GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in...
Transcript of GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in...
![Page 1: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Reference 16Valmont Industrial ParkHRS Package
FILANT NO. 2
WEST HAZILDCTON, PA.
JEXTffiNTT Off OKOUNlDWATIffiia. CONTAMINATION
IPMASB: a.
a>c>«Lar«d fox?:
CHROMA.TBX . INC .
*p*b3r*<* toy:
INXEBNATIONA-X. BX9X.OltA.T X ON . INC . <
377 S»c3fcc«tt: tiPoira Rcl .
January 1989
A R I D
![Page 2: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SITE CHARACTERISTICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . 9
SITE GEOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
GROUNDWATER QUALITY ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
WELL TESTINGPIEZOMETER TESTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .PUMPING TEST OP HELL *10A
Test Procedure and Results . . . . . . . . . .38'Aquifer Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . .43Effects of Punplng Test on Nearby Wells. . . .47
GROUNDWATER FLOW AND VELOCITYGROUNDWATBR FLOW DIRECTION . . . . . . . . . . . .52VELOCITY OF GROUNDWATBR FLOW . . . . . . . . . . . 59
HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE PROJECT AREAGENERAL. ...................... 63UNIT 1: Perched Zone Water Table . . . . . . . . - . 63UNIT 2: Shallow Onconfined Phreatlc Zone .... .64UNIT 3: Deep Unconflned Phreatlc Zone. . . . . . .65UNIT 4: Confining Layer. . . . . . . . . . . . . .66UNIT 5: Confined Zone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66HYDRAULIC RELATIONSHIPS BETWEENINDIVIDUAL UNITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67APPLICATION OF PROJECT DATA TOCONTAMINATED RESIDENTIAL WELLS . . . . . . . . . . 68
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
APPENDICES
![Page 3: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
FIGURES, TABLES & EXHIBITS
FIGURE 1: LOCTION MAP, CHROMATEX PLANT #2 . . . . . . 2
FIGURE 2: AREA FEATURES MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
FIGURE 3: REGIONAL GEOLOGY IN THE VICINITY OFCHROMATEX PLANT #2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
FIGURE 4A: GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION. . . . . . . . . . .13
FIGURE 4B: GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION. . . . . . . . . . . 14
FIGURE 4C: GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION. . . . . . . . . . .15
FIGURE 5: DRAWDOWN IN WELL #10A DURING5.7 HOUR PUMPING TEST . . . . . . . . . . . 4 O
FIGURE 6: RECOVERY IN WELL #10A AFTERCONCLUSION OF 5.7 HOUR PUMPING TEST . . .- .42
FIGURE 7: WATER LEVEL ELEVATIONS IN MONITORINGWELLS #10B, #10C AND #10D DURINGPUMPING TEST ON WELL #10A ........ .49
TABLE 1: LITHOLOGIC LOG OF MONITOR WELL #100. . . - .17
TABLE 2: MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS . . . . 20
TABLE 3: CHROMATEX MONITORING WELL PURGING DATA . . .24
TABLE 4: VOLATILE ORGANIC CHEMICALS DETECTEDIN CHROMATEX MONITORING WELLS. . . . . . . . 29
TABLE 5Ai PIEZOMETER TEST RESULTS: SHALLOW WELLS . . .34
TABLE 5Br PIEZOMETER TEST RESULTS:INTERMEDIATE WELLS . . . . . . . . . . . . .35
TABLE 5C: PIEZOMETER TEST RESULTS: DEEP WELLS. . . . . 35
TABLE 6: WATER LEVELS WITH TIME IN NEARBYMONITORING WELLS DURING WELL #10APUMPING TEST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
TABLE 7: WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS INCHROMATEX MONITORING WELLS . . . . . . . . .53
TABLE 8A: WATER TABLE GRADIENTS CALCULATEDUSING TRIANGULATION METHOD . . - - . „ p o.o - 57
![Page 4: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
TABLE 8B: WATER TABLE GRADIENTS OBTAINEDFROM POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR MAPS . . . . . . 58
TABLE 9A: CALCULATED GROUNDWATER VELOCITIES INSHALLOW PHREATIC ZONE NORTH OF DIVIDE. . . .60
TABLE 9B: CALCULATED GROUNDWATER VELOCITIES INSHALLOW PHREATIC ZONE SOUTH OF DIVIDE. . . .61
EXHIBIT I: MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS,CHROMATEX, INC. ........ .Back Pocket
EXHIBIT II: GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTIONBASED ON TRIANGULATION METHOD . .Back Pocket
EXHIBIT III: POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE MAP,SHALLOW DNCONFINED ZONE ONAPRIL 25, 1988. . . . . . . . . .Back Pocket
EXHIBIT IV: POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE MAP,SHALLOW UNCONFINED ZONE ONMAY 12, 1988. .......... .Back Pocket
![Page 5: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
INTRODUCTION
In March, April and May of 1988, a hydrogeologic
investigation was conducted, by INTEX, in the vicinity of
Chromatex Plant #2 (Plant *2) in West Hazleton, Luzerne
County, Pennsylvania (Figure 1). This investigation was
conducted under an administrative consent order between
Chromatex, Inc. and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. It was initiated after a preliminary investigation
by the U.S. EPA/TAT discovered high levels of contamination
by volatile organic chemicals (VOC's), primarily
trlchloroethylen* (TCE), in residential wells that were
nearby, and apparently hydraulically downgradient of. Plant
#2. Plant 92 used TCE in Its industrial processes, and
Chromatex, Inc. was named by the U.S. EPA as being a
possible responsible party with respect to the groundwater
contamlnat ion.
The investigation consisted of the drilling, testing and
sampling of 12 wells, of various depths, surrounding Plant
#2. It was conducted in compliance with a work plan
submitted to the U.S. EPA in February of 1988, which was
approved and became part of the consent order (INTEX, 1988).
Minor revisions in the work plan were made in the field
during the investigation, with prior approval of the U.S.
EPA and its on-site technical observer, Versar Corp. A copy
RRI00005
![Page 6: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
FIGURE 1: LOCATION MAP, CHROMATEX PLANT #2, V7EST HAZLETON, PA
portion of the Conyngham, Pa., 7.5f quadrangle
- 2 -
![Page 7: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
of this work plan is included in this reoort as Apoendix I.' . ' OWG/JVtt
(Ret/)
The primary purpose of the Extent of Contamination Study was
to answer the questions set forth in the work plan,
submitted to the U.S. EPA by INTEX, in February of 1988:
What is the direction of groundwater flow in the
shallow phreatic zone beneath Chromatex Plant #2?
Does a groundwater divide exist in the shallow
phreatic zone beneath Chromatex Plant #2?
- What is the degree and distribution of VOC conta-
mination?
- What i» the velocity of groundwater flow In the
shallow phreatic zone?
- What head gradients and hydraulic connections exist
between the shallow phreatic zone and deeper zones
from which local residential wells withdrew water?
The answers to these questions should provide enough
Information to allow for a determination as to whether or
not the property of Chromatex Plant *2 was a source of the
VOC contamination. Other questions that should be answered,
in part, by this investigation are:
- What is the vertical distribution of VOC contami-
nation beneath Chromatex Plant #2.
- What are the general hydrogeologic conditions of the
fl R I 0 0 0 0 7- 3 -
![Page 8: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
deeper phreatic zones beneath the site, with regard
to aquifers and confining layers?0;.;-.
Additional purposes of this investigation, as stated in
Section II of the U.S. EPA administrative consent order, are
to estimate the length of time that the VOC contamination
has been in the grqundwater, and to develop information
which may be used in any possible future remediation of the
site.
This Investigation was strictly hydrogeological in nature
and was not intended to explore or make conclusions on the
cause of the VOC contamination or how It cane to be in the
groundwater, nor of its existence and distribution in
mediums other than the groundwater In the vicinity of Plant
#2.
Apparently, the only other hydrogeologic investigation
conducted in the area prior to the initiation of the extent
of contamination study was by EPA/TAT (Weston-SPER), in
October of 1987. This was an emergency response action
under the Superfund statute and consisted of sampling and
measuring water levels in the affected residential wells. A
soil gas survey was also conducted on, and adjacent to the
property of Plant #2. Trichloroethylene was found by
EPA/TAT in most of the residential wells in levels ranging
from 1.0 parts per billion (ppb) to 1,400 p*R|Q0008
- 4 -
![Page 9: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
iTrichlorocthylene was found in the soil gas in levels up to /fo,/'
10 parts per"million' (ppra). The findings of the report by
EPA/TAT stated that groundwater flows from the Chromatex
property toward the affected homes, and that relatively high
levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the
Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible
source of the groundwater contamination.
Soil sampling was conducted, by I NT EX, in November and
December of 1987, at various locations around the Plant #2
property. This investigation revealed a concentrated area
of soil contamination along the southeast wall of the
building, near a retaining wall, with TCE and 1,1,1
trichloroethane levels In the hundreds of parts psr million
range. These concentrations of VOC*s in the soil indicate
that this ares is a probable msjor source of groundwater and
soil contamination. To date, the cause of the contamination
is not known.
A 1O»OOO gallon underground tank located in the front of
Plant *2r nesr the northwest corner of the building, and
used by Chromatex as an emergency overflow receptacle, was
also identified by EPA and the Pennsylvania Dept. of
Environmental Resources (D.E.R,). as a possible source of
the groundwater contamination. In November of 1987, the
contents of the tank was sampled and found to be filled with
water containing TCE in the parts per million range.
A R I Q O C Q 9- 5 -
![Page 10: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Several other VOC's were also found in this water. Soil
sampling, conducted'by INTEX and split with the PaDER,
immediately following the excavation of piping leading from
Plant #2 to the tank revealed TOE contamination in the parts
per million range. However, the soil was sampled
immediately after the piping broke during the excavation
process, causing liquid to leak out Into the soil which was
subsequently sampled. Soil sampling was conducted several
months later by Versar Corp., at a depth of approximately
3.0 feet below the piping. Analysis of split samples
provided to INTEX showed the soil that was Initially found
to be contaminated revealed no contamination by VOC's.
Additionally, testing of the tank itself has proven It to be
airtight. At the prevent time. It is believed that the
Initial soil contamination found In the excavated trenches
was caused by leakage from lines broken during excavation,
and that this area is not a source of groundwater
contamination. Investigations in the tank area are still
continuing.
000 10H ' ' •
- 6 -
![Page 11: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Plant #2 is located in a saddle on the crest of a low,
northwest-southeast trending ridge, which is truncated to
the northwest by Black Creek (Figure 2). Surface drainage
on the ridge, upgradient from Plant #2, is radial to the
north, west and south. In the vicinity of Plant *2, surface
drainage is to the northeast and southwest towards Black
Creek and its tributary (Figure 2). The residential
neighborhood in which wells were contaminated with VOC's is*
located to the northeast of Plant #2 (Figure 2).
_ 7 _ A R I O O O
![Page 12: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
KESIOCHTIAL AREANITH COMTAMIHATED WELLS
FIGURE 2: AREA FEATURES MAP
2 ,000 FT
- 8 -
A R I O O O I 2
![Page 13: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
0/r;,/"•f'i;
REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY
Plant #2 and its surrounding area arc underlain by the
Pottsville Formation (Figure 3). This formation has been
described by Lohman (1937), as being made up chiefly of gray
conglomerate, white, gray and brownish sandstone. In some
places there occurs red and green sandstone, with a few thin
seams of coal. The regional strike of the Pottsville
Formation, in the area of West Hazleton is roughly east-west:,
trending very slightly in a northeast-southwest direction
(Figure- 3). The sit* is located in the glaciated area of
Pennsylvania, but there Is no evidence of glacial, deposits
In the immediate vicinity.
Lohman (1937) reports that groundwater In the Pottsville
Formation occure in the open fractures and crevices in the
hard conglomerate and sandstone. This Indicates that
secondary permeability is the controlling factor of
groundwater flow. Hells in the Pottsville Formation of
Luzerne County range in depth from ISO to 800+ feet, with
yields ranging from SO to 150 gpm. There is a large
seasonal variation in water levels in wells. Many wells
flow during the, wet season, but during the dry season water
levels drop many feet below the surface. The flowing
conditions are said to be caused by occasional beds of shale
A R I O O Q I 3- 9 -
![Page 14: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
CHROMATEX PLANT
Compiled by H. W SCHASSE, 1979-1980
- 10 -
![Page 15: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
which act as aquitards. As a comparison to this regional
information, it can be noted that Plant #2 has a 400 foot
deep well which yields 34 gpm. The water level in this well
in March of 1988 (the wet season) was 35 feet below the
ground surface.
. . A R I O O O I 5
![Page 16: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
SITE GEOLOGY
The lithologies underlying the Plant #2 site were
investigated during the drilling of the 12 monitoring wells
on the site. The locations of these wells are shown on
Exhibit I. In general, the rock types encountered during
drilling are consistent with Lohman's description of the
Fottsville Formation, and consisted mostly of fine, medium
and coarse grained quartz rich and arkosic sandstone. The
sandstones were also found to be rich in dark minerals,
believed to be amphibole. Many of these beds of sandstone
are Jointed, as evidenced by the many weathered fracture
faces that were observed in the drill cuttings. Hell #1OC
penetrated to a depth of 130 feet and Is the deepest of the
12 monitoring wells. The rock types encountered In this
well are representative of those encountered In other wells.
Its llthologic log is reproduced in Table 1. Lithologic
logs of the other wells can be found in Appendix II.
Geologic cross-sections with interpreted correlations can be
found in Figure 4.
A thin, coal bearing bed was encountered at three well
sites, #1, #10 and #11. It occurred at roughly the same
depth at all three well sites, between 4O.O and 44.5 feet
below the surface, and was therefore considered to be the
same bed. Using the depth of the coal bed in conjunction
with the elevation of the well casings, a standajrtj ~ p n
- 12 -
![Page 17: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
![Page 18: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
S CM •
™ oa.LkJ •
^SSVI « t—1/1 —I LU
Fla:t/jJi I
LLJW139 JJ3J
fl R I u u u i 8
![Page 19: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE^ ff> (J»? ? . y .? £. oJ.
rn
![Page 20: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
flfed)three-point problem was solved to determine the strike and
dip of the bedrock layers in the immediate vicinity of Plant
#2. Strike was calculated to be approximately due north,
with a dip of approximately 2 degrees to the east. These
attitudes should be considered approximate, since the
apparent depth of a rock bed can vary within a foot or two
at a depth of 4O feet, with the drilling method that was
used on this project. Strike and dip measured at nearby
outcrops was approximately N 45 degrees E with a dip of
15-25 degrees to the northwest (EPA/TAT, 10/87).
The bedrock attitudes obtained from the three point problem
are very different from those obtained from the measurement
of outcrops. It is possible that Plant *2 is on the axis of
an anticline or syncline, in which case the underlying rock
beds would appear to be flat-lying, as indicated by the
results of the three point problem.
There are very few outcrops In the area from which to obtain
measurements of bedrock attitudes. There are numerous
outcrop* In the mines and road cuts at some distance from
the site. However, due to the dipping and folded nature of
the rocks In this area, there is some doubt as to whether
the outcrops In the mines are the same as those in which the
project wells are located. Since the outcrops in the mines
are associated with relatively thick coal seams/ which are
not encountered in monitoring wells, it is probable that the
beds are not the same.
ARI 00020- 16 -
![Page 21: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
TABLE 1
LITHOLOG1C LOG OF MONITOR WELL #10C
DEPTH BELOW SURFACE (ft) ROCK TYPE
0-7 Yellow-brown clayey silt, little coarsesand.
7-9 Sandy silt with small chunks of sand-stone and arkosic sandstone.
9 - 15 Bedrock. Quartz-amphibole sandstone, wetat 10*. Arkosic in places. Weathered at14 ft.
15 - 24 Medium to coarse quartz-amphibole sand-stone, very weathered, wet .at 17*.
24 - 35 Black, medium sandstone, hard, frac-tured, trace of pyrite and free quartz.Wat.
35 - 42 Gray, medium grained sandstone, trace ofpyrite, very weathered, dry.
42 - 55 Fine'to coarse quartz-amphibole sand-stone, mostly amphlbole, trace of py-rite, some shale, trace of anthracitecoal and mica, dry.
55 - 61 Black, very fine sandstone, some grainsof iron oxide. Wet at 58*.
61 - 69 Medium to coarse, quartz-amphibole sand-stone, trace of pyrite and free quartz.Fractured, wet.
69 - 76 Very fine to fine black sandstone, lit-tle pyrite and quartz, wet,
76 - 87 Medium grained quartz-amphibole sand-stone. Hard, unfractured, wet.
87 - 125 , Black, medium sandstone, some quartzgrains, dry. No evidence of fractures,trace of mica. Weathered zones at 95'.Wet at 106'.
125 - 130 Black, very fine sandstone, soft, frac-tured, some free quartz^ wet.
