the control of lead paint

residues on wood. The concern about lead paint entering a landfill

on demolition wood has not been addressed by the NJDEPE to our

knOWledge. However, any wood entering the recycling facility would

be suspect, and may be diverted to the landfill. No creosoted or

pressure treated wood would be accepted at the recycling facility,

and would be diverted to the landfill instead.

Fires

Another concern at the hearing was the possibility of a fire

at the proposed ~acility and how it would be fought. This concern

was obviously due to the long history of fires at the Keegan site,

and the desire to control these fires once and for all. In fact,

there have been seven major fires at the site in the last eight

years.

The proposed facility would be operated as a state-of-the-art

landfill, and as such would receive at least six inches of daily

cover. In the event of a fire, the operator would be required to

dig up the effected area and extinguish the fire. Substantial cover

would then be placed on top of the effected area to prevent air

from entering.

The asbestos disposal area, as required by state regulations

would be separate from the main operating area, and would receive

a minimum of three feet of cover.

Siting

There was a comment about the siting of the proposed facility,

and why not elsewhere in the District.

The HMDC believes this is the best site for a regional nonprocessable landfill and recycling operation for a number of

reasons. First, the site is ideally located to major highways

including the New Jersey Turnpike, Interstate Route 280 and a major

County road, Harrison Avenue. Second, the site is a former landfill

that presents a serious environmental concern to the area. Without

the proposed landfill, the full clean-up as proposed by the HMOC

will never be realized. Third, the HMDC is proposing to absorb all

closure and post-closure liabilities from the Town for the Keegan

site and the MSLA 1-0 Landfill. Lastly, in order to recoup adequate

closure and post-closure money for these sites, a site had to be at

least 100 acres. This would provide an estimated 10 year site life

at 1500 tons per day.

Regardless of the testimony presented by Hudson Meadows, they

have provided no information that indicates an understanding or

ability to cleanup the site. References were made to the

21

TI ERRA-D-009080
"

construction of high rise structures on the site supported by

piles, and the ability of macadam parking lots as a capping method,

and the fact that the NJOEPE is comfortable with construction,

excavation.etc. on landfills.

Any investigations on a landfill, even for borings and testing

requires a landfill disruption permit from the NJOEPE. Any project

that would be proposed on top of a landfill receives intense

scrutiny by the NJDEPE's landfill engineering group.

No testimony was presented that reflected a willingness on the

part of Hudson Meadows to prevent the lateral migration of

contaminants from the site. These contaminants are entering the

adjacent wetlands as evidenced by the USEPA study. The HMDC has

proposed a perimeter slurry trench cut-off wall and leachate

collection system that would effectively isolate the landfill from

the adjacent Marsh. .

We should also note that at the second pUblic hearing the

consultants for Hudson Meadows agreed with the closure costs for

the landfill; they estimate closure to be "•••in the range of 23 to

33 million dollars."

Sanitary Sewers

There were several questions about the leachate from the site

and t~e use of Kearny sewers for leachate.

The HMDC presently trucks leachate from the l-A Landfill into

a manhole near the Keegan site. The HMDC has entered into

negotiations with the Kearny Municipal utilities Authority to

~ccept leachate from our landfill sites into the Kearny South

pumping station, and from there into the Passaic Valley Sewage

Commission facility in Newark. The draft agreement would require

that the HMDC pay for the entire cost of construction of the sewer

lines for the Meadowlands area of Kearny to the pumping station.

currently, there are a number of industrial facilities that are on

septic. or holding tanks in this area including a major regional

post-office facility. The HMDC is proposing that all these

buildings be hooked up to the sanitary sewer.

Liability

In addition to the information from the first public hearing,

liability issues were raised at the second public hearing. This

included comments that the State of New Jersey should pay to close

the dumps.

The HMDC as a State agency is proposing to effectively close

and maintain both the Keegan site and the nearby MSLA 1-0 landfill.

22

TIERRA-D-009081
·.

,. • t

There are DO other relative fundinq .echaDi ••• available to clo.e

the.e .ite.. Both sites ceased operations prior the Solid Waste

Management Act. Therefore, no money was put in escrow for this

purpose. Further, monies collected for closure and post-closure at

the other District landfills has been budgeted and is needed at

those sites. As an option, we assume that the Town of Kearny as the

landoWner could apply for either Spill Fund money and/or Closure

Tax money for these sites.

Financial

Several people questioned the amount of money that would be

collected through the tipping fees at this facility. Since the HHDC

is.proposing a facility that would accept 1500 tons per day, 300

days per year, and at a cost of $75 per ton, the HMDC would collect

approximately $337,500,000 over a ten year lifetime. Where does

this money go?

The HMDC responded that a large portion of the tipping fee

goes to taxes. currently, $24.35 per ton in taxes are collected for

Type 10 (Municipal) waste. Assuming no increases in the taxes

before the facility be4;ins operations, this translates to· 33

percent of the total tipping fee. Included in this amount is'a

$4.50 per ton host-community benefit.

Additionally, there will be the operational contract for the

landfill. The present contract with GROWS/Waste Management costs

about $775,000 per month or $9,300,000 per year~'Assuming that the

contract amount for operations at the Keegan site was the same,

this would translate to 28 percent of the total money collected.

Closure and post-closure for the Keegan and MSLA 1-D sites accounts

for an estimated $120 Million or about 36 percent of the total

money collected. So far, this adds up to 97 percent, or about $1.0

Million per year remaining. Some of this amount would include the

cost for the operations of the Construction , Demolition recycling

operations, site access improvements, permitting, contingencies and

administration.

As noted at the public hearing, the HMDC is a utility, and

must file and justify all base rates and increases with the State.

Further, all expenditures are SUbject to State review and approval.

End Use

The HMDC is proposing that once the facility is at capacity,

the site would be capped and become part of a passive open space

recreational area in conjunction with the Kearny Freshwater Marsh.

Perimeter site improvements will have been completed prior to site

operation. Therefore, the environmental quality of the adjacent

area will be SUbstantially improved before park conversion.

23

TI ERRA-D-009082
Property Values

.'

For the residents that live near the proposed site, there was

a concern about property values once the landfill is opened.

The HMDC believes that there will be no negative effect on

property values in the area for a number of reasons. First, the

Keegan site is already a landfill, however it has no environmental

controls. There are numerous· underground fires annually that

require heavy equipment, and there are no security controls. The

uses s~rounding the Keegan site are primarily heavy industrial,

inclUding Port-O-San (a portable toilet storage and repair

facility), a construction/demolition recycling operation, solid

waste haulers storage yard, junkyards, Town DPW yard, and a number

of warehouses.

The HMDC is proposing to remediate the Keegan site, control

the underground fires, control the leachate and prevent the

unauthorized entry onto the site. The one disadvantage to our

proposed vertical expansion of the Keegan site, is the visual

impact that a 100 foot landfill would have on the area. This is

something that the HMDC cannot control. However, a thousand feet

of industrial buildings and an existing railroad embankment that is

20 feet high will provide limited visual screening of the landfill.

We should note that adjacent to the Bergen County landfill and

the BCUA Transfer Station, a developer is building 15 two family

homes. Obviously, a developer would not build new homes if no one

were willing to live there.

The HMDC maintains, however, that the proposed park end use

with all the other environmental improvements, will in fact add

considerably to a site that the USEPA has designated as Medium

priority for cleanup.

24

TI ERRA-D-009083
, .'

t.

..

. ..

SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

The Hackensack Meadowlands Municipal Committee is the

designated solid waste advisory committee for the HMDC. The

Municipal Committee is made up of the mayors of the fourteen towns

which form the Meadowlands District.

On February 3, 1992, the HMDC discussed the proposal of the

regional materials handling complex with the mayors. Mayor

Lindenfelser of the Town of Kearny took exception to Kearny's

responsibility in re-opening the landfill, and stated that the

municipality objected to the proposal. He also commended the HMDC

staff on the manner in which they had presented their position to

the citizens of Kearny. P.J.Mclntyre of the Town of Kearny objected

to the proposed height of the landfill and the traffic that it

would generate. The advisory committee took no formal position on

this plan amendment.

Additional Written COmments

·Written comments were received followinq the second pUblic

hearing from Hudson Meadows Urban Development corporation. The

Comments largely reflected comments received earlier, and testimony

made. at the two hearinqs. However, they will be addressed as

follows:

1) Cloaur. costs were proposed to be recouped by the developer

from tax revenues at a rate of $1.5-2.5 Million per year over a ten

year period. Aside from the fact that this conflicts with previous

statements for Hudson Meadows regarding tax income to the Town of

Kearny, these revenues will fall far short of the estimates made by

the HMDC and Hudson Meadows' own consultant for the proper closure

and post-closure of the Keegan site.

2) zap.ota from the proposed materials handling complex have

been addressed elsewhere in this report in a preliminary nature as

required by the planninq process. Once certified, the HMDC will

undertake all necessary investigations •

3) The aoop. of the project is very clear as to the wastes

that the HMDC will allow into the facility. No hazardous wastes

will be permitted to enter the site. Although not necessarily

hazardous, incinerator ash will not be allowed at this facility,

and in fact the landfill will not be designed for ash.

4) The iDoo•• to be generated for this facility will be

sufficient to cover all costs associated with the two sites.

Estimates provided so far will be fine tuned only after full

environmental and engineering studies are conducted. No excess

money will be collected and the HMDC will substantiate all costs to

the NJDEPE before the rate is set.

25

TI ERRA-D-009084
I

l

. ....

I.

t

8y nommr :'\&...01..1-· tOO councilmc ntook 1.cmporary tract. such as by ~cing the •

"".nin, ..... SI." Writer rerU;;e in a back room of the ;;. Hackensack }Ieadowlands De-· •.

Th.> t.............. counet'l '"3U"U' S . vclopmcnt Commiuion to Uslce" ~,

~ n. •.... ... ... Lincoln School. where the meet·· . '. .

1;1st ni:::hl hcard complainlll" 'h d ed "'-ft f ac'ion . •' tng a been mov """,awe 0 .

a1)l)ut dUr.li>i1;~ r.ear l"Csidential . the overllow crowd. . .". Mrs. ~Jarie ~Iatu! complair.cd ' ",~

areas ani! pla('ement or a drug , " that she was manhandled by TJOo

lr(':llment ;1ro;:r3m in lown. .' D~J~ty Police Chief Joseph V. '. c. ·lice while she was picketing Silh

. ~Irs, ~Iar;':;lrct Jla!lOlWil)',' Delhm a?proac~cd the woman, " .. urday at ttoe (h:mp, A police rcejected by litatc Police rrom:: '.' .::. as a. peacemaker and won a . pOrt said she was pulled from

GO\', Cahill's 'umce in Trenton • pro~usc, that she s~c would rc- . :" the path of an oncomm; truck, . ':

lIonday, was ordered out oC the mam Silent. cavalier rc.lented . . ~trs, ~Iatus termed this a falsifi •..•

council l\~ssiOl1 for continued and she made no more nolSe. " . • cation. •

disI"'&IP:iollsor the proccediu.."'S, , nesidenl$ presented the coun·· .' Joseph Camino complained

S:lC \\'a:\ ordered out bY Mayor . cil with a 2,000 signature petition . that a mcthadone maintenance . •

Anthony J..C.-valier, who bad is- '" dcmandin:: the closing of the . proteram recently instituted in ...

Sl:Cd her ;t 1~3st a dozen W:lrn- ~ Kce:;:an Dumps oll Hamson' town would draw addicts to ; :"

in:;li to be quiet, alter sbe litOCKl Turnpike,. Their prime com··, .. Kearn\", He said he would not be

imd ihXU:ied the council of seek. , . plaint is that it presents a health, .' .' cpposCd to such a center tor .

in;: :::ralt from ~ local dump , '. ,menace because of its proximity "lr'eatment of Kearny addic:.s· •

operators. '" to homes, . . ". orJy. . •

A:i lirvefill poliCCDlen 'ap- A' newly tormed group called Daniel Alfieri, pro::ram dircc- " '.

proachcd to escort ber out, pom-· .. . Cili1.cnS AJ:ainst Pollution. '. tor, told Camino that other pro- •

dcmoniuOl broke loose. in Ihe hrou~t in an attorney. George .... grams in oU:er areas arc treat·

CI"Jwd of about 300, She' ~tinisll oC Nutley, to speak for' ing.Keamy addicts and that lbo', ..,

screamed at the policemen to. them. Minish won a promise local problem, aithougb nol limo .

lake their himds ort ber. Cava· " lrom the council to seek new it.ed to Kearny, woWel ueat

ller rccwed !.he D1CCUng anc1 .' methods of ~osing the. Keeg8n' " . . . .mainly town addicts. '

J

I,

!

"

:3l
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

TELEPHONE CONVERSATION REPORT

~~,-¥--4---=:;;'_-I ime:. By: _--+-/~I )1-<.

Organization: ~ __ -----

Phone Number: _

Subject: .h.$ Lli

----I,~~:t.-.aI!l4=~~~~~~~~~~':.!!:2---L1

--M.J..~~~GJ:",e.~~~'44_r_~~~#

CAA000038

TIERRA-D-009086
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS DEVELOPMENT (;;OMMISSION

Date£k ~J II<-e... Time----- By:---J~...:...:........;;;;;;.:._\_-.,.r"""

Name: =-- _

TELEPHONE CONVERSATION REPORT

Orgdnizotion: _

Phone Number: -:----

Subject: ~ ~ tU:L~?2' 1/-31

TIERRA-D-009087
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

CONVERSATION REPORT

----By: _--.-..l~~~";;::;;';" __

Phone Number: -----~~:::::::!!fi~E'fL::.

Subject: ~,

LV_I. ,

__________ \~3l.7\{ ,---rTIERRA-D-009088
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

TELEPHONE CONVERSATION REPORT

Date:t--r-;-~'""'--'I!

_____ By: __ 1,,--)] I J-lJl....,

Nam~fII!!!~~~~----------------

Orydnizdtion: -------------------

Phone Number: --:_-::-;;::-

Subiect: -I-.!..!...~-::::J....L----...:....!-__f~~...,...r...-t-------

---trf

----fhiy

TIERRA-D-009089
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

TELEPHONE CONVERSATION REPORT

Date~;:;~_- By: ---e.-t..~_

Name~l:--3IIl~E:::~ _

Org.:mizahon: --,

Phone Number: ------------; .... ..v~-------

TIERRA-D-009090
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

TELEPHONE CONVERSATION REPORT

Date-t§pdnme---- By: ---,~:...L.::lI~~ __

Name: _

Organization: _

/-/3

TIERRA-D-009091
QIH

.~

.j

... ....-':.... ......

E-< r-- 1f'l 1f'l 1f'l

p:; 11) r-- r-- r-- 0 .-l .-l .-l .-l

0.. , I

I

I

~

.-l .-l .-l .-l t!:1

r-- r-- r-- r-- :z; H

:z;

(

E-I

0 ;:Z H

E-< U) U U U W I I I H

P-r

~

HH E-<

tI) ...... ...... U)

:z; :z;

H

H

W

~

~ 0::-

~

HW

~

tI) U) (I) E-<

:;::: :;:::

~

U

H

r>..

~

Q ......, FJ:: ~

::r:

>-'1

U

><~

£-<H~

tI)

ID

0 ()'I 1.0

1I'l 1.0 1f'l r--

.-l .-l .-l .-l t I I 1 .. ~ .-l .-l .-l

p:: l' r-- r-- r-- ~UW ~

:;:::

P-r,- .

tI)

U

0~ <.<l

:z; . H <.9 H CQ >- W p., I -

...

.-

\ I

\''\I ~

\

\

\ \1\1 ~> I • I

1-1 I

l"~.

~ I

II

I

\

'I II .1 I 1I l I ! I I I I

:1

! !

;i I

1~.~ I

'I

I

I' , i,iII

;iI ~))~

i:i ~

~

E-< -- >< Z £-< E-t E-t ~ H Z H H ~

::>

P-r

0

~

H <.9 tI)

~

::>

Z ;:J :z;

0 Ol

0

~ Ol

H P-r ...... ......

H

g

~

w :;: tI)

E-t

g

S

~

H

H

H

U E-< <.9

g

Q .a:: ><

~

:z; E-t :z; III

H

~

H

SJ

0 :z;

H

g E-<

W c:;

E-<

U0 E-< f"'< :z; E-<

WW

@ (J)

u ::r:

0 E-<

0

~

E-<

H

:z;

W

0 :z;

U ;§ 1<

0 E-t

~

H

H0 ::s: "~l

(J)

u F::t: f"'<

~

U E-< p::

(J) ::r: :z; >< c:;

tl~

~

::r:

~

E-< E-<

W :><:

w

51 E-< z (J) Q H >

U

H

W

~

H

0 ::J

~

::>

0

F::t:

Q

H f"'<

U

Q co

U

0::. oo

p.,

QH

::>

01HH

(J) w

OJ oH

l/)~H

(J)

TIERRA-D-009092
TIERRA-D-009093
..

;:.~ ~::-..~

".j -~.

':iJ r~

.p ~j

f-l0

moo

rul

ri

0.1

C)

(I)

',-1 c,..1 o

.-;

I.r.~ <))

.p ;j ~H

r-IO

'>-1 cd o I>

1-1o

C'l

',.-1o

+.}

(}) ,.<

J '~-i

.p

~>-l 'H o 0 0\

t-f) oooo

oe::(

<f,

c..,)

!;~ ~·I

.,..(0

!"'I

,.:'.-1

~.;' Vi

~';~ ~.,.

{\i f-: <j)

Fi ~;-~ f"(i

r!

i)~ ()

{-wI ,"' ~

••••j .}.,

f·, Q)

t'0 (1)

TIERRA-D-009094
..

OJ

1"-1

• .. -1 o§o

Cl

rr.l

G)

,.' G...['2

..

()

.J.)

(j)

,0

rl,..~l

·d~

-,-l

fJo

·d

-I:'

0.:

r!

0.1

P,

..•oo

to,..,

~-~,

..-~

'C)

.-1

... •

()

~., .-< H

.. o

t;J

(.)

~P

ijJ

.p

::i o

t',••

p;-~,~

...

<D

.;..1

...

.,.,~ , '

C"~.,

re- O

E-i

.-..........

(\1 "~H :'--1

.........' ........... -:D

:~

t:O

r-~...-.- ..,,~

....\ ....

~:;:

~:.1

e-

.p

;:.~~~~

~~ t""'rt e,)

n ~ Joy. .;--~ Qj ':;

fq ;:~ (-i~

TIERRA-D-009095
:., €

bv .~? ~.. r~...< .!

e (0

r.: .:~ ~~

Qj f'4; 01 :;j.

,I

.:....

()

.,.j

··1

,.""

5':'.

'<.',j ~d

(,0

r.-i

~~d

G)

t.i

.,--{

.p

''''~

ri

r'~

l~o

(..; o

~::j

(j:

TIERRA-D-009096
uo

..c~

.p

G-, o

1:0.0 C

0,-1~o

~

l'--r

Q)

r-I o

•

..

1:1 o

·,-1

.J.,) o

(lj

..

•'d

(])

rl

•.-1 r..-l

...

(I) o

fJ~

.r!

'"dHo

())

,.q

E-I

1-;

(\)

),j

.pH

;:j

G·--j

'I)

.0

o

+.:l H

(j)

l>oo

·.--1

r-Io

.p

~;D~

.,-!

..po

rl

r-I oH

••

LD

;.:i

•.-4H

".j o

,.Q

TIERRA-D-009097
f}.nJ

T

1

,r~;::l

l~/1

1~11.J/;tj ~~~

Q) cD

cD U! (I) () s::

()

H

~ Q) ~ oj (I)

0 lH

.,.-l ro

0

0 Q) ..

~

I 'tj Q,} (I)::i ~H;::l o,.-l Q)

~

tt.I rl Q) .. +> ti--I () 'd

H

~

I

•

W 0,) ;jil)4);::l':::4)(j)H~ .j.) o,-jI

~

W

0 (j)H 'd o,-j :& il) a:l

W Q) (I) () .p Q:::l;::l~Q)::lt><l}Q) () ,.d Q)

00

~ Pi ,q 'M as +> tt.I ti?HH cD s:: 'd

H cD OM

0 Q) s:: j:1" Q) I> s:l <:C8:>.j.) oj

0H

8 .p G-l Q) Q) oj

~

H .,4

0

H (l) .,.-l .p rl s:: P'(1)Q)I><llQ) ~(l)

~

.. 'd

H ,.d ,.q Q) Q) !!: tH r-l

H 0) .p p., ~:>I>~ I=-s:lrd cD '"d Q) P:I

(l) cD

~

t'lj .p '.j.) .p CD

~

,q Q) .. '(:4 Q) r;ll .,4 t; t'lj <:lt~ 'd<ltOr-!HH

§

()

H

0 ,.q

~

(l) ro

'" () .p 11)

H 'd ..d :;::

~

Q)

o .pg .pojll)..p 0,-1 ,.d

8 .p .p ,.d 'd s:l gp s:l +> 11) <0 G--t tIl

H or{ p.-. ~

H s::l WP r-l ell r-t .j.)

ro Q) fI.l .p cD 0 0

0 r;ll ,.d l>

0 ..

~

cD Qj ~ ~ oj :cl (l) S::'M ~ 'd

0

Q

,a s:: 0) Q) I> ',-1 () 11) .p

H .p OM "S cD0 '"d ~ H H li: tlO •.-1 ,d ;::l.p as P-i

0

.,-1

§ s:l &. 'd .:-1 Ul .p ,.d (l) Q)

H

e

.r-!

H tJl tIi eu Q) Q(J

H r-f (),q ?~ <l)

~ .p (l) §

()) <D CI:l r-I .p 'd P. ro () cD a:I cD

~

0 ttl (j) cD.p • .-I Q)

H HO 0

H ..

0.0 () ill '"H Q) oj ill

0

§

Q) G-i (j) Ol

0 1l-t:4:4U):;qIXl<l:l~uJ:;q roH

H s:l~ .,-j

H (J) .,-j g. ",; ,q

H0

H

• tt.I 'd :>

g r-f .. s:: oj .,..{

0 .r-! ()

H~

H

• ti--I

H .pH () Q)

&

H <:r: r-i 'd (j)t<?~COC\lr-i(])z:-..!:"t:0 CD

~

(1)

ti--I .p (J)

~

H CD (j) -1-:1 .,4 (J) .. CI:l Q) r;rl

0

0 oj rf ,...;to "'I (1) C\l r-l

0 l.Q ,.q ,q

oj ,q (l) (l)

0 U') (j) r-l

H Ul s= G-l ,-J

M ttl .pH

g

~

'M

~ cD "41~ <:'\IC\l -:tiN .p s:l .p

<D

H

0 ,.d ..cl0 oj .p

M .g G) r1

H

~

.p .pc

HH (lj

U') Q) .p .p s= .p r;rl

H .pH 'M

0 .r-! (j) (]) <1)

~

r:1

~

p" .p G--t .,-j Q) s:: :::l

~

0 ...

~

H

H oj (l) ,.d

'"

H

Q)

0 r:::0 .p0 ...

~

.p ,.d 'M

0 ro 'd0 <D ,q ..p 'd Q)

H .....

,

0 Q) .p

~

'd oj .p

@

~ G-i cD G-I~

~

.p ill

~ Q) .p

.,1 Q)

S b.O Q)

0 ,.dH0 'd Q)0 ;j

0

P 'd

? Q) .p

H

H .po 'd .p s::l ,.d

0 ..p :::l .p <D ,.d tt.l s:: l!)

0 cD 'n U') .~ •.-l

oj

H (l) .,-j ro Ii-!~ 'd .p un tr.l Q)0 rrj

~ .p P- cDH

S

!7l oj

H b!l P. •.-l Q) CD s::l

H Q) s::l .,.-l (I) .r! Q) l.Q 'r-!

0

-

<D

~ l1.I Po H s:: '§ ~

::l 0) s:l ro CD0 .p .p .r! s:: .p

~

'd (l) Q)

•

~

<)

en

HH Q) Q) ·01 tl.O s:: "';

&

po

~

0 o:S P. (l) Q) tti .. Q)0

H

0

•

•..-t \J:l rn

o;;f1 Q)

0

q G-l u.l rtl s:: <l) rn ...... s::

~

S

p ()

0

0 to

H Q> ••

0

0 'r-! (',.;

(J) r-I 'd (l) .01 .r-! () 'r4 to (l) .p .r! 0"'" CD

HH (l) Q)

0

~ (',.; •• ti--I

~

r-i 'd s::1 CDH :> (l) .p .r! l=- 'd .0 'lj 'd' -!.J I-=i

M

~ 11.1 (l)

H (l) (]) ........

0 ..G <l) <l)

rei (j) () td ...cl 1>4

H r<j (l) ill (l) D.O 'M

A

0 .r-! r..; b,() (\) .p C) <0 ,.d .j.3 ..... rI

.. Q) l> .r! t'lj tti .p Q) as .j..:l

H .j...)H s::1

0

~

cD P.

~

S <l) s:l :s: .p •.-l

0

0 u.l

0 l::

H ..QH

to/) (:4 r-I

§

Q) cd oj ib (j) .r! .j...) ,q a:l CD

H .r! .r-!

? cd ...... .p...-l

g

0

0 (\)

r-i 'd

0

~

Q)

g

,q

§

~ 'd Ul (\) .p

~

H l> ..Q

~

HCD ~«JrlMO<)~ ll-f .,-1

.j.) (l) iJ..l .p .j.3 'n 11.1 .r!

H .r-! 11.1 Pi bD r-l A.. 'd tti

0 CD H ~ J:l r-f <l) I!-l ;3

8 ..H

~

ro 01 .. tti tti (J) .S .p

~

0 l> oj

0

~

I

&

..Q .r!

0 U) ~ oj Q) .:1 r-i G-I rei () .p s:: iLl

<l) s:l oj.:) 'd §' s:: ,..0

0 0.. .r! 'd on +> 'M

A 't:I

~

0 a:l 0 -l.j...)-!.Jr-IOO.r! G-l (l) (l)

~ (l) co Q) 'M .j.3

§ r-I

~

~

... oj tI) s:: .; Q) 'd 'dCD:;:$ o::I;::$.rl,.qH~

0 to

HH

() ..G -!.J

0 f:1 CD (l) ro 'lj 'ro! 'lj (l) D) 'd ill (l) cd..c1 ~

H0 A:2i OP·pr!

H

0

G-l oM .po

0

0 .1'4 l> cd0 (l)H tti to)

S ~.(])

S Ol s:: Q) .p <H tI) 08 .;4

~

():J

H oj ..pO §

s::: r-I ro Q) l=1 P. QO (l) <l)

H

~ CD oj.:)

H

0 s::: ~ cd <tl ~

0 r-I ~ P':> .p Q)

~

0

2P 2P Q) ,q

H 0.0 <D0

H .r-!

0

H .p II) <) 0 0 <l,) .j...) r-l s:l',-I <l) () cD

H .j...) (l)

H 'dH s:l (l) CD

H

&

H

A (l)

0

0 .1'4 .~ 0.. rl

0 H~CDHOS::tti'r-!aH

0 CH

HH

(1) .r! <l) .ro!

0 D.O (l) 'M ..0

H Po ..

W Ii-!

0 .,-1 r-l OJ r-i .,.-1 (l) (l) ~ cd ,d 0 ,-cp .., CD p" cd

0 ..-l

"d .j...) +:l

H ..p .p s:: Ii-! .j.30 rd p. (J) (l) r.c:

H 'd

H tIS

H l>W (l)+:l.p()P~.j...) cD Q) ..j.)

A

r-I

m ro (l)

0 .r! <D0 OJ Ii-! tIS (l)

8

b.O

~

H (l) <l) .r! (l) tIS rf ~ ~...-l oj oj (])H

H

0

0 ,q (l) '0 cd

§

§

H oj l> (l)

P s::: en

g s:l

m

H~ .. Q) p::: P::: C,.)

0 :2:i f~ 0 ~ Q) <D Q)

,G 4.:l

&

H J:.I

H oj ,..0 .po .,..j

0 ',,; r-i ro0 OJ

H tr.l is U) ,.q P.

H

0 .p 'd .p ,C1

w Q)

!

§

~

•.-l u.l 'd (j) <D l:: U') oj

.. QO CD

g @' 'd

§

s:: 'd ,.q

0

~H .p

H ,-i CI:l 'M to) s::: r..;

on s:::H ...

0 !7l (l) +:l Q)

H .r!

0 ::l (l)

0 0- s:::0

~

oj

H r-i

s:: .r! 'd

0

0 'd

0 'd .,-j

H

0 (l) ..

~

P ..r:l Q) +:l (l)

.r! In 'd a:l

0 '@ 'd

§

Ii-!~

0 ..Q 'lj '14 ..p ..

~

{) r-l <0 Q()

~

~ .r!

~

Q)

•

(l)

• .r! (l) rn 4.:l .j.3 Q) cd

H "d 'r! 'd .j...)

H r-l

a s:: I> H •

"'>!

~ I1l .j...)

~

0 4.:l 'd oj rtj a:l +:l s::: .j...) +:l tIS

0 r-I (l)

0 Q)0 .r-! 'd

H 'd I'll """H

0

H0H !i=

•

Q) bl)

0 C\l tI) tti (l) £:--1

H H+>+:l r--l lH tI) 'd

Q) oj

~

~

.. (I) «:l

0

~ s:: c<l to s::

0 (l) .p

§ s:: s:: .r-!

H

a

H

H fJ§

'd r-I

.j...) "d (l) (.) .0 ... <D .,-I 'M

~

A ... <l) cD "d «l s:: 'r!

(l) ..

H (l) ..p

• 'd•

~

(l) s::: gp 4.:l

&

.r-! -P 'd

Q ... ,q G-l lH cdHH~ Q) ,.d0 ::l

h

(:4

~

Cl;l l> -P

A "d 'd Q)

~ ,..0 ·ol .j...) 'd rn (1)

~ r-i <l) cd

8 (l) O::l~ Pi8

m (l)

Q) .,-l .r! (l) (l)

H .r! 'rl 'M0 (!)

H .r! +> Q) rn

H tti tti .,-1 s:: r-l J::q Q) ~

.p ti? (J)

§

h

~~

~

~

4.:l g. (l) as (I) po

§

rQ .p ..p P.. ,p Q) Ul

oj {) .r!

@ 'd (l)

m '0 .j..}H •.-! '0 <Dto)rnS= :.:: ==:=

c

ttl

~

S ()) ~ cD q H .£1 :;:$ <D H (l) CD (J) ..-l §

rn Q,) Q) Q) r;rl (l)

~....

0~0

p

0

0 r'd +:l 'd 'd

0

0

H

0 p:::

0

0 .J.' pO::: r.c:

A

~ .p P:::

'"'"

TIERRA-D-009098
Christine Todd Whitman

Governor

~

o rL (~: c.::.: n\\ii :1 :~~ [\ ,

IQII.c' '. ,-I~::: :, \'./ ..'= \1\\

! , )" 1\\ i11

~ : ;,' ! :J l':)

'. ,

1

~tat.e .of ~.efu 'JJ.erS.e~.~lY-:::::=---=_ =-====-.J

Department of Environmental Protection "Robert C. Shinn, Jr.

401 East State Street, 3rd Floor Commissioner

Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0423

Voice: 609-292-0112

Fax: 609-777-1330

E-mail: pnutkowi@dep.state.nj.us

July 5, 1996

Thomas R. Marturano, P.E.

Director ol.')'oiid Waste/Engineering Operations

Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission

One DeKorte Park Plaza

Lyndhurst, New Jersey 07071-3799

Re: former Keegan Landfill

HMDC, Kearny, Hudson County

Pre-Application Meeting

Dear Mr. Marturano:

This is a summary of the issues discussed at the pre-application meeting which was held at the

Depar1ment of Environmental Protection on Thursday, June 27, 1996 at 2:00 p.m.

You began by introducing the project. The Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission

(HMDC) proposes to construct and operate a Materials Handling Complex in Kearny, Hudson

County, New Jersey. This facility will consist of a non-processible materials landfill and a

construction/demolition recycling facility on the site of the former Keegan Landfill. The former

Keegan Landfill is located on land which is primarily owned by the Town of Kearny. The Keegan

landfill occupies ap proximately 110 acres. The landfill currently has twenty to twenty five feet of

garbage in it. Next to the landfill is the Kearny Freshwater Marsh, which occupies an area of 300

acres. It is the largest freshwater marsh in the HJvfDC district. The former Keegan landfill will be

a regional facility. The revenues generated from tipping fees will be used to close the ID landfill

and the Keegan landfill. The ID landfill occupies 100 acres adjacent to the New Jersey Turnpike.

There are no environmental improvements to the ID landfill. There is a 250,000 gallon oil leak in

the middle of the landfill. Every year 60 to 70 million gallons of untreated leachate runs off into

the Passaic River. A new force main will be built to convey leachate from the facility to the I-A

Landfill east of the site. Another new force main from the I-A Landfill to the Kearny South Pump

Station will permit the leachate to be sent to the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners (PVSC)

facility for treatment through the Kearny Municipal Utility Authority (KMUA) sewerage system.

Nelson Hausman, of the Bureau of Landfill, Compost & Recycling Management, commented that

we think thG landflll should be a Class II landfill. We will send youa letter discussing this issue.

You are required to do a Final Environmental and Health Impact Statement (E.H.I.S.). We

require a closure and post-closure plan as pari of the application. We will act as the permit

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer

Recycied Pilper CCAOOOOS7 TIERRA-D-009099
ap)lication review project manager.

•

Sue Lawson, of the Bureau ofInland Regulation, commented that you will need a Stream

Encroachment Permit (S.E.P.) because of filling in the wetlands. Greater than one quarter acre of

wetland fill in the HIvfDC triggers the S.E.P. When you design the relocation of the stream which

will go outside of the cut-ofT wall, please contact Rick Reilly or Nabil Andrews, LURP,",

Engineering Support (Stream Encroachment), at 609-984-0194, to discuss permitting/engineering

issues related to the top of the hill. You will need a Water Quality Certificate and the USACOE

will require it. We have no Freshwater Wetlands Jurisdiction. This is our jurisdiction for activities

within the district. But if there are any activities outside of the district, then there may be different

requirements.

Nick Horiates, of the Bureau of Construction and Connection Permits, commented that the

Department is investigating the relevance of grant conditions pertaining to the KMUA Kearny

Point Pump Station in relation to your project. Please contact Mr. Horiates directly if you have

any questions.

Eleanor Krukowski, of the Bureau of Operational Ground Water Permits, commented that you

know what you are required to do in terms of ground water monitoring, She suggested a more

qualitative, descriptive approach to complying with the ground water quality modeling

requirements.

Bob Colon, of the Bureau of Stormwater Permitting, commented that you would apply for an

lndividual Permit (I.P.) for storm water which would cover the construction phase and the

operational phase until full closure. At that time we would revoke your I.P., provided that you can

meet the terms and conditions of a General Permit. We would then issue a General Permit.

Helen Kushner will be replacing me as the single point of contact for this project within the Permit

Coordination and Pollution Prevention Element.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me,

Sincerely,

Paul Nutkowitz, Ph.D,

Research Scientist

Permit Coordination and Pollution Prevention Element

copy:

Christopher L. Dour, P E., HMDC

Henry W, Germann, P.E., P.P., HMDC

Paul Bove, HMDC

Nelson Hausman, DSHW, Bureau of Landfill, Compost & Recycling Management

John Edwards, DSHW, Bureau of Landfill, Compost & Recycling Management

Sue Lawson, LURP, Bureau of Inland Regulation

Nabil Andrews, LURP, Engineering Support (Stream Encroachment)

Nick Horiates, Bureau of Construction & Connection Permits

Eleanor Krukowski, Bureau of Operational Ground Water Permits

TIERRA-D-009100
bob Colon, Bureau of Stormwater Permitting

•

Larry Schmidt, Office of Program Coordination

Helen Kushner, Permit Coordination and Pollution Prevention Element

Jeanne Mroczko, Administrator, Permit Coordination and Pollution Prevention Element

u:\pn\pifcomme\keeganJundc p. 4 <", •

TIERRA-D-009101
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS DEVELOPMENT COMMIS~~N

One Dt?Korte Park Plaza • Lyndhurst, ~ew Jersey 07071-3799

, Administrati\'t? Offices: (201) -l60-1iOO Em'ironment Center: (201) -l60-83C~'~

Fax: (201) -l60-1722

March 10, 2000

Mr. Walter M. Smith, Jr.

Hartz Mountain Industries, Inc.

400 Plaza Drive

Secaucus, New Jersey 07094

RE: Kearny/Hartz Mountain Site Improvement

File #00-042

Dear Mr. Smith:

....;

This Office has recently completed its review of your zoning certifIcate

application and related plans for the proposed remediation of the premises

_identified as Block 286, I:.ot4, on Bergen Avenue in the Town of Kearny.

"

, "

Based on our review, we have determined that the proposed Remedial AcCon

Work Plan (RAWP), as approved by the NJDEP, conditionally complies with the

Commission's Highway Commercial Zoning Regulations, and we are th~refore

approving your Zoning Certificate with conditions.

1. This approval .is limited to the proposed actions described in the RAWP,

entitled "Remedial Action Workplan, Harrison Avenue Landfill, Lot 4 Block

286, Kearny, N.J.", prepared by Envirotech Consultants, Inc., dated May, 1999,

and approved by the NJDEP on October 4, 1999. The tasks permitted by this

approval include, but are not limited to, the following: the excavation and offsite disposal of contaminated soils, the placement of a surface cap, the

collection of leachate and the preparation of institutional controls (deed

restrictions ).

The approval is subject to the following conditions:

,;

.',

.~. .

, '

."

2. Any document report, plan, study, test result or the like prepared by or

for the applicant or others in connection with the work which may have a

bearing on this Zoning Certificate approval shall be imme .

, by the applicant to this Office for review. Should the r ·~§j~~~~~~l

document submitted indicate to this OffiCe that the Zoning

CCA000037

MAR 1 3 2000

,"

";

, ,

':', "

"NEW JERSEY IS AN QUAL OPPORru~ITY EMPLOYER"

TIERRA-D-009102 ,"

~J '-
. .