. 17 _
![Page 22: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION '
Twelve monitoring wells were drilled for this investigation;
one more than was originally proposed in the work plan.
Seven of these wells were drilled to depths ranging from 45
to 55 feet and were intended to monitor the upper 20 to 30
feet of the phreatic zone. The locations of these wells are
shown on Exhibit I, followed by the letter "A", or not
followed by any letter at all. These wells were given the
designation of "shallow" in the work plan.
Two wells were drilled to depths ranging from 8O.5 to 82
feet and were cased through the units monitored by the
previously described shallower wells. They were intended to
monitor what was apparently the deeper portion of the
unconfined phreatic zone. Their locations are shown on
Exhibit I, as well #1B and well *10B. These wells were
given the designation of "mid-range" or "intermediate", in
the work plan.
/ Two wells were drilled to depths of 110 feet and 130 feet.
They were cased through the units monitored by all the other
shallower wells. They were intended to monitor the first
water bearing zone encountered beneath an apparently
unfractured anTl impermeable layer occurring at a depth of
approximately 85 to 95 feet. The locations of these wells,
designated #1C and #10C, are shown on Exhibit I. TheseRRIOOH22
- 18 -
![Page 23: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
wells were given the designation of "deep", in the work
plan.
A twelfth monitoring well was added to provide information
on an apparent perched water table that was encountered
during the drilling of wells #10A, #10B and *UOC. This
well, designated as #10D, is IS feet deep. The term
apparent is used because not enough data is presently
available to confirm that it is definitely perched, or that
it is extensive enough to be called a water table. The fact
that water was encountered in the soil immediately above the
bedrock, and that this water occurs several feetr above the
water levels in nearby wells. Is adequate evidence for the
preliminary classification of perched. The location of well
*10D is shown on Exhibit I.
Construction details for all monitoring wells are presented
in Table 2.
All the wells were drilled using the air rotary method. An
in-line filter was used to prevent oil from the air
compressor from entering the drilling string and
contaminating the borehole. However, a non-petroleum based
vegetable oil was used to lubricate the drill bit.
Injection of water through the drill string was not used on
any well. The inner casings in wells *10B and *10C were
RR100023- 19 -
![Page 24: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
TABLE 2MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
WELL *
1A
IB
1C
2
3
4
5
1OA
10B
1OC
1OD
11
TOTALDEPTH(ft)
50.0
80.5
110.0
55.5
47.0
55.0
45.0
50.0
82.0
130. 0
15.0
55.0
SMALLESTDIAMETER
(in)
6
6
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
6
DEPTHOF INNERCASING(ft)
22
55
86.5
15
18
15.5
15
17
57
87
15
20
DEPTHOF OUTERCASING(ft)
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
2O
27.5
NONE
NONE
DEPTH OFINTERVALMONITORED
(ft)
22-50
55-8O.5
86.5-110
15-55.5
18-47
15.5-55
15-45
17-50
57-82
87-130
13-15
20-55
APPROX .YIELD OFMONITOREDINTERVAL
3.8
< l.O
1.3
2.33
1.00
3.75
1.1
2.5
< 1.0
1.5
< 1.0
2.0
Additional construction information can be found InAppendix II.
- 20 -
![Page 25: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
grouted by drilling an 8 inch diameter borehole to the depth
of the casing and pouring grout into the uncased borehole.
A 6 inch diameter steel casing, with its lower end sealed
with a teflon plug, was forced to the bottom of the
borehole, as specified by the work plan. This method proved
to be unsatisfactory, as the pressure at the bottom of the
hole forced the teflon plug several feet up into the casing.
Subsequently, the deeper casings in wells #1B and #1C were
grouted in place using a standard tremie pipe method. This
change in the work plan was agreed upon in the field by the
EPA and Versar Corp. The shallower casings in wells #1A,
*2, *3, *4, *5, 4T10A and *11 were grouted by inserting the
casing Into an oversize borehole and pouring grout in from
the surface. The outer casings in wells *10B and *10C, and
well *1OD were grouted in the same way. Grout was allowed
to harden for at least 24 hours before a well was completed
to its total depth* Grouting details for individual wells
can be found In Appendix II.
The monitored Intervals in all wells, except #10D, were
completed as- open, unscreened boreholes, owing to the
competency of the bedrock. The bedrock that was encountered
in the wells, although it was sometimes highly weathered,
was obviously competent enough to maintain an open hole.
The monitored interval in well #10D was completed using a
torch-slotted 4 inch diameter steel casing, with its outer
annulus packed with pea-size quartz gravel.
/ Q- 21 -
![Page 26: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
The wells were developed using the air lift method.
Development to clarity, and measurement of water level
immediately following development, was not possible due to
the very low yield. However, the majority of water samples
collected, following purging, were essentially clear.
The drilling rig, and all associated equipment, was *
decontaminated before it was used at a new well site. All
decontamination took place at the designated decontamination
area (Exhibit I). Decontamination was accomplished using a
high pressure water rinse, followed by steam, followed by
another water rinse, in accordance with the work plan.
The ground around each well site was protected during
drilling with a doubled thickness of plastic tarp. All rock
cuttings and other material ejected from the wells was
collected in a large tub and transferred directly into
plastic lined, 55-gallon steel drums. The drums were sealed
and moved to the designated storage area at the end of each
work day. In accordance with the work plan (Exhibit I).
A R I Q P - 2 6- 22 -
![Page 27: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
GROCJNDWATER QUALITY ANALYSIS
Groundwater samples were collected from each monitoring
well. Samples were collected from the 7 shallow wells over
a 3 day period in order to obtain a relatively instantaneous
picture of the state of contamination in the shallow
phreatic zone. Sampling of all 12 wells took place between
April 19 and April 26 of 1988.
All the wells, except for *1B, #1OB and #10D were purged of
a minimum of 3 times the volume of water In the well, to
ensure that the sample collected was withdrawn from the
formation and was not stagnating in the well. Hells #1B,
#10B and *10D had such extremely low yields that they did
not recover quickly enough to. allow the removal of 3 well
volumes. Actual, volumes purged from each well are shown in
Table 3.
Well *1B was actually sampled twice to determine if any
cross-contamination had occurred between the shallow and
deeper unconfined zones at the well #1 cluster, where an
uncased, ungrouted borehole was left open to a depth of 85
feet for a period of several hours during the drilling of
well *1C.
A concern over cross-contamination existed for well
- 23 -
![Page 28: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
TABLE 3
CHROMATEX MONITORING WELLPURGING DATA
DATE VOLUME NO. OF TOTAL METHODWELL SAMPLED TIME OF WATER VOLUMES VOLUME OP* (1988) SAMPLED IN WELL (gal) PURGED PURGED (gal) PURGING
1A
IB
IB
1C
2
3
4
5
10A
1OB
10C
10D
11
4/20
4/15
4/19
4/26
4/22
4/22
4/21
4/21
4/20
4/19
4/26
4/26
4/21
12
2
4
11
12
4
4
6
21
6
3
7
12
: 15pm
: 00pm
:45pm
:30pm
:45pm
:35pm
: 16pm
:45pa
: 15pm
:40pm
:00pm
:00ptt
:30pm
NOTE:
37
76
75
S3
71
42
61
51
45
84
145
11
65
.21 3
.43 1
.43 1
.94 3
.08 3
.34 3
.14 3
.65 3
.02 4.89
.7 1.13
.53 3
.85 <1
.0 3
111
76
75
161
213
126
183
154
22O
96
438
4
198
.64
.43
.43
.82
.24
.9
.43
.96
.0
.03
.0
.5
.0
Bailing
Bailing
Balling
Bailing
Bailing
Bailing
Balling
Bailing
Pumping
Pumping
Pumping
Bailing
Pumping
Well #1B was purged andsampled on two separatedates.
- 24 - A R I 0 P n 2 8
![Page 29: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
because, during the drilling of nearby well #1C. and open
borehole was; left: fpr several hours, allowing possible
mixing, in the borehole, of water between shallow and
intermediate zones.
Well #1B was sampled approximately 1.5 days after the
open-borehole event, in an effort to collect a sample of
groundwater before any possible contamination could reach
well *1B from well #1C. Sampling again 4 days later, in
conjunction with drawing in additional water from another
purging operation, would give an indication of whether or
not contaminated groundwater had moved in. All sample* from
the well #1 cluster were uncontaminated.
All purging was accomplished using either a 1/2 hp
submersible pump or 3 Inch diameter teflon bailer (Table 3) .
Purging was completed in such a way that several feet, of
water remained at the bottom of the wells to minimize loss
of volatile organic chemicals. When possible, the water
level in the wells, during purging, was not allowed to drop
below the water bearing zones. No well was ever purged to
dryness. Low yielding wells were purged very slowly to
allow several feet of water to remain in the well. All
purged water was either placed in drums and moved to the
drum staging area, or returned to the well from which it was
removed, as part of the hydraulic conductivity tests.
- 25 -
![Page 30: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
When purging was completed, groundwater samples were
immediately collected from each well using a 2 inch diameter
teflon bailer equipped with a titration valve. Samples were
collected in standard 40 ml, untreated volatile organic
chemical vials. Two sample vials were collected by INTEX
personnel, from each well and 2 samples were collected by
Versar Corp. personnel, the U.S. EPA on-site observer, from
several selected wells. INTEX samples were immediately
stored on Ice. All samples were sealed in Insulated
containers and shipped by overnight carrier to Quality
Control Laboratory, Inc. in Southampton, Pennsylvania.
All purging and sampling equipment was cleaned, after use in
each well, at the designated decontamination area.
Decontamination consisted of rinsing and scrubbing equipment
with potable water, rinsing with Isopropyl alcohol, with
distilled water used as a final rinse. The purge pump was
rinsed both internally and externally. This was
accomplished by inserting the pump in a 55-gallon drum of
potable water and running it at open dishcarge (approx. 15
gpm) for several minutes.
Equipment blanks were collected after decontamination for
each well (i.e., equipment blank #11 would be collected
after decontaminating equipment used in well #11), except
wells #2 and #5, for which field blanks were taken.
- 26 -
![Page 31: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
All samples were analyzed for the following compounds:
Chlorome thane
Broroomethane
Vinyl Chloride
Chloroethane
Methylene Chloride
1 , 1-Dichloroethylene
1 , l-Dichloroethane
1 , 2-Dichloroethylene ( total )
Chloroform
1 , 2-Dlchloroe thane
1,1, 1-Trlchloroethane
Carbon Tetrachlorlde
Bromodi chlorome thane
1 , 2-Dichloropropane
cis-1 , 3-Dichloropropcne
Trichloroethylene
Dibromochloromethane
1,1, 2-Trichloroethane
Benzene-
trans-1 f 3-Dichloropropene
Bromoform
Tetrachloroethylene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Toluene
Chlorobenzen* -
Ethylbenzene
- 27 -
![Page 32: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
The method of analysis used was EPA method 624 (Gas
Chromatagraph/Mass Spectrometer).
Volatile organic chemicals were detected in wells #2, #10A,
#10D and #11. Individual chemicals detected in each well
are presented in Table 4.
Th«re were no volatile chemicals detected in any other well.
Low levels of contamination were found in two field blanks.
Well *2 and Well #10A. However, no contamination was found
in groundwater samples collected from wells after collection
of the contaminated field blanks. Apparently, the air
drying phase of the decontamination procedure caused
volatilization .of the remaining residual VOC's.
Additionally, the Well #10A blank was contaminated with
compounds not found in the well water, suggesting the
possibility of a contaminated container, or contamination in
the laboratory. Chemical analysis data sheets may be found
in Appendix III.
The geologic and hydrologic relationships between the
contaminated and uncontaminated monitor wells, possible
contamination sources and contaminated residential wells are
discussed later in the report.
- 28 - fl R I 0 0 0 3 2
![Page 33: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
TABLE 4
VOLATILE ORGANIC CHEMICALS DETECTEDIN CHROMATEX MONITORING WELLS
WELL # VOLATILE ORGANIC CHEMICAL IN ug/1 (ppb)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 630Trichloroethylene 600
1OA 1,1-Dichloroethylene 361.1-Dlchloroethane 211.2-Dlchloroethylene ISO1,1,1-Trichloroethane 2,30OCarbon tetrachloride 5.8Trlchloroethylene 9,900
10D 1,1-Dichloroethane 9.81,2-Dichloroethylene 841,1,1-Trichloroethane 20Trichloroethylene 570
11 1,1-Dichloroethylene 28O1.1-Dichloroethane . 3701.2-Dichloroethylene 1,0301,1,1-Trichloroethane 13,000Trichloroethylene 17,000Tetrachloroethylene 35Toluene 140Ethylbenzene 29
- 29 -
![Page 34: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
WELL TESTING
PIEZOMETER TESTS
The hydraulic conductivity of the water bearing zones in
each well was calculated using data gathered during
piezometer tests. These tests consisted of the rapid
injection or withdrawal of a volume of water into a well,
followed by the measurement of water level with time as it
recovered to static. The hydraulic conductivity of the
water bearing zone is a function of the duration of the
recovery period, the radius of the well, and the thickness
of the water bearing zone exposed in the well.
The piezometer test method chosen for this investigation was
that developed by Hvorslev in 1951. This method is one of
the simplest of the piezometer test methods and was
developed for use with point piezometers, rather than for a
well open over a large thickness of an aquifer. It is
believed to be the most appropriate method for use with the
wells at the Chromatex site, since the water bearing zones
in these wells consist of isolated layers of fractured
bedrock which comprise a relatively small portion of the
entire open length of each well.
The Hvorslev method was developed for unconfined conditions.
Because of it's simplicity, and the minimal amount of of
R R I O O H 3 U- 30 -
![Page 35: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
field and well construction data needed, it was deemed to be
the method least prone to error in the very heterogeneous
fractured bedrock at the Chromatex site. Aquifer test
methods designed for fractured bedrock require detailed
knowledge of fracture geometry, and make methematical
assumptions that would make then at least as susceptable to
error as the Hvorslev method.
The Hvorslev equation is as follows:
K = r2 In (L/R)2L (To)
Where: K - hydraulic conductivity in ft/hr.
L » length of well screen (ft)
r » radius of well above screen (ft)*
R - radius of well screen (ft)
To » time lag (hrs) (see Appendix IV)
Since the wells at the Chromatex site are unscreened, (L)
would equal the saturated thickness of the water bearing
zones In the well, which Is obtained from the drilling logs.
Additionally, the wells are of the same diameter for their
entire length.
None of the fracture zones were isolated, using packers or
similar equipment, for the piezometer tests. This would not
cause a problem since the total thicknesses of fractured
- 31 -
![Page 36: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
zones were added to obtain the effective length of open
interval (Le.) in each well. The thickness of unfractured,
or much lower permeability layers in the well would not
contribute to Le , and need not be sealed off for the test.
The thickness of water bearing zones in each well was based
on well log information. The thickness of a particular
water bearing zone was based on the apparent thickness of a
unit from which an observable yield was obtained. Sometimes
a unit was a wet granular bed which showed water shortly
after penetration, or a fracture zone Which yielded water
immediately.
Relative yields were also considered when assigning
saturated thickness. In a well which has a water bearing
zone of estlmatable yield (app'rox. 0.5 gpm or more), an
extremely low yielding damp zone would not be considered.
However, these damp zones would be considered in a well that
had an unmeasureably low yield.
For use with the Chromatex wells, the Hvorslev equation can
be simplified to the following:
- r2 In (Le/r). 2 (Le) To
Where: K = hydraulic conductivity in ft/hr
r = well radius (ft)
- 32 - fl "
![Page 37: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Le = effective thickness of water bearing
zones in well (ft)
To = time lag (hrs)
All monitoring wells were tested using the above described
method (including well #10A, which was also subjected to a
pumping test). Repeat tests were conducted on wells #1A,
#1C, 92, #4, #10B, #10C and #11 in order to determine the
reliability of the field procedure. As an additional check,
a piezometer test was conducted on well #10A, which was also
test pumped, to observe the compatibility of the pumping
test and piezometer test results. The results of the
piezometer tests are presented in Table 5.
Worksheets and calculations for the results presented in
Table 5 can be found in Appendix IV.
All injection tests were conducted after the wells had been
purged for sample collection purposes, and had recovered to
original static levels. All injected water was that which
had been previously removed from the same well, to reduce
concerns that non-native water could alter existing water
quality in the formation.