I

.. i

The applicant is hereby advised of their responsibility to investigate and obtain

..all federal, state, and.local permits whid~may pertain to their pioposalor

project. The Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission will not be

held liable for any damage which may result from the applicant's failure to

obtain the necessary approvals from all respective agencies having jurisdiction.

This Office must receive copies of all federal, state, and local permits which may

pertain to the proposal, and "as -built" plans, before it will issue a Certificate of

~ Completion.

Mr. Smith

Page 2

March 10, 2000

approval issued herein is or may be materially affected, further clarIfication

may be sought by this Office, and additional or modified approvals may be

required.

3. Proposed office use is for illustration purposes to satisfy N.J.A.C. 19:4-

6.18(o)lii. No site development can occur without first obtaining a Zoning

Certificate from this Office .

. This letter shall serve as your Conditional Zoning Certificate, designated CZC00-042, and shall be valid for a period of one year. This is not an approval to

start construction. Application must be made to the Town of Kearny for a

building permit. Enclosed please. find a copy of the approved site plans by

Macdel Engineering, Sheets C-l, C-3, C-4, C-5, C-~ C-9 and C-I0, dated 1/11/00

and she~t C-2last rev. 1/6/00.

This letter is an agency determination, decision, and administrative order.

Pursuant toN.l.A.C. ~9:4-6.25(b), if you wish to appeal this decision, a written

notice of appeal must be filed, by certified mail, with the Office of the Chief

Engineer within fifteen (15) days of the date of this decision. The notice of appeal

shall specify the grounds for such appeal. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal,

the Executive Director or his designee shall transmit to the Office of

Administrative Lawall papers as required by the Office of Administrative Law

pursuant to N.I.A.C. 1:1-8.2..

~:..

....

~-:.:.

......

....

....:

'· .. ···1

.- .

. ,

......:

TIERRA-D-009103:::.',1
..~

.'

Mr. Smith

March 10, 2000

Page 3

If you should have any questions, please contact Mark W. Skerbetz of this Office.

Sincerely,

RECOMMENDED BY:

OFFICE OF THE\CHIEF ENGnR

~\))5~~

Mark W. Skerbetz, P.P. AICP

Staffg,~/

~1~Maftinez, P.E.,P.P.

./

y"Acting Chief Engineer

:::;

...... '

, I

I

APPROVED BY:

","

,",

""EnClosure

cc: Robert Armstrong, Kearny Construction Official

Debbie Dakin, HMDC

Bruno Rondi, HMDC

HMMC

:::.

.':

;.'. .~

",I

['::

"" "

~".~.'

, .

, "

, "

,"J

TIERRA-D-009104 :::,:
tlJ~;"'·;·~ I

C;l~7

Chr 15til\~ Todd Whitman

CoverrlO:

Department of Environmental Protection

Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste

eN 414

Trenton, NJ 08625-0414

Tel. #609-984-6664

Fax. #609-777-0769

Robert C. ShInn. ir

Co ['11 ffilSsio,,'er

;§tate of ~ em 3Jerse~

OCT 1 f 1996

Mr Jack Pettigrew

185 Devon Street

Kearny, New Jersey 07032

Dear Mr, Pettigrew:

Governor Christine Todd Whitman has asked me to respond to your letter to the

editor of September 12, 1996 regarding the reopening of the Keegan Landfill in the

Town of Kearny. On behalf of Governor Whitman, I am pleased to respond to your

concerns.

The Solid Waste Management Act places the responsibility for closure and long

term care of landfills on the property owner. The Town of Kearny, as the primary

property owner of the Keegan Landfill, has the responsibility for the proper closure of

this site. The improper closure of the Keegan Landfill poses a threat to the Kearny

Freshwater Marsh as well as creating other problems, such as the fires that have

occured at the landfill. The nearby 1-0 Landfill, which is also owned by Kearny, is also

in need of proper closure. The closure cost for the Keegan Landfill alone has been

estimated at $30 million, with the post closure care cost estimated at an additional $30

million. The closure of both of these landfills would place an enormous economic

burden on the residents of the Town of Kearny.

The planned reopening of the Keegan Landfill by the Hackensack Meadowlands

Development Commission (HMOC) to provide revenue for closure of that landfill and

the 1-0 Landfill is an environmentally and fiscally sound proposal. Before the Keegan

Landfill reopens, all environmental safeguards required by the Solid Waste Regulations

will be in place. Installation of environmental improvements will not be put off until the

site is ready for closure. A perimeter cut-off wall and leachate collection system will be

installed to protect the adjoining marsh before the site opens. In addition, HMOC will

use the revenue generated by the reopened Keegan landfill to fund the environmentally

sound closure of the reopened landfill and the 1-0 landfill as well as maintenance and

environmental monitoring for the 30 year post closure period' at both sites.

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer

Recycled Paper 11f~

TIERRA-D-009105
The Keegan' Landfill is NOT an EPA classified high priority Superfund hazardous

waste site as erroneously stated in your letter. The National Priority List (NPL), also

known as the Superfund List, contains the country's most hazardous waste sites. In

1989, a study of the landfill was conducted for the EPA by the NUS Corporation. At

that time, it was classified as medium priority on the EPA'S CERCUS List. This list is

a comprehensive record of all known contaminatedlhazardous sites, including all

potential and actual Superfund sites. The NUS study recommended that the Keegan

site be fenced and that two feet of clean soil be placed over the landfill. These

recommendations were never implemented. The EPA recently eliminated the "medium"

priority category; hence, the Keegan landfill was reclassified.as a "higher" priority site

'on the CERCUS list. The EPA is continuing its evaluation of the Keegan landfill at this

time in order to' determine its potential eligibility for the NPL.

I hope this answers your questions. If you have any additional questions or

comments, please contact me at (609) 984-5950.

Sincerely,

Robert C. Ciolek

Assistant Director

Office of Permitting

and Technical Assistance

file:g238357

..". 0·... .... ('!

;~) .) ; : '..: .·~t.::';

TIERRA-D-009106
Hac~ensac~ Meadowlands Deuelopment Commission

Memorandum

"

FROM

HKDC COMKISSIONEIlS AND ANTHONY SCARDINO. JR.lfi\E.XECUTIVE DIRECTOR

THOMAS I. HAR.TUlARO. DUlCfOi OF SOLID WASTE

GEORGE CORER. D.A.G. . Date MAY 23. 1996

Subject _--====-===-==c..==-===-- KKKGAB LAHDFILL SIn _

In an effort to clean up and properly close an old,

environmentally harmful landfill, the HMDC proposed a Solid Waste

Management Plan (SWMP) amendment for the reopening of the old

Keegan landfill in Kearny. The reopening of the landfill meets two

basic state policies: 1) the funding and proper closure and postclosure of Korphan~ landfills that are polluting the state of New

Jersey on a daily basis; and 2) providing in-state regional

landfill capacity for non-recyclable solid waste. In addition to

the proper closure of the Keegan landfill, the HMDC plan hopes to

generate sufficient funds to close the 1-0 landfill, another old

orphan landfill in Kearny that was never properly closed.

A. statutory and Regulatory Background

In 1969, the HMDC was created as a regional governmental

body to oversee the development of 21, 000 acres of marshland

located in 14 municipalities in order that this resource would not

be lost to the state through unplanned reclamation and development.

N.J.S.A. 13:17-1 ~ seg. Only scattered development had occurred

in the District as of 1969. One of the principal reasons that this

potential for development had never been realized was that the

municipalities in the region had attempted to implement their

separate development plans without concern for the coordination of

these plans. Thus, the legislation emphasized the urgent need in

this area of the state for the HMDC to coordinate the orderly and

comprehensive development of land for industrial, commercial,

residential, pUblic recreation and other uses. N.J.S.A. 13:17-1.

ADditionally, the HMDC was authorized to acquire property, acquire

or construct solid waste facilities and operate these facilities or

contract with persons capable of operating disposal facilities

N.J.S.A. 13:17-10.

The Legislature again recognized the HMDC's solid waste

management role when it designated the HMDC along with the twentyone counties of the state as solid waste planning districts that

must prepare and implement a ten year strategy for solid waste

disposal wi thin their respective jurisdictions. By law, each

distr ict' s SWMP must be approved by the Commissioner of OEP.

N.J.S.A. 13:1E-24. Once a district proposes a SWMP amendment, it

shall hold a hearing for the purpose of soliciting public comment,

N.J.S.A. 13:1E-23. After obtaining pUblic comment, a district may

adopt, modify or reject its proposed amendment. If adopted, ~he

plan is sent to the OEP Commissioner who has 150 days to certify

CCA000059 (/(/ _t:JQ..

CTIERRA-D-009107
is acceptance, modification or rejection of the adopted plan.

H.J.S.A. 13:1E-24.

B. The Plan Amendment Process .,

In or about the fall of 1988, the HMDC, the DEP, Board of

Public utilities (BPU) and the counties of Bergen, Essex and Hudson

undertook a cooperative study to explore the possibilities of a

regional solid waste facility in the Meadowlands District. This

study resulted in the conclusion that such a regional facility

would save the region approximately $500 million dollars over a

twenty-year period. This study also concluded that this facility

would be a landfill that could take any solid waste that was not

sent to a resource recovery facility (burned), recycled or

composted. Such wastes are known as non-processible solid waste.

In the fall of 1991, the HMDC held separate meetings with

the principals of Hudson Meadows and the Mayor and officials of the

Town of Kearny to inform them of the HMDC's intention to introduce

a SWMP amendment for a 10-20 year regional non-processible landfill

in Kearny on the abandoned Keegan landfill. In the preceding

years, Hudson Meadows had submitted incomplete partial proposals

for development of the property. On December 6, 1991, the HMDC

provided pUblic notice and advertisement of the proposed SWHP

amendment which invited pUblic comment. Prior to the pUblic

hearings, written comments were received that requested that the

record be held open, that another hearing be held, and that the

HMDC consider alternative development for the site. Additional

written comments were received from the Bergen County utilities

Authority (BCUA) , Hudson County Improvement Authority (HCIA), and

Town of Kearny.

The first pUblic hearing was held on January 7, 1992 at

the HMDC building. The hearing began with opening statements from

the Executive Director of the HMDC, Anthony Scardino, Jr. and a

detailed overview of the proposed non-processible landfill by

Thomas Marturano. My statement included a description of the site

of the proposed landfill by block and lot number and also described

the site as the old Keegan landfill in Kearny. In addition, my

presentation noted that the landfill would be a non-processible

landfill which would not take any items that could be either

burned, recycled or composted. I also stated that the Keegan

landfill had ceased operations in 1972 before many DEP regulations

that currently exist came into effect. Finally, I noted that the

existing Keegan landfill is producing significant quantities of

leachate and methane gas; and that as an uncontained site, the

landfill created serious environmental problems.

The HMDC plan was described as a continuation of the HMDC

program where old abandoned ~orphan" landfills were taken over,

reopened for the purpose of placing solid waste on top of them and

then dedicating the~tipping fees" or cost to dump at the landfills

- 2 -

TIERRA-D-009108

.-------.....
or funding the closure of the landfills. The proposal includes,

in addition to the environmental closure of the Keegan landfill,

the intention to generate enough funds at the Keegan site to close

the 1-0 landfill along Harrison Turnpike in Kearny. This l.andfill

is approximately 100 acres and 150 feet high; moreover, th~re are

insufficient closure or post-closure monies available for this

site, which is causing serious environmental problems that are

degrading the environment of Kearny everyday. Kearny is

financially responsible for the closure and post-closure of the

Keegan and 1-0 landfills.

The Keegan site was chosen because it is an old landfill

which needs remediation and it contains the largest available

volume in the Meadowlands District. The site was chosen because it

would provide the .ost capacity for non-processible waste, thus

generating the most funds for the closure of both the Keegan and

the 1-0 landfills. The proposed actions of the HMDC for preparing

the Keegan site for closure include the construction of a cut-off

wall around the entire perimeter of the site and the placement of

a leachate collection system on the inside of that wall so that the

leachate which is generated from within the site could not flow

into the adjacent environmentally sensitive marsh. Leachate is the

liquid produced from rain passing through the landfill.

Access to the site is planned to come off of Harrison

Turnpike. No access to the site would come off Schuyler Avenue

from the residential areas. In summation, the HMDC plan amendment

was described as an effort to clean up orphan landfills, to stop

leachate from flowing into the wetlands, to control the methane gas

from the landfills and to protect a marsh that is a vital

environmental area which is being degraded everyday. Finally, the

cost of the environmental cleanup of the Keegan landfill was

presented. It was estimated that the cost would be measured in

tens of millions of dollars for closure. The closure and postclosure of landfills currently under HMDC authority have closure

improvements estimated at 300 million dollars and that the ratios

of those numbers were similar to what was expected at the Keegan

site.

At the public hearing held on January 7, 1992, the HHDC

SWMP amendment was available to all who attended. In addition,

mounted copies of an aerial photograph of the site as well as still

photographs from ground level were presented at the front of the

hearing room. Members of the public presented comment at the

hearing, including Kearny Town Council members as well as

representatives of Hudson Meadows. After the hearing adjourned the

record was held open and a second public hearing was held on

February 19, 1992. At the March 25, 1992 HMDC meeting, further

public comment was taken and the Commission tabled a vote on the

plan amendment subject to a visit to the site by then Chairman

Melvin R. Primas. The record was closed after the March 25, 1992

hearing.

- 3 -

TIERRA-D-009109
From the time of the first public notice on December 6,

1991 until a vote by the full Commission on May 27, 1992 approving

the HMDC adopted plan amendment, all public comment submitted was

accepted as part of the record. Hudson Meadows submitted ~itten

and oral comments, as well as consultants' reports at' every

opportunity. The HMDC adopted the proposed SWMP amendment for the

proposed regional non-processible landfill at the Keegan site. The

plan amendment was forwarded to the DEP for review by the

Commissioner of DEP and his eventual approval, rejection or

modification pursuant to N.J.S.A. 13:1E-24.

c. In Lieu of Prerogative Writ Action

On June 26, 1992, while review of the HMDC amendment was

underway at the DEP, Hudson Meadows and Kearny filed a complaint in

lieu of prerogative writ challenging the adoption of the SWMP

amendment by the HMDC and moved to take depositions. The in lieu

action claimed that the HMDC plan lacked support, failed to provide

a sufficient pUblic comment period, included unnecessary property,

did not comply with local zoning, and did not receive sufficient

votes from the full HMDC. The HMDC opposed this motion and crossmoved to transfer the matter to the Appellate Division as an appeal

of a final administrative action. On August 7, 1992, Judge Seymour

Margulies, J.S.C., denied the HMDC's motion to transfer and granted

the motion of Hudson Meadows to take depositions. On November 23

and 24, 1993, Hudson Meadows deposed Executive Director Anthony

Scardino and Director of Solid Waste Thomas Marturano.

D. DEP Certification of the Plan Amendment

On December 2, 1992, the DEP commissioner certified the

amendment designating the Keegan site for a· residual nonprocessible landfill. The Commissioner found that the HMDC plan to

reopen the Keegan site to "remediate existing pollution problems~

and develop a modern disposal facility "represents significant

positive benefits" locally and to the State. The Commissioner

stated that the plan "will improve, not lessen the environmental

condi tion of the site ....This facility can be a cornerstone to

solving the State's deficiencies in disposal capacity thereby

greatly reducing our dependence on out-of-state lands.~

Pursuant to N. J. S.A. 13: 1E-24, the cOlDJllissionersubmitted

the plan amendment for review and recommendations to the advisory

council on solid waste management in the Department and to the

agencies, bureaus, and divisions within the Department concerned

wi th, or responsible for, environmental quality. The record

reviewed by the DEP during the certification process contained,

among other things, the transcripts of the January 7, February 19,

and March 25, 1992 pUblic hearings as well as the transcripts from

the April 22 and May 27, 1992 HMDC Commission meetings; copies of

all comments received by the HMDC from December 6, 1991 until

HMDC's resolution adopting the plan amendment on May 27, 1992; the

- 4 -

TIERRA-D-009110
eports and comments of consultants on behalf of Hudson Meadows and

the Town of Kearny and internal Department comments and comments

from the USEPA.

E. Appeals

On January 15, 1993, Hudson Meadows and Kearny appealed

the Commissioner's December 2, 1993 certification of the May 27,

1992 plan amendment to the Appellate Division. On February 11,

1993, the Honorable George P. Moser, Jr., J.S.C., granted the

motion of the HMDC to transfer the Law Division matter to the

Appellate Division. The two appeals and the transferred matter

were consolidated by Judge Seidman by formal notice dated June 29,

1993. On June 7, 1994, oral argument was held in the Appellate

Division.

On July 18, 1994, the Appellate Division affirmed the

decision of the DEP Commissioner certifying' the HMDC's SWMP

amendment. Writing for the Court, Judge Skillman found that: 1)

the HMDC properly adopted its SWMP amendment and did not need a

."super majority" vote simply because its Solid Waste Advisory

Council (SWAC) disapproved the proposal; 2) the DEP Commissioner is

required to approve, modify or reject a plan within 150 days and an

in lieu of prerogative writ action in no way stays the

Commissioner's action; 3) the in lieu action was properly

transferred to the Appellate Division; 4) the HMDC provided

adequate information to appellants and the pUblic regarding the

plan; and 5) the DEP Commissioner properly measured and approved

the HMDC's plan amendment against the goals of the Statewide Solid

Waste Management Plan. The Court rejected all of appellant's

objections to the HMDC adoption and DEPcertification of the SWMP

amendment. On December 9, 1994, the New Jersey Supreme Court

denied Hudson Meadow's petition for certification. The Town of

Kearny did not join in the petition.

Subsequent to the Appellate Division decision, the

Commission applied to the NJDEP for approval of a Preliminary

Environmental and Health Impact Statement. This is required prior

to the acquisition of land for a solid waste facility. It was

approved on December 28, 1995.

F. Conclusion

Therefore, it is the recommendation of the staff

that this resolution authorizing the Executive Director to acquire

the properties consistent with the Solid Waste Plan Amendment,

either through negotiation or condemnation,be approved.

- 5 -

TIERRA-D-009111
Dow Jones Interactive Page 3 of4

NEWS

ARMY CORPS HEARS PLEA TO SPARE WETLANDS LANDFILL OPERATOR VS. CARLSTADT MALL

By TINA TRASTER and LISA GOODNIGHT, Staff Writers

05/13/1997

The Record, Northern New Jersey

4 Star

101

(Copyright 1997)

CLARIFICATION: An article Tuesday indicated that an exit from the New Jersey Turnpike for a mall proposed by

the Mills Corp. for the Meadowlands would be built with public funds. Mills, of Arlington, Va., has said it would pay

for a ramp from the turnpike t6 Route 120A; a planned realignment of that highway _ which would provide access

to the Mills site but is not necessarily dependent upon that development _ would be publicly funded.

(PUBLISHED, WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 1997, PAGE a02.)

Why fill wetlands and use public funds to build an exit off the New Jersey Turnpike for a shopping and

entertainment complex in the Meadowlands when there is a site in Kearny that offers highway access and enough

land to build a 2.1-million-square-foot mall?

That question was put to the Army Corps of Engineers during a public meeting last week by a landfill operator

who wants Mills Corp. of Arlington, Va., to shift its proposed mall site from a wetlands tract in Carlstadt to Keegan

landfill in Kearny.

"We are telling the corps that there is an ... alternative" that doesn't sacrifice wetlands, said Jeryl Maglio, a

principal with Hudson Meadows Urban Renewal Development Corp., which has development rights to Keegan

landfill.

Because Mills wants to build in wetlands protected under the federal Clean Water Act, the developer must prove

that it has sought _ and ruled out _ alternative sites for its project, which include retail, warehouses, hotel space,

and a mass transit center.

Maglio told corps officials that developers from Western Corp., as the Mills company was formerly known,

considered bUilding on the landfill in 1986. But negotiations fell apart and the developers shifted their plans to the

Carlstadt tract, owned by Empire Ltd. of Wood-Ridge.

Edward B. Vinson, Mills' vice president, said the company has no plans to build on Keegan landfill, or on any

landfill. Vinson acknowledged that "there were some conversations in 1986," but said the company was run by a

different group "with a different focus."

Mills says it eliminated 50 sites in North Jersey, mostly due to environmental challenges.

Maglio suggested the landfill site during a public "scoping" meeting. At that meeting, input was sought on the Mills

proposal while the developer was preparing an environmental impact statement.

Last month, officials from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sent letters to the corps saying Mills should consider

other sites in the New York metropolitan region. Environmentalists say Mills should put its mall in a city such as

Newark, Elizabeth, or Paterson.

Maglio says Mills should follow the lead of other developers who are building on landfills, such as mall developers

in Elizabeth and Nyack, New York.

"Under the Clean Water Act, Mills has to demonstrate that there is not an alternative site," said corps spokesman

Andrew Miller. "Mills will have to take {the Keegan landfill} into account when they write their alternatives

analysis."

CCB000003

http://ptg.djnr.comlccroot/asp/publib/story _clean_ cpy.asp?rndnum=4607 46 0/1") /(\")

TI ERRA-D-009112
Dow Jones Interactive Page 4 of4

Both sites are within the boundaries of the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission, which oversees

zoning for a 32-square-mile district that encompasses portions of 14 towns in Bergen and Hudson counties.

HMDC officials have said the best way to finance "mitigation" or restoration of reed-choked wetlands is by

development. Mills, for example, wants to fill 206 acres of wetlands in the Meadowlands, and in exchange,

refurbish an adjoining 380 acres.

But Maglia said the landfill site offers development dollars within the district, but does not sacrifice wetlands.

The Keegan landfill closed in 1971. Eight years later, Hudson Meadows, a private health-care and real estate

company, bought 34 acres of the landfill and leased development rights from Kearny for an additional 384 acres

that constitute the landfill and surrounding freshwater marsh.

Hudson Meadows wants to build on the landfill but plans to preserve the wetlands.

The company clashed with the HMDC in 1991, after the agency, which has zoning jurisdiction over the site,

proposed reopening the landfill as a dump site for non-organic matter.

HMDC officials argued that reopening Keegan landfill was the only way the agency could generate the $100

million it would take to stop the flow of gases and toxic liquids from the dump. Under the proposal to reopen

Keegan, the commission said it could raise enough additional funds in tipping fees to seal and cap another

landfill, known as 1-D.

Hudson Meadows and Kearny lost their legal battle to stop the the HMDC from reopening the landfill.

Plans have not proceeded. Rather, the HMDC recently commissioned a study to examine whether the site should

be zoned for open space, dumping, or development.

Copyright © 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

http://ptg.djnr.com/ccroot/asp/publib/story_clean _cpy.asp?rndnum=460746 0/1,., /r\,.,

TIERRA-D-009113
~/"5

Hackensack Meadowlands Dellelopment Commission ~

1099 WALL STREET WEST. LYNDHURST, NEW JERSEY 07071 • (201) 935-3250'

PATRICIA Q. SHEEHAN

CluJirman

WILLIAM D. Mc:DOWELL

Executive Director

January 30, '1975

" ,

Mr. Dennis Backus

c/o Municipal Sanitary Landfill Authority

1500 Harrison Avenue

Kearny, New Jersey 07032

RE: MSLA, FILE 71-175

Dear Mr. Backus:

On December 31, 1974, this Office sent a letter to you whiCh required specific

information to be submitted no later than January 20, 1975, in order to complete

the review of MSLA Landfill operations on Sites I-A and I-D, and complete the .

close doWn of site I-A, in Kearny. "

To date, that information has not been forthcoming. "

Please be advised that this delay will not alter the scheduling "for completion of

required improvenents as shown on the marked up plans sent to you by this Office

on December 31, 1974.

Further, the following is an up-to-date status of your compliance with the revised

scheduling as shown on those plans:

1. Site I-A

SECTION TO BE COVERED BY

BA~OOOOOS

,COMPLETED

100

50

85

70 . ;.g

0

--.. .-..~

l.J1 ~u

f6 '.. ~

:11

~

fT1

.2:: L~.~

. OJ 0

"A .. r- I t

rTI :;;0;;; __

W

a

,

-n ~ <' -n "0 -.

c=; 0- ::r:: rn

nl r' 0

,.-.,

.-.. '--'~

W

-.J

October 1, 1974

January.l,1975

January 1, 1975

January 1, 1975

April 1, 1975

July 1, 1975"

'.~ .

. TI ERRA-D-009114 ."- .
Dennis Backus

2. Site I-C

JOB START

A. Construct Dike #4 Jan. 1, 1975

B. Install Leachate Pumps

1 and 2 Jan. 1, 1975

C. Construct Dikes

3, 5 and 6 -Jan. 1, 1975

D. Construct Tide Gates

1,2,3and 4 Jan. 1, 1975-

E. Construct Dikes

1 and 2 Jan. 1, 1975

l.C

....., ......

...., ..v

-- -., rr- , :--Tl fTl --!i,~.-. Eiii n

::0 . I

::s:: fT1 r--

w

0

"'T1 - -- :x:::r -

"'T1

,.__ . :< .. , ::E:

C") ;.m

"1r- a

--~

·G

w

F~ISH ... -..:

~. ,o:>MPLETE

Page 2

January 30, 1975

July 1, 1975 0

July 1, 1975 0

'. ~.~"

,:

July 1, 1975 0

Ju1y.1, 1975 0

July 1, 1975 25

3. Site I-D

JOB

A. Dike #1

B. Leachate Pumps

1 and 2

C. Construct Collect!

Recharge Basins

1 and 2

D. North Swale

START FINISH , o:>MPLETE

Immediately Innnediate 1y o

Immediately IlIIIlIediate1y o.

Immediately July 1, 1975 o

Irmnediately July 1, 1975

Therefore, as you are now aware, it will be in your best interest to submit the

required information immediately.

We a-....ait your prompt response.

Sincerely, O~:2ft mGlNEER '..

GEORGE D. CASCINO, ~

CHIEF ENGINEER

'",

TIERRA-D-009115 ---4~_'!...
. .

Mr. Dennis Backus

Page 2

January 30, 1975

MA/jc

cc: John McNeil, Esquire

Roger Generazzo

William Hui

Mark First, Esquire, D.A.G.

Mr. A. Lawrik

Maryland Casualty Company

Certified Mail #293734

-------~--------------~----

c.o

.

-,

i'-"

:z L:'l --v

rT; - -., ;11 ~ f"T1

:> . - c:o

;::-. , '.--J

.':l'.: r-" • rn

0

w ..

"'n

"'n ~ <: n-- .. U>..

ITr r- :-n

'='

r"---;

'~.' -

W

-....J

TIERRA-D-009116 •• :... __ ~. -. _._' • • _ • -~~A--
'.

Hackensack Meadowlands Deoelopment Commission

1099 WALL STREET WEST. LYNDHURST. NEW JERSEY 07071 • (201) 935·3250 '

PATRICIA Q. SHEEHAN

CJtairmtln

-~

-~....., .

~

'):::0

,:;:;0

--~j .

o;r~

':")

March ~. 1915

_r • ~.-'

.....~ -~.

,,- \

~t.~'"

~c

·0" -...---

~.'-" ;g'i'

1'1'1,_,.

-- . --."

:::., "-J

WILLIAM D. McDOWELL

,E.~cutJ.,. Di"etor --- -,.,- ...-t._

.-, "

'-

Dennis Backus, P.E.

Municipal Sanitary Landfill Authority

1500 Harrison Avenue

Kearny, New Jersey 01032

Dear Mr. Backus:

We reViewed your J.etters dated February 15, 1975, and February 19, 1975, both

received February 24. 1975, in reference to prev1ous'correspondence con~erning

the several MSLA sites.

I. In response to your letter of February 1S, 1915, please be advised of the following:

1. The total perimeter of all MSLA sites is approximately

36.000 feet. of which at least 9.200 feet and as much as

15,000 feet requires diking.

Although 2,200 feet of diking may have been constructed

by MSLA, only about 1,100 feet. on Site I-C, is incorporated

in the required diking scheme. Therefore, at best. only 12%

of the reguired diking is complete •

.;1... The Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission will '

, /" not verify 'thatMSLA has. at any site, consistently collected

"

r .~~.~~ped leachate to top-of-landfill recharge basins.

b

'.~(-~,~..... This ·Office had seen the placement' of .!. pump and ,hose '. ~l('JI( '. on the south side of Site I';D.which no longer exists.

~!Jl'.JJ· . , I c: 'n ';I f, / , ;4!}1 i

L:,.

, ;r~~:~.r:r;lti'

J

fL~!.;~ '/ jt,'1 II' 1 • '. If/t.". t ..r ; f f

\ . ,-,~li~ i~:t'\:,~i, ',:Ju~ . , j,!" N \1 i ~

~\J .....1. t·''';·

BAA000006

TIERRA-D-009117

, J."'
4. HMDC inspections reveal that covering of Site I-A,

has been proceeding satisfactorily. However, please be

advised that HMDC inspections'of this site, in the future

will also include a determination of, the depth of final

cover, to i'DSure that 2' has been applied. Prior to giving

final approval of the eoveriug, this Office must be able

to verify that 2' of cover has been applied throughout the

site. ~.

Dennis Backus, P.E.

M.S.L.A.

March 7. 1975

Page 2

, ,

3. The Commission does take issue to ~ use of a eomposite material consistiug of orgau1c material as ,required

cover. As s'tated in our February 3; 1975 ,letter. ~t8 use

1IlUStbe discontinued immediately! .

We will, however, entertain an 'engineer'8 report,

based on detailed analysis of the composite. to determine

its acceptability as cover Daterial.

Further, covering of active landfill sites continues

1:0 be inadequate, and as stated above, the use of a

'I~ompost" as cover lIIUstbe discontinued immediately. You

can be sure the Commission will closely monitor the sites

and will continue to strictly enforce Regulations concerning

cover •

5. To date, this Office has not received the revised plans,

applications. or any other reguired 'information 'necessary 'for ,

fiualreviewandapproval of the landfill sites. Please be

adVised that MSLA will be -reqUired to 1Ileetall sebedules and

deadlines as specified on the marked-up set of plans sent to

you on December 31, 1974. In addition, if the required information is not forthcoming, in the next few days,- this

Office will compute and bill you for the required application

fees, and will notify you of an estimated dollar amount for

the performanee bond that lDUst be submitted to insure completion of all required improvements.

TIERRA-D-009118
Dennis Backus, P.E.

H.S.L.A.

March 7,1975

Page 3

1. Site I-A: HMDC accepts the revised schedule, with those

additional requirements, as shown on the plans

as follows: \

6. You state that MSLA is a "responsible, experienced

leader in solid waste management.t1 . Therefore, you should

have no .problems conducting covering operations at auy

t1JDeof the year , with very little lagtJme due to ,poor

weather conditions.

In addition, a good display of "responsibility and

leadership" by HSLA could be bestshtntn by giving total

cooperation to meeting BMDC Landfill Regulations.

II. In response to your letter of ·February 19, 1975, in reference

to the compliance schedules for the 'several sites, established by

BMDC, please be advised of the following:

JOB

A. Cover B1

B. Cover B2

C. .'Cover B3

D. Cover C

E. Cover D

F. Take Water Samples

G. Install Methane Vents

on Sections Bl' B2'

B3, c

R. Instill Hethane Vents

on Section D

I. Take Methane Samples

START FINISH

-..-- Harch 15, 1975

March 15, 1975

--

March 15, 1975

April I, 1975

November, 1974

July I, 1975

Monthly

April I, 1975 May I, .1975

July I, 1975 August I, 1975

August I, 1975 Bi-monthly

* To datt:, this Office has not received the results of water sampling at the

site. This information must be forthcoming immediately.

TIERRA-D-009119

.".
Dennis Backus. P. E.

M.S.L.A.

March 7. 1975

Page 4

FINISH

"2. Site I-D: BMDC cannot accept the ~LA schedule for this

site. We restate the BMDCreguired schedule.

with additional requirements as shown on the

plans. for the site. as follows:

JOB

A. Dike Dl

B. Install leachate

pumps 1 and 2

c. Construct Collect!

Recharge Basins

land 2

D. North S~~le

E. Install Methane

Vents

START

Immediately

Immediately

Immediately

Immediately

Immediately

ImDediately

July 1. ·1975

.July 1, 1975

(as each section reaches final elevation)

3. Site I-C: ·HMDC cannot accept the HSLA schedule. at it is

totally unacceptable. What your schedule does. is

procrastinate the placement of required improvements for another two (2) years. (Will MSLA stop

dumping on this site until the required improvements can be completed?)

JOB

A. Construct Dike #4

B. Install Leachate

"Pumps 1 and 2

BMDC will !!5?!. entertain a revision of the schedule.

as set •. Following is the HMDC Schedule with other

required deadlines as shown on the plans for the

site:

START

January 1. 1975

January 1, 1975

FINISH

July 1. 1975

.July 1, 1975

TI ERRA-D-009120
Dennis Backus, P.E.

M.S.L.A.

March 7, 1975

Page 5

'3 Site I-C eontinued: .' .

JOB 'START nNISH

C. 'Construct Dikes

3 and 4 January 1, 1975 .July I, 1975

D. Construct Tide

Gates 1, 2, 3

and 4

G. Construct Dike

16 "

J~y1, 1975 July 1, 1975

J.anuary 1, 1975 July 1, 1975

April I, 1975 July 1, 1975.

April 1, 1975 \ July 1, 1975

April I, 1975 May1, 1975

E. Construct Dikes

1 and 2

P. Install Leachate

Pumps3 and 4

H. Clean Drainage

Ditch

I. Take Water S~les

at Pumps1, 2 and

3 July 1, ·1975 Monthly

J. Ins tall Methane

Vents' (Immediately upon completion of each section)

K. Sample Methane , (Bi-monthly,. :immediately upon completion of

each section)

Further as shown on the marked-up plans, sent to you on December 31, 1974,

Dike 04 must be completed by July 1, 1975, to the west of the Public Service

Electric and Gas Companytransmission lines, and on HSLAproperty, if Dike #4

cannot or will not be constructed utilizing the Public Service Electric and

Gas COmpany'saccess road.

TI ERRA-D-009121
"

.':) '.,

,,'

.1:;-'

1--

Denn1sBackus, P. E.

H.S.L.A.

Harch 7, 1975

Page 6

, .

- :~.::~'.".

,".

.,

- .~':".:.. ~.;.;.,. :.• - - .~.

. -:! ' ,.:..,.;.' .

~ _. • ~. "t.lL ~ ~'G .. :, : ;'. .:...:.;.' [- .-_:' ~

.... ~.. :t.~\~.'. .. ;... ... -. .. .~ .~

": • ..J~' '-;." .>..'Piully, as can be seen from tbeabove 8~bedu1es~:JDaD1 items' should have alX'eady

.;been 1Ditiated, and some eompleted. ,As stated in previous .correspondence, it

should now be clear that 'it w1l1be :1n your, bestintereat to submit. au requ1red'~

,1Dformation iJDmed1a1:ely.·. 'If require:d :Implementation schedules are 1lO1:followed.

~i8 Office will have no -recourse but 1:0 take further action.

We await your prompt respOuse.

.',

Sincerely,

HA/jc

cc: . John McNeil, Esquire

Roger Generazzo, H. S. L. A.

Hark L. First, Esquire, D.A.G.

Mr. William Bui, N.J.D.E~P.

" Mr. A. Lawrilt, P. U.C.

Haryland Casuley Company

CeX't1fied Hail #293586

TI ERRA-D-009122
NEW JERSE....!'ATEDEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT. PROTECTION

INSPECTION OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL AREA

~NERAL INFORMATION

1. Date of Inspection TuJ.J€ 1~ ,I Cf 1-? Time, --.:..:...-

2. Name of Solid Waste Disposal Fad lity Pz S L I} . J -11>__ - _

3. Street Location,__ L..:..:~:::!:::.:.::...::;.;,~~..:.:::::_ _

4. Lot and Block No.

S. Municipality k~iJ#

6. Name of Owner (rJ$ LI}.

7. Address of Owner

8. Name of Operator A.J L4.

9. Address of Operator

Coun ty ,JIr:I0Jd IV

-......;..-,;.,;........:.....:..._-------

\[, B {2J tf1'1 f'1 c. iJ~LV

(Please Print)

The deficiencies marked "X" below were noted at the subject solid waste disposal area,

as related to N.J.A.C. 7:26--1 et seq.