Attempts were made to-test well #10D, which monitors a
perched water zone. However, the well did not recover when
water was removed from it, and too little water was removed
RR100037- 33 -
![Page 38: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
TABLE 5A
PIEZOMETER TEST RESULTS: SHALLOW WELLS
INJECTION WITHDRAWAL HYDRAULICWELL # TEST * TEST TEST CONDUCTIVITY (ft/3)
1A 1 X 4.72 X 1CT-51A 2 X 5.55 X lO'-S2 1 X 1.10 X 10"-52 2 X 3.45 X 10"-53 1 X 1.80 X 10"-54 1 X 7.27 X 10"-54 2 X 1.01 X 10"-45 1 X 7.70 X 10"-610A 1 X 1.53 X 10~-511 1 X 3.69 x 10"-511 2 X 3.46 x 10"-5
GEOMETRIC AVERAGE 3.O4 x lO'-S
Maximum K 1.01 x 10~-4Minimum K 7.70 x 10~-6
A R I 0 0 0 3 8
![Page 39: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
TABLE 5B
PIEZOMETER TEST RESULTS: INTERMEDIATE WELLS
INJECTION WITHDRAWAL HYDRAULICWELL # TEST # TEST TEST CONDUCTIVITY (ft/s)
IB 1 X 2.16 x 10"-610B 1 X 2.95 x 10--610B 2 X 2.8O x 10~-610B 3 X 2.95 X lO'-e
GEOMETRIC AVERAGE 2 . 70 X 10"-6
Maximum K 2.95 x 10~-6Minimum K 2.16 x !O'-6
TABLE 5C
PIEZOMETER TEST RESULTS: DEEP WELLS
INJECTION WITHDRAWAL HYDRAULICWELL * TEST * TEST TEST CONDUCTIVITY (ft/s)
1 C I X 5 . 9 X 10~-51C 2 X 8.5 X 10"-510C 1 X 5.7 x 10--610C 2 X 4.4 X 10*-6
GEOMETRIC AVERAGE 1.89 X 10"-5
Maximum K , 8.5 x 10"-5Minimum K 4.4 x lO'-S
39
- 35 -
![Page 40: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
cto make for an effective injection test. This well would /•have to be tested using the injection of a relatively large
volume of fresh water to build up enough head to induce flow
into the formation. This was not done since the U.S. EPA
had requested that fresh water not be used for injection
tests.
Well #10D is presently useable for permeability testing.
It's poor recovery suggests that: it's gravel pack may be
clogged. Additionally, disruption of the ground surface by
compressed air during the drilling of nearby well *10A
presents the possibility that the characteristics of the
shallow subsurface may have been altered. Therefore, any
permeability data that may be gained froa this well in the
future muat be considered suspect .
The test results for the shallow wells indicate that'
permeability in the shallow phreatic zone is relatively
uniform across the site, considering that the medium is a
he t erogenous fractured bedrock, which typically exhibits
wide ranges in hydraulic conductivity over small areas.
The deeper portion of the unconfined zone (monitored by the
intermediate wells) is an order of magnitude less in
permeability than the overlying zone, and therefore, would
behave as a semi-confining layer, or aquitard. The zone
monitored by the deepest wells appears to be slightly higher
- 36 -
![Page 41: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
in permeability than the intermediate zone, and slightly
lower than the shallowest zone. Geometric, rather than
arithmetic, means were used to calculate average
permeability, as outlined in Fetter, 1988.
RR1000UI
- 37 -
![Page 42: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
PUMPING TEST ON WELL #10A
Test Procedure and Results
In accordance with the work plan, a pumping test was
required to be conducted on one well in the #10 cluster.
Well #10A was chosen because it had the highest apparent
yield of any well in the cluster, and because preliminary
sampling indicated that it contained the highest levels of
volatile organic chemicals in it's cluster, namely
trichloroethylene and 1,1.1 trichloroethane (Appendix III).
The pump used waa a Gould's 1/2 hp electrical submersible
pump, with 1.0 inch ID polyethylene discharge hose.
Discharge was controlled with an adjustable gate valve and
measured approximately every 5- milnutes with a calibrated 5
gallon bucket and stopwatch. Depth to water was measured
with a Soiltest water level indicator with cable marked at
1.0 foot intervals. Datum was top of well casing.
The pumping test had a total duration of 342 minutes (5.7
hours). It was pumped at a rate of 2.O gpm for 235 minutes,
at which time the pumping rate was increased to 3.0 gpm and
adjusted to 2.5 gpm for the remaining 107 minutes of the
test. When the pump was shut off, recovery of the water
level was measured for 95 minutes.
- 38 - A R I 0 0 0 k 2
![Page 43: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
During the 2.0 gpm portion of the test, a maximum drawdown
of 10.70 feet was observed (Appendix V). As shown on Figure
5, drawdown was consistent and continuous until 80 minutes
into the test, except for a period at 20 minutes where
discharge slipped to 1.5 gpm. At 80 minutes into the test,
the water level stabilized and remained constant, with minor
fluctuations caused by constant adjustments to maintain
constant discharge (Figure 5). This leveling off of water
levels may have been caused by delayed yield from aquifer
storage, diminishing casing storage, or the reaching of
equilibrium of the well's cone of depression.
After allowing the well to pump at 2.0 gpm for an additional
155 minutes, the discharge was Increased to 3.0 gpm and
adjusted to 2.5 gpm to further stress the aquifer and
provide additional data. After 7 minutes of pumping at 3.0
gpm, the pumping; level in the well dropped below 32.75 feet,
at which time cascading was heard in the well, indicating
that the pieziometrlc surface of the cone of depression had
dropped below a water bearing zone, and that dewaterlng was
taking place. The rapid drawdown that occurred afterward
suggests that the dewatered zone, at approximately 33 feet,
provided a significant percentage of the well's total yield
(Figure 5). Within 95 minutes after the pumping level in
the well passed 32.75 feet, it had dropped to within a few
inches of the pump intake, which was set at 1.0 foot above
the bottom of the well, and the test was concluded.
RRl '"
- 39 -
![Page 44: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
-4U -r -
|:.: ^-ii <oH H* Wuj"£g
O oCM l o n o o
id N MO a
![Page 45: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
The recovery of the water level was measured for 95 minutes-'.-": . . (h^,after the test ended. During that time, it recovered to
within 2.18 feet of the original pre-pumping water level,
for 90* recovery {Figure 6, Appendix V).
The data, obtained from the pumping test indicates that the
main water bearing zone of the shallow phreatic zone is
located at a depth of approximately 33 feet. According to
the well log, this is a fractured sandstone approximately
2.5 feet thick. The pumping test data also suggest* that
the water bearing zone encountered at 45 feet Is not capable
of yielding 3-4 gpm as was estimated during drilling.
- 41 -
![Page 46: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
— rr -"ID
O U_ tO^H O UJ=lte H-
_J O CD* 1 f • -I 1^^
C3 OU. Q£ ID
UJ Q£ O> UJ 3101-cj u_ r .UJ <t •
4-4
-t ^Ht- ^4i:-. ~: "-:- i - : - j - j
3 -
••^^a:
'="•1-r -T-T-
? - - :".: ; : :-:;: ! to1
•'•?•-- ':'•••'= ^ ^ LU= ——— ' ."!.....
£
i . .9a.7
6.
5
i
»^Sg&&pijttSSEiiJlJaii g¥i5iJSfcBrH&p!8 g 5SPg ^ gS*c»jtl ir^?J ptiiMiiJgBKiHig
grgp^gr^^^^^i^^^s^^^^^M^^^^^^^^^iggyaffjaB^^S^^^paE^^K^^ffi^^^^^^^^l
^=£vf3=~
O in o"CM "4 01*6 ^
I A
![Page 47: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Aquifer Characteristics
The drawdown data obtained from the pumping test was
calculate the characteristics of the aquifer penetrated by
well #10A. Two aquifer characteristics were calculated,
transmissivity and storativity.
Transmissivlty was calculated using the Jacob straight line
method. Due to the low discharge at which the test was
conducted, the relatively large well diameter, and the
relatively small specific capacity compared to well
diameter, it is believed that drawdown during the early part
of the test was influenced by casing storage.
Therefore,, an approximation of the- tlma after which casing
storage effects were Insignificant was calculated using the
following equation (Schafer, 1978):
tc - 0-6 (dc2 - dp2)Q/s
Where: tc * time (min) after which casing storage
effect becomes negligable
dc « diameter (In) of well bore
dp * diameter (in) of pump riser pipe
Q/s * specific capacity of well at time tc
- 43 -
![Page 48: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
In this case:
- dc = 6-inchesffied)
dp = 1.25 inches
Q/s = was estimated by using the average
specific capacity of the well between
1O and 50 minutes into the test..
The calculation yields a tc of 77 minutes, which is very
close to the 80 minute time duration when water levels began
to stabilize. Therefore, drawdown data from the first 80
minutes of the test probably does not reflect the response
of the aquifer to pumping.
Iterations, as recommended by Schafer, were not used in this
case, since this equation was used as a check against
qualitative evidence that casing storage may have affected
the well until t-8O minutes. It should be noted that at
t*8O minutes, almost 1OX (9.6%) of the water that had been
pumped from the well was casing storage. Iterative
calculations may indicate, mathematically, that effects of
casing storage dissipated earlier than 80 minutes, however,
we feel the qualitative evidence is more reliable in this
case, considering the approximate nature of aquifer testing
in fractured bedrock terrain.
Transmissivlty was calculated using the Jacobs straight line
method. This method is a standard tool of aquifer analysis
![Page 49: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
and is discussed in Fetter, 1988, and Freeze and Cherry,
1979. Drawdown data and recovery data from the pumping tesrt
was used to obtain several transmissivity values of 176
gpd/ft, 198 gpd/ft and 226 gpd/ft (Appendix V). These
transmissivity values have a narrow range and an average of
2OO gpd/ft. If it is assumed that almost all of the water
supplied to the well is provided by the 2.5 foot thick layer
of sandstone at 33 feet of depth, and the 6.5 foot layer at
40 feet, a hydraulic conductivity of 3.43 x 10"-5 ft/s is
obtained. This compares to that of 1.53 x 10~-5 ft/s
obtained from Well #10A using the Hvorslev method. It falls
within the range calculated for all of the shallow wells and
compares very closely with the average of 3.04 x 10"-5 ft/s
from the shallow wells.
Calculation of transalsslvlty'using data from the 3.O gpm
portion of the test used a drawdown of 12 feet. .The •
drawdown of 12 feet was used in an effort to compensate for
the possibility of increased drawdown when the water bearing
zone at approximately 33 feet began to dewater. Although
this is only a semi-quantitative calculation, it does
provide additional supporting data for the purposes of
comparison.
No other wells of the same depth were affected during the
test, so there was no observation well data with which to
confirm transmissivity data or calculate the storage
RRIOOOU9- 45 -
![Page 50: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
*.coefficient. The approximate storage coefficient was
calculated using the Jacobs variation of the Theis equation.
The Jacobs equation was used to calculate approximate
storage coefficient since there was no observation well data
available with which to calculate this value in the standard
way. It is believed better to have some site specific
semi-quantitative data related to effective porosity, with
which to compare published data rather than to have none at
all. The Jacobs equation is as follows:
s * in 2,25 *T
Where: s = drawdown at time t (ft)
Q « discharge (cfs)
T = transmisaivlty (ft*2/s)
t - time (aec)
r « well bore radius- (ft)
S « storage coefficient
See Appendix V for calculations.
Storage coefficients (specific yield) calculated using
drawdown data of the 2.0 gpm portion of the test range from
0.046 to 0.052. Additional storage coefficients calculated
for various portions of the test range from 0.012 to 0.16
(Appendix V) . These storage coefficients exhibit a range
not only because of the approximate nature of the
calculations, but because the storage coefficient of an
RR I 00050- 46 -
![Page 51: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Ok.-.ftfit,
unconfined aquifer changes with time during a pumping test.
The range of values'obtained is consistent with those
published by Walton (1985), which states that the specific
yield of typically low permeability materials, such as clay
and silt, ranges from 0.01 to 0.30.
Effects of Pumping Test on Nearby Hells
During the pumping test, the water levels in the other wells
in the *1OC cluster were measured periodically, as were the
water levels In well *11 and the well #1 cluster. These
water levels are presented In Table 6.
Two wells, #10B and *10C display definite signs of being
affected by the pumping of well #10A, in the form of
continuously decreasing water levels during the test and an
Increase in water levels when the pump was shut off. Well
#10B exhibits a total drawdown of O.82 feet and well #10C
exhibits a total drawdown of 0.56 feet. (Figure 7).
The drawdown In wells #10B and *10C Is small compared to
that which occurred In the pumping well, especially
considering the short distance that separates the wells. It
is possible that upward vertical flow from, the zones
monitored by wells #10B and tflOC was induced when the head
in the shallow aquifer became less that that existing at
greater depths.
f t R l O O O S !- 47 -
![Page 52: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
V0
UCQ
EH
WEH2K5cu
rHrH=**
a~* oCO rHCO **
in04 x-^\ uin «* EH
iJ *— 03 U£i3 tJ ^^ f^SCd Ps JJ — I?*4j t^ ^^ n
EH HO EH Cac 2 -H
EH H OM OS 2 USOU H
EH & 0) CQin H S| > oW O P- H **S32 -, .w < nr3 >H 0 0)
_> 03 •-* **P4 04 ** fljW < £ UEH W *4 rH
IS W rH
W *_>^^
U
n n
04 0a *rtQ >**
•
rH
TJ0)4J •i-t CMOJ O44J ..tn en
§"£3
rH 10rH 0
o enrH
04 COCO ^>
rH
*O O4\o mm oo04
r— mco.^*r toO4
m enn mo ooro
VD CM0 0
o enco
rH inrH 0
rH CTl04
Qr3 Whi 2> Dw ini-3 rf!
U04 £caEH P4*^J §S M
EH
rH CMrH ^3*
o enrH
n coen n^* onrH
r^ oCO O
tn o04 rH
in inm ro" en
04
rH r*rH <*p
O 0mrH
on *ron oCM rH
oo oen ^*o oCM i-H
Q
U <K
u entj <u04 Sue-» wffi SIS IH
EH
in no n
o oiH i-H
o r~en in^p oni~t
o voen CMin o04 rH
n i\o m"fl* enO4
rH^•H nO rHn rH
on n-en o04 rH
in *oCO 04
0 rHCM r-t
Q»J WM K
>0u in•4 <u04 SWEH W< SS M
EH
m m0 O
0 rH•H iH
o nO 04
in o--H«H
CO 04cn oin rH04 rH
•
TP Or- 04^ o04 rH
CO ^»rH n
o CM .nn
cn n
cn HCM rH
CO CO00 CM
O CMCM rH
Qh5 U(q K> Du ini-3 ft.
y04 £WEH U< SS H
EH
CM 00rH CO
O CMrH rH
CM Chcn in•*• O_i «*jr-« r^
o m0 O
V0CMCM rH
cn inr* in-<r oCNrH
rH«rH V
o n
OHo n0 04n rH
CM CM00 *P
o nCM rH
Q
> Dw inA <u04 ftUEH U< as3 M
EH
in coo no rorH M
CO 04cn or CM
rH H
O4 OO ro
to ro04 rH
.10 oen o•** 04CM H
•*• COrH in
o «rCOH
04 ^-cn •**en roCM rH
in r-CO <4>
O TTCMrH
Qhi UW 04
u in*-3 rf|w04 £
EH Urij 2t£ H
EH
y-i •O ^r
o4J ..3 vn01
CL TJE3
•H r*rH in
O -«Tr-H tH
O COO rH
in nrH H
CO COo m\ocoCM rH
in \ocnn^- n
^ 04H CO
O 10
^p ocn inen ^PCM H
CO P*CO CM
O <0CM H
Qr3 WW 2
cq inrH <u04 £WEH W< £3= M
t
O *?o min nrH rH
CM HCM ^3»
to -vCM rH
in CMo inm nCM rH
^ Ocn ncn vo(N H
Qr} Q
U K> Dw in1-3 >£
CJCH £U£H W< ££ n
E-"
ff '
'•(,-.-":iV
0 CO O 0On rH ^H
rH rH rH ,-1
rH rHrH rH
*0 V0CM rH
cn «3 in er\rH n cn c>
CM rH CM rH
Q Q*— 1 CJ *J COU 04 CU Q4> 3 > 0u tn w oa^4 < j <:
W Cd0- S 24 SU >d&H W H Cd< s: < s3 w 2 KH
E- EH
![Page 53: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
- 49 -
uO
![Page 54: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Well #10D displays drawdown of 0.18 feet during the test.
Observations made during drilling, and water levels in wells
#10A and #10D indicate that the zone monitored by well #10D
is perched above the true water table.
Presently available data is not sufficient to allow a firm
conclusion of whether or not a connection exists between the
perched zone and the shallow phreatic zone. However, this
possibility cannot be ruled out. Considering the
possibility of disruption of soil permeability in the area
of well *ioD, this may not be the appropriate place for
future investigation Into the characteristics of the perched
zone.
Solving the Jacobs variation of the The is equation for the
distance from the well at which drawdown « 0, yields a
radius on the order of 15 feet. Although this may not be
the exact radius of the cone of depression, it offers one
explanation as to why other shallow wells were not affected
by the test. The closest shallow well, #11, is 150 feet
away.
In closing this section, it should be noted that this
pumping test was conducted in a bedrock terrain, in which
apparently all the permeability is secondary. Drilling data
and the general nature of fractured bedrock indicates that
- 50 -
![Page 55: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
this .porous, medium Is quite heterogeneous. Aquifer analysis
equations were derived for use with ideal, homogeneous
aquifers (such as would occur on the coastal plain, etc.),
and have limitations when used in fractured bedrock terrain,
since bedrock aquifers are not usually homogeneous over
large areas. However, data obtained from this pumping test
agrees with piezometer test data. This suggests that the
hydraulic characteristics of the shallow phreatlc zone do
not vary significantly over the project area.
00*55
- 51 -
![Page 56: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
GROUNDWATER FLOW AND VELOCITY
GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION
The depth to the water table was determined by talcing water
level measurements in each shallow well on April 25, 1988
and May 12, 1988. Water levels in the shallow wells
Increased by an average of 4.4 feet between the two periods
of measurement, probably in response to recharge due to the
rainfall that occurred during this period. These
measurements are presented in Table 7. Only the wells which
monitor the shallow unconfined zone, were used to define the
actual water table. The elevation of the water table across
the site was determined by surveying the elevations of the
tops of the well casings and subtracting the depth to water
In shallow wells from this elevation (Exhibit I).
The direction of groundwater flow across the site was
determined using two different methods. The first method
Involved defining a plane using the water level elevation of
3 monitoring wells and then calculating the direction of
slope of the plane. The direction of the slope represents
the general direction of flow of groundwater within the
triangle formed by the three wells. The calculated flow
directions across the site for the two dates of measurement
are shown on Exhibit II.
ARI 00156
![Page 57: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
TABLE 7
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS IN CHROMATEX MONITORING WELLS
(DEPTHS IN FEET BELOW TOP OP CASING)
WATER LEVELS ELEVATION OF
WELL * 4/25/88
1A 21.11
2 9.50
3 20.35
4 15.25
5 12.00
10A 19.40
11 10.11
IB 30.06
10B 24.37
1C 30.35
10C 25.66
10D 14.82 .
. ———————————— j_-
5/12/88
16.57
7.21
15.66
11.81
8.00
14.53
6.33
24.75
18.96
. 24.94
20.17
11.54
Ur UJT WCLiL. UASINU
(ft. MSL)
1547.34
1536 .-07
1536.33
1552.60
1538.77
1537.39
1539.33
1547.91
1538.16
1547.88
1539.00
1538.33
- 53 -VRIOO-.57
![Page 58: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Groundwater flow directions across the site were also
determined using potentiometric surface maps. The fw. _.....— ..—————-_—————^-.____-————— ^
groundwater elevations in the shallow wells were contoured
to obtain the approximate configuration of the water table
surface on the two dates of measurement. The interpreted
potentiometric surfaces and flow directions are shown on
Exhibits III and IV.
The data obtained by both methods of flow direction
determinations indicate the presence of a groundwater divide
trending roughly east-west across the center of the site.
There is an excellent correlation between flow directions
determined using the two different methods on the northern
side of the divide. It is also found that direction of
groundwater flow does not change significantly when there is
a change of several feet in the elevation of the water
surface.
Groundwater flow directions on the southern side of the
divide are not consistent between the two methods of
determination. Flow direction calculated using the
triangulation method trend southwest while flow directions
obtained from the potentiometric surface maps trend roughly
due south.
There are several possible explanations for the
discrepancies between the two methods. The most obvious
- 54 - A R |
![Page 59: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
explanation is the sparsness of data points on the southern
side of the.'divide, - resulting in minimal control when
contouring. Another reason could be that flow directions
calculated using the triangulation method could be skewed if
some of the data points used are on the other side of the
divide.
Water level elevations in wells in the #1 and *10 clusters
show a head gradient in the downward direction. This
Indicates that the site is in a recharge area, where
groundwater tends to flow from shallow zones toward
progressively deeper zones. However, the piezometer test
results and water quality testing in the intermediate and
deep wells at the #10 cluster suggest that very little, if
any, vertical groundwater flow occurs in the immediate area.
Since only two intermediate depth wells and two deep' wells
were drilled, it is not possible to calculate groundwater
flow directions in the zones monitored by these wells with
the available data. The use of other nearby wells, such as
residential wells or the Chromatex facility well, to
calculate flow in the deeper zones was not considered
appropriate. All evidence Indicates that those wells are
cased to a maximum of 40 feet. Therefore, this construction
makes them incompatable for use with the more deeply cased
project wells. EPA/TAT calculated groundwater flow
direction using the residential wells exclusively. Their
flR!00059
![Page 60: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
ttfcalculated flow direction was very similar to those ^''
calculated for this report in the vicinity of the well fflO
cluster.
The gradient of the water table, on either side of the
divide, was calculated using the same 3 point triangulation
technique as was used to calculate direction of flow.
Gradients were also obtained from the potentiometric surface
maps. This data is presented in Table 8.
- 56 - AR I 00060
![Page 61: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
(Red)
TABLE 8A
WATER TABLE GRADIENTS AT CHROMATEX PLANT #2
CALCULATED USING TRIANGULAITON METHOD
WELLS FROM WHICH
WATER LEVELS WERE
USED TO CALCULATE
HYDRAULIC GRADIENT 4/25/88 5/12/88
1A, 10A, 11
4, 10A, 11
5, 10A, 11
1A, 2* 11
3, 4, 11
1A, 2, 4
1A, 2, 4
——— norxn or
0
O
0
——— South of
0
0
0
0
uiva.ae ——— —
.048
.050
.043
Divide ———
.0065
.054
.013
.051
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.042
.045
.040
.009
.025
.018
.046
R R 1 0 0 0 6- 57 -
![Page 62: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
TABLE 8B
WATER TABLE GRADIENTS AT CHROMATEX PLANT #2
OBTAINED FROM POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR MAPS -
4/25/88 5/12/88
North of Divide
South of Divide
Gradients 0.050 0.039 - 0.043
Gradients 0.086 - 0.090 O.O69 - O.O72
- s s - RRI 00062
![Page 63: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
VELOCITY OF GROUNDWATER FLOW
By utilizing the previously collected data on hydraulic
conductivity, specific yield and water table gradient, an
approximation of the velocity of shallow groundwater flow at
the site can be calculated. The calculation is as follows
(from Walt on, 1970):
Ahv = sy
Where: v » groundwater velocity in tt/m
K « hydraulic conductivity in ft/*Ah~L~~* hydraulic gradient
Sy - specific yield
A number of velocities were calculated to observe
differences in either side of the divide, and to obtain
maximum, minimum and range of velocities. Several possible
velocities were calculated using the range of data obtained
from previous calculations of hydraulic conductivity,
specific yield and hydraulic gradient.
Calculated groundwater velocities are presented in Table 9,
Each pair of high and low values presented In Table 9
represent calculations using progressively less conservative
data, gradually approaching an approximate median.
A R I Q O Q 6 3- 59 -
![Page 64: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
TABLE 9A
CALCULATED GROUNDWATER VELOCITIES IN SHALLOWPHREATIC ZONE AT CHROMATEX PLANT #2
NORTH OF DIVIDE
AhK (ft/s) Sy — v (ft/s) v (ft/day) COMMENTS
1.01 x 10~-4 0.012 0.05 4.2 x 10~-4 36.26 max.calcu-lated velocity
7.70 x 10"-6 O.16 O.39 1.0 x !O'-6 0.16 min.calcu-lated velocity
7.27 x 10"-5 0.014 0.048 2.49 x 10'-4 21.53
1.10 x 10"-5 0.081 O.040 5.43 x 10~-6 0.45
5.55 X 10"-5 0.022 O.045 1.13 X 10'-4 9.81
1.53 x; 10"-5 0.07 O.042 9.18 x 10*-6 0.79
4.t2 x 10"-5 0.035 0.043 5.8O X 10"-5 5.01
1.80 X lO"-5 O.O52 0.043 1.4 X 10~-5 1.29
3.04 x 10"-5 0.046 0.043 2.84 x 10"-5 2.45 approximatemedian
fl R I 0 n n- 60 -
![Page 65: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
TABLE 9B
CALCULATED GROUNDWATER VELOCITIES IN SHALLOWPHREATIC ZONE AT CHROMATEX PLANT #2
SOUTH OF DIVIDE
K (ft/s) Sy ^- v (ft/s) v (ft/day) COMMENTS
1.01 x 10~-4 0.012 0.09 7.57 x 10~-4 65.00 max. calcu-lated velocity
7.70 x 10~-6 0.16 0.0065 3.12 x 10*-7 0.03 min. calcu-lated velocity
7.27 x 10'-3 0.014 0.086 4.46 X !O'-4 38.53
1.10 X 10--5 O.081 0.009 1.2 x 10'-6 0.10
5.55 x 10--5 O.O22 0.072 1.82 x 10"-4 15.69
1.53 X lO'-S 0.07 0.013 2.8 x 10"-6 0.24 ;
4.72 X 10"-5 0.035 0.069 9.3O x 10"-5 8.03
1.80 X 10"-5 0.052 0.018 6.2 X 10~-6 0.53
3.04 x 10"-5 0.046 0.051 3.37 x !O'-5 2.90 approximatemedian
f l R i o o n e s- 61 -
![Page 66: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
Groundwater flow velocities on either side of the divide
exhibit ranges over 3 or 4 orders of magnitude. It is most
probable that both the extremely high and extremely low
velocities are unrealistic, especially the high values,
since they appear to be extremely rapid for groundwater flow
in low permeability fractured bedrock. It is interesting to
note that the median values of velocity on both sides of the
divide are very similar.
- 6 2 -
![Page 67: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE PROJECT AREA
GENERAL
The hydrogeology of the Pottsville Formation underlying
Chromatex Plant #2, to a depth of approximately 100 to 130
feet, is characterized by relatively low permeability.
Additionally, it appears that secondary permeability is
dominant over primary permeability, if there is any primary
permeability at all. Based on interpretation of data from
the drilling, testing and sampling of the on-site monitoring
wells, this section, of the Pottsville Formation can be
divided up into 5 distinct hydrogeologic units. They are
described below, beginning with the shallowest unit.
UNIT 1: Perched Zone Water Table
An apparently perched water table has been found to exist in
the vicinity of the well #10 cluster and in the area of well
#11. It occurs at a depth of approximately 11 feet at well
#10, and has been observed to be within 2 feet of the
surface in backhoe pits excavated near well #11. This zone
is monitored by well #10D. Whether or not this perched zone
exists outside of these two areas is not known at this time,
nor is it known if it is seasonal or perennial. This unit
yielded enough water to require that it be cased off during
the drilling of wells #10B and #10C. No perched water was
- 63 -
![Page 68: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
observed during the drilling of well #11, but backhoe pits
in this area have filled with water fairly quickly, during
previous investigations. This water table is believed to be
perched at the bedrock/soil interface, resting in the soil
on top of the bedrock. Information on the permeability or
hydraulic conductivity of this zone is not available, since
tests on the one well that monitors this zone were not
successful, as previously discussed. The perched water is
contaminated with VOC's, as shown by the analyses of the
water collected from well #10D and previously collected
water samples from backhoe pits near well #11. The levels
of contamination in well #10D are less than those In deeper
well #10A, so It is possible that the contamination in the
perched zone is due to the collection of volatile gases
diffusing from the top of the true water table approximately
7 to 10 feet below.
UNIT 2: Shallow Unconfined Pnreatic Zone
This unit is monitored by wells #1A, #2, #3, #4, #5, #10A
and #11. It is that thickness of the Pottsville Formation
between the top of the water table and a depth of
approximately 45.to 55 feet below ground surface. Since
there are no obvious confining layers overlying this zone,
it can be considered to be unconfined, a belief which is
supported by the range of specific yields obtained from the
pumping test on well #10A. Monitoring wells penetrating
,64. flRIO-%8
![Page 69: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
r.this zone, in general, had the highest yield of all project
wells. Additionally, piezometer tests show that it has the
highest hydraulic conductivity of any zone investigated.
However, the yields obtained (in addition to the
transmissivity obtained from the well #10 pumping test),
could classify this zone as a semi-confining layer, or
aquitard, rather than an aquifer.
Drill cuttings indicate that unit 2 is rather highly
fractured. However, low well yields and hydraulic
characteristics suggest that the majority of these fractures
are at least partially filled with the mineral material that
was observed to coat fracture faces and thus, limit
groundwater movement.
Thin layers of coal were observed In this unit. Coal often
has a high permeability, due to a high concentration of
cleats and other fractures. However, the coal does not
appear to play an important role in hydraulic conductivity
in this case, perhaps because it is too thin.
UNIT 3: Deep Unconflned Phreatic Zone
Unit 3 is monitored by wells #1B and #10B. It occurs at
depths from approximately 55 feet to approximately 85 feet.
Its average hydraulic conductivity is 2.71 x 10~-6 ft/s.
Yields from wells in this zone were extremely low, and it isRRIOOP69
- 65 -
![Page 70: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
essentially dry. To call this unit unconfined is perh^s a
misnomer, since its hydraulic conductivity and yield would
classify it as a confining or semi-confining layer.
However, since there apparently is nothing of lower
permeability directly overlying it, it could still be
considered as part of the unconfined phreatic zone,
Portions of this unit appear to be fractured. However,
these fractures do not appear to interconnect, or are filled
in with limonite.
UNIT 4: Confining Layer
This zone occurs from 87 to 95 feet in well #10C and 82 to
86.5 feet in well #1C. This unit could probably be
considered as a portion of unit 3. However, during the
drilling of well #1OC/ an 8 foot thick layer of apparently
unfractured rock beneath low permeability unit 3 was
encountered, leading to the belief that any water bearing
zones occurring at greater depths would be confined. There
are no project wells that specifically monitor this zone.
UNIT 5: Confined Zone
This zone occurs immediately beneath the confining layer of
unit 4. Its thickness is at least 35 feet in well #10C and
24 feet in well #1C. Although the average yield of wells in
this zone are less than that of the shallow zone, theRRIOQ070
- 66 -
![Page 71: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
hydraulic conductivities of the two units are similar and of
the same order of magnitude. This unit exhibits the same
characteristic fracturing as overlying units, and the same
fracture fillings.
Relative hydraulic characteristics indicate that units 3 and
4 act as at least a semi-confining layer overlying the
confined zone. However, the head in well #100 is lower than
that of wells #10A and #10B, and the head in well #10 is
lower than that of #1A and #1B. This indicates that, even
though unit 5 may be confined or semi-confined, it is
probably not under an artesian head.
HYDRAULIC RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL UNITS
Data from the pumping test of -well #10A and water quality
data can be combined with vertical head gradients to
interpret the hydraulic inter-relationships between the
units. As stated in the previous section, while conducting
the pumping test on well #10A, a small amount of drawdown
was observed in wells #10B and #10C during this pumping
test. This indicates some degree of hydraulic
interconnection between units 2, 3, 4 and 5. This is not
unexpected, since completely impermeable, laterally
extensive, confining layers are rare in bedrock terrain.
Under natural, non-pumping conditions, a vertical head
gradient exists across units 2 , 3,4 and 5, with the head in.67- A R I 0 0 0 7
![Page 72: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
unit 2 being the highest and the head in unit 5 being the
lowest. This situation indicates the tendency, and
probability, for groundwater flow in the downward direction.
However, the distribution of VOC's in wells #10A, #10B and
#10C suggest that very little, if any, groundwater flows
from the shallow unconfined zone into deeper zones. This is
probably because the hydraulic conductivity of the shallow
unconfined zone is an order of magnitude greater than that
of the deeper unconfined zone. Since groundwater flow
follows the path of least resistance, it would be expected
that the majority of flow would be in the horizontal
direction. It is probable that the vertical conductivity of
the deeper unconfined zone is even less than its horizontal
conductivity, which is what was measured by the piezometer
tests.
APPLICATION OF PROJECT DATA TO CONTAMINATED
RESIDENTIAL WELLS
Available data on residential wells indicates that they
range from 85 feet to 495 feet in depth, with casing lengths
of 20 to 40 feet. The great majority of these wells are
deeper than the deepest wells drilled for this
investigation. This is not surprising In light of the data
obtained from the upper 100 to 130 feet of the Pottsville
Formation, which indicates it to be a rather poor aquifer.
The Chromatex facility well is 400 feet deep, with 20 feet
f l R I 00072- 68 -
![Page 73: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
of casing, and yields 34 gallons per minute. According to
the driller, all but a few gpm of this yield was obtained at
depths greater than 350 feet. This well is contaminated
with TCE in the 1.0 to 3.0 ppm range.
This data raises the following question: If the aquifers
from which most of the residential wells, and the Chromatex
production well, withdraw their water are below units 3, 4
and 5, which have been shown to be uncontaminated, then how
did the deeper aquifers become contaminated? The simplest
and most logical explanation to this question concerns the
casing lengths of these wells. These casings, which are
apparently no deeper than 40 feet, would not completely seal
off the highly contaminated shallow unconfined zone.