() Sanitary Landfill Operational Requirements (General)

N.J•A.C. 7 : 26- 2. 5. ( )~1 ( ). 2 ( ). 3 ( ). 4 ( ). 5 ( ). 6 ( ). 7 ( ). 8 ( ).9 ( ). IO

( ).11 ( ). 12 ~ .13 ()4.14 ( ) .15 ( ) .16 ( ).17 ( ) .18

().19 ().20 ().21 ().22 ().23 ().24 ().25 ().26

() Sanitary Landfill Operational Requirements (Specific)

Sewage Sludge and Other Materials

N.J.A.C. 7:26-2.6.1. ().l ().2 ).3

Bulky Items

N • J •A. C• 7: 26- 2. 6. 2• ( ). 1 ( ). 2 ( ). 3

Radioactive Materials and Lethal Chemicals BAA000007

N •J .A • C • 7: 26- 2 • 6. 3. ( ). 1

() Hazardous and/or Chemical Wastes and Oth~r Materials

N.J.A.C. 7:26-2.6.4. ().1.().2 ).3 ( ).4

Disrupted Landfill Requirements

N. J.A. C. 7 : 26- 2. 7. ( ). 1 ( ). 2 ) •3 ) •4 ( ). 5

Smoking, Smoldering or Burning

N.J.A•C. 7: 26- 2. 8. ( ). 1 (.). 2 ) •3 ) . 4 ( ). 5 ( ). 6 ( ). 7

Other

~~~~ In~ctOr(Signdture)

The New Jersey Bureau of Solid Waste Management =epre3entative has rovided me a copy of

this report.

(Date)

The disposal area owner and/or operator may, if he so desires, arrange for a conference

with the Bureau of Solid Waste Management to discuss the deficiencies noted.

TIERRA-D-009123
MEMORANDUM

.ate of Ne~ Jersey

Department of Environmer.tal Prptection 

TO: filE

FROM: gl?ll/ltJ /'1C /J /fl-L Y DATE: VUNE J 6, Jq 7~

7~·Z,6, z ~J'. /4. - SevERII'-- /J1?{;~ 0 CL l/R ON 7JlC SoeF/JC£

wH1£~c CcJAJ..J17ftlC71dtJ - tJp!'7o l-1Tl1J,v tJl1fJC IS

UJEfJ IkJ A- c r

o Jt.:-.e r:'7~;e 11ft- J I'Mil (()l-ttR L..t

o AJ 77/£ f(() flOS- Uifj;:./ZC /r /J us cp ~ A

f3(-1-J£'

TIERRA-D-009124
M E M 0 RAN 0 U M

TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:. f1{L/1- - ~fIJtJtJ· t1V.c:

r

1

,

\.

WC~I,)C>- f1tr<.£

L.41t~ I~"i o·k....

\

)

iJ

St ~ of New Jersey

Department of Environmental Protection

DATE: (j"c.n.J£ 1f,p I 171'

J

- -t t-~

#'t71-1t.~ l \ 0 tV .. ~~~r;~~:.....:.:- ~

TIERRA-D-009125
1

'\J" 4.

"

S·-

!:

"

,

iii

l

il

il

',.

\0

"

,I

"

}/rtj ~T ~ MS1J4 t:?1'TI: J'';' D

HHlJC: Nl K:€ I JlHL

}.ISlA.' ~~ ~~?lrJ1 /)~/tS 31!¢vS"',

4- .Z R:>~E'N

'.'00 Ru.

'I!i

.,

"

,

;; ~'

~ . . Dflf'ri1JA-rj 4:: I i)i }Q N~" t:>() J...4 PIIJ~ I ~ ~AJ7/fA)(,.. I

()N &JvT>4 'S' 06" ~t= S 177F. .::J:+J ~o JnoAJ /

~ue-o'm; ~o COl/(;(U1.1l; of 1;LOt'fS"S •

..t. ~4tt0/~1 eolltN-tPr of S-~M ~_:-9~~~~ •. L_~ .. _ .

.~ AIf <i1lo.J C4J er CD/o./.IJ Uf1E tJJ ,'''' 1J a .u~S . _. ._.

It ~ro S4!U'HJP (2 ~4U'1~

~. ~ 151 I fle'"'A. ~ WI j,(". IJG" ~~ ~ J..I / TTEO. 9'--(

~IJ'S gA-c.l=-U5 ~ ~I ~ CON<;"h.AJei Pt

uP 70 NITtA)'

g. (}JI 4..L ~'u,;:- ~~in., CDrJJ t:1 (J~,v lD fA.o 8~ "F jlti>~

---------- I

t>1/~- Jr..J lIz.o"AJO SOcJ j)4 -~ t:oeIJ~ •. ~AJ7b GoL~ 'H/AJ

TIERRA-D-009126
/ I' U I:

~. I

:!

i:. .~.

'.

. j

:1.'ii~I

.

. .

; I J'

,', . 1.... . "- .

'. I.

TI ERRA-D-009127
15

Hackensack Meadowlands DeueJopment Commission

1099 WALL STREET WEST. LYNDHURST, NEW JERSEY 07071 • (201) 935-3250

PATRICIA Q. SHEEHAN

Chairman

WILLIAM D. i\kDOWELL

Executive Director June 18, 1976

Mr. Roger Generazzo

Municipal Sanitary Landfill Authority

1500 Harrison Avenue

Kearny, New Jersey

RE: MSLA, FILE 71-175

Dear Mr. Generazzo:

On June 17, 1976, this Office conducted inspections of the MSLA Sites

I-A, I-C and 1-0, in Kearny. Based on the above, this Office found

the following disturbing oonditions:

. ( 1) All work has ceased on the drainage and leachate

control system along the southerly property line of Site

I-D. Specifically, since our last joint inspection, no

further covering of the slopes or drainage area has been

completed. In addition, the new drainage ditch has been

only partially dug and abandoned. Further, the clean

fill piled up just south of the new ditch is ineffective

as diking, since it is dumped directly over the demo fill.

As a result, leachate continues to escape the site through

the demo material, and by way of ditches that have been

dug to the property south of the PSE&G right-of-way.

We anticipate that work will immediately resu~e in

order that this problem may be corrected as soon as pos3ible.

(2) Active filling on Site r-c has progressed.to the easterly slope of the site, along the PSE&G powerline right-ofw?>'j-:"However, the required 50 t plateau is not being main-

:;~ained along that slope and the stakes marking the setback

, .

. ..

.:.~.

./ ;)

!' .i·

. I" BA-A000015

; .,

TIERRA-D-009128
Mr. Roger Generazzo - 2 - June 18, 1976

have been removed. Therefore, you are hereby ordered to

cease all dumping in the vicinity of the east slope, to

immediately stake out a 50' wide plateau from the top of

the existing slope and to adhere to the required setbacks

during all future filling.

Further, enclosed is a copy of the approved complaince schedule which has

been marked to indicate those additional items with which this Office has

found deficiencies. We anticipate that you will give all these items your

prompt attention in order that they may be resolved as soon as possible.

If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this Office.

Sincerely,

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER

GEORGE D. CASCINO, P.E., P.P.

~?

CHIEF ENGINEER

~.A/jo

cc: Dennis Backus, P.E.

Kenneth D. McPherson, Esq.

Mark L. First, Esq., DAG

TIERRA-D-009129
START

2/1/76

2/1/76

DEADLINE

COMPLETE

.4/1/76

7/1/76

7/1/76

8/1/76

1/1/77

1/1/77

THOSE DEADLINES UNDERLINED HAVE NOT BEEN MET

< i , , .

MUNICIPAL SANITARY LANDFILL AUTHORITY cm1PLAINCE SCHEDULE

SITE I-A

Bimonthly to 1/1/79 - Water Sampling (bi-monthly)

Complete final cover (2') entire site should be completin~.

Construct and/or recondition swales for drainage should be

completing.

Seed entire site

Install methane vents -;should be starting.

Submittal of diking plan, if necessary.

SITE I-D

IMMEDIATE IMMEDIATE .Water and methane sampling (monthly)

2/1/76

2/1/76

2/1/76

2/1/76

2/1/76

2/1/76

7/1/76

3/1/76

3/1/76

7/1/76

7/1/76

7/1/76

7/1/76

8/1/76

9/1/76

Re-install leachate pumps 1 and 2 pump on southwest corner removed.

Construct collection and recharge basins - must be reconditioned.

Construct barrier berms.

Site shall become Inactive.

Final covering shall be complete (2') - not started.

Construct new south swale and ditch - has been abandoned

Install methane vents - not started

Seed entire site.

DEADLINE SITE I-C

IM,"lEDIATEIMMEDIATE No filling within 200' of P.S.E •.& G Company right-of-way (50'

plateau) or within limits of ffiIDCSawmill Park Landfill Extension.

(both limits Should be staked immediately) Has been violated .,.

shall be re-sta~ed and maintained.

2/1/76

2/1/76

3/1/76

4/1/76

4/1/76

Clean drainage ditch along Belleville Turnpike side of site - only

started recently.

Water sampling (monthly)

Block all drainage pipes under P.S.E.& G. towers

TIERRA-D-009130
M~ICIPAL Sfu~ITARYLM~DFILL AUTHORITY CO~~LI~~CE SCHEDULE CONTINUED

STAR!' COMPLETE SITE I-C

3/1/76 4/1/76 Install leachate pumps (along P.S.E. & G side) construct collection

and recharge basins.

3/1/76 4/1/76 Construct dikes 3 & 5 (P.S. side-south and north of site).

4/1/76 "6/1/76 Construct flood gates 1,2,3,&4 (southeast corner Under P.S. line for

Belleville Ditch)

2/1/76 7/1/76 Construct swales P.S. side (clean ditch?)

7/1/76

6/1/76 7/1/76

9/1/76

1/1/77

2/1/76 1/1/77

..~... . . .

4/1/76 4/1/77

4/1/76 4/1/77

9/1/76 5/1/79

5/1/79

Construct new bridge from Belleville Pike.

Install leachate pumps #3 & #4 (Dike #6 at north tip should be

complete - no deadline established).

Methane samples - monthly

Revised topos due.

Install methane vents

.Elevate dike #4 (or construct new dike on property)

Construct Dikes 1 & 2

Construct barrier berm (Belleville Side)

Construct barrier berm (P.S.E.&G Side)

TIERRA-D-009131
.....-

yJ /.."

1,/1 h'

z..1'/""

"l.' , h'

2/' h,

-

.2-/' he

"2,{' /7'

7/'/,(,

'2.[ '/7'

3/;/?tI

-

... ----- - - ,

....

COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE (MSLA)

Deadline

SITE I-A

C, /..{pt.eTlf

4/1/76 Bimonthly to 1/1/79- Water Sampling (Bi-Monthly)

7/1/76 Complete Final Cover (21

) Entire Site "5~"'t.O 'b€GtDUPc.E.,,,.19

7/1/76 Construct and/or Recondition Swales for Drainaqe 1!;H-ovc..O &E c..Df..fPLEnNt;'

9/1/76 Seed Entire Site

1/1/77 Ins ta 11 Methane Vents "f:t#<)vU) _eo -S~""N~

1/1/77 Submittal of Diking Plan, if necessary.

SITE 1-0

7/1/76 Site shall become Inactive

7/1/76 Final covering shall be complete (21

) ~T ~

7/1/76 Construct new south swale and ditch. HIr-s ~E5N A6~DOIJE'O

8/1/76 Install Methane Vents "'or ~~EO·

9/1/76 Seed Entire Site

Deadline

SITE I-C

-

TIERRA-D-009132
..,

••

.-'-"

_1111 'f, l cSan.it~'tu LandAU ell

ClV\UI. -'ra ~ I'

t:5oq HARRISON AVENUE

KEARNY. NEW JERSEY 07032

PHONE: 991·6814

-

June 23, 1976

-

-

.sR t \"".~t. v:·ED .- .

Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission

1099 Wall Street West

Lyndhurst, New Jersey 07071

Att: Mr. George D. Cascino, P.E., P.P.

Re: HMDC Letter dated June IS, 1976;

MSLA Sites I-A, I-C, I-D

Dear Mr,. Cascino:

This letter is in response to your recent letter citing the

results of an inspection of MSLA Sites I-A, I-C, I-D conducted

on June 17, 1976.

Within the past week I have met with you at least three (3)

times to discuss plans and progress at the subject landfill sites.

In our meeting we talked about the problem of dumping on the easterly

slope of site I-C. I told you th~t T ~0uld ~~fer to D~~~i~ Dac~~5,

our Engineer and cease operation in the immediate area until clearance

is given to proceed.

On June 23, 1976 Mr. Backus informed me of the following:

1. The HMDG roadbed, located to HMDG's plan dimensions .~

200 ft. off the property line, falls directly in the ~,

middle of the existing east slope, not on the top shelf ~~ I

a desir .' ~.

HMDC has not given an elevation for this roadbed as .

"marked-up" on MSLA plan drawing no. 10)-OC B}

Without the design elevation for this roadbed and without

resolution of the incompatibility of this road location with

HMDC's Final Elevation Plan "A Recreation Complex" dated

January, 1974, MSLA can not proceed with construction. If MSLA had

proceeded with construction to HMDC's 200 ft. location dimension,

the whole east~rn slope (over 5000 ft.) would have been disturbed.

Repeatedly you~have requested that this slope not be disturbed because

of its view-line from the New Jersey Turnpike.

In the interests of resolving this problem at an early date

it is requested that HMDC send a representative to meet at the jOb

site with MSLA and see first hand the magnitude of the problem as

indicated by our survey stakes. Subsequently, the road plan can

be revised to our mutual satisfaction.

BAA000017

TI ERRA-D-009133
"

.# .

eM.uni.t!i.pal <San.Ua't'j .LandfiLL cf/utho'tity

Hsoq HARRISON AVENUE

KEARN'y. NEW JERSEY 07032

PHONE: 991·6814

In reference to your comments concerning site I-D, in excess

of 300 ft. of drainage ditch has been excavated per MELA's plan.

This work was not stopped by MSLA. Construction ceased when the

backhoe MSLA specifically purchased for this ditching broke down

due to catastrophic failure of the hoe linkage bearing. We have

tried unsuccessfully to obtain the necessary parts from two (2)

International Dealers and are awaiting a shipment of the necessary

parts from the factory.· MSLA has not abandoned this construction

work at site I-D. As soon as the backhoe is repaired, MSLA will

resume work.

Also at site I-D, our engineer informs me that the clean fill

you refer to which has been placed there by MSLA to protect the

PSEG gas main. The PSEG roadbed serves as a dike and will be

effective when the MSLA ditches are drained by the two (2) recirculation

pump systems located on the site specifically for this purpose.

Any leachate passing through the demolition fill and over the roadbed

dikes would have to travel uphill.

In closing, I wish to state that I thought we were working under

a plan of cooperation based on our meetings last week. At no time

.during these meetings did yoU state that we would receive vour

referenced letter of complaint. Clearly, your letter was ~nnecessary

and a needless surprise. These items could have been jointly resolved

through communication via the telephone.

vei!trtrul~ yours, y

f l /

-_~ ..(tr :.~L..,. /' ~II·I..- / 7) "

I ;. :

Roger Generaz20,. Manager

MUNICIPAL SANITARY LANDFILL AUTHORITY

CC D L Backus, Engineer

William McDowell

Waters, McPherson, & Hudzin

Mark First,Deputy Attorney General

RG:nd

TIERRA-D-009134
(

22.

75 JACOBUS AVE., S. KEARN"Y,N. J. 07032 201:589-0277

July 20, 1976

Municipal Sanitary Landfill Authority

1500 Harrison Avenue

Kearny, New Jersey 07032

Attention: Mr. Roger Generazzo

General Manager

RE: Letter Received from Modern Transportation Co.

dated June 14, 1976

Dear Sir:

Pursuant to receIvIng a copy of a letter that you received from

the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission dated

July 1, 1976, Modern Transportation Co. contracted with United

States Testing Company, Inc. to perform the analyses required

by Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission.

Would you be kind enough to once again request permission of

the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission to dispose of

that phase of our lime slurry material not currently being

reused or resold for other purposes. Your cooperation in this

matter is appreciated.

Very truly yours,

MODERN TRANSPORTATION CO.

~jnweng~,\. H. h\o O._C_o _-I

_,._ •.. -_0 l.-_--

JUl 2S '916

RECEIVED

TANK TRAlLERSIOCEANIC GOING BARGES/BULK STORAGE

TIERRA-D-009135
UNBTE~ ~TATES TEST2NG cor ·....l.\r\Jv, I.NC.

REPC,nf OF WATER AND WASTEWATER ANALYSIS

Page __ 3__ 0, 3

Client: Modern Transportation Co. Report No.: 86074-282 Dale: 7/20/76

Sample No.: 1 Description Powder lime filter material (rug/kg except where noted)

Sample No.: 2 Description Leachate (rug/1 of water extract except \vhere noted)

SAMPLE NO. SAMPLE NO

..)

1

.

TEST Powder Leachat e* TEST Powder ueach,

,.idity (~~CaCO,) < 10 < 10 Surlactants

l~.alinity,Total (as CaCOJ) Aluminum

II~alinity Antimony

Hydroxide % 25.5 Arsenic

_.-

Carbonate % 12.0 Beryllium

Bicarbonate Cadmium

lomides Calcium % 21.2

fal Organic Carbon Chromium,Total <0.02 <0.0:

.l~mical Oxygen Demand (COD) 4 Chromium. Hexavalent

nlorides Cobalt ,

,.Iorine Residual Copper 72 3.0

liorinat~d Hydrocarbons Iron I

janides Lead < 0.05 < 0.0::

llorides Magnesium , 6400 210

~rdness, Total Manganese

dide . Mercury < 0.02 < 0.02

itrogen M.~l~bdenum

.

...

Ammonia Nickel ...

Nitrate Potassium

Nitrite Selenium

:GJdahl Sodium

:I/Grcase Tin' , .

IJU~its) 12.0** 12.0 Titanium

lenols ppb 3 Zinc 7300 150

,?sphate, Total Immediate Oxygen Demand -

lica, Dissolved BiochemicalOxygen Demand(5 days) 10

1lids Biochemical Ox~genDemand (20 <:i'ays)

-- ..

Moisture 9! 9.45 Coliform, Total (MPN/100 mls.) o .

"-SUspended % 9.00 Coliform, Fecal(MPN/100 mls.)

Fecal Streplococcus (MPN/100 ml~.)

Total Dissolved Total Plate Count (per ml.)

.~alile Suspended Odor (Units)

Settleable Solids Coior(UnitS} 5

Iifates !!, 19.3 Specific'Con-duclance(micromhos/ em.) o .

IJrides Taste (Units)

11 fites Turbidity (J.T.U.)

~ens i ty lbs/ftJ

24.3

'RP vs. Standa rd Calomel

Elect ro de -60 mv

~EMARKS: * Leachate analysis was performccl using 20 gms. of solid & 200 m! of

'~ter and' conditions per Clierit's instructions. Leachate concentrat10ns are

cported in mg/1 of leachate as described. ** 1 powder·to 10 distilled water.

!ote: Powder analyses aTe reported in mg/kg of dry sample unless otherwise shown.

Note: All Results are given in mgJI. unless olhi~rwise shown. TIERRA-D-009136
2.3

Hachensack Meadowlands Deuelopment Commission

1099 WALL STREET WEST. LYNDHURST, NEW JERSEY 07071 • (201) 935-3250

PATRICIA Q. SHEEHAN

Chairman

WILLIAM D. McDOWELL

Executive Director Ju1Y 28, 1976

Mr. Roger Generazzo

Municipal Sanitary Landfill Authority

Belleville Turnpike

Kearny, New Jersey

R: LETTER OF MODERN TRANSPORTATION

DATED JUNE 14, 1976

----------

Dear Mr. Generazzo:

This' Office has reviewed the chemical analysis transmitted to this

Office by Modern Transportation relative to the disposal of a lime

based filter at the MSLA Landfills in Kearny.

Based upon our review, the request of Modern Transportation to dispose of the lime-based filter cake, described in the letter of June

14, 1976, at the MSLA Landfills is hereby approved, subject to the

followi ng condi tions:

(1) This approval is valid for a one y~ar period,

ending July 27, 197}

(2) A maximum of 10 twenty yard loads per week is

hereby approved. Any increases in the number of

loads or cubic yards disposed of a the MSLA Landfills shall be first approved by this Office.

(3) At least once every six months, the lime-based

filter cake (solid) shall be analyzed for the follaN-

.ing parameters: Acidity, Hydroxide, Carbonate, pH,

..,.0'-% moisture, ORP, Calcium, Copper, Magnesium and Zinc.

i ;/'" An analysis report shall be submitted to this Office

,.1 / .. , .....J?,:;.f{)revi ew. -'; r; ,,- ~

.(Ily))-

~. . ,

.j.,: ,'J·.1 .. : .....

:",:,f':;':'~ B A A.OGOO 2 ~

\}ii~;~:~\;~·I t:

TIERRA-D-009137
(0 . \

Mr. Roger Generazzo - 2 - July 28, 1976

"

(4) This approval may be revoked upon two weeks notice

if Modern Transportation violates conditions #1 to #3.

If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact this Office.

Si ncere ly,

OFF~~ ENGINEER

GEORGE D. CASCINO, P.E., P.P.

CHIEF ENGINEER

JB/jo

cc: John Wengryn, Modern Transportation

TIERRA-D-009138
-dl!l.unlelpal danita't'j ~andfiLl cIIutho'tit !J

1500 HARRiSON AVENUE r--::--::--:---_

KEARNY. NEW JERSEY 07032 1---.-. H. f..~. D. C. J

September 27, 197~

PHONE: 991·8814 -

SEP ::?'S 1976

RE\"a;, v i1D J

Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission

1099 Wall Street West

Lyndhurst, Nev Jersey 07071

Attl Mr. George D. Cascino, P.E., P.P.

Chief Engineer

Re: MSLA Site I-D (1), lile 71-1?5

Dear Mr. Caac1no:

We have obtained the spot elevations requested in your letters

of August 23 and September 151

1976. !he~.are torwarded superposed

on a oopY ot our MarGh 24, 19r6 topograph~cal map.

Please note that although as stated in my letter ot September 3,

"some elevations exceed 50 feet in spots", the majority ot the spot

elevations do not exceed the maximum approved elevation of 50 feet.

Further, we wish to advise you that we have not tinished our

work in this area to establish proper drainage. When we have

finished spreading, grading and compacting, we expect allot the

elevations to fall within the 50 ft. contour.

I expect that these results will meet with your complete

satisfaction. If you have aQ7 questions, please contact Dennis Backus,

of our staff who will be available to discuss this with lOu.

V~tru~our I

R~~eD &ZZO, Manager

~~I~ ANITARY LANDFILL AUTHORITY

RG:nd

CO The Joint Venture

Dennis Backus, P.E.

BAAOG0024

TIERRA-D-009139

Diamond Alkali Co.

New Jersey

EPA ID#: NJD980528996

EPA REGION 2

Congressional District(s): 08

Essex

Newark

NPL LISTING HISTORY

Proposed Date: 9/8/1983

Final Date: 9/21/1984

Site Description

The Diamond Alkali Superfund Site includes the former pesticides manufacturing plant and surrounding properties at 80

and 120 Lister Avenue in Newark, New Jersey, the Lower Passaic River Study Area, the Newark Bay Study Area and the

extent of contamination. The Lower Passaic River Study Area includes the 17-mile tidal stretch of the river from Dundee

Dam to Newark Bay, and tributaries. The Newark Bay Study Area includes Newark Bay and portions of the Hackensack

River, Arthur Kill and Kill Van Kull. Because the problems posed by the upland part of the site are significantly different

from those in the Passaic River and Newark Bay, the site was divided into three operable units: the 80 and 120 Lister

Avenue properties, the Lower Passaic River Study Area, and the Newark Bay Study Area. The area is both densely

populated and heavily industrialized.

From 1951 to 1969, the Diamond Alkali Company (subsequently known as the Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Company)

owned and operated a pesticides manufacturing plant at 80 Lister Avenue in Newark. The property was used for

manufacturing by numerous companies for more than 100 years. The mid-1940s marked the beginning of the

manufacturing operations related to the current site conditions, including the production of DDT and phenoxy herbicides.

Subsequent owners used the property until 1983, when sampling at the site and in the Passaic River revealed high levels

of dioxin. Dioxin (also known as 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin or TCDD) is an extremely toxic chemical and an

unwanted byproduct of the manufacture of certain chemicals which were produced at the site. Since Occidental

Chemical Corporation (OCC) is a successor to the Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Company, OCC is required to perform

remedial activities at the 80 and 120 Lister Avenue properties and the Newark Bay Study Area under the Superfund

program.

For the Lower Passaic River Study Area, a more innovative approach is being taken. In 2004, EPA formed a partnership

with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps), New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and New Jersey Department of

Environmental Protection (NJDEP) to conduct a joint study of the Lower Passaic River. The joint study is an integration

of a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) under Superfund and a Feasibility Study under the Water

Resources Development Act (WRDA). A group of 43 potentially responsible parties (PRPs), including OCC, is required to

provide funding for the Superfund portion of the integrated study. In May 2007, a group of 73 PRPs (named the

Cooperating Parties Group or CPG), including the above 43, took over the performance of the Superfund portion of the

study, under EPA oversight.

Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a combination of Federal, State, and potentially responsible

party actions.

Threat and Contaminants

Dioxin, pesticides and other hazardous substances were found in the soil at 80 and 120 Lister Avenue. Other properties

in the area were also contaminated by dioxin. Dioxin, pesticides, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and other

hazardous substances were found in groundwater at the site. Persons who contacted or ingested the contaminated soil

may have been at risk. Although groundwater is not used as a source of drinking water, groundwater migrated toward the

Lower Passaic River where it may have added to the contamination of fish and shellfish. However, all of those threats

were addressed through immediate and interim remedial actions on the land site. Dioxin, polychlorinated biphenyls

(PCBs), mercury, metals and pesticides were also found in sediment samples taken from the Lower Passaic River,

Newark Bay and nearby waterways. The Lower Passaic River and Newark Bay are under fish and shellfish consumption

advisories, issued by NJDEP based on PCB, dioxin and/or mercury contamination. EPA and NJDEP posted fishing

advisory signs within the study area and beyond.

Diamond Alkali Co. 1 9/23/13
Cleanup Approach

The site is being addressed in several stages: immediate actions and interim remedial actions on the land site, time and

non-time critical removals in the Passaic River, a long-term remediation of the 17-miles of the river starting with a

focused remediation of the lower eight miles, and a long-term remediation of Newark Bay.

Response Action Status

Immediate Actions: The dioxin discovery led to the 80 Lister Avenue property being secured by a fence and by

twenty-four hour security guard service. Exposed soils on the property were covered with geofabric to prevent potential

migration of contamination. At other properties, dioxin-contaminated soils and debris were removed by excavation,

vacuuming, and other means, and were transferred to 120 Lister Avenue for storage. This work was initiated by the EPA

and NJDEP in 1983 and was taken over by the Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Company under State Administrative

Consent Orders.

Interim Remedy: In 1987, EPA selected an interim remedy for the 80 and 120 Lister Avenue properties that included (1)

construction of a slurry wall and flood wall around the properties, (2) installation of a cap over the properties, and (3)

pumping and treating of groundwater to reduce the migration of contaminated groundwater. Under a 1990 Consent

Decree with EPA and NJDEP, OCC and Chemical Land Holdings (CLH) submitted design plans to EPA for construction

of the interim remedy. Prior to approving the design plans, EPA, at the request of the local community, explored the

potential for implementing an alternative to the interim remedy selected in 1987. EPA considered innovative technologies

as well as on-site and off-site thermal treatment options, but due to the nature of the material to be remediated, new

technologies were deemed inappropriate at that time, and no off-site option was available. One alternative, on-site

incineration, was deemed technically feasible, but the local community expressed opposition to on-site incineration in

public meetings throughout the summer of 1998. Therefore, EPA approved the design plans for the interim remedy. CLH,

now known as Tierra Solutions, Inc. (TSI), selected its construction contractor after approval of the design plans and

specifications. Construction began in April 2000 and was completed in December 2001. The construction completion

report was approved on July 24, 2006. Under the 1990 Consent Decree, the interim remedy is required to be reevaluated

every two years to determine if it remains protective of human health and the environment. Pursuant to the Consent

Decree, the first Remedy Evaluation Work Plan was submitted and is undergoing review.

Non-Time Critical Removal: In June 2008, OCC and EPA signed an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) for a

non-time critical removal of approximately 200,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment from the Passaic River in the

vicinity of the former Diamond Alkali plant in Newark NJ, to be done in 2 phases. Phase 1 would include the excavation

of 40,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment which would be shipped off-site for treatment and disposal. Phase 2

would include the excavation of 160,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment which would be placed in a CDF,

anticipated to be sited and constructed in Newark Bay. A public comment period was held from 11/19/08 to 12/19/08 on

the Phase 1 Proposed Plan, the Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis and draft Community Involvement Plan, and the

Action Memorandum was signed 1/9/09. After completion of the design plans, construction began in July 2011. Dredging

began in March 2012 and the project was completed in January 2013.

Time-Critical Removal: In June 2012, EPA and the CPG signed an AOC for a time-critical removal action to address the

risks posed by elevated concentrations of dioxins and PCBs (and other contaminants) found at the surface of a mudflat

on the east bank of the river at River Mile (RM) 10.9 in Lyndhurst, NJ. The action will involve removing the volume of

sediment necessary to place an engineered cap over those contaminated sediments, thereby reducing exposure and

preventing migration of the contamination to other parts of the river. Design of the action is underway and dredging is

expected to begin in summer 2013. This time-critical removal action is not a final remedy: a final decision for RM10.9 will

be made by EPA as part of the 17-mile Lower Passaic River Study Area RI/FS Record of Decision.

Lower Passaic River Study Area: Under an AOC executed on April 20, 1994, CLH, on behalf of OCC, started an RI/FS in

a six-mile stretch of the Passaic River. The objectives of the study were to determine: (1) the spatial distribution and

concentration of dioxins, furans, PCBs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), pesticides and metals, both

horizontally and vertically in the Passaic River sediments; (2) the primary human and ecological receptors of

contaminated sediments; and (3) the transport of contaminated sediment within the Study Area.

The sampling results from the six-mile stretch investigation and other environmental studies showed that sediments

contaminated with hazardous substances, and potential sources of hazardous substances, exist along the entire 17-mile

tidal stretch of the Passaic River, from Dundee Dam to Newark Bay. As a result, EPA expanded its investigation to

include that 17-mile portion, also known as the Lower Passaic River, and its tributaries. At the same time, the Corps, with

NJDOT as local sponsor, was authorized to conduct a study of restoration opportunities along the 17-mile Lower Passaic

River. EPA, NJDEP, the Corps, NJDOT, NOAA, and USFWS formed a partnership to conduct a joint Superfund-WRDA

study of the Lower Passaic River watershed.

During the course of the 17-mile study, the sediments of the lower eight miles of the river were found to be a major

Diamond Alkali Co. 2 9/23/13
source of contamination to the rest of the river and Newark Bay. Therefore, a Focused Feasibility Study was developed

to evaluate alternatives for an action to control this major source of pollution. A draft of the Focused Feasibility Study was

reviewed by a group of stakeholders and their comments are being incorporated. A Proposed Plan is expected to be

released for public comment in 2013.

Newark Bay Study Area: In a separate action, EPA also found that hazardous substances are present in Newark Bay.

Therefore, on February 13, 2004, EPA and OCC entered into an AOC for TSI to conduct an RI/FS in Newark Bay and its

tributaries.

Enforcement Status

In 1984, NJDEP and Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Company entered into two Administrative Consent Orders, the first

for the investigations and immediate response work at 80 Lister Avenue and the second for investigations and immediate

response actions at other properties including 120 Lister Avenue. A Consent Decree was filed in 1989 among OCC,

CLH, the State and EPA requiring OCC and CLH to undertake cleanup activities at the site. The U.S. District Court

approved the Consent Decree in November of 1990. This work is being conducted under EPA oversight. In addition,

CLH, on behalf of OCC, entered into an AOC on April 20, 1994 with EPA. Under this AOC, CLH conducted extensive

sampling in a six-mile stretch of the Passaic River, the results of which have been incorporated into the current 17-mile

Lower Passaic River Study.

On February 13, 2004, EPA and OCC signed an AOC for TSI to perform an RI/FS for Newark Bay, including portions of

the Hackensack River, Arthur Kill and Kill Van Kull. The AOC allows EPA to maintain oversight of the Newark Bay work

and to ensure that it is conducted consistently with the Lower Passaic River study.

Effective June 22, 2004, EPA entered into an AOC with 31 potentially responsible parties (PRPs) to fund the RI/FS

portion of the joint Superfund-WRDA study of the Lower Passaic River (i.e., the 17-mile, tidal portion of the river, from

Dundee Dam to Newark Bay, and tributaries). The Corps and NJDOT are cost-sharing equally the WRDA portion of the

joint study. Effective November 9, 2005, EPA's June 2004 administrative settlement has been amended to include 12

additional companies that will share in the estimated cost of the RI/FS portion of the Lower Passaic River Restoration

Project. A key benefit of the amendment is that all of the companies (both the new parties and the earlier settlors) have

agreed to pay EPA $750,000 in additional funding for the RI/FS if such additional funds are needed to complete the

study. On May 8, 2007, EPA entered into another AOC with 73 PRPs (including the 43 PRPs who signed the previous

AOCs), for them to take over the RI/FS work, with EPA oversight. Coordination of the RI/FS with the WRDA portion of

the study will continue through EPA.

On June 23, 2008, EPA and OCC signed an AOC for TSI to perform a non-time critical removal of 200,000 cubic yards of

contaminated sediment from the Passaic River in the vicinity of the former Diamond Alkali plant in Newark, NJ, to be

done in 2 phases. This work is being conducted under EPA oversight.

In June 2012, EPA and the CPG signed an AOC for a time-critical removal action to address the risks posed by elevated

concentrations of dioxins and PCBs (and other contaminants) found at the surface of a mudflat on the east bank of the

river at RM10.9 in Lyndhurst, NJ. This work is being conducted under EPA oversight.

Cleanup Progress

The interim remedy has reduced risks associated with the 80 and 120 Lister Avenue properties.

The Phase 1 non-time critical removal action removed the most concentrated inventory of dioxin-contaminated

sediments from the Lower Passaic River.

Site Repositories

Newark Public Library, 5 Washington Street, Newark, NJ 07102

U.S. EPA Region 2 Superfund Records Center, 290 Broadway, 18th floor, New York, NY 10007

Diamond Alkali Co. 3 9/23/13
 

EPA ANNOUNCES PROPOSED PLAN 

 

This Proposed Plan identifies the preferred 

alternative for an Early Action to address the light 

nonaqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) source area at 

the Diamond Head Oil Refinery site, and provides 

the rationale for that preference. For this action, 

also referred to as Operable Unit 1 (OU1), EPA is 

recommending construction of an on-site biocell to 

facilitate the biodegradation of the LNAPL source 

area. Not all the wastes are expected to be 

effectively treated within the biocell, so this Early 

Action also includes the excavation and off-site 

disposal of the more highly contaminated material 

within the LNAPL source area. This action would 

be taken while remedial investigations to determine 

the full nature and extent of contamination for the 

site are completed. 

This proposed plan summarizes the data 

considered in making this early action 

recommendation. This document is issued by 

EPA, the lead agency for site activities. EPA, in 

consultation with the New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection (NJDEP), the support 

agency for site activities, will select the final OU1 

remedy after reviewing and considering all 

information submitted during a 30-day public 

comment period. EPA, in consultation with 

NJDEP, may modify the preferred alternative or 

select another response action presented in this 

Proposed Plan based on new information or public 

comments. Therefore, the public is encouraged to 

review and comment on all the information 

presented in this Proposed Plan. 

EPA is issuing this Proposed Plan as part of its 

community relations program under Section 

117(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation and Liability Act 

(CERCLA, or Superfund), and Sections 300.430 

(f) and 300.435(c) of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan 

(NCP). This Proposed Plan summarizes 

information that can be found in greater detail in 

several reports, included in the Administrative 

Record, in particular, the June 2009 report 

Operable Unit 1 Focused Feasibility Study for the 

LNAPL Source Area (FFS Report). EPA and 

NJDEP encourage the public to review these 

documents to gain a more comprehensive 

Superfund Program U.S. Environmental Protection 

Proposed Plan Agency, Region 2

Diamond Head Oil Refinery Superfund Site 

Kearny, New Jersey

July 2009 

MARK YOUR CALENDAR 

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: 

July 14, 2009 - August 12, 2009, U.S. EPA will accept 

written comments on the Proposed Plan during the public 

comment period. 

PUBLIC MEETING: 

July 22, 2009 at 6:00 P.M. 

U.S. EPA will hold a public meeting to explain the 

Proposed Plan and all of the alternatives presented in the 

Feasibility Study. Oral and written comments will also be 

accepted at the meeting. The meeting will be held at the 

main council chambers in Town Hall, 402 Kearny Avenue, 

Kearny, New Jersey. 

For more information, see the Administrative Record 

at the following locations: 

U.S. EPA Records Center, Region II 

290 Broadway, 18th Floor 

New York, New York 10007-1866 

(212-637-4308) 

Hours: Monday-Friday – 9 A.M. to 5 P.M. 

Kearny Public Library

318 Kearny Avenue 

Kearny, New Jersey 07032 

(201-998-2666)
2

understanding of the site and Superfund activities 

that have been conducted there. 

SITE DESCRIPTION

The Diamond Head site, listed as 1401 Harrison 

Avenue, Kearny, New Jersey, is characterized by 

contamination from a former oil reprocessing 

facility located near the Hackensack 

Meadowlands. Figure 1 shows the site location. 

The site is comprised of a 15-acre unoccupied 

parcel that includes wetland areas and drainage 

ditches, a small wetland/pond, a vegetated landfill 

area along the western border, and the remnants 

of the former Diamond Head Oil Refinery on the 

eastern portion of the site. The parcel is bordered 

by Harrison Avenue (also called the Newark 

Turnpike) to the north, entrance ramp "M" of 

Interstate 280 (I-280) to the east, I-280 to the 

south, and Campbell Distribution Foundry to the 

west. 

The land use surrounding the site is industrial or 

open space/wetlands; the nearest residential area is 

a half-mile to the west. To the south, a Municipal 

Sanitary Landfill Authority (MSLA) landfill, 

identified as the 1-D Landfill, is situated south of 

I-280. 

The 15-acre parcel is fenced. The prior site 

operations took place on the eastern half of the 

parcel; the landfilled area was once an access road 

to the 1-D Landfill, and a landfill mound remains 

from those activities that rises 10 to 15 feet above 

the rest of the site. Surface water drains through a 

drainage ditch that eventually discharges to 

Frank's Creek, which in turn discharges to the 

Passaic River.

SITE HISTORY

The oil reprocessing facility operated under 

several company names, including PSC Resources, 

Inc., Ag-Met Oil Service, Inc., and Newtown 

Refining Corporation, from 1946 to early 1979. 

All of these companies were owned by Mr. Robert 

Mahler. During facility operations, multiple 

aboveground storage tanks and possibly 

subsurface pits were used to store oily wastes. 

These wastes were intermittently discharged 

directly to adjacent properties to the east and the 

wetland area on the south side of the site, creating 

an "Oil Lake." 

 

In 1976, the New Jersey Department of 

Transportation (NJDOT) purchased several lots 

from PSC Resources, Inc., as part of its plans for 

construction of I-280. In 1977, NJDOT removed 

over 10 million gallons of oil and oil-contaminated 

liquid and over 230,000 cubic yards of oily sludge 

from the area of the Oil Lake. The liquid wastes 

were shipped to waste-oil recycling facilities. The 

oil-contaminated sludges from the bottom of the 

Oil Lake were excavated and placed in a series of 

disposal cells, one atop the MSLA 1-D Landfill, 

and a series of smaller cells within the right-ofway (ROW) to the highway, next to the then stilloperating oil-reprocessing facility. The details of 

these disposal efforts are not well documented, 

but a simple liner and a clay-based capping 

material were to be part of the disposal efforts for 

the sludges. 

While the surficial Oil Lake was removed and 

filled, the NJDOT also reported finding an 

"underground lake” of oil-contaminated 

groundwater extending from the eastern limits of 

the I-280 right-of-way to Frank’s Creek, west of 

the site. 

From the close of operations in 1979 until 1982, 

the abandoned site was not completely fenced. In 

1982, during the dismantling of the oil 

reprocessing facility, approximately 7,500 gallons 

of materials were apparently pumped out of the 

tanks and disposed off site, and 27 tons of 

contaminated soil were reportedly removed from 

the site. It was sampling undertaken during this 

cleanup effort that first identified hazardous 

substances, including polychlorinated biphenyls 

(PCBs) in waste material collected from the site. 

Aerial photographs from 1982 show that the oil 

reprocessing facility infrastructure had been 

dismantled. The buildings and facilities associated 
3

with previous site operations were constructed on 

the eastern half of the site, and some remnant 

concrete building and tank foundations remain. In 

1985, the refinery property was sold to Mimi 

Urban Development Corporation, which 

subsequently changed its name to Hudson 

Meadows Urban Development Corporation. 

The property sat idle for a number of years, at 

least in part because of the alleged contamination. 

EPA was asked by NJDEP to evaluate the site for 

inclusion on the National Priorities List (NPL) in 

1999. The site was added to the NPL of 

Superfund sites in September 2002. 

In 2002, EPA began a remedial investigation (RI) 

to determine the nature and extent of the problems 

posed by the site. In addition to the LNAPL 

findings discussed below, the RI found soil, 

groundwater, sediment and surface water 

contamination attributable to the site. The RI also 

included a number of test trenches through the 

landfill portion of the site to assess the nature of 

the material buried there, and has collected 

borings along the I-280 ROW berms to confirm 

the presence of the buried sludges. Site studies 

are ongoing; for example, new groundwater 

monitoring wells were installed earlier in 2009 on 

a number of neighboring properties to fully assess 

the extent of the groundwater problems posed by 

the site. Field investigations for the 

comprehensive remedial investigation of the site 

are expected to be complete in 2010, at which 

time EPA can proceed with evaluating remedial 

alternatives for the entire site. 

SITE CHARACTERISTICS 

 

Site Hydrology 

The nearest surface water body is Frank's Creek, 

and as a result of I-280's construction, all drainage 

on the north side of the highway now travels by a 

man-made drainage swale, a distance of about 600 

feet to the creek, which in turn discharges to the 

Passaic River. Prior to the 1940s, the area south 

of Harrison Avenue was wetland. Landfilling 

activities that started in the 1940s began to shrink 

and divide the wetland areas, and the eventual Oil 

Lake, estimated in 1977 at between six and seven 

acres, appears to have formed in a remaining 

lowland area surrounded by properties filled for 

industrial development and by what would become 

the MSLA 1-D Landfill. With the construction of 

I-280, including the placement of the ROW berms, 

an isolated wetland, frequently ponded, remains 

just south of the former Diamond Head Oil 

facility. 

Two factors have a significant influence on the 

water table at the site. The first is the presence of 

wetlands along the southern site boundary that 

include areas of surface water, and the second is 

the presence of an LNAPL plume in the southeast 

corner of the site in the area of the former lagoon. 

Although lighter than water, the density of the 

LNAPL has the effect of depressing the water 

table and influencing groundwater flow. Excepting 

these areas, groundwater is first encountered at 

the site under unconfined conditions at a depth of 

one to two feet below the ground surface. 

Site Hydrogeology 

The stratigraphy at the site consists of a relatively 

uniform vertical sequence of unconsolidated 

materials as follows, from top to bottom: 

• A highly variable (in content and thickness) 

layer of anthropogenic fill across the site, 

consisting of typical demolition-type debris, 

including wood, brick, metal, glass, plastic and 

concrete mixed in a matrix of poorly sorted 

fine to coarse sand and gravel or silt, sand, and 

gravel. 

• A sand unit about five feet thick on the 

western side of the site and pinching out until 

it is not present on the eastern side of the site. 

• A silty clay unit, up to eight feet thick in 

sections of the site, that appears to be 

continuous throughout the study area. 
4

• A distinctive peat layer of varying thickness 

but considered continuous across the site. 

• A silt and sand unit approximately 15 to 20 

feet thick beneath the peat. 

• Laminated silt and clay unit, the full thickness 

of which was not observed in any of the study 

borings to date (as deep as 50 feet). 

• Bedrock, which also has not been encountered 

to date. 

Shallow groundwater flow direction above the 

silty clay and peat layers is consistent with surface 

water flow directions, to the south and west. In 

the waterbearing unit below the peat, groundwater 

flows from northeast to southwest, consistent with 

regional trends in groundwater flow.

The ongoing RI studies will result in a more 

comprehensive understanding of stratigraphy and 

groundwater. 

Nature and Extent of LNAPL Source Material 

The RI studies to date have outlined two areas as 

potential source areas where LNAPL may be 

continuing to release contamination to the 

environment: 

• the former oil reprocessing section of the site, 

once containing two buildings, multiple 

aboveground storage tanks (ASTs), drum 

storage areas, and possibly underground pits; 

and 

• remnants of the Oil Lake, estimated in 1977 to 

cover an area of six to seven acres, located 

over the southern section of the site and 

extending outside the site’s fenced boundaries 

to the east and south. 

Currently, in the oil processing section of the site, 

only the foundations of one building and two 

ASTs are visible. No remnants of the Oil Lake are 

visible, but historical information shows that the 

lagoon occupied the southeastern section of the 

site and extended eastward. Figure 2 shows the 

boundary of the Oil Lake compiled from historical 

aerials of the site. 

There is evidence of oil contamination in nearly 

every boring installed within the 15-acre fenced 

property and in many borings to the southeast. 

Because of this "smear" of oil contamination 

across the site, the RI studies performed to date 

have used the following methods to document the 

nature and extent of the LNAPL, and to identify 

the more severely contaminated areas of the site: 

• A geotechnical measurement tool called laserinduced fluorescence (LIF) allowed for the 

subsurface mapping of borings that contain 

LNAPL. LIF can rapidly identify an oil 

"fingerprint," including both extent and 

relative concentration. 

• Soil borings were collected throughout the site 

down to the laminated silt and sand unit, as 

much as 50 feet deep, and the presence of oil 

staining or separate-phase oil in the soil 

borings was documented. These results were 

compared with the LIF sample points to 

calibrate the LIF data to site-specific 

conditions. 

• A number of monitoring wells, meant to 

measure groundwater contamination, have 

thicknesses of floating product in the tops of 

the wells, with as much as five feet of LNAPL 

floating in some wells. 

• Samples were collected of contaminated soil 

and oily wastes and sludges and sent for 

laboratory analysis to identify potential 

contaminants of concern and to establish an 

analytical profile of the LNAPL. 

Using these methods, several characteristics of the 

LNAPL were established: 

• The LIF study concluded that LNAPL is 

present in the subsurface throughout most of 

the investigated area, though the LIF showed 

wide variations in the intensity of the LNAPL 
5

signal, indicating substantial variation in 

concentration across the site. 

• LNAPL was measured in wells in three areas 

of the site, one in the former process area, and 

two within the footprint of the Oil Lake. 

These areas are identified on Figure 2. 

• The vertical occurrence of LNAPL can be 

further separated into two depth intervals: (1) 

at the water table (approximately two feet 