Therefore, contaminated water flowing through the shallow
zone would be able to leak under the shallow casings into
the wells, thereby contaminating them. Since TCE and
related VOC's are heavier than water, it would be possible
for them to sink to the bottom of the wells, contaminating
the entire water column and probably the deeper aquifers as
well. Since the typical household well pumps for only a
small fraction of each day, it would be possible for VOC
contaminated water entering the wells from the shallow zones
to flow in to deeper zones penetrated by the well, since the
pumping period would probably be too brief to prevent this.
Head gradients in the downward direction would facilitate
this occurrence.RR100073
- 69 -
![Page 74: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1) Volatile organic chemical contamination, including high
concentrations of TCE, has been identified in the
groundwater in monitoring wells #2, #10A, #10D and #11.
The concentration gradients of this contamination, com-
bined with calculated groundwater flow directions,
indicates that a major source of the contamination is
in the vicinity of monitoring well #11.
The distribution of groundwater contamination and calcu-
lated flow directions also offer strong evidence that
the VOC contamination that affected the residential
wells did not originate in the vicinity of the under-
ground tank at Chromatex Plant #2.
If the potentlometric surface maps are correct, the
VOC contamination in well #2 could not originate in the
area of well #11, since they are on opposite sides of
the groundwater divide, unless it was able to cross the
divide in the vadose zone.
Another explanation for the existence of contamination
on the south side of the divide is that it is remanent
from a time when the divide was distorted or depressed
by the cone of depression of,the facility well. It is
possible that the pumping of the facility well altered
- 70 -
![Page 75: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
the configuration of the water table enough to allow
contaminated groundwater in the vicinity of well #11
to cross the divide. When the Chromatex well stopped
pumping and the water table returned to it's ambient
configuration, a slug of contaminated water was left
on the south side of the divide.
2) The vertical distribution of VOC contamination in the
well #10 cluster indicates that it is, limited to the
shallow unconfined phreatic zone, and does not extend
in significant concentration below a depth of 55 feet.
The reason for this is believed to be the low perme-
ability of the deeper unconfined zone, which inhibits
vertical groundwater flow and forces most groundwater
flow to occur in the horizontal direction. However,
vertical head gradients In the well #1 cluster and
well #1O cluster indicate the potential for ground-
water flow from shallow zones to deeper zones.
3} The hydraulic conductivities in the shallow phreatric
zone range from 1.O1 x 10"-4 ft/s to 7.70 x 10~-€ ft/s
However, 9 of 11 hydraulic conductivities obtained for
the shallow zone fall within the 1 x 10"-5 ft/s range,
suggesting relative uniformity across the site. Hy-
draulic conductivity values in the deeper unconfined
zone are in the 1 x 10~-6 ft/s range, and hydraulic
conductivities in the confined zone range from
8.5 X 10"-5 ft/s to 4.4 x 10~-6 ft/s. ^_cRRI00075
![Page 76: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
4) Calculated groundwater flow directions indicate the
presence of a groundwater divide in the water table
beneath Chromatex Plant #2. The divide trends in an
east-west direction. Groundwater flows off the northern
side of the divide in a northeast direction, and off of
the southern side of the divide in a south or south-
west direction.
5) Velocities of groundwater flow have been calculated
for the shallow phreatic zone, off of each side of
the divide. They range from 36.26 ft/day to 0.16 ft/
day on the northern side of the divide, with an ap-
proximate median of 2.45 ft/day. On the southern
side of the divide, calculated velocities range from
65.00 ft/day to O.03 ft/day, with an approximate
median of 2.90 ft/day. It is most probable that the
extreme values of velocity are not representative of
conditions at the site. A more typical range of
velocities in this type of terrain should be
1.0 to 10.0 ft/day.
To date, the most distant downgradient well in which
VOC contamination has been detected is the Arby's
Restaurant well on Route 93. This well is approxi-
mately 1,560 to 1,660 feet from the most highly con-
taminated well, monitor well #11.• The Arby's well is
72 n R I o n o 7 6
![Page 77: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
not in the exact direction of calculated groundwater
flow, but is in the general direction. Assuming
groundwater flow in a straight line between the two
wells, which is unlikely, at a velocity of 1.0 ft/day,
it would take approximately 4.27 to 4.55 years for
VOC's reaching the water table at well #11 to reach
the Arby's well. Using a groundwater velocity of
10 ft/day, this time period would have a range of
0.42 years to 0.45 years. The median flow velocity
would produce a range of 1.74 to 1.86 years. The
available data does not allow for the calculation
of an exact velocity, or of a narrow range of velo-
cities.
Since VOC contamination has already reached the Arby's
well, the leading edge of the contaminant plume is now
located at some distance downgradlent from-It. There-
fore, any estimates of the length of time that contami-
nation has been In the groundwater, using the Arby's
well, must be considered as absolute minlmums.
The above calculations assume natural, unimpeded
groundwater flow through the residential neighbor-
hood. It must be kept in mind that, up until Octo-
ber, 1987, at least 22 residential wells, in addi-
tion to the Chromatex Facility well, were in opera*-
tion. These wells, which obviously drew in contamiun tami- — -i( \ R 1 0 0 0 7 7
- 73 -
![Page 78: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
nated groundwater while pumping, may have impeded
the flow of groundwater through the shallow phreatic
zone. Personnel at Chromatex Plant #2 estimate that
the facility operated at a withdrawal rate of
5,500 gpd. This well, which evidently drew in con-
taminated groundwater while pumping, may have slowed
down the migration of the contaminant plume toward
the residential wells by pulling it in another di-
rection while it was pumping.
The nature of flow of VOC's in groundwater must be
considered when calculating their travel time
through an aquifer. TOE and related compounds are
denser than water and can display differing flow
characteristics, and it is possible that it could
take longer for TCE to flow through the aquifer
than uncontaminated water.
6) An apparent perched water table is located in the
vicinity of the well #1O cluster and well #11.
This water table has been investigated in a very
preliminary fashion, and found to be contaminated
with VOC's,
- 74 -
![Page 79: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
REFERENCES
Fetter, C. W., 1988, Applied Hydrogeology; MerriliPublishing : Columbus, Ohio.
Freeze and Cherry, 1979, Groundwater; Prentice-Hall:Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
Hvorslev, 1951, Time Lag and Soil Permeability in Ground-water Observations; U.S. Army Corps of EngineersWaterways Exp. Sta., Bull. 36, Vicksburg, Miss.
INTEX, 1988, Work Plan for Phase 1 of Extent of Contami-nation Study at Chromatex Plant #2, West Hazleton,Pa.
Lohman, 1937, Groundwater in Northeastern Pennsylvania;Pa. Geologic And Topographic Survey Bulletin W4.
Schafer, 1978, Casing Storage Can Affect Pumping TestData; Johnsons Drillers Journal, Jan/Feb., JohnsonSivision, UOP, Inc.
Walton, 1970, Groundwater Resources Evaluation; McGraw-Hill, N.Y.
Walton, 1985, Practical Aspects of Groundwater ModellingNWWA.
A R I O O H 7 9
![Page 80: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
CHROMATEX PLAKT NO. 2WEST HAZLETON, PA.
EXTENT OF GROUNDWATERCONTAMINATION STUDY, PHASE
APPENDICES
![Page 81: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
p t
wtfLA&xt
Rp>yvmVwft*fe?r£&&l$g*
tfraflM?
f«* w^vK* "'Vlewwtt&A nffl
![Page 82: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARYPROJECT: cnromatex
'WELLDEPTH(f t )
Well Cross Section
- 16
16 - 22
?3 - 25'
25 - 33'
33 -35*
35*-
GEOLOGY
Yellow brown, mediumsandy s i l t , somechunks of coarse sand-stone, damp.
Brown-yellow mcd. sandchunks of dark grayarkose, very weathereddry.
Brown coarse sand,rounded, and sandstonesome s i l t , fractured.Damp. (Bedrock).
Soft spot at I6i to17 ' . Brown, fine tocoarse sand, somes i l t , chunks of veryfine black sandstone,trace Umontte, dry.Towards 20* some con-glomerit ic, coarsesandstone (quartz &hibole - ?)
Coarse quartz-amphi-bole sandstone, trace1imoni te, fractured,wet. Dry spot at 23'
Red coarse arkose,few dark minerals,clean quartz gravelfrom conglomerateabove, t race 1imonItedry. At 30' arkosicconstituents -arerarer.
Dark, cbarse, quartz-amphibole sandstone,conglomerittc inplaces, predominantlyamphiIbole, fracturedtrace pyri te, dry.
Conglomerit ic arkose,reddish brown stain,
l i t t l e pyri te, damp.
Grout Apro,v
rGroundSurface
CementGrout
fej
Bentoni teSeal
^'SolidSteelCasing
Open hole tototal depth.
VERTICAL SCALE
0 . 3P
1 in. = 10 ft.
Construction Details
Location: Continental White Capproperty.
Driller: KohlDate Started: 3/29/88Date Completed: 3/30/88
Driller's file name: jeff G i l l
Yield: 3-8How Determined: Purging well wi t t
air for timed interval, then count-ing buckets needed to bail mud tub
Total Well Depth: 50' dry
Static Water Level: 21.57'Date: V19/88
b . t . «
Casings:Diameter Depth6" SteelSt ick-up
22'1 W
Grouting Details: 5* bentonite,35% Type I Cement to surface, w i t hli1 bentonite pel lets at bottom ofcasing.
Water Bearing Zones:
Depths
22'35*'
Yield
<.5 gpm1 gpm
3 - k gpm
NOTE: Lithologic contact depthsare approximate, as cutt ingscame up with di f f icul ty.
Water Quality:
Data provided by
IKTIKNATIONAL
577 Sackettsford RWamtinster, PA
18974-139
![Page 83: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY WELL: IA
PROJECT: Chromatex
'WELLDEPTH(ft)
Well Cross Section
- 50'
GEOLOGY
Coal, trace pyrite,soft and fractured,wet.
Black shale, fractured"sprinkled" with py-rite, wet.
Quartz-amphilbole con-g1omerate, occasion-ally arkoslc, occa-sional encrustation ofpyrite, wet.
Black medium grainedsandstone with minorquartz constituent,minor pyrite encrusta-tion, wet, fractured.
END OF DRILLING: 50'
Developed for 37 minutesby air l i f t .
Construction Details
Location:
Driller:Date Started:Date Completed:
Driller's file name
Yield:How Determined:
Total Well Depth:
Static Water Level:Date:
Casings:Diameter Depth
Grouting Details:
Water Bearing Zones:
Depths Yield
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
Date: 0083
INTONATION A L
577 Sackettsford RWarminster, PA
18974-139
![Page 84: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
;ELL CONSTRUCTION WELL: IB'PROJECT; C
'WELLDEPTH(ft)
0 - 10'
Well Cross Section
10-1V
15-13'
19-22'
22-25'
1*2-50'
GEOLOGY
Yellow brown silty sand 1some chunks of dark ar-kose, dry. Sandstonechunks become bigger £harder at 6i'.
Bedrock. Medium quartz-amphibole sandstone,t race a rkose, t racemica, dry. Weathered.
Black medium sandstone,conglomeritic in placesvery weathered (cuttingappear as sand). Dry.
Black coarse sandstone,trace mica, trace ar-kose, dry.
Gray sandstone, cuttingappear as sand.
Coarse quartz-amphibolisandstone , trace 1imo-nite staining, tracearkose, no apparentfracturing, dry.
Like above, with quartdthat may be a fracturefi l l i n g and a trace ofsoft purplish si It-stone.
Black medium sandstoneconglomeritic in placesome limonite staininglittle black £. purpl issiltstone, damp. Tracepyrite at 32'.
Coal, anthracite.
Black, hard shale,litt l e coarse conglom-erate, little pyrite,trace free quartz,trace anthracite andhematite, wet.
Grout
6"SolldSteel- Cas i ng
Cemen tGrout
Bentonite^ Seal
Open hole tototal depth.
VERTICAL SCALE
0 10h————————j
1 in. = 10 ft.
Construction Details
Location: Continental W h i t e Capproperty, by Jaycee B l v d .
Driller: KohlDate Started: 3/3V88Date Completed: */8 /88
Driller's file name:Jeff G i l l
Yield: < 1 gpmHow Determined: Est imate
Total Well Depth: 80*'
Static Water Level: 30i 'b. t .cDate: 4/19/88
Casings:Diameter____Depth___
i ek-up
Grouting Details: Bentoni te p e l lat bottom of a n n u i u s , fol lowed by a5% bentonite/95t cement m i x t u r e tob.g.s . A 1:2 sand/cement mix fromWater Bearing Zones: ground t
surface.Depths Yield
Hi'261 •1*2'
moist zonemoist zone< -5 gpm
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
Date:
1WTIRNAT10NAL
577 Sackettsford FWarminster, PA
18974-13^
![Page 85: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY WELL: IBPROJECT: Chromatex
WELLDEPTH(ft)
50-55'
Well Cross Section
55-57'
:>7-62i'
GEOLOGY
Black, fine sandstone,trace pyrite £ quartz,trace 1imonite (dscrust), fractured, soft
Medium sandstone, littlblack shale, trace veryhematic sandstone,fractured, wet. Dry at57'.
Medium quartz-amphibolesandstone, trace mica,dry.
62i-69i' Dark gray medium sand-stone, fractured, tracepyrite £ Mroonlte, dry.Iron minerals disappearat 65±'-
Trace anthracite.
Medium quartz-amphibolesandstone, trace mica,dry.
Some iron mineral en-crustations, possiblyfractured.
73'
END OF DRILLING: 80i
Developed intermittently for30 minutes by water injectionand air lift. Unmeasureablylow yield.
Construction Details
Location:
Driller:Date Started:Date Completed:
Driller's file name:
Yield:How Determined:
Total Well Depth:
Static Water Level:Date:
Casings:Diajneter Depth'6" Steel
Stick-up55'
1 .62'
Grouting Details:
Water Bearing Zones:
Depths Yield
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
INTT«NATK>NAL
577 Sackettsford 3W&rminster, PA
18974-13'
![Page 86: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY W E L L :PROJECT: Chromatex
'WELLDEPTH(ft)
0 - 3'
3'
3 - .15'
Well Cross SectionGEOLOGY
Yellow-brown sand andsi l t , few chunks ofarkose, dry.Bedrock.
Gray medium sandstone,Ii ttle mica, some arfkose, silt 6 sand,weathered, dry.
15 - 22' Coarse quartz-amphibolesandstone, dry. Veryweathered. Hemati testaining at 20' .
22 - 27' Black shale, trace pur-plish mudstone, tracelimonite as an encrustation, trace hematite,dry.
27 -4li' Medium quartz-amphibolesandstone, trace limo-nite, very weathered,dry.
Anthracite & blackshale, fractured, tracelimonite, dry.
- **9' Black shale, trace py-rite, trace hematite,damp.
- 60' Black very fine sand-stone, trace quartzconglomerate, frac-tured, trace iron min-erals, damp. Wet at 51
60 - 66' Medium quartz amphiboltsandstone, little limo-nite, trace mica, wet.
66 - 70' Black fine sandstone,some anthracite, tracepyrite £ limonite, wet
70 - 82' Quartz-amphibole sand-stone, trace 1 imoni te ,fractured, wet. Very
J _ A. Qt i
Grout.Apron Locking Cap
\\
GroundSurface
SolidSteelCasing
Cement"Grout
BentoniteSeal
Open hole tototal depth
VERTICALSCALE
0 10 20
i in. = 10 ft.
A R I 0 n n
Construction Details
Location: Continental White Cap,by Jaycee Blvd.
Driller:KohlDate Started: 4/12/88Date Completed: 4/1*1/88
Driller's file name:jeff G i l l
Yield: i .3How Determined rnming developmei
then measuring purged water.
Total Well Depth: no1
Static Water Level :3o.39 'b .t.cDate: A/19/88
Casings:Diameter Deptfr'V SteelStick-uo
86V2.19 '
Grouting Details: Bentonite pelt bottom of annulus, followed by a% bentonite/95$ cement mixture to-g.s. A 1:2 sand/cement mix toround surface.ATER BEARING ZONES:
Depths Yield
damp< 1 gpm< 1 gpm1 .3 gpm
51'87'
100'
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
IWTKRNATIONAL
577 SackettsfordWarnunster, PA
18974-1
Date
![Page 87: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY WELL:PROJECT: Chromatex
'WELLDEPTH(ft) GEOLOGY
82 -86i
864- 92'
92 -96*'
•$64-110'
Same lithology as abovebut no evidence offractures £ almost notrace of iron minerals.
Black shale, trace limonite, fractured, moist.
Black fine sandstone,wet.
Medium to coarse sand-stone (quartz-amphibole)trace Umonite, frac-tured, wet. Some frac-ture faces lined withquartz.
END OF DRILLING: 130'
Developed for 31 minutesby air 1ift.