below ground surface), sometimes with an 

extended smear zone into the saturated fillcontaining material and soil to about 10 feet 

below ground surface; and (2) as a distinct 

deeper interval at depths of 10 to 16 feet 

below ground surface within the silty/clayey 

soil. The bulk of LNAPL-containing soil is 

located near the water table within the fill 

layer. 

• LNAPL appears to contain more diesel range 

organics than gasoline range organics. The 

following compounds or classes of compounds 

were detected in the LNAPL: benzene, 

toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes, as well as 

a number of other volatile and semivolatile 

organic compounds (VOCs and SVOCs) 

consistent with a petroleum matrix. In 

addition, two PCBs (Arochlor-1232 and 

Arochlor-1260) and a variety of metals, 

including lead and cyanide were also identified 

in LNAPL-zone samples. 

• Despite the large thickness of LNAPL found 

in some monitoring wells and its relatively 

high saturation, LNAPL is extremely viscous 

and is relatively immobile under ambient 

gradients. This is indicative of a highly 

weathered LNAPL, where much of the more 

mobile components of the site releases have 

degraded or already traveled away from the 

site, leaving the less mobile fractions. 

• Within LNAPL, there are pockets of less 

weathered LNAPL of high saturation that 

present a leaching concern to groundwater. 

These are LNAPL areas that may be 

considered to present a risk for leaching 

contaminants to groundwater. 

Principal Threat Evaluation of LNAPL 

Based on the LNAPL studies performed to date, 

portions of the LNAPL are more mobile, are likely 

to have a higher toxicity, and are at a much 

greater concentration at the site. These high-level 

wastes form the "principal threat" posed by the 

site. Having developed an understanding of the 

nature and extent of the LNAPL, the RI studies 

further identified characteristics for the principal 

threat LNAPL, consistent with EPA guidance. 

EPA defines principle threat wastes as “those 

source materials considered to be highly toxic or 

highly mobile that generally cannot be reliably 

contained or would present a significant risk to 

human health or the environment should exposure 

occur. They include liquids or other highly mobile 

materials (e.g., solvents) or materials that have 

high concentrations of toxic compounds.” By 

contrast, low-level threat wastes are defined as 

“those materials that generally can be reliably 

contained and that would represent a low risk in 

the event of a release. They include materials that 

exhibit low toxicity, low mobility in the 

environment, or are near health-based levels.” 

The following lines of evidence based on sitespecific data were used to interpret whether the 

LNAPL source material at the Diamond Head site 

represents a principal and/or a low level threat: 

• Assessment of the presence of LNAPL in the 

soil column through soil borings and 

interpretation of LIF results, placing particular 

emphasis on LNAPL found at or near the 

ground surface and, therefore, posing a directcontact threat; 

• Comparison of LIF results to areas where 

LNAPL was visually observed in the pore 

spaces of soil cores collected from soil 

borings, and to groundwater data to indicate 

where the highest mass of wastes were 

located, and where those high-concentration 
6

wastes were associated with elevated 

groundwater concentrations; and 

• Areas where a measureable thickness of 

LNAPL was found in monitoring wells and 

piezometers during RI studies. 

Using these lines of evidence, LNAPL detected at 

the site was separated into areas where LNAPL 

material is considered to represent a principal 

threat, and areas where LNAPL can be considered 

to represent a lower-level threat, and for which 

appropriate measures will be considered during 

future feasibility studies. Figure 2 shows the areas 

identified as a principal threat using these lines of 

evidence (shaded in orange). The total area is 

roughly 176,000 square feet. This area includes 

the two areas of the site where monitoring wells 

contain measurable thicknesses of LNAPL 

(shaded in yellow). The thicknesses of the 

principal threat LNAPL varies. Based on an 

average depth of seven feet below ground surface, 

a volume of 45,825 cubic yards, including 2,593 

cubic yards where LNAPL floating product is 

found in wells, constitutes the principal threat 

LNAPL (outlined in red on Figure 2). 

A noncontiguous area within cloverleaf of I-280 

(also identified on Figure 2) appears to meet some 

of the characteristics of a principal threat as 

described in the FFS, but it is not as near the 

surface, and groundwater contamination is not as 

clearly attributable to this area. This area is not 

included within the definition of a principal threat 

for this Early Action; further studies of this area 

will be carried out as part of the site-wide RI. 

While further studies of the landfilled area of the 

site are required, the history of site activities and 

the test trenches already installed support EPA's 

conclusion that the landfill is not a source of 

LNAPL. EPA will further evaluate the landfill as 

part of a site-wide RI. 

SCOPE AND ROLE OF ACTION

In order to remediate Superfund sites, work is 

often divided into remedial phases, also referred to 

as operable units. This first operable unit has been 

identified as an early action to address the 

principal threat LNAPL. A second operable unit 

will address residual soil contamination 

attributable to the site including lower-level threat 

LNAPL, the on-site landfilled area, the ROW 

berms, and groundwater and sediment 

contamination. 

ENFORCEMENT 

Diamond Head Oil Refinery, Inc., and its affiliated 

companies are no longer in business. Hudson 

Meadows Urban Development Corporation 

(HMUDC) is the land owner for the former 

Diamond Head Oil facility, and Kearny Township 

and NJDOT retain ownership to the remaining 

land associated with the site. At the start of the 

RI/FS, EPA concluded that HMUDC was not 

capable of funding the cost of the necessary 

studies; the RI/FS has been federally funded. 

SUMMARY OF RISKS ATTRIBUTABLE TO 

LNAPL SOURCE AREAS 

The focus of this Early Action is to address light 

nonaqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) that 

constitutes a principal threat at the site. The 

principal threat LNAPL is physically similar to 

free oil product. Oil products are toxic to 

ecological receptors and humans through direct 

contact, incidental ingestion, and inhalation 

pathways. Potential exposure to ecological 

receptors and humans from the high-concentration 

LNAPL that is present at the site could result in 

adverse health effects. It is, therefore, important 

that steps be taken to reduce or eliminate the 

volume of LNAPL present at the site. Reducing 

or eliminating the LNAPL at the site would reduce 

potential exposure to free product and is an 

important early step in managing the site risks; 

however, it is not expected to eliminate the overall 

risks and hazards to ecological receptors or 

humans because of residual contamination that 

would remain on the site. This residual 

contamination will be addressed in subsequent 
7

actions and will be accompanied by full ecological 

and human health risk assessments. 

In addition to removing the potential exposure to 

LNAPL at the site, reducing or eliminating the 

LNAPL would also limit its potential migration, 

which would aid in investigating and selecting a 

remedy for the remainder of the site. 

A list of chemicals of potential concern identified 

to date can be found in Table 1. Further 

information about the nature and extent of 

contamination found at the site is included in the 

Administrative Record. 

Based upon the results of the site studies to date, 

EPA has determined that actual or threatened 

releases of hazardous substances from the site, if 

not addressed by the preferred remedy or one of 

the other active measures considered, may present 

a current or potential threat to human health and 

the environment. 

REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVES

The following remedial action objectives for the 

principal threat LNAPL wastes address the human 

health risks and environmental concerns at the 

Diamond Head Oil site: 

• Remove or treat principal threats, consistent 

with the NCP, to the extent practicable; 

• Prevent current and future migration of 

LNAPL and associated chemical contaminants 

to the various media at the site including 

groundwater and seeps to surface water; and 

• Prevent human exposure through direct 

contact with the principal threat LNAPL. 

The first two RAOs are intended to address the 

principal threat LNAPL and the contamination 

that may be released from this material. The third 

RAO is intended to address risks to potential 

future site workers/users as a result of exposures 

to this material. 

This proposed action would address the principal 

threat wastes that have been identified to date at 

the site, thereby addressing the most highly 

contaminated material that, without early 

attention, would result in ongoing contamination 

of currently uncontaminated areas. The RAOs 

would be achieved by attaining the remediation 

goals of no measurable thickness of LNAPL in 

monitoring wells, and no potential for LNAPLcontaminated soil to leach oil and grease to 

groundwater, as measured by a synthetic 

precipitate leachate procedure (SPLP) leaching 

test. Because there are no Federal or State 

cleanup standards for LNAPL, EPA established 

these remediation goals based upon the toxicity 

and mobility and the principal threats to address 

this continuing source. 

SUMMARY OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

The RAOs identified above are primarily focused 

on addressing the LNAPL mass and do not 

specifically address the co-located chemical 

contamination in soil at the site. Some, though 

not all of this chemical contamination is associated 

with LNAPL; therefore, by reducing the mass of 

LNAPL, the Early Action would also reduce some 

of the co-located chemical contamination and the 

unacceptable risks to potential human and 

ecological receptors associated with both the 

LNAPL and co-located chemical contamination at 

the site. 

While the effects of the selected technologies on 

the co-located chemical contamination cannot be 

quantified at this time, the effectiveness of each 

alternative is presented in terms of LNAPL source 

reduction and the technology’s potential to reduce 

concentrations of other chemicals present at the 

site. 

The principal threat LNAPL to be addressed by 

this proposed action encompasses two areas 

(outlined in red in Figure 2), and identified in the 

FFS report as the "remedial target area." The 

thickness of the principal threat LNAPL varies 

from between six and 12 feet, and at its deepest, 
8

appears to have penetrated as much as six inches 

into the silty/clay layer that underlies the site. The 

total volume of these areas was estimated in the 

FFS at 45,825 cubic yards. 

The RI included several treatability studies of 

technologies that are commonly used for 

petroleum-based LNAPL: in-situ air sparging and 

LNAPL pumping. For both technologies, the 

viscosity of the LNAPL was an impediment to 

successful performance. Consequently, neither of 

these technologies was carried forward in the FFS, 

although the biodegradation treatment process at 

work in air sparging is present in Alternative 2. 

Detailed descriptions of the remedial alternatives 

can be found in the FFS report. The alternatives 

are: 

Alternative 1: No Action 

Capital Cost: $0 

Annual O&M Cost: $0 

Present-Worth Cost: $0 

Construction Time: NA 

The Superfund program requires that the "noaction" alternative be considered as a baseline for 

comparison with the other alternatives. The no 

further action alternative does not include any 

physical remedial measures (beyond those 

response actions already completed) that address 

the LNAPL contamination at the site. 

Because this alternative would result in 

contaminants remaining on site above health-based 

levels, CERCLA requires that the site be reviewed 

every five years. If justified by the review, 

remedial actions may be implemented to remove 

or treat the wastes. 

Alternative 2: On-Site Biocell

Capital Cost: $16,080,000

Annual Biocell Operations Cost: $207,000

Annual operation and maintenance 

(O&M) Costs: 

$0

Present-Worth Cost: $17,340,000

Construction Time: 1 year 

Remediation Time: 5 years 

Under this alternative, the remedial target areas 

would be isolated with a sheet pile wall, and the 

principal threat LNAPL areas excavated. Some of 

this material, as discussed more fully below, 

would be removed for off-site disposal. The 

remaining excavated material would be augmented 

with nutrients and bulking agents to enhance 

permeability and the conditions for biological 

activity. The area within the sheet pile walls 

would be converted into a biocell by installing 

piping to supply air and distribute nutrient 

additives, along with a collection system for air 

and water that may accumulate in the biocell. The 

augmented LNAPL material would then be placed 

in the biocell for treatment, and capped. 

The biocell would require continued operation of 

the aeration, nutrient distribution, and water 

collection systems, including collecting and 

treating water accumulated in the biocell, and 

maintenance of the cover, until the remediation 

goals are achieved. The FFS describes 

performance sampling and final confirmation 

sampling that would be required to demonstrate 

that the LNAPL wastes have been destroyed 

through biological degradation, at which time, the 

biocell components would be dismantled. The 

FFS estimates that the biocell would require five 

years to achieve the remediation goals. 

Areas where a measureable layer of floating 

LNAPL product is found in monitoring wells may 

not be amenable to effect treatment in the biocell, 

or may extend the time frame required for 
9

treatment beyond the projected five-year time 

period. Under this alternative, these areas would 

be excavated and transported for off-site disposal. 

These highly contaminated soils and sludges may 

need treatment via stabilization to allow for 

transportation. The quantity of material that 

would not be suitable for the biocell cannot be 

determined until remedial design; for costestimating purposes, the FFS assumed, at 

minimum, that the floating product area, 

approximately 2,600 cubic yards of the 45,825 

cubic yards within the remedial target areas, 

would be disposed of in this fashion. Although 

additional treatability work during remedial design 

will refine the amount of material to be shipped off 

site for disposal, the volume could be much larger 

than 2,600 cubic yards; the effectiveness of the 

process in achieving cleanup goals within given 

time periods will be a major factor in this 

determination. For example, removing a larger 

volume of material for off-site disposal may 

reduce the time to meet cleanup goals and enable 

more rapid reuse of the site. 

While this alternative would result in contaminants 

remaining within the remedial target areas above 

health-based levels, the action is expected to 

address the principal threat LNAPL as a final 

action. A subsequent Record of Decision will be 

required to make a final determination about the 

underlying constituents that would remain within 

the treated soil; therefore, the need for a review of 

the site every five years, as required by CERCLA 

if contaminants remain above health-based levels, 

would be made at that time. If justified by the 

RI/FS, remedial actions may be implemented to 

remove or treat such wastes. 

Alternative 3: On-Site Soil Washing 

Under this alternative, the remedial target areas 

would be isolated with a sheet pile wall, and the 

principal threat LNAPL areas excavated. The 

excavated material would then be treated on site 

using soil washing. The excavated soils and 

LNAPL wastes would be placed in a slurry reactor 

vessel and combined with a washing fluid, a 

combination of water, surfactants and co-solvents 

that would "wash" (desorb or dissolve) the 

LNAPL from the soil particles. This technology 

requires a water treatment facility to treat the 

LNAPL and contaminants of concern in the 

washing fluid so it can be reused. The separated 

wastes from soil washing would be taken off site 

for further treatment and disposal. The treated 

soil material would be tested for compliance with 

the cleanup goals, and returned to the excavated 

areas. 

The FFS describes confirmation sampling required 

to demonstrate that the LNAPL wastes have been 

removed from the treated soils prior to returning 

the material to the excavation. The FFS estimates 

that soil washing could be implemented in 

approximately one year. 

As with Alternative 2, areas where a measureable 

layer of floating LNAPL product is found in 

monitoring wells may not be amenable to soil 

washing, and this alternative assumes that these 

areas would be excavated, treated as necessary, 

and transported for off-site disposal. For costestimating purposes, the FFS assumed that, at 

minimum, the floating product area would be 

addressed in this fashion. 

While this alternative would result in contaminants 

remaining within the remedial target areas above 

health-based levels, the action is expected to 

Capital Cost: $18,560,000

Annual O&M Costs: $0

Present-Worth Cost: $18,560,000

Construction Time: 1 year 
10

address the principal threat LNAPL as a final 

action. A subsequent Record of Decision will be 

required to make a final determination about the 

underlying constituents that would remain within 

the treated soil; therefore, the need for a review of 

the site every five years, as required by CERCLA 

if contaminants remain above health-based levels, 

would be made at that time. If justified by the 

RI/FS, additional remedial actions may be 

implemented to remove or treat such wastes. 

Alternative 4: Excavation and Off-Site 

Treatment/Disposal 

Capital Cost: $19,450,000

Annual O&M Costs: $0

Present-Worth Cost: $19,450,000

Construction Time: 1 year 

Under this alternative, the remedial target areas 

would be isolated with a sheet pile wall, and the 

principal threat LNAPL areas excavated. As with 

Alternatives 2 and 3, dewatering would be 

required prior to excavation, and the removed 

water would need to be treated prior to discharge. 

The excavated material would then be stabilized 

on site to allow for transportation for off-site 

disposal. The excavated areas would be backfilled 

with clean fill. 

Sampling would be performed during remedial 

design to delineate the extent of the remedial 

target areas, but no performance monitoring 

would be required. The FFS estimates that this 

alternative could be implemented in approximately 

one year. 

Because this alternative would create a "clean 

island" in the center of the site, the sheet pile wall 

would be left in place at the end of the action. 

The excavated area would be graded to create a 

recharge area that would maintain a positive 

gradient from within the sheet piled areas to the 

outside to prevent recontamination of the area by 

other contaminants of concern. 

This alternative would not result in contaminants 

remaining within the remedial target areas above 

health-based levels, as any underlying constituents 

within the excavated area would also be removed. 

A subsequent Record of Decision will still be 

required to make a final determination about the 

need for five-year reviews for other areas of the 

site. 

EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES 

Nine criteria are used to evaluate the different 

remediation alternatives individually and against 

each other in order to select a remedy, (see Table 

above, AEvaluation Criteria for Superfund 

Remedial Alternatives@). This section of the 

Proposed Plan profiles the relative performance of 

each alternative against the nine criteria, noting 

how it compares to the other options under 

consideration. The nine evaluation criteria are 

discussed above. The ADetailed Analysis of 

Alternatives@ can be found in the FFS. 

1. Overall Protection of Human Health and 

the Environment 

Given the limited scope of this early action, the 

remedial action objectives only consider 

protectiveness of actions to address the principal 

threat LNAPL. Site-wide protectiveness will be 

considered in a subsequent decision document. 

The no action alternative is not considered 

protective because it does nothing to mitigate the 

LNAPL as a continuing source of contamination 

or as a direct contact threat. 

Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, is not 

protective of human health and the environment. 

The remaining alternatives are considered 

protective, because they remove the LNAPL 

through treatment or off-site disposal. 

2. Compliance with ARARs

Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 are expected to satisfy 

applicable or relevant and appropriate 

requirements (ARARs) that pertain to the 
11

principal threat LNAPL and comply with the 

substantive requirements of the applicable laws 

and regulations. EPA has developed site-specific 

remediation goals that are consistent with the 

expectations of the New Jersey Technical 

Requirements for the remediation of free product 

(N.J.A.C 7:26E-1). The Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act (RCRA), 40 CFR 261, is 

applicable for assessing the disposal requirements 

of potentially hazardous solid wastes, such as the 

LNAPL-contaminated soils. Based upon the 

available documentation, EPA has concluded that 

the LNAPL wastes are not listed hazardous waste, 

nor do they exhibit hazardous characteristics; 

therefore, they do not require treatment to meet 

RCRA Land Disposal Restrictions. 

It should be noted that the active alternatives 

require the disturbance of the on-site wetlands. 

Restoration of the wetlands is not included in 

these alternatives, as a significant full-scale 

remediation effort is expected to follow this Early 

Action. Therefore, wetland restoration will need 

to be considered as part of the overall remedial 

action for the site. 

3. Long-term Effectiveness and Permanence

The No Action alternative offers no long-term 

effectiveness or permanence. For Alternatives 2 

and 3, the potential risks from the principal threat 

LNAPL would be reduced, although both 

alternatives can be expected to leave some 

residual LNAPL in the remedial target areas. 

Alternative 4 eliminates principal threat LNAPL 

within the remedial target areas. As discussed 

earlier, this action only addresses LNAPL that is 

considered a principal threat; under all the active 

alternatives, lower-level threat LNAPL would 

remain on other areas of the site. 

Other than water from biocell dewatering during 

operation, no treatment residuals are expected 

from Alternative 2. Treatment residuals, in 

addition to water from dewatering, are expected 

from Alternative 3; the concentrations of principal 

threat LNAPL and associated contaminants are 

expected to be high in these residuals (e.g., filter 

cake and blowdown water from soil washing). 

The residuals from Alternative 3 are assumed to 

require off-site treatment and disposal. There are 

EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR SUPERFUND REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

Overall Protectiveness of Human Health and the Environment evaluates whether and how an alternative 

eliminates, reduces, or controls threats to public health and the environment through institutional controls, engineering 

controls, or treatment. 

Compliance with ARARs evaluates whether the alternative meets federal and state environmental statutes, 

regulations, and other requirements that are legally applicable, or relevant and appropriate to the site, or whether a 

waiver is justified. 

Long-term Effectiveness and Permanence considers the ability of an alternative to maintain protection of human 

health and the environment over time. 

Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume of Contaminants through Treatment evaluates an alternative's use of 

treatment to reduce the harmful effects of principal contaminants, their ability to move in the environment, and the 

amount of contamination present. 

Short-term Effectiveness considers the length of time needed to implement an alternative and the risks the alternative 

poses to workers, the community, and the environment during implementation. 

Implementability considers the technical and administrative feasibility of implementing the alternative, including factors 

such as the relative availability of goods and services. 

Cost includes estimated capital and annual operations and maintenance costs, as well as present worth cost. Present 

worth cost is the total cost of an alternative over time in terms of today's dollar value. Cost estimates are expected to be 

accurate within a range of +50 to -30 percent. 

State/Support Agency Acceptance considers whether the State agrees with the EPA's analyses and 

recommendations, as described in the RI/FS and Proposed Plan. 

Community Acceptance considers whether the local community agrees with EPA's analyses and preferred alternative. 

 Comments received on the Proposed Plan are an important indicator of community acceptance.
12

no treatment residuals for Alternative 4, as this 

alternative involves the excavation and off-site 

disposal of all the waste. 

For Alternatives 2 and 3, at the end of the 

implementation period, an isolation barrier would 

not be needed around the treated soil, as the 

treated soil is expected to be of similar 

characteristics to the surrounding soil, including 

some residual LNAPL and some underlying 

constituents that would not be treated. 

Under Alternative 4, an isolation barrier around 

the perimeter of the remedial target areas would 

need to be maintained between the new backfill 

and the surrounding soil. This isolation barrier 

would be needed as the remediated area is 

expected to contain no LNAPL and no other 

contaminants compared to the surrounding soil. 

The surface would need to be graded to drain 

clean surface water toward remediated soil such 

that there is a slight positive gradient from within 

the remedial target areas to the outside. Thus, 

while Alternative 4 provides more long-term 

permanence by addressing all the LNAPL and all 

the underlying constituents not treated by 

Alternatives 2 and 3, it achieves a level of 

remediation - a "clean island" in the middle of stillcontaminated soils - that requires more rigorous 

efforts to maintain. 

4. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume 

of Contaminants Through Treatment 

Alternative 1 provides no reduction in toxicity, 

mobility or volume. Alternatives 2 and 3 would 

reduce the toxicity, mobility and volume of the 

contaminants in the remedial target areas through 

treatment. For Alternatives 2 and 3, the treatment 

is permanent. 

Alternative 4 does not use treatment – rather, the 

toxicity and volume are transferred from the site 

through off-site disposal. 

5. Short-term Effectiveness

There are no short-term effectiveness issues 

associated with the No Action alternative. 

Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 would present some shortterm risks to the community (dust, emissions, soil 

erosion); however, these risks can be controlled 

through engineering controls. Risks to workers 

during implementation also can be controlled 

through safety procedures and the use of personal 

protection. As noted earlier in this Proposed Plan, 

there are no residences within half a mile of the 

site. Short-term concerns would relate to any 

potential impacts on industrial and commercial 

neighbors. 

All of the alternatives involve excavation. Risks 

to commercial and industrial neighbors can be 

controlled through engineering controls such as 

soil erosion controls, dust suppressants, and the 

implementation of spill prevention and response 

procedures. Risks to workers also can be 

controlled by using safety procedures and 

protective equipment. 

Short-term risks associated with Alternative 4 

would be the greatest because of its larger 

transportation component (both contaminated soil 

and clean backfill need to be transported from and 

to the site). The short-term risks are expected to 

be the lowest for the biocell construction and 

operation. 

This Early Action will be the first of several 

remedial actions for the site; therefore, one shortterm consideration would be whether this action 

delays or otherwise limits future remedial 

decision-making. Alternative 2 appears to pose 

the highest likelihood of confounding future 

remedial planning because of its longer operational 

phase. The biocell may also take additional time, 

beyond the projected five years in the FFS, to 

reach the remediation goals, and a longer time 

period may interfere with other remedial planning 

or with the timely reuse of the property. As 

discussed above, under Long-Term Effectiveness 

and Permanence, Alternative 4 poses the plausible 

scenario of a "clean island" within an area with a 

long history of industrial use, where a future 

remedy may need to choose to either to maintain 
13

this cleaner zone at high expense, or allow it to be 

recontaminated. 

6. Implementability

There are no implementability issues associated 

with the No Action alternative. Alternatives 2, 3 

and 4 are considered implementable from a 

constructability perspective. Possible challenges 

common to all three alternatives include the 

difficulty of installing sheet piles in clayey soils, 

excavation dewatering and water treatment, 

phasing cell construction, and uncertainties in the 

depth to and variability of the native clay layer. 

Because of the complexities of the equipment and 

process, the soil washing technology is expected 

to have a higher potential for delays associated 

with equipment problems. Portions of the 

principal threat LNAPL soils are clays and oily 

wastes that will pose significant materials handling 

challenges; therefore, preparation of material for 

placement in the biocell and for the feed to the soil 

washing process is critical for both alternatives, 

although probably more so for the soil washing 

process. As described in Alternatives 2 and 3, the 

most highly concentrated areas of the site, where 

floating product is found, cannot likely be treated 

through either the biocell or through soil washing, 

and would need to be transported off site for 

disposal. 

Equipment and specialists are commercially 

available and sufficiently proven for all three 

alternatives, although fewer vendors are available 

for competitive bidding for the soil washing 

technology. 

Alternative 2 would require operation over a 

longer period (five years of operations are 

estimated) than Alternatives 3 and 4. The O&M 

activities needed for this alternative are routine, 

and failure of a component of the alternative is not 

expected to result in any significant threats to 

public health or the environment. 

7. Cost

The estimated present worth costs of Alternatives 

2, 3 and 4 are $17.3 million, $18.4 million and 

$19.5 million, respectively. There are no costs 

associated with Alternative 1. 

8. State/Support Agency Acceptance

The State of New Jersey concurs with EPA=s 

preferred alternative in this Proposed Plan. 

9. Community Acceptance

Community acceptance of the preferred alternative 

will be evaluated after the public comment period 

ends and will be described in the Record of 

Decision, the document that formalizes the 

selection of the remedy for the site. 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 

Based on an evaluation of the various alternatives, 

EPA and NJDEP recommend Alternative 2, the 

on-site biocell along with excavation and off-site 

disposal of the more highly contaminated material, 

as the preferred alternative to address the principal 

threat LNAPL. This alternative involves isolating 

the remedial target areas with sheet pile walls, and 

excavating the principal threat LNAPL areas, a 

total of approximately 45,825 cubic yards of 

material. The more highly contaminated portion 

of this material, including all liquid LNAPL at a 

minimum, will be transported off site for disposal. 

The remaining excavated material would then be 

augmented with nutrients and bulking agents to 

enhance permeability and the conditions for 

biological activity, and the area within the sheet 

pile walls would be converted into a biocell by 

installing piping for air and nutrient distribution 

and a collection system for air and water that may 

accumulate in the biocell. The augmented 

LNAPL material would then be placed in the 

biocell for treatment, and capped. 

Operation of the aeration, nutrient distribution, 

and water collection systems for the biocell would 
14

be required for an estimated five-year period. 

Performance sampling and final confirmation 

sampling would be conducted to demonstrate that 

the LNAPL wastes have been destroyed through 

biological degradation, at which time the biocell 

components would be dismantled. 

In addition to liquid LNAPL, soils with LNAPL 

concentrations that are found during the remedial 

design to be unsuitable for treatment in the biocell 

(based on factors including the effectiveness of the 

technology to achieve cleanup goals, the projected 

time period to do so, engineering concerns, etc) 

would be excavated and treated via stabilization, if 

needed to allow for transportation, and 

transported for off-site disposal. 

The preferred alternative would achieve the 

remediation goals that are protective for the 

principal threat LNAPL, but a subsequent decision 

is still necessary to address the underlying 

constituents within this material. Thus, the need 

for institutional controls, such as a deed notice or 

covenant, would be determined as part of a future 

remedy. 

The preferred alternative is believed to provide the 

best balance of trade-offs among the alternatives 

based on the information available to EPA at this 

time. EPA believes that the preferred alternative 

would be protective of human health and the 

environment, would comply with ARARs, would 

be cost-effective, and would utilize permanent 

solutions and alternative treatment technologies to 

the maximum extent practicable. The selected 

alternative can change in response to public 

comment or new information. 

Consistent with EPA Region 2's Clean and Green 

Policy, EPA will evaluate the use of sustainable 

technologies and practices with respect to any 

remedial alternative selected for the site. 

COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION 

EPA encourages the public to gain a more 

comprehensive understanding of the site and the 

Superfund activities that have been conducted 

there. 

The dates for the public comment period, the date, 

location and time of the public meeting, and the 

locations of the Administrative Record files, are 

provided on the front page of this Proposed Plan. 

Written comments on the Proposed Plan should be 

addressed to the Remedial Project Manager, 

Grisell V. Díaz-Cotto, at the address below. 

EPA Region 2 has designated a public liaison as a 

point-of-contact for the community concerns and 

questions about the federal Superfund program in 

New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. 

Virgin Islands. To support this effort, the Agency 

has established a 24-hour, toll-free number that 

the public can call to request information, express 

concerns, or register complaints about Superfund. 

For further information on the Diamondhead site, 

please speak with: 

Grisell V. Díaz-Cotto Wanda Ayala 

Remedial Project Community Relations 

Manager Coordinator 

(212) 637-4430 (212) 637-3676 

Email: diaz-cotto.grisell@epa.gov 

U.S. EPA 

290 Broadway 19th Floor 

New York, New York 10007-1866 

Written comments on this proposed plan should be 

addressed to Ms. Díaz-Cotto 

The public liaison for EPA’s Region 2 is: 

George H. Zachos 

Regional Public Liaison 

Toll-free (888) 283-7626 

(732) 321-6621 

U.S. EPA Region 2 

2890 Woodbridge Avenue, MS-211 

Edison, New Jersey 08837-3679

Harrison Ave

§ ̈¦280

Figure 2

Proposed Remedial Target Areas

Diamond Head RI/FS

Kearny, NJ

Legend

Temporary Gravel Road

Proposed Remedial Target Area

Measureable LNAPL in Wells

Delineated Wetlands

Extent of Historical Source Area (1976 Aerial Photo) 0 175 350 87.5

Feet

 ́

LNAPL Plume

STL \\LACLEDE\PROJ\USACE\359471DIAMONDHEAD\GIS\MAPFILES\388641_OU2\PUBLIC_MEETING\FIGURE 2 - PROPOSED REMEDIAL TARGET AREAS_REV.MXD RHURSEY 7/8/2009 16:26:48
Surface Water Groundwater Sediment

Surface Soil (0 to 2 feet 

below ground surface)

Subsurface Soil (2 to 12 

feet below ground 

surface)

Chlorobenzene Benzene Benzene Benzene Benzene

Chloroethane Chlorobenzene Dichlorobenzene-1,4 Ethylbenzene Bromomethane

Dichlorobenzene-1,4 Chloroethane Ethylbenzene Tetrachloroethylene Carbon tetrachloride

Dichloroethane-1,2 Dichlorobenzene-1,3 Tetrachloroethylene Trichloroethylene Chloroform

Dichloroethylene-1,2 cis Dichlorobenzene-1,4 Trichloroethylene Xylenes, total Dibromoethane-1,2

Tetrachloroethylene Dichloroethene-1,2 trans Xylenes, total Acetophenone Dichlorobenzene-1,3

Trichloroethylene Dichloroethylene-1,2 cis Acetophenone Benzo(a)anthracene Dichlorobenzene-1,4

Vinyl chloride Ethylbenzene Benzo(a)anthracene Benzo(a)pyrene Dichloroethane-1,2

Benzo(a)pyrene

Methyl isobutyl ketone (4-methyl-2-

pentanone) Benzo(a)pyrene Benzo(b)fluoranthene Dichloroethylene-1,2 cis

Benzo(b)fluoranthene Tetrachloroethane-1,1,2,2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene Benzo(k)fluoranthene Dichloropropane-1,2

BHC, beta Tetrachloroethylene Benzo(k)fluoranthene Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Ethylbenzene

BHC, delta Trichloroethylene Cresol-p Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

Methyl isobutyl ketone (4-

methyl-2-pentanone)

Barium Vinyl chloride Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Methylnaphthalene-2 Tetrachloroethylene

Beryllium Xylenes, total Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Naphthalene Trichloroethane-1,1,2

Cadmium Acetophenone Methylnaphthalene-2 Aldrin Trichloroethylene

Chromium Cresol-o Naphthalene BHC, alpha Vinyl chloride

Iron Cresol-p Aldrin BHC, beta Xylenes, total

Lead Cresol-parachloro-meta BHC, alpha Dieldrin Acetophenone

Manganese Dimethylphenol-2,4 DDT-4,4 Heptachlor Epoxide Benzo(a)anthracene

Thallium Ether, bis-chloroisopropyl Dieldrin Pcb-aroclor 1016 Benzo(a)pyrene

Methylnaphthalene-2 Heptachlor Epoxide Pcb-aroclor 1242 Benzo(b)fluoranthene

Naphthalene Pcb-aroclor 1242 Pcb-aroclor 1248 Benzo(k)fluoranthene

Nitrophenol-4 Pcb-aroclor 1248 Pcb-aroclor 1260 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene

PCP (Pentachlorophenol) Pcb-aroclor 1260 Aluminum Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

Phenol Aluminum Antimony Methylnaphthalene-2

Phthalate, bis(2-ethylhexyl) (DEHP) Antimony Arsenic Naphthalene

Trichlorophenol-2,4,6 Arsenic Barium Aldrin

DDD-4,4 Barium Cadmium BHC, alpha

Dieldrin Cadmium Chromium Dieldrin

Heptachlor Epoxide Chromium Copper Heptachlor Epoxide

Aluminum Copper Iron Pcb-aroclor 1016

Antimony Iron Lead Pcb-aroclor 1242

Arsenic Lead Manganese Pcb-aroclor 1248

Barium Manganese Mercury Pcb-aroclor 1254

Chromium Mercury Nickel Pcb-aroclor 1260

Lead Silver Selenium Aluminum

Manganese Thallium Silver Antimony

Nickel Vanadium Thallium Arsenic

Selenium Zinc Vanadium Barium

Thallium Zinc Beryllium

Vanadium Cadmium

Chromium

Copper

Iron

Lead

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

Selenium

Silver

Thallium

Vanadium

Zinc

Table 1

Summary of Chemicals of Potential Concern for the HHRA

Diamond Head RI/FS, Kearny, NJ

1 of 1
..(I\.

, .:\'-'1-" \J)\1 t.

MAXUS005581
Diamond Head Oil Refinery Division

Harrison Turnpike (Rt.508)

Kearny, Hudson Co.

BAD000002

MAXUS005582
CONFIDENTIAL:

BUREAU OF FIELD OPERATIONS

RESPONSIBLE PARTY INVESTIGATIONS UNIT

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

Case Name: Diamond Head oil

AKA: Diamond Head oil Refining Co.

AKA: Bay City oil

AKA: Northeast Oil Service

AKA: Newtown Refining corporation

AKA: PSC Resources, Inc.

AKA: Ag-MET oil service

CASE SUMMARY

The Dia~ond Head oil site is a 5.5 acre property located at 1401

Harrison Avenue/Turnpike, Kearny, Hudson County (Block 285, Lot 3).

The site is bounded on the north by Harrison Avenue; on the east by

properties owned by NJDOT (Block 285 Lot 4) and the Town of Kearny

(Block 285 Lot 15) i on the south by property owned by the NJDOT (Block

285 Lot 2A); and on the west by property owned by the town of Kearny

(Block 285 Lot 14). The northern portion (3.88 acres) of the subject

property is currently owned by Mimi Urban Renewal corporation

(formerly Mimi Development corporation). The remaining southern

portion of the site (approxinately 1.62 acres) is owned by the New

Jersey state Department of Transportation (as part of the right-of way

for 1-280 which runs south of the site). Diamond Head oil Refining

company and its subsequent successor companies operated a waste oil

refining facility at the subject site from approximately 1949 to 1979.

The subject site was formerly part of a larger, 349.4 acre, property

(County Block 1434) bounded on the north by Harrison Avenue (formerly

the Newark Turnpike); on the east by land belonging to the Delaware,

Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company; on the west by Franks Creek

and the boundary line of the adjoining property.

On July I, 1901, the subject site was sold (as part of a larger parcel

which includes County Block 1434, referred to as Tract 6) by Ellen M.

pike (widow of Samuel N. Pike) et also of New York to John R. Ferrier

of New York for the sum of $1,492,180. John R. Ferrier then sold the

property for $1.00 to Henry L. Sprague of New York on October 17,

1901.

On November 16, 1901 Henry L. Sprauge sold the property for $1.00 to

the Hackensack Meadows Company (a New Jersey Corp.).

On september 18, 1911 the subject property was sold by the Newark

Meadows Improvement Conpany, et also to Harry M. Durning.

Harry M. Durning by a deed dated March 4, 1915, sold the property,

which included the subject site, to newark Factory sites, Inc. (a NeH

Jersey Corp.).

BAD000005

MAXUS005583
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 2

CONFIDENTIAL

The Town of Kearny purchased the property from Newark Factory Sites,

Inc. on Feb~uary 4, 1942.

On November 24, 1948, the Office of the Building Inspector for the

Town of Kearny (Building Dept.) issued a building permit to Diamond

Head oil Refining Co., Inc. for the purpose of erecting a tank

foundation on the subject site Block 285 Lot 3. The dimensions of the

founaatiolL, hS described on the permit, are 40'4" width with a depth

of 11'4".

The Diamond Head oil Refining Company, Inc. (Diamond Head Company) was

incorporated in the state of New Jersey on December 12, 1949.

Diamond Head ~O;[lPi:il,j oriyinc.lly operated on the property that is

located to the east of the subject site (1427 Harrison Avenue, Block

285 Lot 4). Corporate officers of Diamond Head CO;""pC.nyleased this

adjacent property (Block 285 Lot 4) from Abe Finkelstein of Glen

Ridge, NJ from December 1, 1945 to December 1, 1950. According to the

lease agreement, the property y;asto be "used and occupied only for

the refining and sale of waste and used oils of all kinds and such

petroleum products ...II •

On December 12, 1945 (the same date that Diamond Head oil Refining

company incorporated) Bay city Oil service incorporated in the state

of New Jersey. The principal office for both corporations, as

described in their certificates of incorporation, was 1427 Harrison

Turnpike, Kearny. The incorporators and directors of both Diamond Head

and Bay city oil were the same.

One of the objects for which Bay city oil service was incorporated, as

stated in their certificate of incorporation, was to "acquire and take

over as a going concern the business now carried on at #38 west 41st

street, in the city of Bayonne I 1,ewJersey, under the firm name or

style of Bay city Oil Service, and in connection with the acquisition

of such business to purchase the goodwill and all or any of the

assets, and assume all or any of the liabilities of the proprietors of

such business.1I

Another object for which Bay city oil Service was incorporated, as

stated in the certificate of incorporation, was litobuy and sell waste

and used oils of all kinds and such petroleum products, mineral and

vegetable oils as the Directors ~ay determine would be for the

financial benefit of the corporation."

Bay city oil describes the character of their business in annual

reports filed with the llJ Depart",ent of state for the years 1946

through 1961, as follows:

"buying and selling ylaste ar.3used oils of all kinds and petroleum

products, mineral and vegetable oils" (1946 through 1956)

11Collectors of waste oil" (1958)

11Collectors of used cr2n}:case oils" (1959)

MAXUS005584
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 3

CONFiDENTiAL

"Collectors of used Petroleum oils" (1961)

The NJ state Industrial Directory (NJSID) for the years 1949 through

1955 and 1958 through 1968 listed Diamond Head oil Refining Company at

1427 Harrison Turnpike/Avenue. Directories for the years 1956-1957

and 1969 through 1980 lists Diamond Head oil at 1401 Harrison

Turnpike/Avenue.

A corporation named Shur-Flo oil Co., Inc. is listed in the Industrial

Directory as having operated at 1401 Harrison Turnpike/Avenue from

1952 to 1961. The descriptions given in the Directory for the

operations of Diamond Head oil Refinin~ and Shur-Flo Oil are oil

refining and canning motor oil respect1vely.

In annual reports filed with the Division of commercial Recording for

Diamond Head oil Company from 1946 to 1951, Diamond Head oil described

the character of their business as follows:

Buying and refining waste and used oils of all kinds and selling

same when so refined at wholesale or retail"

Shur-Flo oil Co., Inc. incorporated in New Jersey on August I, 1949.

Both Diamond Head and Shur-Flo shared the same registered agent and

had several directors and corporate officers in common.

In annual reports filed with the Division of commercial Recordingl

Shur-FIo described the character of their business for the years 1949

through 1959 as follows:

"Buying, selling and canning motor oilsl lubricating oils and

petroleum products of all kinds and any other lubricants whether

derived from petroleum products or otherwise.ll

On January 9

1

1952, Shur-Flo filed papers with the Division of

COIDwercial Recording to change their registered office frOID 1427 to

1401 Harrison Turnpike 1 Kearny.

The following building permits were issued to Diamond Head oil in 1951

for the subject property (Block 284 Lot 3):

1) Permit #11004 Issued 01/11/51

Erect a concrete block building for use as a garage and

office

\'1idth 401

Depth 1261

Height 1 & 2 story

(complete 07/13/51)

2) Permit #11313 Issued 09/21/51

MAXUS005585
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 4

CONFIDENTIAL

Erect a concrete block building for use as a warehouse

width 40'

DeJ;lth lOa'

Hel.ght 321

(complete 04/26/52)

3) permit #11314 Issued 09/21/51

Erect a tank foundation and dike

Tank Foundation 50' Diameter

Dike 9

1 Height

4) permit #11347 Issued 10/16/51

Erect a concrete block building for use as a switch house

and meter

Width

DeJ;lth

Helght

7'4' •

1114' I

10'

On January la, 1952, the Building Dept. issued a building permit to

Diamond Head for the purpose of erecting a one story masonry building

for use as a boiler house.

Shur-Flo filed a certificate of dissolution with the Department of

state on April 17, 1961. It is unknown if Shur-Flo operated at the

subject site between 1953 (the final year that Shur-Flo was listed in

the Industrial Directory) and 1961 (the year of dissolution) .

The waste oil refining operations Diamond Head oil and Shur-Flo caused

the formation of a large pool or 1I1akell of oil, located mainly on an

adjacent property which is currently owned by the New Jersey

Department of Transportation (NJDOT) (Block 285, Lot 2) and partially

on the sUbject site. It is not known when and from whom the NJDOT

came to acquire Bloc}: 285 Lot 2.

On October 12, 1971, an inspector from the Hackensack Meadowlands

Development Commission (HMDC) I while conducting an inspection in the

vicinity of the subject site, observed a stream of liquid with an oily

sheen flowing into a storm drain on the south side of Harrison

Turnpike (approximately 800 feet east of the SUbject facility). The

stream of oily liquid was further observed to flow into a catch basin

(located approximately 175 feet west along the storm drain), then from

the catch basin it traveled under Harrison Turnpike, into a drainage

ditch which Ultimately carried the liquid into the Passaic River.

The oily liquid was traced bac}: to a large pool of oil (commonly

referred to as 1I0il Lakell) located partially on the southern portion

of the SUbject site and mainly on propert.y owned by the NJDOT

MAXUS005586
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 5

CONFIDENTIAL

(situated to the south and east of the subject facilitYi Block 285 Lot

2) .

upon further inspection of the southern and eastern sides of the

sUbject site, the inspector observed a number of storage tanks from

which a series of pipes extended southward toward the rear of the

property, where several ponds (of earthen construction) were located.

The ponds adjoined the main body of the oil Lake and was separated by

earthen berms/dikes. According to the inspector the ponds appeared to

have been built up above the level of the surrounding ground and that

of oil Lake~ The liquid contained within the ponds exhibited an oily

sheen and was of a similar color and consistency as the liquid which

was observed in oil Lake. The pipes that were observed extending from

the storage tank area terminated in the vicinity of the ponds. The

inspector also observed a number of flexible hoses with couplings

lying on the ground around the ponds.

According to a letter dated December 8, 1971, to the Department from

the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners (PVSC), it was reported that

during heavy rain storms, oil and water would overflow and enter

county storm drains and Frank's Creek. The runoff would also run onto

an adjacent roadway (presumably Harrison Avenue) causing a traffic

hazard.

l

!

On May 11, 1972, Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc. submitted a

completed Waste Effluent survey to the Passaic Valley sewerage

Commissioners. On the survey form Diamond Head Oil Company listed

their type of business as 'IRecyclers (Re-refiners) of Used Oils

SIC 2911". The operations were described as follows: "Waste oils are

treated and settled in holdin9 Tanks, then fractionated by

distillation, and contacted wlth activated clay to restore the oils

color, and then filtered to remove spent clay and any remaining

iDpurities."

hccording to the survey the finished product was lubricating oils

(average production of 300,000 gallons per month). Diamond Head oil

Company listed the raw materials used as waste crankcase oils

collected from service stations, motor car companies, and industrial

plants. Diamond Head oil Company listed the following substances as

being in their discharge to the storm sewer:

emulsified oils (100.2 ppm), aluminum (1.6 ppm) , boron (0.1 ppm) ,

barium (0.3 ppm), calcium (9.3 ppm) , chromium (3.3 ppm), iron (4.3

ppm), magnesium (1.9 ppm), nanganese (0.1 ppm) , molybdenum (0.1

ppm), sodium (70 ppm) , lead (3.2 ppm), silicon (9.3 ppm) , vanadium

(0.1 ppro), and potassium (1.4 ppm).

NOTE: The discharge described above was from a sample collected on

March 29, 1972 during a 1-2 hour span.

According to the waste Effluent survey, Diamond Head oil Refining

company discharged 75,000 gallons of waste water to the storm seYler,

river, or ditch.

MAXUS005587
DIAHOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 6

CONFJ DENT/At

On June 1, 1972, Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc. submitted an

application to the Department for a certification to collect or haul

solid waste. The nature of their operation was described on the

2!Jplication as "Recycle used lubricating oils". They also stated that

they did not collect waste and that they did not have trucks for waste

disposal purposes.

~he following were listed as officers of Diamond Head oil Refining

Co., Inc.:

Hartin Morrison

Nicholas Matin

Michael stellato

Martin Morrison, Jr.

President

Vice President

secretary

Treasurer

Bay city oil service, Inc. also submitted an application to the

Department for a certification to collect or haul solid waste on June

2, 1972. The nature of the operation of Bay city oil was described as

1Icollector of used lubricating oi11l

•

Bay city oil stated on the application that they collected an

estimated 26,000 gallons of waste oil per week from New Jersey; 24,000

gallons of waste oil from New York; and 1,500 gallons of waste oil

from connecticut. Bay city oil stated that the lubricating oils were

delivered to Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc. for recycling.

NOTE: The address ~iven on the application for Bay city oil

service, 1401 Harr~son Turnpike, Kearn¥, was the same as the

address given for Diamond Head Oil Ref~ning Co., Inc. (the subject

site) .

The following were listed as officers of Bay city oil Service, Inc.:

Nicholas Matin*

Martin Morrison*

Martin Morrison, Jr.*

John Hudzik

President

Vice President

Treasurer

Secretary

*Officers of Diamond Head oil Refining company, Inc.

Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc. and Bay city oil service, Inc.

filed applications with the Department for renewal of their

certifications to collect or haul solid waste on April 30, 1973 and

Hay 14, 1973 respectively. The sar.teindividuals served as corporate

officers for both corporations. The names of the officers and their

respective titles were listed as follows:

lU..J1E

TITLE AT

DIAl101W HEAD OIL

TITLE AT

BAY CITY OIL

Martin Morrison

tricholas Matin

John L. Hudzik

President

Vice President

Secretary

Vice president

President

Secretary

MAXUS005588
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 7

CONFIDENTIAL

Martin Morrison, Jr. Treasurer Treasurer

Both corporations reported operating from the same address and having

the same telephone number.

Bay city oil service reported that they collected approximately 20,750

gallons of waste oil per week for disposal/recycling at Diamond Head

oil Refining Co., Inc. (subject site). They also reported collecting

approximately 24,250 gallons of waste oil per week from New York for

disposal/recycling at Diamond Head Oil Refining Co., Inc. Bay city oil

indicated that they had six 1500 gallon capacity trucks which they

used for transporting the waste oil.

On February 6, 1973, representatives of the NJDEP, Bureau of Water

Pollution control (BWPC) conducted an inspection of the subject site.

The inspectors noted the presence of oil Lake to the south and east of

the subject facility. An inspector described oil Lake as containing a

large quantity of petroleum, oil, and other petroleum products. During

the course of the inspection the inspectors observed that oil was

leaking from several valves in use at the subject facility; several

open cans of oil were full and running over; and an oil water

separator in use at the facility was not maintained and running over.

The inspector also noted that the ground at the subject site was

saturated with oil. According to one inspector, the saturated

condition of the ground during the time of the inspection, resulted in

the runoff of oil into a storm drain located on Harrison Avenue. The

inspector stated in an affidavit, that he observed drain pipes that

had been placed so as to run into the oil Lake from the facility's oil

\~ater separator; and a drain-off line had been placed in the bottom of

the facility's sludge holding tanks (Affidavit of John Vernam dated

June 16, 1978).

The BWPC inspector also noted that the topography of the site during

the time of the inspection was such that it permitted surface runoff,

including oil and other petroleum products which were saturating the

ground area of the facility to flow both onto Harrison Avenue and into

oil Lake.

\

I

I

I

!

I

In a letter to Martin Morrison, Sr., of Diamond Head oil Refining Co.,

Inc., dated February 22, 1973, from John Vernam of the NJDEP, BWPC

stated the findings of the February 61 1973 inspection of the subject

site. Mr. Vernam also stated that during the inspection, the NJDEP

representatives were accompanied by Martin Morrison, Jr., of Diamond

Head oil

l

who stated that he completely agreed with the Department

inspectors with regard to the poor condition of the site.

A memorandum dated March 1, 1973, by John Vernam provided the

following infornation:

"Diamond Head is [was] basically a refining company. They use[d] a

three step process to extract lubricating oils, grease, and low

grade heating oils from waste oils, lmostly crank case oill

•

1I

MAXUS005589
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 8

CONFJDENTIAl

"Their through-put is [was] about 50,000,000 gallons per year, of

this amount approximately 220,000 gallons a month is (was]

refined into a usable product." (Resulting in approximately .6

million gallons of usable products per year.)

" ...their sludge waste amount[ed] to 3,600 gallons per day."

Mr. Vernam also stated that Martin Morrison, Jr., who accompanied him

during the inspection, made the contention that their oil problems

stemmed from oil Lake which was located on the adjacent NJDOT

property. However, Mr. Vernam later stated the following IlBut, after

viewin9 his (Morrison's] grounds and operations, Diamond Head oil is

also dlrectly responsible for the oil pollution problems on Harrison

Avenue" .

, .

,.

During a followup inspection on March 22, 1973, the NJDEP, BHPC

inspector noted that Diamond Head had shut down their facility to

enable them to fix the leaking valves, repair the dike area, remove

the "illegalll drain pipes and to start cleanup of their grounds.

Diamond Head had completely removed the oil water separator \vhich had

a discharge into the pond of oil (i.e oil Lake) off their property.

NOTE: In his June 1978 affidavit the inspector stated that he was

aware that oil Lake had overflowed numerous times, both prior to and

subsequent to February 6, 1973.

According to a May 2, 1973 ill·1DCletter to the Commissioner of the

NJDEP, members of the HMDC's environmental section met with

representatives of the NJDEP, Bureau of water Pollution Control to

discuss a solution to the oil pollution problems at the Diamond Head

oil Refining Company site. During the course of the discussions,

questions were raised as to the status of the "Lake of oil

ll

located on

Block 285 Lot 2 (on the 1-280 ROW). The size of the lake was estimated

to be 15 acres in size and up to one foot in depth. The capacity was

estimated as being 2,000,000 gallons of which 500,000 gallons were oil

and oily water, and 1,500,000 gallons were oil sludge.

It was further stated in the letter that the HMDC was concerned about

the ultimate disposal of the lake, because of the pending construction

of 1-280 in this section which was to occur within the next few years.

The letter stressed that improper dumping of the oil and sludge during

construction could be a disaster. The letter concluded by stating that

a plan of action should be made at that tine, before construction of

1-280 began.

As of April 25, 1974, the ill1DChad not received a reply frOD the

NJDEP, to the May 2, 1973 letter. On April 25, the Hl1DC requested

assistance from the NJDOT in involving the t:JDEP in exploring

solutions to the problems associated with oil Lake.

On October 26, 1973, PSC Resources, Inc., a subsidiary of Phillips

Screw company, Inc. a Delaware Corporation, entered into a stock

purchase agreement which resulted in the acquisition of 100% of the

MAXUS005590
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 9

CONFIDENTIAL

issued outstanding stock of Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc. on

November I, 1973 (175 NJ superior court, NJDOT v. PSC Resources,

Inc. ).

As stated in the superior Court of NJ, Law Division synopsis cited

above:

liThe terms of the a<;rreementrequired the officers and directors of

Diamond Head to resl<;rnon November I, 1973, while PSC's nominees,

Arthur M. Vash, presldclt and director of PSC, John J. Casey,

treasurer and director of PSC, and Jerome E. Rosen, secretary and

director of PSC, became the new directors and officers of Diamond

Head. II

On November I, 1973, within hours after the appointments (of the neH

directors and officers of Diamond Head), the new director of Diamond

Head submitted a "P12:iof Cor..pleteLiquidation and Dissolution

ll

which

PSC Resources, as sole shareholder, adopted.

PSC Resources continued to operate the subject facility under the

names Diamond Head oil Refining company, Division of PSC Resources and

Diamond Head oil Refining company Inc. until November 3, 1976.

The 1973 NJSID lists Martin Morrison as President, Nicholas Matin as

Executive Vice President, Michael stellato as Secretary, Martin

Morrison, Jr. as Treasurer, and John Hudzik as Office Manager for

Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc.

On November 5, 1973, Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc. sold the

SUbject property to Phillips Resources, Inc., a Delaware corporation

with its principal office in Natick, Massachusetts. The property was

sold for less than one hundred dollars. Arthur M. Vash and Martin

Morrison Jr. signed the deed as president and secretary of Diamond

Head oil Refining Co., Inc. respectively.

On December 5, 1973, Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc. submitted a

revised Haste Effluent survey to the PVSC. Diamond Head oil reported

that their production remained at 300,000 gallons per month. They also

stated that they had installed a water recycling system during the

second quarter of 1973 which eliminated all discharges to the storm

sewer, river or ditch. Martin Morrison, Jr. signed the survey as the

General Manager of Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc.

Dia~ond Head oil Refining Company, Inc. and Bay city oil service, Inc.

filed Certificates of Dissolution with the Department of state on

Deceraber 28, 1973. John J. casey, Jerome E. Rosen, and Arthur 11. Vash

constituted all of the directors of Diamond Head oil Refining Co·t

In:::.

The 1974 through 1976 UJSIDs list Diamond Head Oil as a Division of

Phillips Resources, Inc. Arthur M. Vash, Jerome E. Rosen, and John J.

casey (Directors of Diamond Head oil Refining Company at the time of

dissolution) appear in the 1974 Directory as President, Secretary, and

MAXUS005591
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE sUMMARY

PAGE 10

Treasurer respectively of Diamond Head oil Refining company,

Inc./Division of Phillips Resources, Inc .. John Hudzik was again

listed as Office Manager in 1974. Martin Morrison, Jr., who was

listed as Treasurer in 1973, was listed as Purchasing Agent in

Directories from 1974 to 1976.

In a letter to the PVSC dated March 20, 1974, Diamond Head oil

Refining Company stated that they were not tied into a sewer. They

reported that they had their awn septic system. The letterhead that

\~as used by Diamond Head oil Refining company for this letter

indicated that Diamond Head oil Refining company was a Division of

Phillips Resources, Inc.

An undated waste Effluent survey for 1974 (for industries served by

the Passaic Valley sewerage Commissioners), which was si9ned by Edward

cincotta of Diamond Head oil Refining Co., briefly descrlbed the

operations at the subject facility in the following way: llReceive

\~aste oil, Chc~ical Treat, caustic to Separate Solids, super Natant

oil Heated and refined with clay.1I

By letter dated May 2, 1974, the IDIDC informed the NJDOT that they may

have come up with a solution to eliminating oil Lake and its

associated problems. In the letter the HHDC stated IIWehave worked out

an agreement to have the pond pumped out, and expect to use the

material as a road base for the landfills in Kearnyll. The letter

further stated that the ill1DCexpected to begin in the next week or so.

It is unknown if this plan was ever implemented.

On June 13, 1974, the Law Department of Hudson county wrote a letter

to the Department summarizing problems that were related to the pool

of oil that existed on the NJDOT property that is adjacent to the

subject site. According to the letter, there was a drainage ditch

which led from the pool of oil to the adjacent roadway causing an

extremely dangerous road condition. The letter went on to state that

results of an investigation by the County indicated that Diamond Head

oil Refining Company, located at 1401 Harrison Turnpike, was directly

responsible for the oil related problems that existed in the area.

On Oece~~er 12, 1974, Oianond Head oil Refining Company, Div. of PSC

Resources, Inc. applied for a National pollutant Discharge Elimination

System (NPDES), Permit to Discharge. In a letter dated December 10,

1974 to the USEPA, Diamond Head oil Refining Co. described their

process and waste disposal practices as follows:

IIHererefine used oil. He produce approximately 200,000 gallons

per month. It is sold from here both wholesale and retail.

He have several waste products:

1. oil Sludge - this waste is re~ovcd by Jonas waste Removal,

Sewell, N.J. It is ducped at an app~oved dump site.

2. Human Waste - this waste is stored in septic tanks and

periodically pumped out.

MAXUS005592
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 11

CONFIDENTIAL

3. contaminated runoff, boiler blowdown and process water - these

wastes are removed by Jonas.

4. Uncontaminated runoff - this waste flows to the street and the

meadowlands.

We are preEen~ly stud~ing water treatment to handle #3 due to the

high cost of disposing of the water ...1.

NOTE: The Jonas referred to in number 1 above is Marvin Jonas

which is an active case in the NJDEPE, DRPSR, BSCM.

The letter to the USEPA and the application for the NPDES permit ,~ere

both signed by Fred H. simmons, Plant Manager, of Diamond Head oil.

On April 28, 1976 the USEPA conducted a SPCC (spill prevention

compensation and Control) inspection at the sUbject site. The

inspection was scheduled due to questions concerning the large oil

lake that was located mainly on the adjacent NJDOT property. The sales

manager for Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Ed Cincotta, was present

during the inspection.

The USEPA inspector noted that the facility was a waste oil

reprocessing plant with a storage capacity of approximately 440,000

gallons. The USEPA inspectors observed that the majority of tanks at

the facility were not diked and the ground beneath the tanks was

saturated with oil. oil and water from numerous small leaks and spills

was observed flowing towards the rear of the Diamond Head oil Refining

plant.

,

! i

Several open lagoons containing oil and water were observed at the far

rear of the plant. One of the lagoons had a discharge pipe extending

to the large waste oil lake which was located on the adjacent property

(owned by NJDOT). The USEPA inspector noted that the oil and water

that was observed flowing to the rear of the property was caught in a

sump and discharged into the lagoons where the oil was supposed to be

separated and reused and the waste was then dischar~ed into the oil

lake. The inspector described the facility as old, ~n a state of

disrepair, and very poorly maintained.

As revealed during discovery in a NJDOT law suit filed against PSC

Resources in september 1977 (discussed later in the this report),

Tammy's oil service, Inc., a corporation of the State of New York,

owned 100% of the stock of PSC Resources (since March 17, 1975). On

Hay 25, 1976, the directors and stockholder of both Tammy's oil

service, Inc. and psc Resources, Inc. approved a Plan of complete

Liquidation and Dissolution for each of the two corporations.

Authorization was also given to Russell W. Mahler as President and

Director of both corporations to liquidate the assets of the

corporations and receive the proceeds in trust for the corporations.

On June 25, 1976, an inspector from the USEPA, while tracing the

source of an oil flow into the narshes surrounding Exit 15W of the NJ

Turnpike, inspected the subject facility. During the inspection of the

MAXUS005593
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 12

CONFIDENT/At

facility, the inspector observed a brownish liquid (which appeared to

contain oil) being delivered through a pipe to a lagoon in the rear of

the facility. The inspector further observed that a black liquid was

flowing from the bottom of the lagoon through a pipe with an open

valve. The inspector also observed visible signs that the black

liquid was leaching from the lagoon into oil Lake. Analysis of a

sample of the biac}~ liquid (which was collected by the USEPA on that

same date) revealed that the sample had a hydrocarbon content of ~1%.

(Affidavit dated September 28, 1979 by Michael V. Polito, of the

USEPA). Robc~t Mahler, of Diamond Head, stated to the USEPA inspector

that Diamond Head oil had no NPDES permit because the facility was

totally self contained.

According to an inspection report that was written by the USEPA

inspector, the NJDEP had reportedly given the facility permission to

release water (including water from dripping condensate lines and

steam lines) from the property without regard to the permit system.

The RPIU has not found any documentation confirming this claim.

According to the USEPA inspector, water from the ground was collected

and released through an effluent pipe (presumably the same pipe that

was previously described as discharging an oil containing liquid to

the property) . .

The USEPA inspector also went on to state that the oil had leached out

into the navigable waters of the United states and that the USEPA had

expended at least $10,000 to date for the cleanup.

The following was stated in a notification to the creditors of. PSC

Resources, Inc. dated October 12, 1976, PSC Resources/ Inc.:

_ PSC Resources is [was] about to transfer to Ag-MET Oil service/

Inc./ in bulk all of the materials, supplies, merchandise,

equipment, fixtures, and inventory of PSC Resources now [then]

located at 10 water street/ Palmer, Massachusetts and 1401

Harrison Turnpike, Kearny, New Jersey.

_ The business names and addresses used by PSC Resources in the

past three years are [were]: PSC Resources, Inc., Phillips

Resources, Inc., Diamond Head oil Company and Diamond Head oil

Refining Company at 1401 Harrison Turnpike, Kearny, New Jersey;

at 10 water street, Palmer, Massachusetts.

On October 29/ 1976, Bay city oil service submitted a registration for

a solid/liquid waste collector or hauler to NJDEP, Bureau of Solid

Haste Management. The address given for Bay city was 1401 Harrison

Turnpi}:e, Kearny (the subject site). Robert Mahler was listed in the

section marked "Person having prime administrative authority or person

to be contacted in an emergency". The registration statement was

signed by Anthony J. Dattolo, Terninal Manager. NOTE: Bay city oil

Service, Inc. was dissolved in December, 1973.

On Hovenber 3, 1976, PSC Resources, Inc., a successor to Phillips

Resources, Inc. sold the subject site for the sum of $563/978.68 to

l,g-l1etoil service, Inc., a New York corporation qualified to do

MAXUS005594
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 13

business in the state of New Jersey, care of Ag-Met, Inc. Russell H.

Mahler and Thomas Humiston signed the deed as president and secretary

of PSC Resources, Inc. respectively.

Ag-MET oil services continued to operate the sUbject facility. On

November 29, 1976, Ag-MET oil services, Inc. changed its name to

Newtown Refining Corporation.

Ag-Met oil Service, Inc. had submitted a registration for a

solid/liquid waste collector or hauler to NJDEP, Bureau of Solid waste

Mana~ement on November I, 1976. The address given for Ag-Met was 1401

Harrlson Turnpike, Kearny (the sUbject site). Russell W. Mahler was

listed in the section marked "Person having prime administrative

authority or person to be contacted in an emergencyll. The signature

of the person who signed the registration statement as vice president

.is not legible.

On November 29, 1976, the USEPA, Region II, issued a Findin~s of

Violation and Order to Show Cause to Diamond Head oil Refinlng company

pursuant to section 309 (a) (3) and (a) (4), Federal Water pollution

Control Acts Amendments of 1972 (33 U.S.C. subsection 1319).

It was stated in the findings portion of notice that Diamond Head oil

had been discharging a water and oil mixture into a large 7,000,000

gallon lagoon which was located behind its property. The USEPA also

stated that during wet weather periods the lagoon overflowed into a

navigable waterway (discharging without a permit). According to the

USEPA, on December 12, 1974 Diamond Head oil Refining Co. submitted a

Short Form C application for a NPDES permit for discharge of

pollutants from its facilit~ to Franks Creek. On October 29, 1975 the

USEPA had requested in writlng additional information on their

discharge. As of the date of the issuance of the Findings of

Violation, Diamond Head failed to submit such data as requested by the

USEPA.

Diamond Head oil Refining Company was ordered to appear at the USEPA

on December 28, 1976 and show cause as to why the USEPA should not

refer them (Diamond Head) to the US Department of Justice for

imposition of civil and criminal penalties.

On December 22, 1976, counsel for Ag-MET, Inc. and its wholly owned

subsidiary, Newtown Refining corporation responded by letter to the

Findings of Violation and Order to Show Cause. The letter stated that

the USEPA, during a telephone calIon December 21, 1976, had agreed to

adjourn the date on which the Findings of Violation and Order to Show

Cause was returnable from December 28, 1976 to January 11, 1977.

According to the letter Newtown Refining corporation acquired the

assets of PSC Resources, Inc. on November 3, 1976. It was the belief

of Ag-Met's counsel that PSC Resources had previously acquired the

assets of Diamond Head oil Refining company.

counsel for Ag-MET also stated that Ag-MET was unable to locate the

both the Short Form C application for a NPDES permit filed by Diamond

Head on December 12, 1974 and the letter from the USEPA, dated October

MAXUS005595
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 14

CONFIDENTIAL

29, 1975, to Diamond Head requesting additional information for the

NPDES permit.

On January 20, 1977, counsel to Russell W. Mahler and Newtown Refining

corporation forwarded a memorandum to the USEPA. The memorandum,

written by Russell H. Hahler (also dated January 20, 1977) described

the history of the subject site which was owned by Newtown Refining

Corporation.

Russell Mahler described the history of site ownership as follows:

liOnMarch 17, 1975, Tanuuy's oil service, Inc. ("Tammy's")

purchased all the issued and outstanding stock of PSC Resources,

Inc. ("PSC") from Phillips Screw company. At that time, PSC owned

the Facility as successor to Phillips Resourcesf Inc./ which

acquired it from Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc. on November

1, 1973. On November 3, 1976, Tammy's sold substantially all its

assets, including its stock in PSC/ to Ag-MET OIL SERVICE/ INC.

which subsequently changed its name to Newtown Refining

Corporation ("Newtown"). I am currently President of Newtmvn and

was the President and principal owner of Tammy's when it acquired

and when it sold PSC. It was the custom of PSC to operate the

Facility as Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Division of PSC

Resources/ Inc.

Hhen Tammy's acquired the PSC stock on March 17f 1975 none of

Tammy's officers or stockholders was aware of the existence of

violations of environmental regUlations, governmental orders or

license applications with respect to the Facility. Furthermore,

Tammy's was informed at that time by Phillips Screw that none

existed ...."

On January 24, 1977, Riverside Engineers, Inc. (Riverside) f consulting

engineers for Diamond Head oil Refining company, sent a letter to the

USEPA. The letter included the following completed items:

1) standard Form C (HPDES permit application)

2) Process Flow Diagram

3) Plant Schematic Arrangement

4) site Plan and

5) Pond Location

Riverside stated that the enclosures represented the current concept

of operation of the SUbject facility. The letter contained a proposal

by the site owner to change the concept of operation to include a

treatment operation.

According to Riverside, the engineering program would include the

following as its prirary objectives:

1) additional containment to avoid potential mixing of

product or waste with any water stream,

2) greater in-plant reuse of water and

3) greater design of suitable treatment units for

MAXUS005596
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 15

,CONFIDENTIAL

discharge of effluent

On January 11, 1977, Robert Mahler of Diamond Head oil Refining

company along with the consulting engineer for Diamond Head, appeared

at the USEPA office without counsel. Mr. Mahler was advised by the

USEPA of the alleged violations by Diamond Head that were set forth in

the Findings of Vlolations and Order to Show Cause. He was then given

an opportunity to explain why he believed the matter should not be

refe~red to the US Denartment of Justice for imnosition of civil and

criminal penalties. A~formal resolution was not~reached since counsel

was not present for Diamond Head.

In a letter from the USEPA to counsel for Russell Mahler/Newton

Refining, dated February 41

1977, the USEPA suggested that a meeting

be held to resolve the matter of past violations which were still

pending and to discuss what action would be required of the site

owners to ensure their compliance with federal pollution control laws

and regulations. The USEPA also stated that they expected Russell

Mahler/Newton to be prepared to make a formal showing as to why the

matter of past violations should not be referred to the US Department

of Justice. It was recommended by the USEPA that a copy of the SPCC

plan for the subject facility be submitted by Russell Mahler/Newton.

On February 15, 1977, a copy of the SPCC plan which was certified on

Ma~ 7, 1976 was sent to the USEPA. The RPIU has not obtained a copy of

thls SPCC.

On March 15, 1977, counsel representing Newtown Refining Corporation

sent a letter to the Enforcement Division of the USEPA Region II, in

response to the Findings of Violation and Order to Show Cause that was

issued to them. In this letter they stated that the man-made "lake

l

!

which developed behind Newtown's property was caused when the Town of

Kearny created a refuse dump blocking the normal drainage of the area.

Counsel for Newtown also stated that it appeared that during periods

of heavy rainfall the "lakell floods Newtown's property as well as the

nearby property.

Counsel for Newtown addressed the points specifically set forth in the

Findings of violation and Order to Show Cause. Among the points made

in the letter were:

1. Newtown believes that they had furnished the information

required to process its application for a NPDES permit for the

reasons stated beloW.

According to Newtown, the several changes of ownership which

have occurred since the original HPDES permit application vias

filed had disrupted communications and contact on this matter

(the NPDES permit application). They also stated that the only

managerial employee held over beyond March, 1975 was the old

plant manager, Edward cincotta. According to counsel for

newtown, Mr. Cincotta did not prcve to be an effective manager

and in January" 1976 he was replaced. They claimed

that the request for inforPation which the USEPA made of

MAXUS005597
GUN FJDEfVTJAL

DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 16

Diamond Head oil Refining Company by letter dated october 29,

1975 and addressed to Fred Simmons was never made known to any

~ember of management or ownership other than Edward Cincotta.

Newtown stated that they did not know why Mr. Cincotta failed

either to respond to the USEPA request or to make such request

known to the management or ownership.

It was stated in this letter that the new owners were under the

impression that a NPDES, permit was not required for the

facility and therefore did not contact the USEPA on its own

initiative to follow up the initial application which was filed

on December 12, 1974 by the previous owner. Newtown's

management was not aware that a compliance problem might exist

with the USEPA until May of 1976. According to Newtown, thp

first time that the owners and management and the present

plant manager, Robert Mahler, saw the October 29, 1975 letter

(letter requesting additional information regarding their

discharge) was when the USEPA supplied a copy to them in

January 1977.

Newtown also stated that prior to an inspection by the USEPA in

May of 1976, their management was unaware that while complying

with the instructions and requirements of the HNDe, the NJDEP,

and the NJDOT, they did not also satisfy federal pollution

laws and regulations.

Prior to the USEPA visit in May of 1976, the facility

management was unaware that the "lakell was not completely

landlocked and believed therefore, that the discharge was not

SUbject to federal jurisdiction.

Newtown went on to state that whatever violation may have

resulted from the inadvertent failure to reply to the letter of

october 29, 1975, by reason of lack of notice and lack of

knowledge concerning federal requirements and jurisdiction in

addition to that of the state agencies, has been corrected by

Newtown's filing of a revised NPDES permit application

(#NJ0030864) on January 24, 1977.

2. Newton stated that to the best of its knowledge, that they we

not discharging pollutants in violation of the Act.

Newtown claimed that any discharge into the 1l1ake" after

November 1975 (the date of the alleged failure to respond) ,

which was approved by management, was sporadic and comprised of

principally rain water and lake water.

A company named Diamond Head oil Refining corporation, Inc.

incorporated in the state of Hew Jersey on August 24, 1978. (HaTE:

emphasis added by underlining) Robert l1ahler and David Riso

constituted the first Board of Directors.

On May 13, 1977 Bay city oil Service sub~itted a registration

statement for solid/liquid waste collector-haulers to the Department's

MAXUS005598
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 17 CONFIDENTIAL

solid Haste Administration for fiscal year 1978. This application

listed Robert s. Mahler as the person having prime administrative

authorit~ for Bay city oil service. It was indicated on the

applicatlon that Bay city oil hauled 500,000 gallons of waste oil and

sludge from locations in various counties and municipalities and

disposed of them at Diamond Head Oil Refinery, 1401 Harrison Avenue,

Kearny (sUbject site). This application was signed by Robert s.

Hahler, Manager.

On June 17, 1977 l;orth East Oil service, Inc., of Grafton,

Hassachusetts submitted a registration statement for solid/liquid

waste collector-haulers to the Department's Solid waste Administration

for fiscal year 1978. This application listed Robert S. Mahler as the

person having prime administrative authority for North East Oil

service. It was indicated on the application that North East Oil

service hauled 360.00 (sic) gallons of waste oil and sludge from

locatic~= in various cou~t:es and municipalities and disposed of them

at Diamond Head oil Refinery, 1401 Harrison Avenue, Kearny (subject

site). This application was signed by Lloyd P. Mahler, vice President.

On May 3, 1977 the Hackensack Meadowlands Development commission

(HMDC) reviewed and approved a plan by a NJDOT contractor for the

disposal of 72,000 cubic yards of oil contaminated materials (soil)

from sections 8A and 80 of the 1-280 construction project (areas

including portions of the right-of-way where the oil "lakell was

located and parts of Frank's Creek) in a secure land burial facility

located at MSLA Landfill site I-D. The HSLA Landfill site 1-0 is

located at the eastern portion of what was formerly designated as

county Block 1434 (east of the subject site and immediately west of

Ramp "M" of Route 1-280).

subsequent to this approval substantial additional quantities of

contaminated materials were found. The discovery of the additional

amounts of contamination increased the initial estimated volume of

72,000 cubic yards to a minimum volume of 150,000 cubic yards.

On september 14, 1977, the New Jersey state Department of

Transportation (NJDOT) filed civil suit (Docket # L-1718-77) with the

superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division against PSC Resources, Inc.

(successor of Phillips Resources, Inc.) and Diamond Head oil Refining

company, Incorporated. The primary reasons that the NJDOT filed this

suit was 1) because of damages suffered by the NJDOT as a result of

oil contaminated water which entered onto their property from the "oil

lake't, which was located on the PSC Resources property (the subject

site), and 2) to recover costs incurred as a result NJDOT's

remediation of same.

The following were among statements made by the NJDOT in the

cOhlplaint:

(1IOTE:the underlined portions were later denied by PSC Resources

in Answer and Counterclaim, filed by Attorney for PSC Resources,

Inc., November la, 1977)

MAXUS005599
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 18

CON FJDENTjAL

_ On November 1, 1973, PSC Resources, Inc., through its

predecessor Phillips Resources, Inc., acquired the subject

site and had been engaged in the operation of a waste oil

reprocessing and canning facility.

_ It had been the custom PSC Resources, Inc. to operate the

facility as IIDiamond Head oil Refining co., Division of PSC

Resources, Inc.1I and IIDiamondHead oil Refining Co. r Inc."

_ prior to the construction activity of the NJDOT (construction of

sections 8A and 80, 1-280), a body of water known as oil Lake

was located on the NJDOT's property.

A portion of oil Lake was located on the property 6fPSC

Resources, Inc. (the subject site).

_ For many years and at various times PSC Resources had been

discharging a mixture of water and oil into oil Lake.

_ It had been the practice of PSC Resources to accumulate ground

water seepage, surface water runoff, plant drainage, and

condensate and to pump or permit such accumulated material to

flow into a low area of its facility. PSC Resources maintained a

runoff drain in the low area through which the accumulated

material ma have been dischar ed into oil Lake thereb enterin

the NJDOT's prooerty.

_ On May 25, 1976, February 11, 1977, September 3, 1974, July 25,

1974, and April 29, 1974 PSC Resources discharged and/or

otherwise caused material collected at the facility to enter

into oil Lake.

_ The NJDOT incurred additional expense related to the

construction of 1-280, Sections 8A and 80, including removing

and disposing of oil, oil emulsion and oil contaminated

material rovidina water oll.ution control measures excavatin

unsuitable material, providing suitable backfill material,

dewatering to prevent refloatation of trapped oil and petroleum

liquids, and providing topsoil in replacement of that rendered

unsuitable by oil contamination.

_ Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc. (a dissolved NJ Corp.) was

engaged in a waste oil reprocessing and canning facility at the

subject site from January 1, 1952 until November 1, 1973.

_ On February 6, 1973, Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc.

permitted oil to leak from several valves located on its

facility, permitted open cans of oil to run over and discharge,

maintained drain pipes running off its property from oil water

separator, and pernitted the ground area around its yard to be

loaded with oil products allowing oil runoff into a storm drain.

_ Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Inc. caused material described in

the preceding paragraph to enter into oil Lake.

MAXUS005600
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 1.9 CONFIDENTIAL

On December 12, 1977, the resident engineer for Route 280 project

(Sections 811.and 80) observed tha~ a l~~ge quantit~ of oil was located

in an area that was adjacent to the Diamond Head 011 Company.

According to the engineer the oil, which followed existing drainage

patterns moved to an area ~o the soutL ~~C2 of the ~ccess road to the

Diamond Head oil COID~any. According to the NJDOT engineer, the

standing water in thls area was displaced by the oil and the water

moved across the access road to the area between the access road and

Harrison Avenue.

The NJDOT engineer also reported that heavy rains on December 14, 1977

displaced the oil causing an approximately 100 foot long section of

Harrison Avenue to be covered with oil. On December 15, 1977 the oil

level had receded substantially. Also, the Cresent Construction

company, the Hudson county Road Development and the Kearny Fire

Department helped to correct the problem.

On January 4, 1978, a representative of the NJDOT notified the HMDC of

the presence of oil on the south side of Harrison Turnpike adjacent to

the SUbject site. Immediately after receiving this notification, a

representative of the HMDC inspected the subject site. The inspector

observed large pools of oil and oily wastes along the facility's

western property line, on an access road which had been constructed by

the NJDOT, and on an area immediately adjacent to Harrison Turnpike.

The inspector also observed a stream of oil and oily wastes leading

between the subject facility and the pools of oil. The HMDC inspector

later stated in an affidavit, dated May 5, 1978, that he believed,

based on his observations made during the January 4 inspection, that

the source of the discharges was the subject facllity.

A certified letter dated January 6, 1978, was sent from the HMDC to

Robert Mahler of Diamond Head 011 Refining Co. This letter informed

Diamond Head oil of the observations made during the inspection of

January 4. It was pointed out in the letter that it appeared that

rain could have easily caused move the pools of oil and oil wastes

onto Harrison Avenue resulting in a traffic and safety hazard. The

letter concluded by stating the that "it is apparent that the source

of these oil and ally wastes are from Diamond Head's operation" and

ordered Diamond Head to cease and desist the discharge of the wastes

immediately. Diamond Head was further ordered to take all necessary

steps to immediately remove the pools of waste and any contamination

caused on properties owned by the Town of Kearny and the NJDOT.

By January 10, 1978, 87,000 cubic yards of contaminated materials from

the construction of Route 280, sections 8A and 80 were placed in a

secure land burial facility located at MSLA Landfill site 1-0, in

accordance with permission 9ranted by the mmc. Four 12 inch

monitoring wells were also ~nstalled at the landfill. The addition of

the 87,000 cubic yards of contaminated materials filled the landfill

to capacity.

A followup inspection by the ID1DC of the subject site on January 12,

MAXUS005601
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 20

CONFIDENTIAL

1978 revealed that no action to clean up the contamination, observed

on January 6, 1978, had taken place. In addition to previously noted

contamination, the HMDC inspector noted that fresh contamination had

occurred at the sUbject site and on properties owned by the NJOOT

(adjacent to ramp "WI of 1-280).

The subject site was reinspected by the HMOC on January 19, 1978. No

effort to cleanup the site was observed. The inspector observed a

trench, or swale, and hoses in place at the facility. Based on the

observations made during the inspection, the inspector concluded that

the hoses were used to discharge the contaminating material and the

trench was used to convey the material.

The HMOC, by way of letter dated January 25, 1978, notified Diamond

Head oil Refining Co. of the observations made during the inspection

of January 19. The HHOC assessed Diamond Head oil $200.00 per day for

each day after January 25, 1978 that the cleanup of the two areas was

not completed. It is not known if the HMDC received any payment from

Diamond Head oil.

On January 30, 1978, the ID1DC granted the NJOOT permission to create a

second (new) on-site disposal area, located on Block 285 Lot 2

(immediately west of the subject site), for the additional quantities

of contaminated materials from Route 280, sections 8A and 80. The new

area was designed to contain a maximum of 197,000 cubic yards. The

request for the new disposal area, which was reviewed by the both the

HMDC and the Solid Waste Administration of the NJDEP, was approved

subject to the several conditions including but not limited to the

following:

_ A liner of a minimum compacted thickness of six inches of sand

would be placed under all materials disposed of in the new area

_ The disposal area was to be worked in full depth sections

separated by sectional dikes of sand

_ A ~inimum setback of 50 feet would be maintained between the

disposal area and Diamond Head oil's western property line

_ Three combination methane/monitoring wells was to be installed

_ A two foot compacted thickness silty-clay cover material was to

be placed on the completed disposal site

~ A four inch thick topsoil layer, mulched, fertilized and seeded

with Type A grass seed was to be placed over the silty-clay

cover material

l,ccording to the mmc I the nJO~p e):pressed SOI:\econcern about 1) the

long term affects of storing oil-contaminated materials in sand-lineu

areas, and 2) the responsibility of NJOOT if the sand liner should

fail, causing oil contamination to be released from the disposal area.

For these reasons the HMOC requested that a plan of action for dealing

with liner failures be submitted by the NJOOT. It is unknown if this

MAXUS005602
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 21 CONFIDENTIAL

plan was ever submitted to the HHDC.

Inspections by the HMDC on February 27, and March 30, 1978 revealed

oily wastes being discharged from the subject facility onto properties

owned by the Town of Kearny and the NJDOT through a hose which was

connected to a storage tank on the Diamond Head property.

On March 23, 1978, an employee of Diamond Head oil, who wished to

re~ain anonymous, contacted the Department and stated that they had

information on the sources of point and non-point pollution (oil,

water, and sludge or the company·s process waste). The employee