Well Cross Section
R R I O O D 8 7
Construction Details
Location:
Driller:Date Started:Date Completed:
Driller's file name;
Yield:How Determined:
Total Well Depth:
Static Water Level:Date:
Casings:Diameter Depth"
Grouting Details:
Depths Yield
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
INTERNATIONAL EXPUOIW577 Sackettsf ordWarrainster, PA
18974-11
Date:
![Page 88: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION WELL; 2PROJECT: Chromatex
'WELLDEPTH(f t)
0 - 1 '
1 - 5-'
Well Cross Section
5 - 7'
- 15'
15 -20*'
- 25'
- 30'
3 0 - 3 3 '
3 3 - 3 7 '
37 -
GEOLOGY
Yellow brown sandy siltTopsol1.
Bedrock. Dark coarsearkose, some si It,hard,dry. Some 1imonitestaining.
Dark gray medium sand-stone , conglomeri tic inplaces, 1imonite-1inedfracture faces, dry.
Medium grained, quartz-amphibole sandstone,conglomeritic and lim-oni tic In places ,fractured, dry.
Soft, dark gray shalefew chunks of sand-stone, damp. Soft to20±'.
Black, fine sandstone,hard, some hematicstaining, dry.
Light gray, mediumsandstone, trace darkparticles £ trace sandstone conglomerate,1imonite staining,weathered, dry.
Black, fine sandstoneor shaly sandstone,fractured, 1imonitestalning , hemati testaining, dry.'
Medium grained quartz-amphibole sandstoneconglomerate, weathere.dry.
Dark gray medium sand-stone, fractured, limonite staining, dry.
GroutApron
CementGrout
Ben ton i teSeal
Open hole tototal depth.
VERTICAL SCALE0 10t_________i
1 in. = 10 ft.
f l R I O n n
Construction Details
Location: A11 steel property,closest to Jaycee B l v d .
Driller: KohlDate Started: 3/29/88Date Completed: 3/30/88
Driller's file name:Jeff G i l l
Yield: 2.33 gpmHow Determined: Purging well witi
air for timed interval, then couning buckets needed to ball mud tui
Total Well Depth: 55i' dr
Static WaterDate: 4/19/88
Casings:Diameter
Level: 9.51'b.t.c.
Depth6" SteelStick-uo
IS1
1.9V
Grouting Details: Approx. 1i' betonite pellets at bottom of annulusfollowed by 5%_bentonite/95* cementto 2'b.g.s. 1:2 ratio sand/cementfrom 2' to ground surface.WATER BEARING ZONES:
Depths Yield
1*7* 2 gpm
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
IWTTHNATIONAL
577 Sackettsford FWarminster, PA
18974-13S
Date:
![Page 89: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
'WELLDEPTH(ft)
- 50'
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY
Well Cross SectionGEOLOGY
50'
-55i
Medium quartz-amphibolconglomerate, arkosic,fractured, dry. Waterat 47 ' .
Quartz vein. Few chunkare stained with iron-oxides. Rarely a palegreen encrustation.
Black, fine to mediumsandstone, fractured,limonite staining,wet.
END OF DRILLING: 55*'
Developed for k3 minutesb y a i r l i f t .
LL:PROJECT: Chromatex
Construction Details
Location:
Driller:Date Started.:Date Completed:
Driller's file name:
Yield:How Determined:
Total Well Depth:
Static Water Level:Date:
Casings:Diameter Depth'
Grouting Details:
Water Bearing Zones:
Depths Yield
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
IWTMNATIONAL
577 Sackettsf ord IWarminster, PA
18974-13'
Date
![Page 90: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/90.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMPROJECT: Chromatex
'WELLDEPTH(f t )
Well Cross Section
V
13'
13 -
16 -
18'-
16'
.18'
1 8 - 2 2
22 - 25
25-27'
27 - 30'
30-^7'
GEOLOGY
Brown si l t and rockfragments.
Bedrock. Dark graysandstone, very weath-ered In places. Dampat 6i'.
Calcite (?) Vein. Darkcoarse sandstone. Damp
Quartz-amphibole. sand-stone, hard.
Cuttings appear as1 ight and dark finesand. Weathered. Nowater.
Dark gray medium sand-stone, soft, slightevidence of fracturingtrace i ron-stainedlight mineral (possiblyplagioclase). Dry.
Med i urn, quartz-amphi-bole sandstone, somelimonite staining,fractured, dry.
Quartz-amphibole con-glomerate , trace 1imo-nite stain and parti-cles, dry.
Medium grained arkose,many clear quartzcrystals (fracture1 ining) fractured, 1 imonite stained, wet,
Medium, quartz-amphi-bole sandstone, oc-casionally conglomeritic, some s i l t , somelimonite staining,fractured, wet.
END OF DRILLING:
fnr
Grout^Aproj!^f
GroundSurface
CementGrout
BentonIteSeal
Open hole tototal depth.
VERTICAL SCALE
1 in. - 10 ft.
A R I 0 0 0 9 0
Construction Details
Location: Al l s tee l property, aloproperty's border w/Chromate
Driller: KohlDate Started: V8/88Date Completed: k/\ 1/88
Driller's file name:Jeff G i l l
Yield: 1 gpmHow Determined: T i m i n g w e l l deveopment, then measuring collecteddevelopemnt water.
Total Well Depth: 47'
Static Water LevelDate: V19/88
19.87'b.t .c
Casings:D i ame ter____Depth'
6" SteelStick-up
18'
Grouting Details: Bentoni te p e l lat bottom of annul us. followed by5? bentonite/95% cement mixture tcb.g.s. A 1:2 sand/cement mix fo ;
Water Bearing Zones: grours u r f f
Depths Yield
27'35*'
< 1 gpm1 9Pm
Water Quality:
Data provided by
577 SackettsfordWarminster, PA
18974-1
Date:
![Page 91: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/91.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION WELL:*PROJECT: Chromatex
'WELLDEPTH(ft)
0 - 7 '
7 - 10'
10 -lOi
- 16
Well Cross Section
1 6 - 2 0
20'-
2 0 -
2 5 -
25
35
35 -
4H- 43'
A3 - 45'
4 5 - 5 5 '
GEOLOGY
Yellow brown sandy sflChunks of arkose beginto appear at 6'.
Bedrock. Medium grainearkose, weathered Inplaces, dry.
Medium sandstone,weathered. Cuttingsappear as sand, dry.
Dark gray to blackmedium sandstone, noapparent fractures,trace Umontte stain
Medium to coarse sand-stone and arkose. Dry
Quartz Vein.
Sandstone and arkose.Dry. Fractured.
Black-, medium sand-stone, fractured,little limonltestaining, dry.
Medium quartz-amphi-bole sandstone, some1imoni te staining,fractured, moist.Dry at 37* .
Arkose, some ironminerals as staining,fractured, dry.
Black, medium sand-stone, damp.
Quartz-amphibole sandstone, fractured,trace hematite, damp.Wet at 49' .
END OF DRILLING: 55'DEveloped for 32 minutesby air 1i ft.
Grout Apron
GroundSurface
CementGrout
Jen ton i teSeal
LockingJ CapT»ifJ«JA __
6"SolidSteel"Casing
Open hole tototal depth.
VERTICAL SCALE
0 10i ___ i
1 in. = 10 ft.
A R I 0 0 0 9
Construction Details
Location: In the woods behind thsoutheastern side of Chromatex.
Driller: KohlDate Started: 4/6/88Date Completed: 4/13/88
Driller's file name:jeff ^\\\
Yield: 3.75 gpmHow DeterminedTIming developmer
then measuring amount of waterpurged.
Total Well Depth: 55'
Static Water Level: 15.3'b .t.c.Date: 4/19/88
Casings:Diameter Depth' _ _6" SteelStick-up
IS}'1.8'
Grouting Details:Bentonite pellat bottom of annul us, followed by a5? bentonite/95t cement mixture toj.g.s. A 1:2 sand/cement mix to groWater Bearing Zones: surf
Depths
34434953
Yield
dampdamp1 gpm3 gpm
Water Quality:
Data provided by;
577 SackettsfordWarminster, PA
18974-1
Date
![Page 92: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/92.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY WELL: 5PROJECT: Chromatex
'WELLDEPTH( f t )
0 - 5'
Well Cross Section
5 -74'
74-n1
n-351
35-45'
GEOLOGY
Brown £ yellow-brownsi l t , some sand, tracearkose chunks. Gray sandstone chunks appear at5 ' .
Bedrock. Black, mediumsandstone, trace con-glomerate, trace pyrite,trace muscovite, dry.
Very weathered. Cuttingsappear as sand.
Dark gray, medium sand-stone, trace conglomer-ate, trace Umonitestaining, trace arkose,fractured, dry.Moist at 25*'.
Cutt ings appear as sandVery weathered. Wet,but no yield.
GroutAprons
END OF DRILLING: 45'
DEveloped for 30 minutesby air lift.
GrounaSurface
CementGrout
Bentoni teSeal
Locking Cap
6"SolidSteelCasing
Open hole tototal depth.
VERTICAL SCALE
10
1 in. = 10 ft
A R I Q O n g ?
Construction Details
Locatiomln the woods just southof Bent P i n e Road.
Driller: KohlDate Started: 4/6/88Date Completed: 4/7/88
Driller's file name:Jef f G i l l
Yield: 1 .1 gpmHow Determined-Timing develment ,
then measuring amount of waterpurged.
Total Well Depth: 45'
Static Water Level: 11 .0 'b . t . c .Date: 4/19/88
Casings:Diameter Depth'
6" SteelStick-up
1£'2 .17'
Grouting Detailsfientonite pelleat bottom of annul us, followed by a5% bentonite/95$ cement mixture toj.g.s. A 1:2 sand/cement mix to grotWater Bearing Zones: surf<-
Depths
25*35'
Yield
< 1 gpm1 gpm
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
iNTTKNATIOMAL
577 Sackettsford :Warminster, PA
18974-13
Date:
![Page 93: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/93.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION' SUMMARY WELL: IDAPROJECT: Chromatex
'WELLDEPTH(ft)
0 -Hi
Well Cross Section
Hi- 15'
15 - IS-
- 30
30 - 35
1*0 -
- 5Q
GEOLOGY
Yellow-brown sandy s i l tdry. (Topsoi1) Sand-stone fragments beginto appear at 5'.
Bedrock. Quartz-amphi-bole sandstone, arkosicmoist. More weatheredat 15'.
Cuttings appear as med-ium sand. Highlyweathered sandstone, dp)
Coarse, quartz-amphi-bole sandstone, veryweathered, d ry, t racearkose & iron oxidestaining. Particle sizeis fine to medium at25-30'. Fractured.
Grout*H I uly
Locking/ Cap
Fine black sandstone,trace arkose, gradingto siItstone at 33' •Soft 6 damp.
Black to dark gray med-ium sandstone, soft, noapparent fractures.Noticeably wetter at 37
Medium quartz-amphibolesandstone, highlyfractured, little py-rite, wet.
Fine black sandstone orsiltstone, very soft.
CementGrout
Seal
t_
s
L.• *
#*
*:t^*m i•^
|v«
iite
J rjr>
.•i
yjV5.
*f!^»
4'
1
GroSur
6"
41*TIa s n g
Open hole tototal depth.
END OF DRILLING: 50'
Developed for 20 minutesby air 1ift.
VERTICAL SCALE
0 10i______mir_m__|
1 in. = 10 ft.
f l R I 0 0 0 9 3
Construction Details
Location:Northeast side of Chrom*tex property at edge of parking lotDriller: KohlDate Started: 3/1*1/88Date Completed: 3/17/88
Driller's file name: jeff G i l l
Yield: 2 - 3 gpmHow Determined:Estimated during
developing.
Total Well Depth: so-
Static Water Level: 19.19'b . t.c.Date: VI9/88
Casings:Diameter
6" st»»iStick- up
17' b.g.s.1 .28* abovegrout apron
Grouting DetailsSenonite pelletat the bottom of annulus, followed5% bentonite/95t cement mix to 21
b.g.s. 1:2 ratio.med. sand & cementfrom 2' to ground surface.WATER BEARING ZONES:
Depths Yield
11430'37'1*0'
1 gpm
1 gpm2-3 gpm
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
577 Sackettsford !Vfeirminster, PA
18974-13!
Date
![Page 94: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/94.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION' SUMMARY '*«*WELL: 10BPROJECT: Chroma tex
'WELLDEPTHCft )
0 - Si1
5*'- 81'
8* - 12'
2 - 15'
15 - 20'
20 - 28'
28 - 35'
35 -
- 55'
GEOLOGY
Yellow-brown sandy sil(Topsoil) , dry.
As above, with fewsmall chunks of coarsesandstone.
Brown medium to coarsesand and silt, somechunks of sandstone,dry. Moist at 11 '.
Bedrock. Medium grain-ed quartz-amphibolesandstone, trace ar-kose, very weathered,moist.
8"SolidBlack medium sandstone! Steeltrace quartz and pyritle. CasingFRactured, wet. Coarse)at 201.
Medium to coarsequartz-amphibole sand-stone , cong1ome r i t i c,trace free quartz,pyrite £• arkose, dry.
Black medium to veryfine sandstone, frac-tured, trace quartz &pyrlte, damp, lessfractured at 32' .
Quartz-amphibole con-glomerate , fractured,wet. At 36' traces ofarkose, quartz.& py-rite appear.
Black shale, tracepyrite & quartz, wet.
Black, fine to veryf ine sandstone,1 itt le black shale,trace anthracite £pyr i te, wet. FRac-tured & possiblyfaul ted.
Well Cross Section
VERTICAL SCALE
0 10 20
1 in. * 10 ft.
Grout Apron4
GroundJSurface
BentoniteSeal
6" SolidSteel ———
Casing
Bentoni teSeal~
CementGrout
^Cement'* G rou t
Open hole to
Construction Details
Location: Northeast side of Chrometex property at edge of parking lot.Driller: KohlDate Started: 3/21/88Date Completed: 3/28/88
Driller's file name:Jeff Gill
Yield: <1 gpmHow Determined: Es t imate
Total Well Depth: 82'
Static Water Level: 24 .09 'b . t . cDate: 4/19/88
Casings:Diameter Depth'8" Steel6" SteelS t i ck- up
20'S7'1.67'
Grouting Details: Bentonite pelat bottom of annulus, followed by a5% bentonite/95% cement mixture tob.g.s. A 1:2 sand/cement nix toground surface.
Depths
IT16'28'35'50'691'
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
Yield
moist* 1 gpmdamp
1 gpm2 gpm
moist
IKTTHNATIONAL577 Sackettsford 1Warminster, PA
18974-13'
Date
![Page 95: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/95.jpg)
'WELLDEPTH(ft)
55 -574
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY
Well Cross Section
PROJECT: Ch roma tex
Construction DetailsGEOLOGY
574- 63'
63 -694'
691- 73'
73 - 77'
Gray medium sandstone,few chunks of pyrite £limonite, wet.
Dark gray fine sandstoneno evidence of fracturesdry.
Medium to coarse quartzamphibole sandsto/ie,conglorneri tic, hard, noapparent fractures. Dry
Black shale, soft, someanthracite fragments,trace pyrite, fracturedMoist, coal dust at 73'
Black fine sandstone £shale, unfractured,hard, wet, no yield.
82' Black fine sandstone,as above. Wet, no yield
END OF DRILLING: 82'
Developed when water ac-cumulated intermittentlyfor *»5 minutes by air lift.
A R I O O P 9 5
Location:
Driller:Date Started:Date Completed:
Driller's file name
Yield:How Determined:
Total Well Depth:
Static Water LevelDate:
Casings:Diameter Depth'
Grouting Details:
Water Bearing Zones:
Depths Yield
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
iNTEftNATlOMAL E
577 Sackettsford fWarminster, PA
18974-139
Date
![Page 96: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/96.jpg)
CONSTRUCT!' SUMMARY W E L L : 1 0 CPROJECT :Chromatex
'WELLDEPTH(f t )
0 - 7'
7 - 9'
9 - 15'
1 5 - 2 1 *
Well Cross Section
2k - 35'
35 -
2 - 55'
55 - 6V
61 - 69
69 - 76'
GEOLOGY
Yellow brown clayeys i l t , 1i ttle coarsesand (topsoil), damp.
Sandy s i l t with smallchunks of sandstone £arkosic sandstone. Dry
Bedrock. Quartz-amphi-bole sandstone, wet at10'. Arkosic in placesWeathered at 14'..
Medium to coarse quartzamphibole sandstone,very weathered, wet at171 .
Black medium sandstonehard, fractured, tracepyrite £ free quartz,wet.
Gray medium grainedsandstone, trace pyritevery weathered, dry.
Fine to coarse quartz-amphibple sandstone,(mostly amphibole) ,trace pyrite, someshale, trace anthra-cite £ mica, dry.
Black very fine sand-stone, some grains ofiron-oxide in thestone. Wet at 58' .
Medium to coarsequartz-amphibole sand-stone, trace pyrite £free quartz, fracturedwet .
Very fine to fineblack sandstone,1i ttle pyrite & quartzWet.