further stated that they would like to meet with someone from the

Department to pass on the information. It is unknown if anyone from

the Department has ever met with the employee.

On March 30, 1978 a representative of the NJDOT observed a hose

drai~ing a t~nk, locate~ at the subject site, onto the west side of

the subject property. The inspector in a memorandum regarding this

inspection stated that the oil and water mixture followed the existing

ground contours and ended up on the NJDOT's right-of-way for 1-280.

On April 28

1

1978, North East oil Servicel Inc. submitted a

registration statement for a solid/liquid waste collector or hauler

for fiscal year 1979 to the NJDEP, Solid Waste Administration. The

statement which was signed by Russell Mahler, President, listed the

address for North East oil Service as Box #477 'iorster Avenue, North

Grafton, Massachusetts. Russell W. Mahler was listed as the person

having prime administrative authority for North East oil service.

Bay Cit~ oil Service, also submitted a registration statement for a

solid/llquid waste collector or hauler for fiscal year 1979 to the

NJDEP, Solid \\aste Administration. Russell W. Mahler was listed as the

person having prime administrative authority for Bay city oil Service

and also signed the registration statement as President. The address

for Bay Cit~ oil Service was listed as 1401 Harrison Turnpike, Kearny,

1;J (the subJect site). Bay City oil Service indicated that they hauled

589,404 gallons or cubic yards (gallons and/or cubic yards not

specified on the statement) from locations various municipalities

within Hudson County to Diamond Head oil Refinery in Kearny.

Russell W. Mahler, President and Chief Operating Officer of Newtown

Refining corporation, stated that all refinery operations of Newtown

had been closed/terminated as of midnight on May 28, 1978 (Affidavit

of Russell W. Mahler dated June 8, 1978).

In an affidavit dated June 8, 1978, Russell Mahler stated that he had

"several years of experience in supervising the overall operationll of

the subject facility.

On June 7, 1978, the Solid waste Administration received an

application (dated June 5, 1978) from Newtown Refining Corporation,

DiaDond Head oil Refining Division for a temporary (one year)

operating authorization (TOA) to operate a special waste facility at

the subject site. The~application stated that Newtown had incorporated

MAXUS005603
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 22

~uivfIDENTJALJ

in the state of New York. Russell Mahler was listed as the ~erson that

had prime administrative authority for Diamond Head oil Ref~ning. The

property owner was listed as Newtown Refining Corporation. The on site

processes was described as reprocessing of used crankcase oil into

usable lubricating oil. The specific waste types handled was stated as

waste oil and oil sludge. The application was signed by Lloyd Mahler,

Vice President, on June 5, 1978.

On July 14, 1978, the NJDEP, Solid waste Administration issued a TOA

to Diawond Head oil Refining bivision for the purpose of operating a

special waste facility.(facility #6907B) at the sUbject site. The TOA,

which had an expiration date of April 30, 1979, was conditioned upon

compliance with and implementation of the following:

1. Permitted waste Types:

Only waste 10 #70 (waste oil and oil sludge) specifically waste

oil and used crank oil was authorized to be accepted by Diamond

Head oil Refining*

*The facility was NOT authorized to accept PCB waste.

2. Engineering Design

An engineering design per Solid waste Administration

requirements was to be submitted within four months of the date

of the TOA.

On November 28, 1978 the NJDEP inspected the subj ect facility. ·The

inspectors noted that oil spills were prevalent throughout the site,

but could not ascertain the source. In talking to the Diamond Head Oil

representative that was on site during the inspection, it was revealed

to the NJDEP inspectors that the oil processing operations had been

halted due to a court order. According to the facility representative,

the facility was packaging only virgin oil and was not receiving any

waste oil.

According to a NJDEP memorandun dated February 6, 1979, the Diamond

Head oil Refinery (sic) had indicated that they were closing. The

memorandum went on to order that a folloriup field inspection be

performed by the NJDEP.

An inspection of the subject facility was performed by a

representative of the NJDEP on February 6, 1979. The inspector noted

that there was no evidence of current reprocessing operations observed

during the inspection. According to the inspector, two underground

storage pits were observed to contain a dark liquid which resembled

contaminated oil. When the inspector as}:ed an individual at the site

what the substance in the pits was, he ~as told that it was probably a

thin film of oil on top of sose water that seeped into the pits.

The NJDEP inspector noted that oil spillage was observed throughout

the facility. "The same anount of spillage was noted during this

inspection as was evident the last tine.1I The inspector recommended

MAXUS005604
DIN10ND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 23 CONFIDENTIAL

tha~ it be determined if any waste oil was being stored on the

facility.

The subject facility was inspected by NJDEP representatives on April

12, 1979. Leaks and spills were observed at the site and the overall

housekeeping was described as being very poor. The spills/leaks were

attributed to drainage and tanks. No security measures were noted at

the site.

On August 28, 1979, a corporation named Diamond Recycling Corporation

of 1401 Harrison Avenue, Kearny, filed an initial registration

statement for a solid/liquid waste collector-hauler for fiscal year

1980 with the NJDEP, Solid waste Administration. The registration

statement listed Robert S. Mahler as the person having prime

administrative authority for the corporation. The corporation also

listed waste oil and sludge as the types of wastes to be carried for

disposal. The statement was signed by Robert S. Mahler, President.

A Hovember 30/ 1979 memorandum from the HMDC indicated that recent

inspections (for oil-contaminated soils) at the NJDOT disposal area,

which is located adjacent to ramp "M", Route 1-280, revealed that top

soil covering the side slopes of the disposal area had eroded,

exposing contaminated materials. Also, tidal penetrations in the ditch

adjacent to the ramp had eroded the compacted sand liner of the

disposal area. According to the HMDC, subsequent rain falls had caused

oily discharges from the eroded areas into the ditch which is adjacent

to Ramp "M". The HMDC also noted that an oily discharge had been

observed where the ditch was connected to Franks Creek.

By memorandum dated January 4, 1980, the HMDC informed the NJDOT that

sampling data from one of the monitoring wells located at MSLA 1-D

showed increasing concentrations of BODS1 COD and chlorides. According

to the HMDC, there was a black liquid observed in that same well

indicating liner damage at the disposal area. The HMDC memorandum

concluded by stating at that point is was not possible to determine if

materials in the disposal area were leaching into the surrounding

soils. It was recommended that additional sampling be undertaken as

soon as possible to determine the magnitude of the liner damage.

The following companies are identified, in Industrial Waste Surveys

submitted to the NJDEP from 1977 to 1979, as 1) having sent their

~astes to the subject site and/or 2) using Bay city oil, North East

oil, or Diamond Head oil as their hauler:

American Aluminum Company

Mountainside, NJ 07092 (Union Co.)

Clarkson and Ford Company

Clifton, NJ 07012 (Passaic Co.)

Falke Corporation

Waldwick, NJ 07463 (Bergen Co.)

Gayton Lucchi Tool Company

MAXUS005605
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 24

carteret, NJ 0700S (Middlesex Co.)

G&L Tool company

Rahway, NJ 07065 (union Co.)

Monsanto company .

Kenilworth, NJ 07037 (Union Co.)

Monsanto company

Trenton, NJ 08620 (Mercer Co.)

Red Devil. Inc.

Union Twp., NJ 070S3 (Union co.)

Texaco. Inc.

Teterboro, NJ 07730 (Bergen co.)

Action Plastic Company/Division Dart Industries

Totowa Borough, NJ 07512 (Passaic Co.)

Beacon Die Mold. Inc.

Clifton city, NJ 07011 (Passaic Co.)

Campton Tool and Die Company

Kenilworth Bora, NJ 07033 (Union co.)

Design and Moldina services

Piscataway Twp., NJ 08854 (Middlesex Co.)

Dianem Company

Lodi Borough, NJ 07644 (Bergen Co.)

Digital computer Controls

Fairfield Borough, NJ 07006 (Essex Co.)

Einson-Freeman Detroy corporation

Fair Lawn, NJ 07410 (Bergen Co.)

Foremost Manufacturing Company. Inc.

Union Twp., NJ 07083 (Union Co.)

Carmet company/Amcar Division

East Rutherford, NJ 07073 (Bergen Co.)

International Telephone and Telegraph Corp.

Hidland Park, NJ 07432 (Bergen Co.)

ITT Marlow

Midland Park, NJ 07432 (Bergen Co.)

Bekker Garret and Sons, Inc.

Clifton city, NJ 07012 (Passaic Co.)

Arrow Plastics corporation

CONFIDElVTIAL

MAXUS005606
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 25

CON FIDENTIAl.J

Garfield city, NJ ·07026 (Bergen Co.)

Jae Trucking (hauled for American Aluminum)

Pinto service (hauled for Arrow Plastic corp.)

p~bert Hore (haUled for Falke Engine Rebuilding Corp.)

DePalma oil Company (hauled for Red Devil, Inc.)

Monsanto company indicated in the Eckhardt Report that from 1973 to

1979, Monsanto.s Kenilworth, NJ plant sent 33 tons of wastes to the

subject site for disposal (reprocessing/recycling). The waste types

listed were organics, and oils and oil sludges.

On March 19, 1980, the sUbject site ~as inspected by a representative

of the NJDEP and a representative of Environmental Assessment Council

in order to determine if Diamond Head oil company was still operating

at the facility. EAC was inspecting the site on behalf of the USEPA.

The inspectors found that the site no longer appeared to be operating

as an oil reprocessing facility. This conclusion was based on the fact

that all of the doors and windows were locked and it appeared as if

most of the equipment was not used for a long period of time. However,

the inspectors did find some evidence which led them to believe that

the site was being used for illegal dumping of waste oils.

Among the evidence that was cited by the NJDEP inspector were the

following: certain equipment including valves and pipes located in the

vicinity of the off loading area appeared to have been used very

recently (relative to the other equipment on site); there were also

several recent truck tire tracks concentrated in the vicinity of the

off loading area; and some of the storage tanks contained significant

amounts of oil which mayor may not have been left over from Diamond

Head oil. No site security measures were noted at the site.

The EAC representative stated that a contractor (Modern

Transportation) was hired to clean up the site and that

representatives from the Modern had already visited the site. The EAC

representative stated that he did not know when the cleanup was to

take place. It is unknown who hired Modern Transportation to conduct

the cleanup.

On April 4, 1980, the site was ins~ected by the NJDEP. A watchman

present at the site stated to the lnspector that the facility was

being "taken down" shortly. The NJDEP inspector noted large amounts of

standing oil throughout the facility (particularly within the diked

areas). The inspector was informed that Modern Transportation

~eriodically came to the facility ~o vacuum up the standing oil. The

lnspector also noted that same plplng had been removed and some of the

tanks were either in the process of being pumped out or had already

been pumped out.

The NJ Superior Court, Law Division decided on July 31, 1980, that PSC

MAXUS005607
DIAMOND HEAD' OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 26

.CONFIDENTIAL

Resources, Inc., was the successor to Diamond Head oil Refinin~ Co.,

Inc., and is subject to liability for any claims against it arlsing

from the discharge of pollutants onto the NJDOTls property.

In an opinion that was filed by the NJ Superior Court on May 29, 1981,

the Court found that PSC Resources, as successor to Diamond Head oil

Refining Co., transferred the subject facility as an operating unit to

Newtown Refining corporation essentially unchanged. The.Court found

that Newtown Refining Corporation was llable for claims against it

arising from the torts committed by its predecessor corporation, PSC

Resources.

A soils investigation report dated June 1981, entitled IIProposed Hotel

Development, Harrison Avenue, Kearny, NJII was submitted to Himi

Development of Kearny, NJ (now known as Mimi Urban Renewal

corporation; the current site owner) by Johnson Soils Engineering

Company.

The soil investigation consisted of 24 test borings that were taken to

de~ths between 22 to 102 feet. Five previous borings, which were

drllled on site by William Walsh, Inc., were also consulted.

NOTE: The RPIU has not found any other information pertaining to the

william Walsh borings.

The purpose of the site investigation as stated ';1aslitoprovide

information to adequately support the 1,2, and 7 story structures

proposed for the site and property site development concerning the oil

contaminated fill area. The scope of this-investigation included both

Lots 2 and 3 of Block 285. Lot 3 (the subject site) was described in

the report as II ••• the site of Diamond Head oil Refining Company which

had oil ponds on site.lI

•

Borings B-1 to B12 were drilled in Lot 2. Borings B-13 to B-24 were

drilled in Lot 3. The findings relative to Lot 3 (the SUbject site)

include the following:

_ depth of fill and organic varied between 11 and 20 feet,

_ borings indicate oil contaminated soils,

- hydrocarbons were present at the following depths:

B-13 6 to 10 ft.

B-14 6 to 10 ft.

B-15 6 to 15 ft.

B-16 8 to 16 ft.

B-17 8 to 10 ft. , 12 to 18 ft.

B-18 8 to 12 ft.

B-19 10 to 22 ft.

B-20 10 to 20 ft.

B-21 10 to 12 ft.

B-22 7 to 10 ft.

B-23 3 to 10 ft.

B-24 6 to 10 ft.

MAXUS005608
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 27

\jU ~'irl.U tfXTtAL

_ every sample taken on the site indicated the presence, even if

in small quantities, of hydrocarbons at some depth,

_ the existing 75' diameter pond on lot 3 had a small amount of

oil on the surface that could be pumped out.

The subject site was inspected on May 20 and 24, 1982 by the NJDEP.

The inspection resulted because of a complaint from the Kearny Health

Department regarding activity at the SUbject site (material was being

pumped from tanks into drums) .

On May 20, 1982, the NJDEP inspector met a Mr. Walt witt, operations

Manager for Eastern Chemical Cleaning Co. of Secaucus, NJ. Mr. witt

explained that Eastern Chemical was hired by Refinemet International

Co. of Woonsocket, Rhode Island to clean up the site. According to Mr.

witt, Diamond Head oil had cleaned out the two 100,000 gallon storage

tanks two to three years earlier, when Route I-280 was being

constructedi and demolished the building. Mr. witt alleged that

"someone" (whose identity was unknown) had been depositing oil sludges

in the tanks for an unknown period of time. Refinemet was the parent

corporation of·Newtown corporation (the current site owner).

According to theNJDEP inspection report the cleanup of the property

began with the analyzing of the material in both tanks. One tank

reportedly contained approximately 50 gallons of water and oil with a

concentration of less than 50 ppm of PCBs. The second tank contained

approximately 7,450 gallons of oil with a concentration of 206 ppm of

PCBs.

Both tanks were reportedly vacuumed out starting on May 19 and ending

on May 20, 1982. The contents of both tanks, totaling approximately

7,500 gallons, were transferred into 147 new 55 gallon steel

"tight-headll (open head) drums. Each drum was subsequently labeled

with a PCB label and a hazardous waste label (Which listed Newtown

Refining Corp., EPA ID #NJD980642117 as the generator).

On May 21, 1982 the NJDEP inspector spoke with John Scott of Eastern

Chemical on the telephone. Mr. Scott stated that Newtown Refining

Corporation, which was a wholly owned subsidiary of Refinemet

International Co., decided to put an end to the illegal dumping into

their tanks by having the tanks removed. Mr. Scott gave Newtown's EPA

10# as NJD980642117.

According to the NJDEP inspector the drums were manifested off site by

box trailer on May 24 (77 drUIDS) and May 25 (70 drums). The first

shipnent of 77 drums was sent to chemical Waste Mana~ement in Alabama.

The second shipment of 70 drums was to be shipped inltially to

Resource Technology Service (RTS) of Conshohod:en, PA to m,"ait

shipment to Chemical Waste Management.

The HJDEP inspector met with a Hr. Steve Gutfeld, Assistant Vice

Fresident of Refinemet International, at the subject site on May 24,

1982. Mr. Gutfeld stated that Newtown was no longer in the oil

MAXUS005609
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 28

CONFIDENTIAL

business and was not located in New Jersey. According to Mr. Gutfeld,

Newtown was a precious and scrap metals reclaimer.

Mr. Gutfeld reportedly was interested in getting the NJDEP inspector's

assurance that Eastern Chemical was conducting the cleanup properly.

The inspector checked both tanks and determined that they were

Ilcleanll• Mr. Gutfeld claimed that he was getting several estimates for

the removal of the tanks but had not made any decision at that time.

The NJDEP inspector observed that the soil surrounding the tanks

(especially the second tank) was black with oil. When asked if the

soil surrounding the tanks would be scraped up, Mr. Gutfeld stated

that he did not knoW.

The NJDEP contacted RTS to inquire about the status of the 147 drums

of oil. RTS informed the NJDEP that the drums had been shipped to the

cWM facility in Alabama. However, the drums were being stored at the

site pending further analysis prior to disposal. Apparently,

subsequent analysis of the shipment revealed levels of PCBs (3300 ppm)

that were significantly higher than the original analysis by Eastern

Chemical (206 ppm). NOTE: CWM was not permitted to accept waste

containing over 500 ppm of PCBs.

The drums were subsequently sampled by Refinemet and revealed a

concentration of 3100 ppm of PCBs. All the drums were ultimately sent

to Mobile, Alabama to be incinerated at sea.

On June 14, 1982, Mr. Gutfeld of Refinemet International contacted the

NJDEP and stated that Refinemet would have the oil and contaminated

soil from around the second tank removed. Gutfeld also stated that

piles of oily sludges and a lagoon at the site were not on

Refinement's property and therefore Refinemet was not going to clean

it up. Gutfeld suggested that that portion of the property may be

owned by the NJDOT or the Town of Kearny. Mr. Gutfeld further stated

that he had additional fencing installed at the site to prevent

further dumping on the property.

On June 15, 1982, the subject site was inspected by a Department

representative. oil was observed in the base of tank #2. The piles of

sludge and the lagoon at the site appeared unchanged. No evidence of

new dumping was observed. No guard was present at the site. Fence

posts were installed however, the gate was not up yet.

After the inspection of June 15, steve Gutfeld of Refinemet

International contacted the Department inspector and stated that he

had copies of the analysis to present to the inspector. He also stated

that the soil around tank #2 and the remaining oil in the tank would

be removed. However, Mr. Gutfeld also stated that he wanted to know

from the Department just how deep they would have to excavate around

the tank. Mr. Gutfeld went on to state that there was a pool of oil 60

feet down, below the tank, and he did not intend to get too close to

it. The RPIU has not found any other information regarding this "pool"

of oil that was located 60 ft. down.

During a telephone conversation with the Department inspector on

MAXUS005610
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 29

CONFIDENTIAL

AUo/Ust 13, 1982, Mr. Gutfeld explained that Refinemet/Newtown had

orlginally decided to clean up the subject site when they had learned,

through their attorney, that someone was using the two tanks on their

property to dispose of waste oil. Their attorney had been negotiating

the sale of the subject site at the time, so he advised Newtown to

clean up the site. Gutfeld ended by statin~ that RefinemetjNewtown

intended to complete the cleanup of the sOlI at the subject site but,

they had not decided on which contractor to hire at that time.

On October 13, 1982, Newtown Refining shipped two loads (NJ Manifest

#s NJ0135037 and NJ0135038) of PCB contaminated soil, totaling 27

tons, from the subject site to CECOS International in New York. It is

not known from which area of the site these soils were .taken from.

By letter dated November 4, 1983, the DAG representing the NJDOT in

this law suit, confirmed that Russell Mahler.had agreed to contribute

$30,000 toward an overall settlement package of $630,000 previously

agreed to by the parties. NOTE: The RPIU has not been able to document

when this agreement was initially reached.

On May 30, 1984 the sUbject facility was inspected by the Department.

The facility was closed with no one on site. The two storage tanks

were cut off at the base and had grass growing out of them. The

building on site was described by the inspector as being "just a pile

of rubblelt• A slight oil sheen was observed on puddled rain water. The

inspector recommended, based on his observations that Diamond Head oil

Co., be removed from the RCRA major facility list.

On November 2, 1984, the superior court, Law Division, ordered that

the following settlement proceeds be deposited as folloWS with the

Clerk of the Court within 30 days:

Aetna Insurance company

Newtown Refining Corp.

Russell Mahler

$500,000

$100,000

$ 30,000

$630,000 Total

By letter dated November 26, 1984 to the Department, the attorney for

Newtown Refining corporation requested confirmation from the

Department as to the non-applicability of the Environmental Cleanup

Res~onsibility Act (ECRA) to a pending sale of the SUbject property to

Miml Urban Development corporation. The letter stated ln part:

" ...Until May 1978, a waste oil re-refinery operation was

conducted at 1401 Harrison Ave., Kearny. At that time the

operation was discontinued, and thereafter the buildin9s and other

facilities on the land were removed. In 1982, two remalning oil

storage tanks were dismantled and removed, after the remaining

contents thereof and certain surrounding soil had been removed ...":

(NOTE: Underlining added for emphasis.)

An affidavit from steve Gutfeld, Assistant Vice president of Newtown

MAXUS005611
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 30

CONFIDENTIAL

in 1982 was attached to the November 26 letter. As stated in the

letter the affidavit pertained to facts involving the removal

operations in May and October, 1982.

On December 11, 1984, the NJDEP, DWM, Bureau of Industrial site

Evaluation sent a letter to Counsel representing Newtown Refining

corporation. This letter stated that, on the basis of the information

presented by Newtown and the affidavit signed by steven Gutfeld, the

Department found that the transaction was not subject to the

provisions of ECRA. The letter further stated that the decision was

made in light of the absence of an industrial establishment as defined

within the standard Industrial Classification numbers covered by the

Act.

In a January 8, 1985 letter to Counsel for the defendants, the state

Attorney GeneralIs Office stated that Aetna Insurance Company had paid

the sum of $500,000 to the Court as required in the November 2, 1984

Order. It was also stated that Russell Mahler and Newtown had failed

t9 comply at that time.

On January 11, 1985, Newtown Refining corporation, successor by change

of name to Ag-Met oil service, Inc., sold the subject site to Mimi

Urban Renewal Development corporation for the sum of $290,000. As

previously discussed, Mimi Development had a soils investigation

conducted for the subject site in June of 1981.

In a letter dated January 29, 1985 to the NJ Attorney General, the

attorney representing Russell Mahler stated that his client had every

intention of making the $30,000 payment as per the settlement

agreement. It was further stated that Russell Mahler, at that time,

was residing in the Federal Penitentiary in Danbury and was unable to

raise the funds to make the deposit at the time. According to the

letter Russell Mahler was scheduled for release on March 22, 1985.

Mahler's Attorney stated that his client proposed that he be allowed

to make the $30,000 settlement payment in six equal installments over

a six month period with the first payment being made one month after

his release from Danbury.

The Attorney GeneralIs Office, in a March 18, 1985 reply to the letter

from Mahler's attorney, stated that the terms described in the January

29, 1985 letter were unacceptable to the state. The DAG also stated

that all other parties (Newtown and Aetna Insurance) have made their

payment, and as of December 2, 1984, Russell Mahler had been in

violation of the November 2, 1984 court Order. The DAG then stated

that the state was willing to discuss a short term installation

arrangement, however, the state would require Mahler to pay at least

one-third of the amount due by the end of the month. The letter closed

by stating that "once Mr. Mahler has demonstrated algood faith'

attempt to live up to the terms of his previous agreement and the

Court Order by making this payment, the state would be more willing to

entertain the installment payment conceptll

• It is not known if Mahler

ever made the required payment.

The subject site was inspected by the Department on April 23, 1985.

MAXUS005612
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 31

CONFIDENT/AL

The inspector noted that the facility had been demolished and the

bases of two tanks, the foundation of a building, and a lagoon

(approximately 30' X 40') were all that remained. other observations

that were made by the inspector are as follows:

_ the gate on the driveway was propped open with a rock,

_ a black, oil¥ stain measuring approximately 30' x 10' was found

.directly ins~de the gate, next to the foundation,

_ fresh tire tracks which crossed through the above mentioned

stain and led to the lagoon,

_ the lagoon was filled with muddy water with a milky grey edge.

The "lip" of the lagoon, 2', was black, and oil stained down to

the

water,

_ crushed drums, building rubble, and black, oily stains were

observed throughout the site,

- no one was on site

No photographs or samples were taken during the inspection.

On May I, 1985, the NJDEP Bureau of Environmental Measurements and

site Assessment inspected the SUbject site. various spills and two·

lagoons were observed on site. The site was fenced however, the gate

was unlocked. six soil samples and two surface water samples (from

the lagoons) were collected during the inspection.

The results of the sample analysis confirmed the presence of volatile

organics (Vas), Base/Neutrals, and metals in soil and surface water

samples collected from the SUbject site. Pesticides and PCBs were also

detected in soil samples (See substances Discharged/Abandoned on pg.

34) •

On January 8, 1986, the subject site was inspected by the NJDEP, BFO.

The gate to the property was unlocked and open. The condition of the

site appeared to have remained unchanged from previous inspections.

Some observations that were made are as follows:

_ An approximately 60' x 30' oil stain immediately to the west of

the building foundation,

_ several oil stains near one tank

_ a heavy black tar-like material in the second tank base,

_ a thick tar-like substance, covering "dozens" of square feet,

mounding up from the ground surface, approximately 200' to 250'

from the old building foundation,

_ evidence of illegal dumping of solid waste,

MAXUS005613
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 32

CONFIDENTIAL

_ six to ten partially buried drums

_ heavily stained soil in the vicinity of the drums

The NJDEP, Division of Hazardous waste Management, Metro Field Office

(MFO), inspected the site on January 5, 1988. A construction office

trailer was observed on the property bearing the name "Hudson Meadows

Urban Development corp.". There also was a sign on the trailer which

read "Office - Commercial - Industrial/ Will Build To suit/

10,000-50,000 sq. ft."

The ground at the site was frozen and snow covered during the

inspection. The NJDEP inspector also noted the following during the

inspection:

ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY;

_ "much" debris including at least five rusted 55 gallon drums

(empty),

_ various metal buckets and containers,

_ material from the demolition of the facility,

ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY;

ground appeared to have been built up by earth moving machinery

approximately four to five feet above the grade of the east side

of the property,

_ less debris on the west side compared to the east side,

_ not able to detect/observe any ground contamination due to snow

cover and frozen ground.

The DHWM, MFO reinspected the site on February 23, 1988, after the

snow cover had melted. According to the inspector, petroleum sheens

were noted on virtually all standing water, and oil contamination 0:

soil around the old tank foundation was observed. Some pools of water

exhibited an unusual white or pinkish coloration.

The DHWM, MFO contacted the Hudson Meadows Urban Development

corporation via telephone on February 18, 1988. The purpose of the

telephone call was to inform Hudson Meadows of the potential problems

that existed at their site in regards to the development of the site.

Hud~o~ Meadows stated that they had taken their own samples and were

awaltlng the sample results.

On March 15, 1988, the DHWM, MFO sent a followup letter to the Budsor!

Meadows Urban Development Corporation. This letter, which confirmed

the telephone conversation of February 18, outlined the potential

problems that existed at the site. The letter stated that the

Department had not been able to locate the responsible party, Russell

MAXUS005614
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 33

Mahler, but, if ~ossible will issue Mr. Mahler an order requiring

cleanup of the s1te.

The letter closed by stating that if the Department could not locate

the responsible party, the Department would take alternate measures to

ensure that proper remediation was done before development of the

site. The Department also recommended that Hudson Meadows Development

corporation undertake a Ilclean-upll investigation for the site.

NOTE: Some time subsequent to MFa's initial contact with Hudson

Meadows Development corporation (date unknown), Hudson Meadows

retained the services of Killam Associates to conduct a remedial

investigation (RI).

The RPIU has not located an~ additional information regarding the

remedial investigation. It 1S not known whether or not any RI's were

initiated.

No other activity has been documented relative to the subject site

subsequent to the March 15, 1988 letter to Hudson Meadows Urban

Development corporation.

MAXUS005615
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE sUMMARY

PAGE 34 LLJ.~rjUtl~ IIf\L

DISCHARGE/ABANDONMENT INFORMATION

Diamond Head Oil Company

1401 Harrison Avenue

Kearny Town Hudson County

Block: 285 Lot: 3

CURRENT OWNER

Mimi Urban Renewal corporation

525 Riverside Avenue

Lyndhurst, NJ 07071 (Bergen County)

(201)460-0088/761-1800

Mailing Address: Same as above

SUBSTANCES DISCHARGED/ABANDONED

Analysis of soil and surface water (lagoon) samples collected by the

NJDEP, BEMSA, SED from the subject site in May, 1985 revealed the

presence of the following contaminants:

SOIL:

Volatile organics Benzene, 1,1-dichloroethane, 1,2-dichloroethane, 1,1-dichlo

roethylene,

ethylbenzene, methylene chloride, tetrachloroethylene, toluene,

1,2-trans-dichloroethylene, 1,l,l-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene,

trichlorofluoromethane, vinyl chloride,

Base/Neutrals Acenaphthene, acenaphthylene, anthracene, benzo(a) anthracene,

benzo(a)pyrene benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene,

bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, chrysene, 1,3-dichlorobenzene, di-n-butyi

phthalate, 2,4-dinitrotoluene, fluoranthene, fluorene,

indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene, naphthalene, phenanthrene, pyrene,

1,2,4-trichlorobenzene

Pesticides Endosulfan II, alpha-BHC, 4,41-DDD, Endrin aldehyde

PCBs

Aroclor 1260

Metals, cyanide, and Phenols

Antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead,

mercury, nickel, silver, zinc, cyanide (total), phenolics (total)

MAXUS005616
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 35

CONFiDENTIAL

Tentatively Identified organic compounds

unknowns, 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro ethane, cyclohexane, methyl

cyclopentane, methyl cyclohexane, 2,3-dimethyl pentane, dimethyl

benzene, 1-ethyl-4-methyl benzene, 2-methyl-3-heptene, naphthalene

1-methyl, naphthalene 2-methyl, l-methyl-4-propyl benzene,

2-ethyl-l,4-dimethyl benzene, 1-ethyl-2-propyl cyclohexane,

decahydro-2-methyl naphthalene, alkane, 1,8-dimethyl naphthalene,

1,6,7-trimethyl naphthalene, naphthalene 1,4-dimethyl

SURFACE WATER:

Volatile organics Benzene, 1,1-dichloroethane, ethylbenzene, tetrachloroethylene,

toluene, 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane

Acid Extractable Compounds

2,4-dimethylphenol, phenol

Base/Neutrals

dimethyl phthalate, isophorone, di-n-butyl phthalate

Metals, cyanide, and Phenols

Arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, zinc,

cyanide (total), phenolics (total)

Tentatively Identified organic compounds

unknowns, dimeth~l SUlfide, alkane, xylene, l,3-isobenzofurandione,

N-methoxy-succin1mide, 5-propyl tridecane, 2,6,8-trimethyl decane,

2,4-dimethyl undecane,

DESCRIPTION OF SITE CONTAMINATION

There is both soil and surface water contamination on site. The

contamination appears to have resulted from the daily operations of

Diamond Head oil, which permitted waste oils to be discharged into th~

environment. The high water table at this site brings oily residues to

the surface. Soil samples were taken in May, 1985 by the site

Evaluation Unit of the Bureau of Environmental Measurements and site

Assessment (See substances Discharged/Abandoned). The results of the

sample analysis confirmed the presence of Volatile organics (VOs) ,

Base/Neutrals, and metals in soil and surface water samples collected

from the SUbject site. Pesticides and PCBs were also detected in soil

samples.

In addition to the waste oil contamination of the site, it is also

suspected that the site may have been filled with waste chromate

production slag/fill. The use of waste chromate production slag as

fill in many areas of Hudson County was a common practice from the

early 1950s to the early 1980s.

MAXUS005617
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 36

CONFlUtNlIAL

Associated with the site are contaminated soil disposal cells located

in areas adjacent to the subject site. These cells were constructed in

early 1978 by NJDOT for the cleanup of debris from the lloil lake" that

was situated partially on the adjacent NJDOT property (Block 285 Lot

2) and partially on the subject site (Block 285 Lot 3). Due to a lack

of capacitr at the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission's

MSLA 1-Dd1sposal cell, NJDOT constructed 86,570 yd

3

of on-site

disposal cells. These cells border the Diamond Head oil site on the

south and the east sides.

The cells are associated as being on Town of Kearn~ property (Block

285 Lots 14 and 15) but are also at the south of D1amond Head oil

company site (Block 285 Lot 3). Following construction of the cells,

ground water monitoring was required for the cells. Monitoring of

ground water was pursued by NJDOTi initially to provide documentation

on performance of disposal cells.

By memorandum dated January 4, 1980, the HMDC informed the NJDOT that

sampling data from one of the monitoring wells located at MSLA I-D

showed increasing concentrations of BOD5' COD and chlorides. According

to the HMDC, there was a black liquid observed in that same well

indicating liner damage at the disposal area. The HMDC memorandum

concluded by stating at that point is was not possible to determine if

materials in the disposal area were leaching into the surrounding

soils. It was recommended that additional sampling be undertaken as

soon as possible to determine the magnitude of the liner damage. It

appears that there was no monitoring data submitted beyond July, 1980.

The oil lake discharged .its oils to Frank's Creek, a tributary to the

Hackensack River. During the construction of Route 280, Frank's Creek

was sampled by NJDOT. The results were not reported to the NJDEP.

MAXUS005618
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

"INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 37

CONFIDENTJAL

Responsible Party: MIMI URBAN RENEWAL CORPORATION (formerly known as MIMI DEVELOPMENT

CORPORATION)

Current owners

525 Riverside Avenue

Lyndhurst, NJ 07071

Registered Agent:

Hudson Meadows Urban Renewal Corporation

Delores Turco

525 Riverside Avenue

Lyndhurst, NJ 07071

corporate status: Active, incorporated in the state of New Jersey in June 29, 1978.

Financial status:

Not Available

Principals:

Delores Turco

54 Enclosure Road

Nutly, NJ

comments: Current site owner; Prior to the January 1985 purchase of the sUbject

site, Mimi had a soils investigation conducted for the SUbject

property.

MAXUS005619
DIAMOND HEAD OIL CON FJD

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY .. . IEN flAL

PAGE 38

Responsible Party: NEWTOWN REFINING CORPORATION (formerly Ag-MET oil service, Inc.)

37-80 Review Avenue

Long Island City, New York 11101

Address:

Landmark Tower

One Landmark Square,

stamford, CT 06901

Registered Agent:

corporation Trust ~ompany

28 West state street

Trenton, NJ 08608

suite No.303

corporate status: Active, foreign corporation, incorporated in the state of New York on

January 12, 1976

Financial status:

Not Available

Principals:

Not Available

comments:

Former site owner/operator.

MAXUS005620
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 39 ,C.U.NtlUtNTJAL

Responsible Party:

NORTHEAST OIL SERVICE OF SYRACUSE, INC.

North Gafton Shopping Center

North Grafton, MA 01536

Mailing Address:

Box 477

North Grafton, MA 01536

Registered Agent:

corporation Trust Company

28 west state Street

Trenton, NJ 08608

corporate status:

Revoked; Foreign incorporated in Massachusetts

Financial status:

Not Available

Principals:

Russell Mahler

Address Unknown

Lloyd P. Mahler

Vice President

Box 477 (Last Known Address)

North Grafton, MA 01536

comments: Transported waste oil and oil sludges to the subject site.

MAXUS005621
DIAMOND HEAD "OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 40

CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

DIAMOND HEAD OIL REFINING CORPORATION

Registered Agent:

Last Registered Agent: Ralph M. Lowenbach

Gateway One

Newark, NJ 07102

corporate status: VOID, November 17, 1983; incorporated in the state of New Jersey on

August 24, 1978.

Financial status:

Not Available

Principals:

Robert Mahler, Director, President

David Risa, Director

Comments:

operated at subject site

MAXUS005622
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

~:~S~iG]l.TIVE SIJ1OO\RY CO N FID EN nAL

Responsible Party: PSC RESOURCES, INC. (formerly Phillips Resources, Inc.)

229 south state street

Dover, DE 19901

Registered Agent: The Prentice Hall corporation System, New Jersey, Inc.

One Exchange Place

First Jersey National Bank

Jersey city, NJ 07303

corporate Status: Revoked, February 23, 1983; incorporated in the State of Delaware as

Phillips Resources, Inc. on October 23, 1973

Financial status:

Not Available

Principals:

Arthur M. Vash

President

229 South state Street

Dover, DE 19901

Comments:

operated at subject site

MAXUS005623
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 42

CONFJDtN flAL

Responsible Party:

DIAMOND HEAD OIL REFINING COMPANY, INC

Last Registered Agent:

Martin Morrison .

Last known address

1504 East 95th street

Brooklyn, NY

Corporate status: Dissolved as of December 28, 1973; incorporated in the state of New

Jersey on December 12, 1949

I

Financial status:

Not Available

Principals:

Nicholas Matin

Shareholder

c/o 129 west 48th street

Bayonne, NJ 07002

comments:

operated waste oil refining plant at the subject site from

approximately 1950 to 1973.

MAXUS005624
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 43

CONFJDENTfAL

Responsible Party:

SHUR-FLO OIL COMPANY, INC.

Registered Agent:

N/A

corporate status: Dissolved as of April 17, 1961; incorporated in the state of New

Jersey on August 1, 1949

Financial status:

N/A

Principals:

Martin Morrison, President

Nicholas Matin, Director

Comments:

operated at the subject site

MAXUS005625
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 44

CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

Diamond Recycling corporation

1401 Harrison Avenue (Last known

Kearny, NJ 07032

Registered Agent:

Ralph M. Lowenbach

Gateway One

Newark, NJ 07101

corporate status: Void, in New Jersey as of November 17, 1893; originally incorporated

in the state of New Jersey on July 20, 1979.

address)

Financial status:

N/A

Principals:

Robert Mahler, Director

1401 Harrison Turnpike

Kearny, NJ 07032

comments:

operated at subject site

MAXUS005626
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 45

CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Part¥:

Tammy's oil Serv1ce

Registered Agent:

N/A

Corporate status:

N/A

Financial status:

N/A

Principals:

Russell W. Mahler, President and Principal Owner

Comments: owned all outstanding stock of PSC Resources from November if 1973 to

November 3, 1976

MAXUS005627
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 46 CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

EDGEWATER TERMINAL

Registered Agent:

N/A

corporate status:

N/A

Financial status:

N/A

Comments: Eckhart 'reports states that this company operating at the SUbject site

received approximately 33 tons of oil and oil sludge wastes from

Monsanto's Kenilworth, NJ plant (1973 to 1979).

MAXUS005628
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 47

Responsible Party:

REFINEMET INTERNATIONAL COMPANY (Formerly Ag-MET, Inc.)

Last Known Registered Agent:

corporation Trust Company

'28 west state street

Trenton, NJ 08608

corporate status:

Revoked; Foreign corporation: incorporated in Delaware

Financial status:

N/A

Comments:

Former site Owner/operator

CONFIDENTIAL

MAXUS005629
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 48

Responsible Party:

BAY CITY OIL SERVICE

Registered Agent:

N/A

Corporate status: Dissolved as of December 28, 1973; incorporated in the state of New

Jersey on December 12, 1945.

Financial status:

N/A

Comments: operated at subject site and hauled waste oil and oil sludge to the

site

MAXUS005630
DIAMOND HEAD OIL C

~~S~~GATIVE SUHMARY ONFIDENTIAL

Responsible party:

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

1035 Parkway Avenue

CN 600

Trenton, NJ 08625

Registered Agent:

NJA

Corporate status:

N/A

Financial status:

NJA

Principals:

Thomas M. Downs, commissioner

Comments: Owner of portion of 1-280 right-of-way on the sUbject site (Block 285

Lot 3)

MAXUS005631
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE SO CONFJD£NTlALJ

Responsible Party:

MONSANTO COMPANY

800 N. Lindbergh Blvd

st. Louis, MO 63141~7843

Registered Agent:

corporation Trust company

28 West state street

Trenton, NJ 08608

corporate status: Active, incorporated in the state of Delaware as Monsanto Chemical

Company on April 19, 1933. Registered to do business in New Jersey on

January 31, 1936.

Financial status: D&B Estimated latest year sales of $8,995,000,000; 22% sales growth;

Net worth $3,146,000,000.

Principals:

Richard J. Mahoney, Chairman of the Board, CEO

28 Upper Ladue Road

st. Louis, MO 63124

Earle H. Harbison, President & chief operating Officer

48 Portland Drive

st. Louis, MO 63131

Comments: According to the Industrial waste survey, two different

Monsanto facilities reportedly sent to waste to the subject site;

North 8th and Monroe Avenue

Kenilworth, NJ 07037.

584 US Highway 130

Trenton, NJ 08620

The facility located at North 8th and Monroe Avenue also reported (in

the Eckhart Report) using the subject site as a disposal facility for

33 tons of oil and oil sludge wastes from 1973 to 1979.

MAXUS005632
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 51

Responsible Party:

AMERICAN ALUMINUM COMPANY

230 Sheffield street

Mountainside, NJ

Registered Agent:

Edward J Duggan

230 Sheffield street

Mountainside, NJ 07092

Corporate status:

Active, incorporated in the state of New Jersey on April 8, 1911 as

Aluminum & Metal Specialty Manufacturing Co.

Financial status:

D&B Estimated latest year sales of $11,000,000; 25% sales growth.

Principals:

Henry J. Brucker, Chairman

Robert J. Brucker, President

Edward J. Duggan, Exec. Vice President/Secretary

Comments: American Aluminum Company is currently listed as a hazardous

waste generator; NJD002155166i Reported sending waste to the sUbject

site in the Industrial waste survey.

MAXUS005633
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE suMMARY

PAGE 52

CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible party:

cLARKSON AND FORD COMPANY

30 Industrial st. W

Clifton, NJ 07012-1712

Registered Agent:

Franklin T. Johnson

30 Industrial st., west

Clifton, NJ 07012

Corporate status: Active, incorporated in the state of New York on January 17, 1903.

Financial status: D&B Estimated latest year sales of $550,000. 10% sales growth.

principals: Franklin T. Johnson, president/Treasurer

41 Lake End

Green pond, NJ 07435

Alfred C. Johnson, Vice president/Secretary

238 Alpine Trail

sparta, NJ 07871

comments: Reported sending \,"csteto the subj ect site In the Industrial

waste survey.

MAXUS005634
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 53

Corporate status:

NjA

I

I

I

i

l

I

I

I

I

I

i

I

I

I

Responsible Party: FALKE ENGINE REBUILDING CORP.jFALKE CORPORATION

24 Frederick street

i'1aldwick,NJ 07463

Registered Agent:

NjA

Financial status:

NjA

Comments: Reported sending waste to the subject site in the Industrial waste

survey.

MAXUS005635
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 54

CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

GAYTON LUCCHI TOOL COMPANY

27 Skita Avenue

Carteret, NJ 07008

Registered Agent:

N/A

Corporate status:

.N/A

Financial status:

N/A

comments: Reported sending waste to the subject site in the Industrial waste

survey

MAXUS005636
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 55

CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

G&L TOOL COMPANY

830 Elston street

PO Box 642

Registered Agent: No Record with Division of commercial Recording 08/28/91

corporate status: No Record with Division of commercial Recording 08/28/91

Financial status: D&B Estimated latest year sales of $3,500,000 (11/15/1990). 36% sales

growth.

Principals:

Gayton Lucchi, Owner

Anne Lucchi, Office Manager

comments: Reported sending waste to the subject site in the Industrial waste

survey

MAXUS005637
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 56

CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

RED DEVIL, INC.

2400 Vauxhall Road

Union, NJ 07083

Registered Agent:

George Lee

2400 Vauxhall Road

Union, NJ 07083

corporate status: Active, incorporated in the state of New Jersey on January 28, 1926.

Financial status: D&B Latest Year Sales of $47,525,622. 28% sales growth. Net worth

$9,270,372

Principals:

George L Lee, Jr., Chairman

2400 Vauxhall Road

Union, NJ 07083

Donald Hall, President

2400 Vauxhall Road

Union, NJ 07083

comments: Red Devil, Inc. is currently listed as a RCRA generator EPA

10#: NJD002136232; Reported sending waste to the subject site in the

Industrial waste survey

MAXUS005638
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE sUMMARY

PAGE 57

CONFIDEN/JAL

Responsible Party:

TEXACO, INC.

177 Industrial Avenue

Teterboro, NJ 07730

HEADQUARTERS ADDRESS

2000 west Chester Avenue

White Plains, NY 10604-3613

Registered Agent:

prentice-Hall Corp. system I

150 west state street

Trenton, NJ 08608

corporate status: Active, incorporated in Delaware on August 26, 1926 and subsequently

authorized to transact business in New Jersey in october 1941.

Financial status: O&B reports latest year sales of $40,899,000,000; net worth of

$9,385,000,000.

Principals:

Alfred C. OeCrane, Jr.

Chairman of the Board

William P. Doyle

President

James W. Kinnear

President

Earl J. Johnson

President

Comments: Texaco (Teterboro) is currently listed as a RCRA generator

EPA 10#: NJ0084015452. Reported sending waste to the sUbject site in

the Industrial waste survey

MAXUS005639
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 58

CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Party: ACTION PLASTIC COMPANY/DIVISION OF D~~T INDUSTRIES

50 Furler street (Last known address)

Totowa, NJ 07512

Registered Agent: (DART INDUSTRIES)

corporation Trust Company

28 west state street

Trenton, NJ 08608

DART INDUSTRIES Active, incorporated in Delaware on August 9, 1960 (formerly known as

Rexall Drug and chemical company)

I

I,

\ !

[

I,

corporate status:

Financial status:

N/A

comments: Reported sending waste to the subject site in the Industrial waste

survey

MAXUS005640
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 59 CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

BEACON DIE MOLD, INC.

57 Crooks Avenue

Clifton city, NJ 07011

Registered Agent:

Pascal A. Esposito

6 Arrowhead Lane

Saddle River, NJ 07458

corporate Status: Active, incorporated in the State of New Jersey on January 26, 1956.

Financial status: According to D&B, on July 21, 1987 Pascal A. Esposito, President,

stated that Beacon Die Mold, Inc. discontinued operations in 1985. On

september 5, 1991, outside sources

Principals:

Pascal A. Esposito, President

6 Arrowhead Lane

Saddle River, NJ 07458

Anglea A. Esposito, Secretary

6 Arrowhead Lane

Saddle River, NJ 07458

Richard G. Esposito, Vice President

G Arrm"hc:ad Lane

Saddle River, NJ 07458

Comments: Reported sending waste to the subject site in the Industrial Waste

Survey

MAXUS005641
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 60

CONfIDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

CN1PTON TOOL AND DIE COMPM~Y

40 sidney Circle

Kenilworth Borough, NJ 07033

Registered Agent:

Albert W. Bossert, Jr.

25 sidney circle

Kenilworth Borough, NJ 07033

corporate status: Active, incorporated in the state of New Jersey on August 23, 1966.

Financial status:

N/A

Principals:

Albert W. Bossert, President

886 Sunset Ridge

Bridgewater, NJ 08807

Lee R. Rosander, Vice President

1412 Golf street

Scotch plains, NJ 07076

Mary Ann' Bossert, Secretary/Treasurer

886 Sunset Ridge

Bridgewater, NJ 08807

Comments: Reported sending waste to the subject site in the Industrial Haste

survey

MAXUS005642
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 61

ResDonsible Party:

DESIGN AND MOLDING SERVICES

25 Howard street

piscataway Twp., NJ 08854

Registered Agent:

Paul R. Willlams, Jr.

302 East Broad street

Westfield, NJ 07090

corporate status: Active, incorporated in the state of New Jersey on February 2, 1969.

Financial status:

N/A

Princinals:

Jerry P. Fontenelli, President

205 Hockenbury Road

Neshanic, NJ 08853

John L. Fontenelli, Exec. Vice Pres.

384 Rolling Ynolls Hay

Bridgewater, NJ 08807

Robert c. Malenchek, Secretary

279 sunnymead Road

somerville, NJ 08876

comments: Reported sending waste to the subject site in the Industrial waste

survey

MAXUS005643
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 62

CONfiDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

DIANEM COMPANY

Lodi Borough, NJ 07644

Registered Agent:

N/A

Corporate status:

N/A

Financial status:

N/A

comments: Reported sending waste to the subject site in the Industrial Haste

survey

MAXUS005644
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 63 CONflDEiVTlAV

Responsible Party:

DIGITAL COMPUTER CONTROLS

12 Industrial Road

Fairfield Borough, NJ 07006

Registered Agent:

corporation Trust Company

28 West state street

Trenton, NJ 08608

Corporate status:

Active, incorporated in the State of Delaware on l1arch 8, 1971.

Financial status:

N/A

PrinciDals:

Michael B. Evans, President

4400 Computer Drive

Hestboro, MA 01580

John Gavin, Jr., Treasurer

4400 Computer Drive

Westboro,}~ 01580

william F. Robinson, Jr., Ass't Sec.

4400 Computer Drive

Westboro,}~ 01580

Jacob Frank, Secretary

4400 Computer Drive

Westboro, MA 01580

Comments:

Reported sending waste to the subject site in the Industrial Waste

Survey

MAXUS005645
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 64

CONFIDENTfAt

Responsible Party:

EINSON-FREEMAN DETROY

20-10 Maple Avenue

Fair Lawn

CORPORATION

Registered Agent:

Ronald A. Joy

20-10 Maple Avenue

Fair Lawn, NJ 07410

corporate status:

Active, incorporated in the state of New Jersey on July 6, 1978.

Financial status:

N/A

Principals:

Robert C. Quinn, President

Ronald A. Joy, Vice President

Comments: Einson-Freeman & Oetroy Corp. is currently listed as a RCRA

generator EPA 10#: NJD052092616; Reported sending waste to the sUbject

site in the Industrial waste survey

MAXUS005646
DIAM

INVE

PAGE

Rest

CARlI

160

East

Reg:i

NjA

~

NjA

Fine

NjA

ComI

Rep(

su~

DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 65

Responsible Party:

FOREMOST MANUFACTURING

941 Ball Avenue

Union Twp., NJ 07410

Registered Agent:

Herbert Schiller, Jr.

941 Ball Avenue

Union, NJ 07083

COHPP.HY, INC.

t,., .-

V/VtlL; "

1:.1'1,

,

corporate status:

Active, incorporated in the State of New Jersey on May 1, 1957

Financial Status:

D&B projected sales of $9,000,000.

Principals:

Herbert Schiller, Jr., President

40 Jared Court

Watchung, NJ 07060

Helen Schiller, Secretary

40 Jared court

Watchung, NJ 07060

Herbert S. Schiller, Vice President

1 Heather Lane

Warren, NJ 07060

Comments: Foremost Manufacturing Co. is currently listed as a RCRA

generator and transporter EPA 10#: NJ0002177285; Reported sending

waste to the subject site in the Industrial Waste survey

MAXUS005647
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 66

Co . NF1DfNTIAl

Responsible Party:

cARMET COMPANY/AMCAR DIVISION

160 East Union Avenue

East Rutherford, NJ 07073

Registered Agent:

NjA

corporate status:

NjA

Financial status:

NjA

comments:

Reported sending waste to the sUbject site in the Industrial waste

survey

MAXUS005648
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY Jrl:ul' J

PAGE 67 ~ V t J U tlV llAL'

Resoonsible Party:

INTERNATIONAL TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CORP. (1TT 11ARLOW)

1330 Avenue of Americas (Headquarters Location)

New York, NY 10019

Registered Agent:

corporation Trust Company

28 west state street

Trenton, NJ 08608

corporate status: Active; Foreign corporation; incorporated in the state of Delaware

Financial status: D&B reports gross revenues of $20,604,000,000; Worth $7,415,000,000.

Principals:

Rand v. Araskog, President and chief Operating Officer

comments: ITT Marlow is currently listed as a RCRA generator EPA 10#:

NJD001572999; Reported sending waste to the subject site in the

Industrial waste Survey

MAXUS005649
DIAMOND HEAD OIL"

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 68

Responsible Party:

GERRIT BEKKER AND SONS,

228 Scoles Avenue

Clifton, NJ 07012

Registered Agent:

William L Handler, Esq.

91 Main street

West Orange, NJ 07052

corporate status: Active; incorporated in the state of New Jersey on January 27, 1981

INC. (Subsidiary of Ramon, CIne.)

Financial status:

Ramon, CIne. - D&B projected sales of $500,000

Principals:

Harshad Shah, Chairman of the Board/president

Dennis Shah, Vice president/Secretary

comments: Reported sending waste to the sUbject site in the Industrial Haste

survey; Reportedly, Gerrit Bekker and Sons, Inc. discontinued

operations at their Clifton site prior to October 1984.

MAXUS005650
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 69

Responsible Party:

ARROH PLASTICS CORPORATION

83 Commerce street

Garfield city, NJ 07026

Registered Agent:

Bernard L. Albert

365 West Passaic street

Rochelle Park, NJ 07662

corporate status: Active, incorporated in the state of New Jersey on February 26, 1946.

Financial status:

N/A

comments: Reported sending waste to the subject site in the Industrial waste

survey

MAXUS005651
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 70 CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible party:

JAE TRUCKING

Address Unknown

Registered Agent:

NjA

corporate status:

NjA

Financial status:

NjA

Comments: According to their response to the NJDEP Industrial waste

survey, the American Aluminum company reportedly used JAE TRUCKING to

transport waste from their facility to the sUbject site.

MAXUS005652
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 71 CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

PINTO SERVICE

445 North Main street

Lodi, NJ 07644

Registered Agent:

Charles Pinto

95 Route 46 west

Lodi, NJ 07644

corporate status: Active, incorporated in the State of New Jersey on November 21, 1963.

Financial status:

D&B projected sales of $3,000,000

Pinto service reportedly has 900 accounts.

Princinals:

Joseph Pinto, President

Gloria Pinto, Secretary/Treasurer

comments: Listed in Industrial Waste survey as waste transporter for

Arrow Plastic Corp. Currently a registered solid waste transporter in

the State of New JerseYi NJS000028852i NJDEP S#: 52885

MAXUS005653
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 72 CONFIDENTIAL

Responsible Party:

ROBERT MORE WASTE OIL SERVICE

124 Biltmore street

North Arlington, NJ 07032

Registered Agent:

N/A

corporate status:

N/A

Financial status:

D&B Estimated latest year sales of $68,000.

Principals:

Robert More, Owner

Comments: Listed in Industrial Haste survey as 'l-,Tastetransporter for

Falke Engine Rebuilding Corp. Currently listed as a NJ hazardous waste

transporteri NJD000513218i NJDEP S#: S6262

MAXUS005654
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 73

Resnonsible Party:

DEPALMA OIL COMPANY

713 pinewood Road

Union, NJ 07083

Reaistered Agent:

N/A

.CONFIDEiV rIAL

Cornorate status: Dead; Incorporated in the state of New Jersey on March 18, 1948

Financial status:

NIA

comments: Listed in the Industrial waste survey as the waste

transporter for Red Devil, Inc. Currently listed as a NJ hazardous

waste transporter; NJD065788556; NJDEP S#: 6689

MAXUS005655
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 74

Responsible Parties (Individuals):

Russell W. Mahler

Robert Mahler

Lloyd Mahler

Registered Agent:

N/A

CONFIDENTIAL

CorDorate status:

N/A

Financial status:

N/A

comments: These individuals were officers of many of the various corporate

entities which operated at the subject site however, their current

whereabouts are unknown.

MAXUS005656
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 7S CONFIDENTIAL

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOHl1ENDATIONS

Mimi Urban Renewal corporation (formerly known as 11ini Development

corporation), as current owner of the subject site, is a responsible

party for site contamination. As previously noted in the case sumDa~y,

in 1981, prior to the January 1935 purchase of the sUbject site, Mini

had a soils investigation conducted for the subject property. The

soils investigation, which was done as part of a proposed hotel

development study for the site, revealed that the site had extensive

petroleum hydrocarbon contamination. This investigation (which was

submitted to Mimi in June 1981) shows that Mimi had knowledge of the

site conditions (relative to soil contamination) prior to purchasing

the property.

The following companies and/or individuals are primary responsible

parties at the subject site as former site owners and/or operators:

Newtown Refining corporation (fornerly Ag-HET oil Service, Inc.) owned

the subject site from November 3, 1976 until January 11, 1985, at

which time the site was sold to the current owner Mimi Urban Renewal

corporation. Newtown continued to operated the waste oil refining

facility at the site from November 1976 to approximately 1979. As

cited in the case summary, on numerous occasions during Newtown's

ownership of the property, spills and discharges were documented at

the subject site by representatives of the HMDC, NJDEP, and the USEPA.

Northeast oil Service was a liquid waste hauler whose NJDEP, SWA

registration statements for fiscal years 1978 and 1979 listed the

subject facility as the disposal location. Northeast was also

identified as the hauler for several companies identified in the

NJDEP, Industrial Waste survey from 1977 to 1979.

Diamond Head oil Refining corporation is believed to have operated at

the subject site in 1978.

PSC Resources, Inc. was owner operator of the subject facility from

nove~ber I, 1973 to November 3, 1976. As cited in the case summary, on

nunerous occasions during PSCls ownership of the property, spills and

discharges were documented at the subject site by representatives of

+-.:~-' ::.:DC,NJDEP, and the USEPA.

Diamond Head oil Refining Company, Inc. was owner and operator of the

subject site from 1950 to 1973. During years of operation, the

practices of this company at this facility led to waste oil

contamination of this site. This corporation no longer appears to be

viable at this time.

Shur-Flo oil Company operated at ~he subject site from approximately

1952 to 1961 as a waste oil refiner and canner of motor oils. Many of

the officers of this corporation were the same as those of Diamond

Head oil Refining company from 1952 co 1961. This corporation no

longer appears to be viable at this tine.

Diamond Recycling Corporation filed an initial registration statement

MAXUS005657
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 76

CONFIDL/V' -'-.

CJ ItAL

for a liquid waste haule~ with the NJ~EP, S~A in August.1979 for

fiscal year 1980. They llsted the subJect slte as the dlsposal

location. This corporation no longer appears to be viable at this

time.

Tammy's oil service owned all outstanding stock of PSC Resources (site

owners) from November 1, 1973 to November 3, 1976.

Edgewater Terminal was listed as the name of the facility operating at

the subject site in the Eckhart Report. In this report Monsanto stated

that they had sent 33 tons of.oil and oil sludge to the subject site.

Refinemet International reportedly was the parent corporation of

Newtown Refining. In 1982, Refinemet hired a contractor to remove two

oil storage tanks which were allegedly receiving illegally dumped

waste oil. The contents of the tanks were analyzed and found to be PCB

contaminated. Refinemet also had a limited soil removal performed in

the area immediately surrounding the tanks.

Bay Cit~ oil service, Inc. was a waste oil collector hauler who hauled

waste all to the subject site from approximately 1950 to 1973 (Note

the officer during this period were also officers of Diamond Head oil.

This corporation dissolved in 1973. The name was later used by a

company which was operated by PSC Resources/Russell Mahler (as

President) and Robert Mahler. This company as stated in the summary

hauled waste oil from New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey to the

subject site. In an application for certification to collect or haul

solid waste which was submitted to the Department in 1972 (by the

original Bay city Oil), the estimated amount of waste to be collected

was 51,500 gallons per year. By 1976, Bay city oil was reporting

estimates of 500,000 per year.

The NJ Department of Transportatioll is a responsible party as owner of

a portion of the SUbject site (right-of-way for 1-280) .

Monsanto Company; According to the Industrial waste survey, two

different Monsanto facilities reportedly sent to waste to the SUbject

site;

North 8th and Monroe Avenue

Kenilworth, NJ 07037.

584 US Highway 130

Trenton, NJ 08620

The facility located at North 8th and Monroe Avenue also reported (in

the Eckhart Report) using the subject site as a disposal facility for

33 tons of oil and oil sludge wastes fron 1973 to 1979.

Russell Mahler as the president and director of PSC Resources, Ag-Me~,

Bay city oil, Northeast Oil, and Newto~n, is a responsible party. In

an affidavit dated June 8, 1978, Russell Mahler stated that he had

several years of experience in supervising the overall operation of

the subject facility.

MAXUS005658
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 77

CONFJOfNTIAL

Robert and Lloyd Mahler have also been identified as responsible

parties as they where also officers of some or all of the companies

named in the paragraph above. Robert was even identified as plant

manager of the subject facility in October 1975. The whereabouts of

Russell, Robert, and Lloyd Mahler are unknown.

The above named companies and individuals, the following companies

were identified as responsible parties based on a survey of the NJDEP,

Industrial waste survey files:

American Aluminum company

Mountainside, NJ 07092 (union Co.)

Clarkson and Ford Company

Clifton, NJ 07012 (Passaic Co.)

Falke Corporation

Waldwick, NJ 07463 (Bergen Co.)

Gayton Lucchi Tool company

Carteret, NJ 07008 (Middlesex Co.)

G&L Tool Company

Rahway, NJ 07065 (Union Co.)

Monsanto company

Kenilworth, NJ 07037 (Union Co.)

Monsanto company

Trenton, NJ 08620 (Mercer Co.)

Red Devil, Inc.

Union Twp., NJ 07083 (Union Co.)

Texaco, Inc.

Teterboro, NJ 07730 (Bergen Co.)

Action Plastic companv/Division Dart Industries

Totowa Borough, NJ 07512 (Passaic Co.)

Beacon Die Mold, Inc.

Clifton city, NJ 07011 (passaic Co.)

Campton Tool and Die Companv

Kenilworth Boro, NJ 07033 (union Co.)

Design and Molding Services

piscataway Twp., NJ 08854 (Middlesex Co.)

Dianem Company

Lodi Borough, NJ 07644 (Bergen Co.)

Digital Computer Controls

MAXUS005659
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE suMMARY

PAGE 78

Fairfield Borough, NJ 07006 (Essex Co.)

Einson-Freeman Detroy corooration

Fair Lawn, NJ 07410 (Bergen Co.)

Foremost Manufacturing Comoany. Inc.

Union TwP., NJ 07083 (Union Co.)

Carmet company/Amcar Division

East Rutherford, NJ 07073 (Bergen Co.)

International Tele hone

Midland park, NJ 07432

ITT Marlow

Midland Park, NJ 07432 (Bergen Co.)

Bekker Garret and Sons. Inc.

Clifton city, NJ 07012 (passaic Co.)

CONFIDENTIAL

Arrow Plastics corporation

Garfield city, NJ 07026 (Bergen Co.)

Jae Trucking (hauled for American Aluminum)

Pinto service (hauled for ArroW Plastic corp.)

Robert More (hauled for Falke Engine Rebuilding Corp.)

DePalma oil company (hauled for Red Devil, Inc.)

The RPs identified in this report should be given the opportunity to

organize into a single representative body that could pursue

negotiations with the Department. This joint participation of 311 of

the RPs will allow the RPs to use one consultant/contractor and act

through a liaison group to the Department. This will reduce the effort

required by both the RPs and the Department in negotiations and

remediation.

project Activity Code AXT was used for this investigation. It is

recommended that administrative cost recovery and recovery of spill

Fund expenditures be an objective of future Departmental actions

relative to this case. Please contact this bureau to review case file

documents or request additional information and assistance.

INVESTIGATOR:

Carlton Dudley, HSMS II NJDEPE, Divis~on of Responsible Party site Remediation

Bureau of Field operations

Responsible Party Investigations Unit

300 Horizon Center

eN 407

Trenton, NJ 08625-407

March 1992

MAXUS005660
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE" 79

FILES UTILIZED

Files: North East Hazardous Waste Project

Division of Criminal Justice

Hughes Justice complex

Market street

Trenton, NJ 08625

ConteD~. Reports on organized crime in waste hauling industry,

referral on inquiries from other states about Russell Mahler/Diamond

Head oil Company/North East oil service, Inc.

Files: Industrial Waste survey

NJDEPE/Division of Responsible Party site Remediation

Bureau of Field operations

300 Horizon Center

Trenton, NJ 08625

contact: Carlton Dudley (609)584-4280

Content: Generators and/or transporters who reported using subject

site/operator for disposal of waste.

Files: Deeds

Hudson County Clerks Office

Hudson county Adninistration Bldg.

595 Newark Avenue

Jersey city, NJ 07306

(201)795-6000

content: Records of deeds and property transactions

Files: Manifest Records

NJDEPE/Hazardous Waste Regulation

Bureau of Advisement & Manifest

401 East state Street

Trenton, NJ 08625

contact: Phil Cole content: No record of manifested wastes received by Diamond Head oil

Refining Co.

MAXUS005661
DIAMOND HEAD OIL.

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 80

FILES UTILIZED

Files: Diamond Head Oil Co.

NJDEPE/Division of Res~onsible Party site Remediation

Bureau of Field operatlons

300 Horizon Center

Trenton, NJ

contact: Deborah Pinto

content: sam~les analysis, preliminary assessments, reports, site

maps, inspectlon memos

Files: Diamond Head oil/Quanta (Hudson Terminals)

NJ Dept. of Law and Public Safety

Hazardous site Litigations section

Hughes Justice Complex, 7th Floor

Trenton, NJ 08625

George Smajda

Content: No file on Diamond Head oil Co. however there is an

extensive file on a related corporation, Quanta Resources/ owned by

Russell Mahler (aka Hudson Terminals).

Files: Air Pollution Control File

NJDEPE/Division of Environmental Quality

Bureau of Air Pollution Control

2 Babcock Place

Hest Orange, NJ

contact: Byron sullivan (201)669-3935

Content: No file on Diamond Head oil Co.

Files: Corporate Records

NJ Dept. of state/Division of Commercial Recording

820 Bear Tavern Road

Hest Trenton, NJ

content: certificates of incorporation ~nd ~~atuses for PRP

corporations

MAXUS005662
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 81

FILES UTILIZED

Files: Diamond Head oil Company, File #07-07-40

NJDEPE/Office of Enforcement Policy

Metro Bureau of Field Operations

2 Babcock Place

west Orange, NJ 07052

contact: Jeff Sterling (201)669-3960

content: Facility inspection reports/memos, correspondence, photos,

analysis, maps, enforcement history

Files: Diamond Head Oil Company

Town of Kearny Health Office

645 Kearny Avenue

Kearny, NJ 07032

contact:

Content:

Ed Grosveno (201)991-2700

Facility inspections, correspondence, photos

Files: Diamond Head Oil & Refining company

Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners

600 Hilson Avenue

Newark, NJ 07105

Contact: Thomas Mack (201)344-1800

Content: waste Effluent surveys, correspondence

Files: Diamond Head oil Refining Co., Division of PSC

NJDEPE/Division of Water Resources

Csr:t-:-...,lFiles

401 East State Street

Trenton, NJ 08625

Content: NJPDES Permit #NJ0028045, inspection reports,

adninistrative orders, correspondence

MAXUS005663
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 82

FILES UTILIZED

Files: MSLA 1-D Landfill, File No.88-396 and 76-026

Hackensack Meadowlands Development commission (ID1DC)

NJ Department of community Affairs

One DeKorte park Plaza

Lyndhurst, NJ 07071

contact: Christopher D'our (201)460-1700

content: Disposal of contaminated soils in MSLA 1-D Landfill and

construction of on-site disposal cells at Diamond Head Oil Co.

facility by NJDOT, maps, engineering details; correspondence

Files: MSLA Landfill, File #09-07-HjSite #7

NJDEPEjDivision of Solid waste Management

Bureau of sanitary Landfill Closure

401 East state street

Trenton, NJ 08625

contact:

Content:

Numbers

Valerie Woods

Hauler and Facility Registration Applications by FEID

Files: Dun and Bradstreet Data Base

NJDEPEjDivision of science and Research

Information Resource Center

438 East state street

Trenton, NJ

Contact: Maria Baratta

Can '1.:811 L. : l~0 [/J.iU1 &: 3..L -..;.:..-' ~ ~ -~_.::.

companies.

(609)98~-2249

:~~ ~'~bject facility or affiliated

Files: Man Collection

NJ state Library

West State street

Trenton, NJ 08625

Content: Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps

MAXUS005664
DIAMOND HEAD OIL

INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

PAGE 83

FILES UTILIZED

Files: Building Permits

construction Code Enforcement Department, Town of Kearny

Town Hall

402 Kearny Avenue

Kearny, NJ 07032

contact: Ray Narwid (201)991-2700

Content: Building and demolition permits (1948-1987)

Files: NJDOT v. PSC Resources et al NJ Sup. Court Law Div. #L-1718-77

superior court of New Jersey

Public Information Center

171 Jersey Street

Trenton, NJ 08611

contact: Sandra Johnson (609)777-0092

content: court records for the subject case.

MAXUS005665
.. ','

.'.

• ,.; .I'

08625

.', '

Dear Mr. Clark:

The commissioners would appreclatereceiving· a

report on what is being done concerning the pool of

oil on the Department of Transportation-s property in

Q8§earny

, which overflows during rain storms, discharging

oil into Frank's Creek.

This matter was referred to your department by

the Deputy Attorney General on November 12, 1971.

Very truly yours,

PASSAIC VALLEY SEWERAGE COMMISSIONERS

Ja;i~~

S. A. Lubetkin

Chief Engineer

SAL/kl

cc: pVSC

Chief Counsel

BAAOOOOOS

... ;:--; ' ... ,,". "". "".~"' ... _ .•.• ' ............ .1', ..

MAXUS005666
Attn:

Dear sir:

requested a' progress .

report on w is being done by the state Department of

En~~~o,~ tal Proteetion eoncerning the pool of oil in

rKearn~;which discharges oil into Frank's creek during

"'m"tTrlitorms..As you reca 11, this matter was referred

to your Department by the Deputy Attorney General on

November 12, 1971, and as of this date the commissioners

have received no reports concerning what is happening.

WOuld you please bring the Commissioners up to

date concerning this matter.

very truly yours,

SAL/kl

cc: P.v.s.,c.

Chief Counsel BAA000001

MAXUS005667
MAXUS005668
.0. ....J!!~ J'l...1t7' ..

1 are!·rteU ·..,V..1"~1O

be4mt iupectiON @f the 4:1..,..1 anll fot' oU ...cOQ8:__ hd .u. dj.~t

to ... Y t.O&"& .t up IIkIU CO'Ml'iq the dliM .lope. of thlt di~

al'•• '" .r~ .... i" COIilt-'''.' _corUb (fti. atu.eba4 -.) ..

McU.ttcuU,.. ddal ,.etntiou b tlMt .1teh Il4j""t to the ftIIIiIIIIP 'haft'

.~ tbe cOllllP4lc"..au._" of tM 'i&Jft a1area.

:,

hbaeq_t. I'~.u.~ c~ (t111tillcMqAl& h_ tbe 81'•• anN i.to

tM 41- ...,... = to~"I" ... dala 'itch e-.-cta til'ftd,. i_o h-'

C"-It 011,~ haw Hd ~1C'INd 11th.. CnNtk .t t~ dlta

e~dn. ftU ·iaa nolad-- of t.u ... ral WatK'oU.U- e-arol jet.

10M ldrul of i_dille. aetimt to Abat. ot:'n.at. tuN 01.1, iU~ ill

~44td.

In.pectorl fres the VS!PA durina the e~ •• of II rtc_nC vialt to the D1~n4

R.ad "Unilll Co. ~ .1110 •• en thill pt.'ob1emand hay. _k.d what will "

done. Aec:ord1nsly. could you plea .. ac!v1u 1M whAt: atep. will" takllm to

r.-ove thie proble ••

Ene.

Icv

eel T. Gill'lI1n4h nAG (v/one)

u. Iteiabers. 1-210 Field (v/eftc)

r. C1m0n8ttlt

~-NiI~lk (w/lne)

BAAOOooaB


nased \.Won 11 Teviri Df:.d~"···mo,n.i.l~ot:lngldal:a fO'ttleUtilA t

lB.IC • and

ID~ in. "the KUrny1ilap) tOne of the.~l1St

ID, appear$':t

o

of ·BQD~'h.CODandChlodde$.

Additiol'lallYt ll of the W1!illnve2lis:abbek

liquid in the

Thel'efOl'e" it' apptlars thattq,e liner enclosin~ the diapoealaTeah#i$ beAA damS.ea. Since the liner l'Mtedal 19 cOf"lpaeted aalldtanon,..cohesive

_!lU'. corrective actions will be needed before further d$1l'llllge' to. the "

liner oecUl'8.

At this 1'"int. it is nQt possible to determine Hthe l'Mtedals in the

disposal area are leachin~ into the surrounding soils. It is recommended

that additional testing. commencing as BoonBS pouible, bellndertaken to

identify the magnitude of the liner damage. Samplin~ of wellS lA, lB.

Ie, and In, on a hi-weeklv bash, dur:ln~ it tl ...O roonth period for Petroleum

Hydrocarbons onlv, (EPA Silica Gel & NDIRProcedure) should be sufficient.

jI'

If you have any questions, 11lease contact me.

1

F..fIC.

ce: r. Germine, DAG (w/enc)

u. Steinberg, 1-280 Field (w/en c

)

F. Cimonetti, NJDOT-Newark (w/enc)

BAA000152

.A.j.i...i." ._-------...;.....--"....

MAXUS005672

~y .

~I Tom Seessel, Deputy Commissioner

- ) Steven Corwin, Special Assistant to the

Conunissioner

Diamond Head Projects - Kearny, New Jersey

August 23, 1974

It is our recommendation that you negotiate l'litht.he Department

of Transpor~ation the immediate removal of the oil lake from their property.

We do not feel that containment is an adequate solution, nor. is

spraying on roads. Evidence to date (US EPA) indicates that

oil sprays wash into the ground and contribute to the pollution problem.

Karl Birn's attached memo gives you a good insight into the

background. He has gone so far as to contact firms 'Which could

handle the problem at a mini~um of cost to DOT.

It is wrong to allow DOT to continue their pollution, as well

as inconsistent with our other efforts.

) SC:C:A18

cc: R. Ricci

K. Pirns

)

88B000047

Pli ...... ft.~_ MAXUS005674

i

1-

! :

j:

, I
,.~

)

Mr. Ricci

~fr. Birns August 23, 1974

Diamond Head Oil Refinery - Kearny, New Jersey

The Diamond Head Oil Refining Company has, for a period of

years, used a property behind its Harrison Avenue facility for

the disposal of waste oil. This disposal has creatod a lake

containing, by various estimates, upwards of a million and

half gallons of oil/water emUlsion. The problem was brought

to the attention of the Oil and Hazardous Haterials Group in

early 1973. A joint investigation was made by its Department

of Environmental Protection and the Hackensack l.Ieadowlands

Development Commission. It was learned that the N.J. Department of Transportation had purchased a major portion of the

contaminated oil lake for the construction of Route 280.

)

Because of the DOT involvement in the case, Mr. Al Guido,

Assistant to the Commissioner, ~as informed of the severe

pollution problem at the site and it was requested that his

office coordinate a clean-up response by the DOT.

The U.S. Coast Guard also investigated the problem and brought

to OUI- attention in May of 1973, the fact that the oil from

the facility was being wnshed out during periods of rain into

navigable waters of the United States in violation of Federal

law.

During the course of the past year,' very little has beon done

other than continued investigation to determine the extent of

the oil pollution. It appears that there was a nlisunderstanding between DOT and our department. It was our impression

that DOT was going to take some immediate steps to remove the

oil, their actual intention was to wait until the highway goes

through; which might not be for a period of years.

l·:r. Cascino, the Chief bngineer of the liac:kensack Meadowlands

Development Commission, requested l'Je reevaluate the case due

to the continuing pollution problem. Also, there were some

vehicle accidents on liarrison Avenue as a result of oil flushing across the road. On May 20, 1974 a meeting was held with

the State DOT, DEP, HHDC, and the U.S. Coast Guard. The

attached melr.OS ~xplain in JlJorcdetail the status of the

problem. Essentially, at this point in tiF.!c,it has heen

decided 'to a110\." Dr. Edgar Clark of Villanova University, ¥ho

represents Blackwood Carbon Products, a waste oil recycler, to

make a proposal to DOT for the removal and treatment of the

oil. This proposal would include the payment to DOT of a fixed

)

I

MAXUS005675
-2-

)

sum for removal of the oil ~ and the cost to DOT for treatJl:ent

of the oil water mixture remaining to equal the payment to DOT

for the oil removal itself. In this method no funds would change hands.

The Coast Guard has informed us that any further discharges

from this site would be subject to penalties under Federal law.

Guard. The State DOT ~ould be defendant in any action by the Coast

E32:Il:A14.AlS

)

."

)

i

I

I

I

i

. I

I

i

MAXUS005676
. '."

t~."nK2Ao.""""

~

•

. .

.,

" ~.-~-'

"..; ...

)

Theodo1'l J..'hcher

Dhision Of DIIfgn- .•,...11

..... JlrM1 ,Dept. of TranlportaUon

1035 ParbM,y AYt.

Trenton, tU -01625

AI: 1-210. StettOlll .,. IfNI to

Contut nlteeI tIItIrt.l1 ...... ' 'lift

Fl1e76-026 '" .

·Dear Mr. Ft1c:Mr:

Thll otffClt .... I"I'¥1Md the NqYllt of -IWDOTfor tM crnttDft of

• I.tond new on~.'t. d'spos.' Irtl, 10citIO on "ock 285, Lot 2 (w.tt of

O1U01'ld He.d Oil) for add1 tlon,' qUlfltttl.s of contMin,tH .. uri.h

from J-280, Sections SA and BO. This .rll II cMslgned to contain •• )1-

tllUll of 197,000 cubic yards. In Addition, w hive .lso revilWd ,,,,'neerIng pl.ns for this work.

' .. ed upon our joint revt ... of ,Your request with the saUd Nalte

Admlnistr.tlon, NJDEP, your request 11 her.by approv.d subj.ct to the

following conditions:

' ..

BAA00003~.

1. W. ftnd, upon "adl", the 1.11. with the Town of Kearny. tttlt

thf propert)' shown on toM '''9'"""''' pl,ns ts not the ,rDPtrt.Y

IctUAlly deliMited In the Igrt.-nt with the T*, of ICHrny.

Therefore, I copy of tht 1.11 •• trttllllftt for the proposed dUpoul .rta _t be ,ublltted.

2. A l1n.r of •• inlMUmcomplct.d thickness of 6 Inch.. of I.nd

sh.ll be plle" under ,11 ut.rills disposed of in the new I"'.

3. The liner of IInd shill be c.acted wi th • .-Ini_ of three

p.II.S af I vibr.tory coqIlctor. conforafng to the description

of page 82 of tne Standlrd Specifications.

)- " •. The d1lponl ..... II to be ..ol"hd 1n full depth .. ction, leplr.ted

, 'b,y •• ction.l dikes of land.

5. A II1nl_ IItbgk of 50 fNt 'hill be ,,'rttaiMd betwetn the dh~

poul '1"'1 .nd Dflll)nd Hlld Oil'. westerl,y property 11M.

.........

MAXUS005677
)

7. A two foot CClIIPIcted ttlfdtMl. ,tltj-e 111QWtr _ttri.l shall

be placed on the COIIIPllted dilpolll .tte. This CGftr _terial

Ihlll contain not less tMn 501 e1q. hive • liquid l1111t of

..... ter thin 40or CORuin 0P"fII'I1c .tert.h. 1Mscewer

.art.l •• 11M CCIIIIPIdId with • vtbr.tor1 CDIIIfJKtor.

8. A fou" tndl tMc:k topIOfl IJ1Ir. IllUlched. fertilized and siected

with Type A 11 be phetd over the stlty-clay

cover .tart.l.

In .ddiUon to the specfflc conditions of I9Proval .bove. IlEP has IXpressed some conc,rn .bout the long .'fects of storing oil-cont •• 1n.ted

.. tert.,s in 'Ind-lined IrllS and the responsfbillty of DOT if the sand liner

should f.II, causing oil contamlnltlon to be released from the disposa' ,rl ••

Therefore, WI request that. plan of action for dealing with liner f.11ures

be subllHtad.

If you hlY' any questions on t~se Matters, do not hesitate to cont.ct

this Office.

Sincerell ,

Office of

)

JB/cycc: W. Sh.der, NJDOT (W/Enclolure)

J. Pompilio, Crescent Construction co.

W. 8ursht1n, Solid Wast. AdIrlnistr.tion. MJOEP

M. Polito. U.S.£.P.A. Edison, NJ

J. Ne;li •• Neal'a Engi~erin9 Assoc.

Mayor a Counet 1, Town of Kearny

MAXUS005678
T ....O .... \.,. :>:. ....".15-

COIIIMI~5i' 0" (: R

,0;,5 PA~I<W."'" AVENUf!;

eN ~o

TRCNfON. NeW JEFlSEY ~un

NJOOT 1nterstate

Route 280

NJPD£S No. NJ0034959

Kearny, Hudson County

~tutl"Df Nrm lrr£lry

DEPARTMENT OF TRI\"'~SPORTATION

June 21,1991

~r. Edward Neafscy, Director

Office for Enforcement Pelicy

Sew Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

cz.; 029

401 East State Street

Trenton, New Jersey 08625

Dear Mr. Neafsey:

This letter is in regards to the Ne~ Jersey Department of

Tr~~sportation (NJDOT)/Interstate Route I-ZBO North Ditch Drainage Facility

located in the Town of Kearny, Hudson County. The NJDOT. through the issuance of

a SJPD£S Per8it (perait No. 0034959), is authorized to discharge fro. the 1-280

facility to receiving waterB named Frank's Creek.

Att~ch~d is e P~ct Sh~pt d~t~iling sitp. history, existing conditions

~~d the current status of the r-Z8~ facility.

Co~pliance Evaluation InBpections of the 1-280 r~cility have been

rout ine 1>" conducted by the NJDEP-Surlace Water/Se ...~r Extensions Metro Bureau of

Regional Enforcement. Based on these inspections'the 1-280 facility has received

a rating of "unacceptable" on a nu.ber of occasions. However, it should be noted

that a review of the resulls from the last six sa-pIing events conducted at the

S. Ditch indicate that this facility has not exceeded the perait li.its.

Due to periodic non-compliance of the NJPDES permit limits Cor the

1-280 facility, the ~JDOT hag been issued directives froe the NJDEP to

~cco.plish the rollo-ing:

institute corrective measures to ~chieve an acceptable discharge rating.

eubmit an ~ppljcation (or modification of the 1-280 facility per.it, and

...ithin thirt;" (30) calendar days of the date of notice, submit a report

concerning specific details of re.edial .easures to be instituted and an

implementation timetable.

As a result of the periodic non-co.pliance of the NJPDES per_it and

th~ ~JD~P directi~e6, L. Robert hi~ball & Associates (Ki~ball) was retained by

the FJooT to investigate feasible alternatives Cor mitigation oC cont&mination

~,d report upon the findings relative to the 1-280 facility.

°",r..qo"',r, " 7

On !':arch2 i,1991, K ic:bal1 sub. itte1 II. DuCt Pellsibili ty Sti.tdf"·thtlt L '-'

discussed the pricarlf0~rce6 of contamination ~~d investigated aitigation

alternatives. s"." J{'(j{'}' IJ An Equal Opportunity Empfo)"tr I~

MAXUS005679
MAXUS005680
fACT SHEET

ROUTE 1-280 NORTH DITCH

TOIffl OF ~I"Y

HUDSON COUNTY

S I TII HI STORY

)

P~ior to construction of 1-280, the project are:. consisted of .arshland

bounded by frank's Creek (a tribut~ry of the Passaic River), Diaaond Head 011

Refining Co., the NJ Turnpike and the Kearny LP. The .arah area through which

1-280 was constructed contained A thick layer o( oil, debris and fill fro. both

the Oi 1 Co. IUld LF. A large yoluae of oil I(IISpu.ped out in an attnpt to rellOve

contaAlnation prior to construction • However, due to the large voluae, oil and

wat~r re.oval WAS terainated and unsuitable .aterial 1(48 re.oved. Excavated

.slerial unsuitable for roaavay e.b&nkaent drainage ayate. construction-was

placed on Elate owned properties arljacent to the roadway.

As Figure 2 shows, soils were placed in Mounds north of the roAdway, veat

of R~p M and as cloverleaf infields. Debris and (ill associated with the Kearny

LF and excavated fro~ roadway ROW ~ere placed into the LF and in a ~a4te area

northwest or the N. Ditch. Following re.oval of contaainated unsuitable

al!tcrill.1, present roacr ..ay ~s:'3.nk~C:ltfi, drainage syste.a and structures 1/'er-e

constructed and the conta.inated Boil piles covered with clean lIoil.

Due to the presence of oil conta.ination adjacent to the N. Ditch, LF

.aterial adjacent to the S. Ditch and oil conta.inated groundwater throughout

the RO~, the N. Ditch siphon vas constructed as an oil water separator &nd a

SJPDES permit obtained.

The N. Ditch NJPDES per.it (No. 0034959) I(a8 obtained In 1981 Cor

~onitoring of total suspended solids (15S), oil and grease, total organic carbon

(TOG), phenols, pH and xylene (see attached).

DEP COHPLIAJ/CE £VALUATION INSPECTIoNS OF THE 11. DITCH

COlpllance Evaluation In8pections of the N. Ditch have been routinely

cor-dueted by the DEP. Based C~ these inspection. the N. Ditch facility haa

received a rating of ~USACCEPTABLE" on several occA8ion~ (Hove.ber

1,19B6-~ovember 31,1986, Nove.her 1,1987-october 31,1988. Nove.ber

l,1989-0ctober 31,1990).

As indicated In DEP's Co.pli~ce [valuation Inspection, the "UNACCEPTABLEh

rating places the N. Ditch in significant violation of the teras and condition.

of the ~JPDES perlit and/or Water Pollution Control Act regulation8 (NJAC

7:14A-l et aeq.).

NJDEP DIRECTIVE(S)

)

Due to continued non-co~pliance of the NJPDES perait li.its for the 1-280

N; Ditch discharge, the DOT h~ been issued directives froa the DEP to

accomplish the following:

",

MAXUS005681
-institute corrective aeasures to achieve An acceptable discharge rating,

-sub.it sn application for .edification of the N. Ditch per.it, and

-within thirty (30) calendar daYB of the date of notIce, sub.it a report

co~~erning fpccific details of reaedial .easures to be instituted and an

i.plementation tiaetable.

It should be noted that the 1-280 facility per.it expired on October

31,1585, The Depart.ent reapplied C~ July 13,1986. After not hearing within six

.onths of reapplication the Depart.ent contacted DEP to ascertain the status ot

the perait. DOT was inforaed that DEP never received the application.

Subs~uently, the Depart.ent subaitted another application and has still not

heard on the status.

CON9ULTAh~ ACTIVITY

As a result of the continued non-coapliance of. the NJPDES per.it and DEP

directives, L. Robert Kiaball l Assoc. was retained by the DOT to review

available data, present fe&aible alternatiTes for .1tig4tion of contaaination

and report upon the findings relative to the 1-280 N. Ditch discharge.

r.iftball Bub.ittcd the Draft Engineering Report for altigation of the 1-280

N. Ditch discharge on Noveaber 1,1990. The Engineering Report present. ki.ball'a

evaluation of t~e discharge problea,

Subsequently, on ~arch 27,1991, Ki.ball sub.ltted a Draft Feasibility

S t t:d)', The FellSib i1 ity ~tuO)' ~~.p.'L.'1rled on th<.- d iBcharge proble. and investigated

possible .itigation aeasures.

SOURCES OF COIiTAMINATION

The N. Ditch discharge is on the north aide of 1-280. The N. Ditch

discharge is a roadway drainage discharge point where drainage collected tro~

north and south surface water drainage systeas of 1-280 flow through a aub.erged

pipe (siphon) into Frank's Creek.

The primary 60urces of contaaination in the'N. Ditch include DiaaoDd Head

Oil Co. overload flow and cont~inated ground~ater infiltration and oil .eeps

fro. Adjoi~ing stockpiled oil-conta-inated soils. Di&Bond Head Oil Co. is no

longer in operation and the Bite Is vacant. The oil 8eeps co.e lroa excavated

aateria18 unsuitable for roadway e.b~kaent drainage syste. construction

Etockpiled on Etate owned properties adjacent to 1-280.

T~ primary sources of cont~.ination in the S. Ditch incl~de contaainated

ground~ater infiltration And Kearny LF run-on leacbate seepage.

iDmJIAL ALTERNATIVES (AS IDE2I'TIFIED BY nMBALL)

Ki.ball identified five (5) alternatives ~hich include:

-clearing and aaintAining tbe exiBting B1Stea- clearing accuaulated

.~teria18 fro~ the bIt tea (siphon and N. and S. Ditches) would reduce oil and

grea5~ and suspended solida. However, sediaent and debris Mill reaccumulate with

ti.e, requiring continued aaintenance of the syste. to maintain the positive

reSllIte, Preaence of conte. inated groundwa teT Iii11 continue to contaainate

future sediment and debris washing into t~e systea.

1i.e to imple.ent this alternative, following design, eBtablishaent of a

funding source and aavertise.ent and award of the construction contract, would

be 4 aontha at a cost of $952,694.

MAXUS005682
-utiliEation of a syntbetic liner-inc"ludes installation of a synthetic

liner in the base of the ditches to prevent infiltration ot contaainated

groundwater. Synthetic liner prevents infiltration ot cont&ainated groundwater

~hile ~l!.intaining control of surface runofr. LF run-on would be prevented using

a hera. Dia.ond He~ run-on Hould still be collected. The liner ~ould prevent

direct contact and discharge of cont~inated groundwater. Properly .alntained,

the liner would be expected to last at le~t 30 years.

Tiae to iaple.ent this alternative, following design, estahl~ah.ent of a

funding source and advertise.ent and award of the construction contract, would

be 4 aonths at a cost r~ging froa 1.3 to 2.9 .illion dollars. The construction

cost is dependant on whether excess aaterial will be disposed of on-site or

off-Bite.

-utili~ation of a concrete lined ditch-includes installation of a concrete

liner in the b&Se of the ditches to prevent infiltration of CODtaainated

groundwater. The liner ~ould prevent infiltration of contaainated ground~ater

while .aintaining control of surface runoff. LF run-on would be prevented wil~

the use of 6 bera. Dia-ond Head run-on would be collected. Concrete

deterioration would have to be repaired on a regular b&Sis to prevent

infiltration. Continual aalntenance will be required.

TiDe to i.pleaent this alternative, following design, establishaent of a

funding ~ource and advertise.cot and award of the construction contract. ~ould

be (j .onths at 8 ct;lsl t/luging from 2.6 to ~.9 aillion dollars. The construction

cost fluctuates based on whether excesS aaterial will be disposed oC on-site or

off-site.

-utiliEation or a clay liner-includes installation oC a clay liner in the

b~e of the ditches. The clay liner would restrict the transport and

infiltration of conta.lnated groundwater and oil in the groundwater. The clay

liner would r~strict but not prevent groundwater Infiltration. Infiltration

would be liaited to .igration through the barriers and through flow paths

created by anilala or vegetation. Clay aB a naturally occurring Bubstance has

excellent lifetiae.

Tiae to ilpleaent this alternative, following de~lgn, establish-ent of a

funding source and advertise.ent and award of the construction contract, would

be 4 .onths at A cost ranging Irol 1.8 to 6.5 lillion dollars.

-ctili~Ation of an enclosed drain&ge syste.-include B installation of

drainage pipe to carry roAd~ay stor.water flows and preYent infiltration of

conta.inated groundwater. Enclosing tbe Byatea eli.iaates infiltration by use of

se~led pipes. The use of a coated concret pipe has a lire of at least 20 years.

Due to the shallow slope of the drainage aysteas, sediaent build-up is expected.

Annual aediaent re.aval is aandatory.

1ile to ilple.ent this alternative, following design, establis~ent of A

funding source and envertiseaent and aWA~ of the construction contract, is 7

aonths at a cost of 1.9 aillion dollars.

A review of the results frol the last 6 saapling events (Nove.her 1990-Apr11

1991) conducted at the N. Ditch indicate that this !acilitl ~ not exceeded the

reEpectiv~ perait Ii.its. Therefore, at this tiae the facility ~ould not be

considered a ~Siguiricant Non-CO.plier~ &8 defined in the proYisions or the

Clean Water Enforceaent Act.

MAXUS005683
)

§-tJ!L' uf ~rll1 JJl'r~iqt

DE ?,:..R7M ENT OF TRANS?ORTAT10N

':l~ ~ AP.,: V "'';£~V~

:. ~:;;;)

7 i=.£ ...."7 C ...... ~E,.. .J~ ... S.Ey ;-ee,::s

25, 1989

to:; De~crt..Te~t. of E:1~..-i::-Ci".=7.€':1':..a: P:!:'cte-:::' ion

::e:2rl ...... 'ric;h':

Divisicn of wa~~= ~=~c~r~es

~e~~o3~€a~ c: ~~:c~c:

2 '=.cxoc:.:: P::ace

\\:E~-: Cr::.r:s'e, K€"·~·l~·e:-=E:,· 07052

I r~ve r=~~iv~= yc~= 8~r=a~s nctificat:on cG~~~B==~ 27; 1909 that our

I:-.T.:::"st.ate i<G~':= LEO rac:::i'tv (l.:JUOJ4939l he!: receiv=-~ a ::-a~inc cf

..,...,-c-e. .... L",;,Io-1G. .... _::'~ '!-"' ...... ,:" ';'-,,- __ • _ •• _~ r;:""-:-'--l'S - ... l.~ c: ",c:,.1+- \..0:_- _ c7 '·C·Ll"- i ......_.,, -.:>\.:"", ....: I'fi u_ ........... C"Q~s ';:0-L to;"<>- _.Ii:::

peric:ci NC\ig'''::er 1, 1987 ~,,=ou::~ OCtoc.e= 31, 1968.

)

p".=.=c:e • -:, --:- c: ';.....!::l -c"'\.. J _-:_ ... _._ i~:::-'::" ~~~s •c·e--~-n .....• .. =-<:...:.- '--1=:' ...... 1__. "'-.. .:. O"!"l! t":=-~~ ~_:"'.o_'P":,e..-cc----·' .:0:.0.,;- - - "-- actl'on t-o s=