GroutAp ron "^
GroundSurface
8" SolidSteel ~-Casing
6" Soli dSteel -_Casing
CementGrout
iBentoni te*
SealOpen hole tototal depth.
Lockingf Cap
%*;• *-*.•/':
2 i«l
CementGrout
SBentoni teSeal
VERTICAL SCALE
0 \0 20
in. = 10 ft.
Construction Details
Location:Northeast side of
Chromatex property atDriller: edge of Park 'n9 ]ot.Date Started: yjJ/88Date Completed:
Driller's file name: Jeff G i l l
Yield: HHow Determined: Estimated
during developing.
Total Well Depth:130'
Static Water Level: 25.49'b. t.cDate: 4/19/88
Casings:Diameter Depth8" Steel6" SteelStlck-un
27V87'1.92'
Grouting Details:^' bentonitepellets at bottom of annulus, undea 5% bentonite/95% cement mixture4 ' b . g . s . A 1:2 sand/cement mix frcVb.g.s. to ground surface.WATER BEARING ZONES:
Depths Yield
10175865106
approx. 5moist<1 gpm
1 gpm2 gpm
gpm
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
INTTHNAT10NAL
577 Sackettsf ordWarniinster, PA
18974-1:
Date:
![Page 97: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/97.jpg)
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARYPROJECT* Chromatex
WELLDEPTH(ft)
76 - 87'
Well Cross Section
87 -125'
GEOLOGY
Medium grained quartz-amphibole sandstone,hard, not fractured,wet
Black, medium sandstone,some quartz grains, dry,No evidence of fracturestrace mica. At 95'weathered zones appear.Wet at J06' .
125-130' Black very fine sand-stone, soft, fractured,some free quartz, wet.
END OF DRILLING: 130'
Developed for 32 minutesby air lift.
I 0 0 0 9 7
Construction Details
Location:
Driller:Date Started:Date Completed:
Driller's file name:
Yield:How Determined:
Total Well Depth:
Static Water Level:Date:
Casings:Diameter Depth'
Grouting Details:
Water Bearing Zones:
Depths Yield
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
IMTMNATIONAL
577 Sackettsf ordWarminster, PA
18974-1:
Date:
![Page 98: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/98.jpg)
'WELLDEPTH(ft)
0 -.5'
.5 - I1
1 - 2
2 - 8.51
8.5 - 11
11 - 15
WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY
Well Cross SectionGEOLOGY
Brown silt, trace sanddry.
Light brown sandy s i l tdamp.
Gray brown-mottledblack silt, peaty,damp.
Yellow brown sandys i l t , smal 1 , scarcechunks of quartz-amphibole sandstone, damp.
Gray brown medium sandscarce chunks ofquartz-amphibole sand-stone, damp.
Bedrock. Very weathere
Reddish brown arkose,dry. High amphibolecontent. Wet at 13* .
END OF DRILLING: 15'
Unable to developdue to low yield.
GroutAp ron.
Lock i ng
groundSurface
iento-nite -^Seal R iij|*2-slotted
SteelGravel ~| Casing
CementGrout
V SolidSteelCasing
'-CEsee^
TeflonPlug
VERTICAL SCALE0 10t_________j1 in. = 10 ft.
WELL:#10DPROJECT: Chromatex Plar
#2, West Hazleton, PA
Construction Details
Location: |n well cluster on peri-meter of parking lot.
Driller: KohlDate Started: 4/15/88Date Completed: A/15/88
Driller's file name:jeff G i l l
Yield: UndeterminedHow Determined:
Total Well Depth: 15-
Static Water Level: 11.73 b.gDate: ii/19/88
Casings:Diameter Depth*»•' fir**l
Perforatedic; ' h g T
13-15' btq.s.
Grouting DetailsiQravel pack frt15 to II1, bentoni te pel lets fromto 34'-,sand £ cement (2:1) concrettfrom 9i' to ground surface.
Water Bearing Zones:
Depths
13'
Yield
< 1 gpm(wet cutti ngs)
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
1NTTBNAT10NAL
577 Sackettsf ord :Warminster, PA
18974-13
Date:
![Page 99: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/99.jpg)
wELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY WELL: 1 1PROJECT: Chromatex
'WELLDEPTH(ft)
0 - V
4 - 7'
7 - 11
Well Cross Section
n -
174-
174'.
20'
5 0 -
GEOLOGY
Gravel ballast, littleyellow-brown sandy s i l t
Bedrock. Medium sand-"stone, hard, fractured,dry.
Very weathered sand-stone (cuttings appearas mealy sand). Dry.
Light gray sandstone,very weathered, dry.
Brown medium to fine,silty sandstone, veryweathered, possibly adecaying quartz vein.Cuttings appear as sandand silt. Dry.
Black medium sandstone,weak, soft. Dry, butdamp at 27' .
Medium quartz-amph I bolesandstone, trace arkosevery weathered, damp.
Black shale, coal dust,trace anthracite. Damp.
Black medium sandstone,damp.
Dark gray medium sand-stone, soft, little py-ri te 6 free quartz,fractured, damp. .Wet at52'.
END OF DRILLING: 55'
Developed for 36 minuteswith air lift.
20 - 32'
32 -
50'
55'
GroutApron\
Locking Cap
CementGrout
Seal
«
tHill ••
•I*
«.*/.*v.
w. *yf
HI te
1
c>wi.. ,
f*
ft
I
T "~ * " It "
GroiSur
6" <"Si
Ca<Steel
Open hole tototal depth.
VERTICALSCALE
0 10
1 in. = 10 ft.
RR I 0 0 0 9 9
Construction Details
Location: Southeast s ide of Chrortex property, approx. 10* out fr
Driller: Kohl wsDate Started; 3/18/88Date Completed: 3/22/88
Driller's file name: Jeff Gil
Yield: approx. 2 gpmHow Determined: Est imated d u r i r
developing.
Total Well Depth:55*
Static Water Level: 9-75'b. t-c.Date: VI9/88
Casings:Diameter Depth'
6" SteelStick-tin
20'1.8'
Grouting Details: U1 bentoniteellets at bottom of annul us, folio*y a 5% bentonite/95% cement mixturo 2'b.g.s. 1:1 ratio of sand/cemenrom 2* to ground surface.
/ATER REARING ZONES:Depths Yield
17'
32'52'
SI ightly damp,no apparent waterDamp2 gpm
Water Quality:
Data provided by:
lKTMNAT>ONAL
577 SackettsfordWarminster, PA
18974-1.
Date:
![Page 100: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/100.jpg)
APPENDIX I
loo
![Page 101: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/101.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX'514 • SOUTHAMPTON, PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID :Sample ID :Analysis Date:
CAS NO.
615436CHROMATEX WELL ttlA4/22/88
COMPOUND
Client:Matrix:Lab File:
INTEXWATER615436V
RESULTS(UG/L)COMME
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-•7 C n A Q/ O-UU— J—75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-0C "7 CC OD f-OO-O-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-•7 Q O1? C/ o-o * -o-10061-0170 ni -fi-( O U X O
124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-10061-0275-25-2-127-18-47Q_Qi K1 ;y~ J*± a
Ino ft o QUt)-t5o 3108-90-7100-41-4
------Chloromethane 10 [I- — ---Bromo methane————— Vinvl Chloride___ — -Chloroethane------Methylene Chloride------1 . 1-Dichloroethene- — ---1 . 1-Dichloroethane------1 . 2-Dichloroethene ( total )
f~*ln T in •• r -f - i • ivi------L,niorororm_. ...._-____! . 2-Dichloroethane- — ---1 . 1 . 1-Trichloroethane------Carbon Tetrachloride------Bromodichlororoe thane______! r 2-Dichloropropane-5----cis-l . 3-Dichloroprooene------Trichloroethene------Dibromochloromethane------1 . 1 . 2-Trichloroethane------Benzene-6----trans-l r 3-Dichloropropene__ —— -Bromo form---- — Tetrachloroethene------1 P 1 r 2 r 2-Tetrachloroethane
--- — -Chlorobenzene------Ethyl benzene
SDRROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromo flurobenzene
10 D10 D10 D5 U5 05 tl5 D5 U5 U5 D5 05 U5 _ 05 05 U5 . U5 U5 U5 D5 _U5 05 05 _0_5 D5 U
% RECOVERY9010893
COMMENT0= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
Signature
Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
to I
![Page 102: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/102.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 615437Sample ID : CHROMATEX WELL tflA FBAnalysis.Date: 4/22/88
Client: INTEXMatrix: WATERLab File: 615437V
CAS NO. COMPOUNDRESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3—74-83-9—75-01-4--*7 c r\ r» oI D-UU-O— -75-09-2--7 R — *^R — 4.--1 O « 3 3 * i•7 K Q A *3f 3-O4-O--540-59-0-C"7 CC QO f DO 3 —
71 c: c o1-55-6--56-23-5--75-27-4--78-87-5 —10061-01-79-01-6—124-48-1-79-00-5--71 _4^_9__J J. r* J £.
10061-02-75-25-2—1 97 1 ft A —L£. 1 i O «i7Q_^4._fi — —
108-88-3-108-90-7-1 nn 4.1 —4J. UU ** J. *t
— —— Chloromethane 10 tl— —— Bromomethane- ——— Vinvl Chloride- —— -Chloroe thane— — -Methvlene Chloride- —— -1 . 1-Dichloroethene__ — _i r 1-Dichloroet.hane-- — -1 . 2-Dichloroethene ( total )— —— Chloroform— — _1 m 2-Dichloroethane— — _1 : i 1-Trichloroethane- ——— Carbon Tetrachloride————— Bromodichloromethane— ---1 , 2-Dichloropropane5- — -cis-1 r 3-Dichloropropene-----Trichloroethene--- — Dibroraochlorome thane—— — 1 , 1 r 2-Trichloroethane— — -Benzene6- — -trans-1 . 3-Dichloropropene- — — Bromoform- — — Tetrachloroethene- — --1 .1,2 r 2-Tetrachloroethane--. — -Toluene- —— -Chlorobenzene- —— -Ethylbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromoflurobenzene
* — _ _____--
10 n10 n10 n5 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 D5 n5 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U
- 5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY8810694
COMMENTU- Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
O R I O O I 0 2Signature
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manage
![Page 103: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/103.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON, PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID :Sample ID •'Analysis Date:
GAS NO.
613410CHROMATEX WSLLttlB4/19/88
COMPOUND
Client; INTEXMatrix: WATERLab File: CHROMV
COMKERESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3—74-83-9 —75-01-4 —75-00-3 —75-09-2—75-35-4 —75-34-3—540-59-0-67-66-3—107-06-2-71-55-6 —56-23-5 —75-27-4—78-87-5—10061-01-79-01-6—124-48-1-79-00-5--71-43-2 —
— —— Chloromethane 10 U- ———— Bromomethane-- —— Vinyl Chloride . . .__- — Chloroe thane-----Methylene Chloride-----1 r 1-Dichloroethene .._ .._ .-----1 t 1-Dichloroethane „,.,.,..,,,., . ,.— —— 1 f 2-Dichloroethene ( total)__ —— Chloroform . ._,.. .-- —— 1 . 2-Dichloroethane . .,-- — -1 . 1 , 1-Trichloroethana . .— — -Carbon Tetrachloride . .-----Bromodichloromethana „-----1 . 2-Dichloropropane5----cis-l , 3-Dichloropropene-- — -Trichloroethene _._- —— -Dibromochloromethane.— —— 1 f 1 T 2-Trichloroethana .— — -Benzene .....
10061-02-6 ——— trans-1 . 3-DichloroDrooene75-25-2 —127-18-4-79-34-5 —108-88-3-108-90-7-100-41-4-
— ---Bromof orm-----Tetrachloroethene-- — -1 . 1 . 2 P 2-Tetrachloroethane-----Toluene_ _ _ _ -Chlorobenzene-- — -Ethylbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneDS-TolueneBromof lurobenzena
10 Q10 U10 tl5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 ' U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 05 a5 U5 _._U5 U5 U
% RECOVEftY8210498
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJr Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
&RI001Q3 Signature
Name/Title
![Page 104: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/104.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. I3OX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID :Sample ID :Analysis Date '•
CAS NO.
615512CHROMATEX WELL IB4/22/88
COMPOUND
Client: INTEXMatrix: WATERLab File: 615512V
RESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3--74-83-9--75-01-4--75-00-3--75-09-2--75-35-4--75-34-3--540-59-0-67-66-3--107-06-2-71-55-6—56-23-5--75-27-4--78-87-5--10061-01-79-01-6--124-48-1-79-00-5--71-43-2--10061-02-75-25-2 —127-18-4-79-34-5--108-88-3-108-90-7-100-41-4-
----------
-----Chl or ome thane-----Bromo methane- —— -Vinvl Chloride_____Chloroethane-----Methvlene Chloride— ---1 . 1-Dichloroethene-----1 - 1-Dichloroethane-----1 . 2-Dichloroethene ( total )-----Chloroform-----1 r 2-Dichloroethane-----1 . 1 f 1-Trichloroethane-----Car-bon Tetrachloride_____Bromodichloromethane_ _ _ _ _ ! _ 2-Dichloropropane5__-_cis_l r 3-Dichloropropene_____Trichloroethene_____Dibromochloromft.thane-----1 , 1 , 2-Trichloroethane.____-Benzenefi----trans-l , 3-Dichloropropene_ _ _ - -Bromo form_____Tetrachloroethene „ ,——— _1 r i r 2 T 2-Tetrachloroethane--- — Toluene___ — Chlorobenzene— ---Et.hvl benzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 , 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromo flurobenzene
10 n10 U10 010 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 LI5 U5 U5 U5 05 U5 U
% RECOVERY89q^i3 J
103
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
Signature
flR I 00 0*4 N Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project, Manager
/oY
![Page 105: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/105.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 615513Sample ID : CHROMATEX WELL IB FBAnalysis Date: 4/22/88
Client: INTEXMatrix: WATERLab File: 615513V
GAS NO. COMPOUNDRESULTS(UG/L)
' *7 A R*7 1, / 4—0 ( — o — —74-83-9 —75-01-4--75-00-3--75-09-2 —75-35-4—75-34-3 —540-59-0-C *7 C C 'Jb f -bb-o--i n*7 net o•71 C £ Cf 1 -3D-0--
56-23-5—7S ?7-4 -•7Q O rj C( tJ-B f -0--10061-01-7O_ni _c__i a — u i D — —124-48-1-7Q_nO-S--I *y W U b/
71-43-2 —10061-02-75-25-2--127-18-4-79-34-5—108-88-3-108-90-7-100-41-4-
—— --Chlorome thane——— -Bromomethake__ —— Vinvl Chloride- — — Chloroethane— - — Methylene Chloride— ---1 r 1-Dichloroethene- — --1 r 1-Dichloroethane———— 1 , 2-Dichloroethene (total)-----Chloroform__ — _i , 2-Dichloroethane-----1 . 1 . 1-Trichloroethane—— --Carbon Tetrachloride__ —— Bromodichloromethane— ---1 f 2-Dichloropropane5 — --cis-1 , 3-Dichloropropene- — --Trichloroethene- — --Dibromochlorome thane- ——— 1 . 1 . 2-Trichloroethane___ — Benzene6----trans-l r 3-Dichloropropene--- --Bromof orm--— -Tetrachloroethene-----1 ,1.2. 2-Tetrachloroethane-----Toluene- — --Chlorobenzene——— -Ethylbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 010 U10 U10 U5 05 U5 05 U5 __. U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 _.U5 U
-----------------+—---% RECOVERY
9888100
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ- Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
RR I 00 I 05Signature
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
to?