~~~a~ cur clsc~ar~e :~to F~a~~'sCreeK cC7.?~les ~l~1 ~~C5= ~~~ts set by cur

~~?S~S ~~lit. A re~e~~ ~~i~g wi~, o~r ~egiona: ~~i;.~e,~~ceEnsinee~ has

i;.~~i=ted ccrr~ive actic~s ar:c a sc~~u~ec ~~e;c e~a:~a~icnwi:~re5~~t i~

~-,e Ge~le~C~f2;:t cf a ;::.G.~ 'to i!o;:r-ove our Cis::::-;a:,,::c. C:-.;::': 't..~i~ fie!c

e,~::"'..:a,,:i~n r,2.S c~'=:: c=i.c-.::::,,:e-:: hc;...:eve::- w'e •..-i:~ ~ I,;i.~:e '::) ?rc· ..ice s~e::i:ic

::-:'2'~~l:=:5 a,:.d ....T: r?:;::":2S'C. a.. e..,:'tc:.sion af t:"Te b ;:::-c',,-ic.iz:S' t..";e ",-dt::'en re,;::ort

2.::::. t:":LEc:Eb:'"" en ~:_....~ i..~p:a'"i>?;.udcn cf :::-2;:-F-Cia~;;".cES:.:=es as req.;este-:=. 1-1y

s~af: ~l:': provice :C~=cffice wi~~ ~~e iio:c~aticn vc~ ~~ve reeuest.ed wi~1in

t.:-:e ne:;.:-;: 30 GE.~·s. If yCl! r.a·...-e c..:'.y questicns or WOl..l~~:.i.:-:ei:.O cisC'JSS t..'J.ls

r,a~~er f~_~e= ~:e~~e c~r.~a~ ~y~e smi~~ of ~~ staff e~ (009) 530-2975,

tF..~r:at~.~_S:'~:';B

jCf~':.t.. \.;.~,!.2

JOf'll". ;.... Wa~z, ~':.ar.cS"e:: .

Bcreal1 0: Proje-:-: St:!:::crt

)

c-· :-!. !::. .. E'':.E<:': "

::t. !'Iica ...../.2:."::..

R. ':;c"es

v~. SmitJ1

Dr. P.. ea!<.e!'" • lJS~?A

88B000171

DOT16'7

MAXUS005684
·-: ".' ~

TO Theodore .T. Fischer, Division ?LPe ..iln, Area I~~•...;HJ=DOT= -------

" ":FROM -:!..ohn T. Bol!D.·1ItDC .~ Ibw BcW"'r 30~"1972

:Subjecl .' Abate.at of 1e . Ira. coat_ated 418 .&1 area ..eaT· rrrr 1-280

Seetloa. 8A , 8D

bC.Dt 1upectiOO. of the dilpoNl area for oU-c:cnt_utedwU. dJaceoC

to ..., ")C" la41UUI tlYt top .,,11 conl'i'lll the aiM .1op4tl of thir di.,-u-"

n •.a haa erodd. expoelDi coat_nated .. cui.la Cte•• tuc:he4 .,).

AddldoaaU,., tidal ".. traUcml in the ditch edjac:ent to the r.., haVe

.~4 tho cOIIPac:cetl. a.aaaUner of tho l1lpo .. l ar.a.

J{

lub.eqDdC, rd.fall. ban cauHd 0111 diacMrl" frOil the er04041 an .. iDto

the ditcb a4j~t to ..., """. »tbi. litcb cODMcta .ireetl,. SDeOrr...

CI'.. k, 011,. 1II1ICuq.' hIV. beetl ob.,.nwd to fl'''' CT_ at. tk IIUda .

coaaec:tiOil. N.:La a Yi,olaUoo of eM ,.ral WaUl'polhel- coat~ol Act.

80M kind or i.-diato ~tlon to abate or trute the .. oily .bclt...... h

need.d.

In.pectorl fr~ the USr.PA durin. th. cour'. of a rec~Dt vi.it to the Diamond

~•• d Refin1na Co. have aho ... n thh problelll and han .. 1ted what will be

done. Accordin.ly. could you pleal' advia. ma whAt Itepi will be ta1ten to

r.move th1. problem.

Ene..

lev

cc: T. C.ndne. OAC (v/.nc)

u. St.tnber •• 1~280 fi.ld (v/.nc)

r. ctDOnettt, "JDOT-N,w.l~ (w/enc)

BAAOGOoeB

"

MAXUS005685
.iANrIUf-,1

{) -':'--"-'.

(77-

• • STA"f£ OF NEW JI.::r.S£Y ....J.

DEPARTf.1£NT OF EUVmOr":MCNT AI. rn:OTECTIO:-'

)

Department of State. Laws. Commissions &: PublicClt10ns

~OM:KiirLf_._~i.rns.L-p.1.:vJsJ~n _Q~ J~~!..cr Resources

Office of Special Services thru Jeff Zelikson

1£3J CCT:_Ne~ ..Jer.sey Depar.tJllcn.t;~qt.J~an~sportation

Kearny, New Jersey

• I

._-------

The letter addressed to you and fonlarded to this office on June 2~, 1976 froll: Hr". Henry·

Cluc~stern~ Attorney for the: Enforcement Division of the United States Environmental

ProtectioncAgencY'dated June 21, 1976 is.an official notification to the State of

New Jersey of a violation of Federal Law by the .Ne~ Jersey Departm~nt of Transportation

. (DOT).

lh~s alleged violation occurred when a pond on nOT's pro?crty overflo~cd r2Iee~ir.~ oil

into vaters of the United States. The USEPA has begun cleanup of this oil using the

money from tile revolving funa administered by' the l!nited States Coast Cuard. As of l,h£::

morn.ine of .Tllnp. 30, 1976 EPAhas spent approximately .$20.000.00. It ·is th-:!ir intent

. to ~ccove~any monies spent on this clean-up operation from the NJDOT since the oil

allegedly came f~om land owned by DOT. )

This office viII continue to monito'r this operation. We do not, have any control over

} enf~~cement action taken by the USEPA. .

c.c.: Commissioner Barber

.Commissioner SagncrDirector Freidcnrick

'.

E23:G6 ..

•

..

t .

)

~-",--" /

"

0011560

."

\Jut o

MAXUS005686