![Page 106: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/106.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 618742Sample ID : QICAnalysis Date: 5/11/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: 01CVR
CAS NO. COMPOUND COMMEflRESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3--540-59-0-67-66-3--107-06-2-71-55-6-56-23-5--75-27-4--78-87-5--10061-01-79-01-6--124-48-1-79-00-5--71-43-2--10061-02-75-25-2—127-18-4-79-34-5--108-88-3-108-90-7-100-41-4-
--- — -Chloromethane 10 U— _ — -Bromome thane————— Vinvl Chloride---- — Chloroethane--- — -Methylene Chloride--- — -1 , 1-Dichloroethene ._ _ _ _ _ _ ! T i-Dichloroethane .— ----1 , 2-Dichloroet.hene (total)— ----Chloroform— - —— 1 , 2-Dichloroethane--- — - I r ^ t 1-Trichloroethane— ----Carbon Tetrachloride--- — -Bromodichloromethane— - — -l f 2-Dichloropropane-5- —— cis-1 T 3-Dlchloropropene— -- — Trichloroethene------Dibromochlororaethane.__ —— ! r i t 2-Trichloroethane-_____Benzene
_6----t,rans-l t 3-Dichloropropene----- -Bromo form. — — -Tetrachloroethene- ———— i t 1 r 2,2-Tetrachloroethane------Toluene— — --Chlorobenzene.__ — -Rthyl benzene
_ _ — — _ — — — -,— _ — ___ ___.___-4
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 t 2-Dichloroe thaneDS-TolueneBromo flurobenzene
10 D10 _ 010 05 U5 U5 U5 05 U5 05 U5 U _5 05 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY8810099
COMMENT0= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
Signature
f l R I O O I O S Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
tOL
![Page 107: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/107.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 618743FBSample ID : W1CFBAnalysis Date: 5/03/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: 1CFB
GAS NO. COMPOUND COMMERESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3--74-83-9--75-01-4--75-00-3--75-09-2--75-35-4--75-34-3--540-59-0-67-66-3 —107-06-2-71-55-6—56-23-5 —75-27-4 —78-87-5 —10061-01-79-01-6--124-48-1-79-00-5 —71-43-2 —10061-02-75-25-2--127-18-4-79-34-5 —108-88-3-108-90-7-100-41-4-
--- — Chlornmethane--- — Bromomethane———— Vinvl Chloride- — --Chloi-oef.hane— — -Methvlene Chloride_____! f 1-Dichloroethene-----1 r 1-Diehloroethane ,_____! r 2-Dichloroethene ( total )___ — Chloroform_____! f 2-Diehloroethane————— 1 r 1 , 1-Trichloroethane-----Carbon Tetrachloride— —— Bromodichlorome thane-----1 . 2-Dichloropropane5 — --cis-1 r 3-Dichloropropene_____Tri chloroethene-----Dibromochloromethane-----1 . 1 r 2-Trichloroethane-----Benzene6- —— trans-1 r 3-Dichlorooropene— ---Broroof orra-- —— Tetrachloroethene— —— 1 . 1 r 2 T 2-Tetrachloroethane___ — Toluene-- — -Chlorobenzene__ — -Ethvlbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 , 2-DichloroethaneDS-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 U10 U10 U10 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY9594111
COMMENT0= Not DetectedJ- Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
R R I O O I 0 7Signature
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 108: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/108.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 617355Sample ID : Well *2Analysis Date: 5/03/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: 617355V
CAS NO. COMPOUNDRESOLTS(UG/L)
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-10061-0275-25-2-127-18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
____ — Chloromethane 10 0_ _ _ _ _ -Bromome thane————— Vinvl Chloride--- —— Chloroe thane---- — Methylene Chloride______! t l-Diehloroethene_ — _ — i r 1-Dichloroethane------1 , 2-Dichloroethene ( total )______Chloroform______! ? 2-Dichloroethane---- — 1 , 1 t 1-Trichloroethane______Carbon Tetrachloride--- — -Bromodichlorome thane------1 t 2-Dichloropropane-5----cis-l t3-Dichloropropfine______Trichloroethene------Dibromochlorome thane— __ — i ti r2-Trichloroethane------Benzene-fi----trans-l , 3-Diehl oropropene------Bromoforra__ —— -Tetrachloroethene—————— 1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane-- —— -Toluene______Chlorobenzene^_____Ethylhenzene-V ——— -.——— ______———___ ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— . ——— ——— ______——— _________ ———
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneDS-TolueneBromoflurobenzene
10 D10 H10 05 U5 Q5 U5 U5 U5 U6305 05 U5 05 U6005 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY9685103
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
f l R I O O I U SSignature
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 109: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/109.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID :Sample ID :Analysis Date:
GAS NO.
617355FBWell*2 FB5/05/88
COMPOUND
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: W2FB
COMMERESOLTS(UG/L)
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-CO 1 O CDo-23-5-75-27 478-87-5-10061-01
124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-10061-02"7 C 1C Oi 5-<25-2-1 O7 1 Q A\£. I 1(5-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
------Chloromethane_ _ _ _ - -Bromome thane— —— -Vinyl Chloride_-____Chloroethan»______Me-thylene Chloride_ _ _ _ — i r 1-Dichloroethene------1 . 1-Dichloroethane_ _ _ _ _ _ ! _ 2-Dichloroethene ( total.)------Chloroform______! f 2-Dichloroethane—— — _1 f i f i-Trichloroethane------Carbon Tetrachloride— ----Bromodichloromethane_ _ _ _ _ _ ! m 2-Dichloropropane-5- — -cis-1 r 3-Dichloropronene------Trichloroethene------Dibromochloromethane------1 . 1 . 2-Trichloroethane-_____Ben2ene_6----trans-l r 3-Dichloropropene- - - - - -Bromof orm_____~Tetrachloroethene— ____! p i f 2 , 2-Tetrachloroethane--- — -Toluene------Chlorobenzene- — ---Ethvl benzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 , 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 U10 U10 U10 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U5 0965 nu5 nw5 U5 U255 U*J U
5 U5 . U5 U5 n•-J \J
i s5 U5 U5 nU5 U
% RECOVERY9692
110
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJr Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
Signature
RR 1 00 i OS Name/Titl< Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 110: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/110.jpg)
m juQC inc
1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID :Sample ID :Analysis Date:
CAS NO.
617354Well *35/03/88
Client:Matrix:Lab File:
IntexWater617354V
COMPOUND COMME1RESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-10061-0275-25-2-127-18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
-- — — Chloromethane 10 U_ — — -Rromo me thane—— _ — Vinyl Chloride-- — --Chloroe thane------Methylene Chloride------\ t 1-Diehloroethene__~___1 t i-Dichloroethane_ — ___i f 2-Dichloroethene (total )------Chloroform__-.__-! r 2-Dichloroethane-- — --1 T 1 T 1-Trichloroethane------Carbon Tetrachloride_ — — -Bromodichloromethane__ — __i ,2-Dichloropropane-5- — -cis-1 r 3-Dichloropropene_ — ---Trichloroethene------Dibromoehlorornethane------1 t 1 r 2-Trichloroethane___ — -Benzene_6- — -trans-1 , 3-Dichloropropene_ _ _ _ — Bromoform— ----Tetrachloroethene—— —— 1 , 1 T 2 r 2-Tetrachloroethane-- —— -Toluene— ----Chlorobenzene---- — Ethyl henzene
jSURROGATE RECOVERY DATA
D4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 U10 U10 U5 U5 G5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY90105101
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJr Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB- Compound in Blank
Signature
f l R I Q O Nape/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Managerno
![Page 111: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/111.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 * (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 617354FBSample ID : Well*3 FBAnalysis Date: 5/05/88
Client: _ IntexMatrix: " WaterLab File: W3FB
CAS NO. COMPOUND COMMERESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-^-1 t O 1 \J*J A on f\74-83-9-75-01-4-
7s nq y75-3*i-4-* w ^* w 1
75-34-3-
C7 CC QO f -DO — O —
7 1-55—6-Sfi-?^-S-•Jv£f-J*J7S-P7-4-1 W *- I 1
78-87-5-10061-017Q_m -fi-1 J U J . O
124-48-1
71 A^ 9
10061-0275-25-2-
--- —— Chloromethane- - - - — Broroome thane————— Vinvl Chloride------Chloroe thane---- — Methvlene Chloride------1 . 1-Dichloroethene-- — — 1 . 1-Dichloroethane- — — -1 .2-Dichloroethene ( total )- ———— Chloroform-- — --1 . 2-Dichloroethane— -- — l.l . 1-Tri chloroe thane . ..- —— --Carbon Tetrachlorlde-- — --Bromodichloromethane ,---- — 1 . 2-Dichloropropane,-5-- — cis-1 P 3-Dichloropropene-- —— -Triehloroethene------Dibromochloromethane__ —— -1 .1 .2-Trichloroethane .,
T3
-6----trans-l . 3-Dichloropropene_ _ _ _ _ _ Bromoform
127-18-4 ————— Tetrachloroethene79-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
---- — 1 r 1 , 2 P 2-Tetrachloroe thane------Toluene— - —— Chlorobenzene--- — -Ethylbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 U10 U10 U10 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U .5 U5 U5 U5 05 U
% RECOVERY99102103
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ — __ _ __ _ ______.*.•___-_ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — _ _ 4-
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
Signature
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Managerin
![Page 112: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/112.jpg)
QC tnc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 617356Sample ID : Well #4Analysis Date: 5/03/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaferLab File: 617356V
GAS NO. COMPOUNDRESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-10061-0275-25-2-127-18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
___ —— Chloromethane 10 0— ----Bromome thane————— Vinvl Chloride------Chloroethane__ — --Methylene Chloride— ____! f l-Dichloroethene— __ — i i i-Dichloroethane— ——— 1,2-Dichloroethene (total)______Chloroform--- — -1 , 2-Dichloroe thane—— — -1 , 1 , 1-Trichloroethane— - — -Carbon Tetrachloride— ----Bromodiehloromethane— — --1 f 2-Dichloropropane_5____ ci s_l t 3-Dichloropropene— ----Trichloroethene— — --Dibromoehloromethane— — __1 r i r 2-Trichloroe-thane— ----Benzene-fi----trans-l f 3-Dichloropropene_ _ _ _ _ _ Br omo f o rra------Tetrachloroethene——— __1 f 1 , 2 , 2-Tetrachloroethane— ----Toluene— ----Chlorobenzene— ----E-fchvlbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 010 U10 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 05 05 U5 U5 U5 D5 D5 U5 - U5 U5 _05 05 U5 U5 U5 05 _ 05 U
% RECOVERY8498101
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
Signature
| 00 I 12 Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 113: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/113.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
•'#
Lab ID : 617356FBSample ID : Well#4 FBAnalysis Date: 5/05/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: W4FB
GAS NO. COMPOUND COMMERESULTS(UG/L)
T <l Q *7 O74-87-3 —74-83-9--75-Q1-4--•7 K fifl O/ o-uu— o--/ D — UI7 £,
75-34-3 —540-59-0-C*7 KG *3 _b i -DO J— -107-06-2-•7 1 K. C 42* l-oo— o--
75-27-4--TO O f C.f O-O I — D — —10061-01-7Q fll C _
124-48-1-i& brf < A <—- ,b
79-00-5--71-43-2—10061-02-75-25-2--127-18-4-79-34-5--108-88-3-108-90-7-100-41-4-
— ---Chlorome thane-----Bromome thane_ _ _ _ _ Vinyl Chloride- - - - -Chloroethane-----Methylene Chloride-----1 . 1-Dichloroethene-----1 r 1-Dichloroethane-- — -1 r 2-Dichloroethene f total )____ -Chloroform__ — _1 r 2-Dichloroethane-----1 . 1 r 1-Trichloroethane-----Carbon Tetrachlorida-----Bromodichlorome thane-----1 . 2-Dichloropropane5----cis-l , 3-Dichloropropene-----Trichloroethene-----Dibromochloromethane-- — -1 . 1.2-Trichloroe thane_____Benzene6----trans-l r 3-Dichloropropene-----Bromofarm-----Tetrachloroethene-----1 . 1 r 2 . 2-Tetrachloroethane-----Toluene-----Chlorobenzene_____Ethvlbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 r 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 U10 U10 U10 U5 U5 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY102100102
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ- Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
Signature
R R l O O ! 1 3 Narae/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 114: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/114.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 617357Sample ID : Well 1*5Analysis Date: 5/03/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: 617357V
GAS NO. COMPOUNDRESULTS(UG/L)
*> t O1 O74-87-3--- — -
75-01-4 —————
75-09-2 —————75-35-4 —————75-34-3 —————540-59-0 ————67-66-3 —————107-06-2 ————71-55-6 —————56-23-5 —————75-27-4 —————78-87-5 —————10061-01-5 ——79-01-6 —————124-48-1 ————79-00-5 —————71-43-2 —————10061-02-6 ——75-25-2 —————127-18-4 ————79-34-5 —————108-88-3 ————108-90-7 ————100-41-4 ————
-Chlorome thane-Bromomethane-Vinvl Chloride-Chloroethane-Methylene Chloride-1 f 1-Dichloroethene-1 . 1-Dichloroethane-1 r 2-Dichloroethene (total )-Chloroform-1 r 2-Dichloroethane-1 r 1 r 1-Trichloroethane-Carbon Tetrachloride-Bromodichlorome thane-1 . 2-Dichloropropane-cis-1 t 3-Dichloropropene-Trichloroethene-Dibromochlorome thane-1 t 1 , 2-Trichloroe thane-Benzene-trana-1 , 3-Dichloropropene-Bromoform-Tetrachloroethene-1 r 1 r 2 r 2-Tetrachloroethane-Toluene- Chl orobenzene-Ethvlbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 .2-DichloroethaneDS-TolueneBromoflurohenzene
10 U10 D10 U10 U5 D5 U5 U5 05 Q5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 05 U5 U_5 U.5 U5 U5 U5 U5 _U_5 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY8695106
COMMENT0= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
Signature
Name/Title
A R I O OHoward WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
//y
![Page 115: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/115.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX'514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
X, <
Lab ID :Sample ID :Analysis Date:
GAS NO.
617357FBWell#5 FB5/05/88
COMPOUND
Client; IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: W5FB
COMMERESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-
- — ---Chloromftthane 10 U- — - - - Bromome thane————— Vinyl Chloride-- — --Chl or oe thane- — ---Methylene Chloride- — ---1 f 1-Dichloroethene------1 r 1-Dichloroe thane————— 1 ,2-Dichloroethene (total)-- — --Chloroform------1 . 2-Dichloroethane------1 f 1 T 1-Trichloroethane______Carbon Tetrachloride------Bromodiehlorome thane ,— ----1 t 2-Dichloropropane .-5----cis-l r 3-Dichloropropene------Trichloroethene------Dibromochloromethane—— _ — 1 r i r2-Trichloroethane_ _ _ _ _ -Benzene
1 0061-02-6-- — trans-1 . S-Dichloroorooene75-25-2-127-18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
---- --Bromof orm- — - — Tetrachloroethene-. — — 1 T 1 r 2 , 2-Tetrachloroethane— — --Toluene______Chlorobenzene-- — — Ethyl benzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 U10 U10 U5 D5 05 05 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY100102
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
R R I O O I 1 5 Signature
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 116: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/116.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID :Sample' ID ':Analysis Date:
GAS NO.
617358Well »10A5/04/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: 617358V
COMPOUND COMMEbRESOLTS(UG/L)
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-10061-0275-25-2-127-18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
- — ---Chlorome thane— ----Bromome thane————— Vinvl Chloride------ Chl oroe thane-- — --Methylene Chloride------1 r 1-Dichloroethene-- — --1 - 1-Dichloroe thane-- —— -1 , 2-Dichloroethene (total )------Chloroform------1 r 2-Dichloroethane------1 P 1 r 1-Trichloroethane-- — --Carbon Tetrachloride------Bromodiehloromethane— ----1 . 2-Dichloropropane-5----cia-l r 3-Dichloropropene------Trichloroethene------Dihromochloromethane_ _ _ _ _ _ ! r i r 2-Trichloroethane------Benzene-6 — --trans-1 . 3-Dichloropropene- - - - - -Bromof orm------Tetrachloroethene------1 ,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane-- — --Toluene------Chlorobenzene- — ---Ethylbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 .2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
! 10 U10 U10 U10 U5 U3621ISO5 U5 023005.85 U5 U5 U99005 U5 - U5 U5 a5 U5 . U5 D5 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY9581105
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
Signature
ARI 00 ! 16 Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 117: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/117.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • {215} 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID :Sample ID :Analysis Date:
CAS NO.
617358FBWellSlOAFB5/05/88
COMFODND
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: W10AFB
COMMERESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3--74-83-9--75-01-4--75-00-3--75-09-2--75-35-4--75-34-3--G.A(] *;Q_n_<j t \j *j & \je*7 c cz — _D ( DO — O- —
107-06-2-n c c o-55-6-^56-23-5--75-27-4--78-87-5—10061-01-79-01-6 —124-48-1-79-00-5--71-43-2--10061-02-•7 E O C O7o-2o-£--127-18-4-7 Q _ T A _ IN _ _I y 3 *i J
108-88-3-108-90-7-100-41-4-
*-----------
— ---Chloromethane 10 U-----Bromome thane———— Vinvl Chloride-----Chloroe thane-----Methvlene Chloride— ---1 t 1-Dichloroethene-----1 . 1-Dichloroethane-----1 . 2-Dichloroethene f total )-----Chloroform ,_,_,. ..-----1 , 2-Diehloroe-thane———— 1 . 1 r 1-Trichloroethane-----Carbon Tetrachloride-----Bromodichloromethane-----1 r 2-Diehloropropane5----cis-l . 3-Dichloroprocene-----Triehloroethene-----Dibromochloromethane-----1 . 1 . 2-Trichloroethane-----Benzene6----trans-l . 3-Dichloropropene-----Bromoform
-----1 .1,2. 2-Tetrachloroethane-----Toluene- — --Chlorobenzene-----Ethylbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 r 2-DichloroethaneDS-TolueneBroroof lurobenzene
10 U10 U10 U5 U5 U5 U5 U685 U5 U5 U
105 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 CJ
% RECOVERY102104100
COMMENTCJ- Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB- Compound in Blank
A R I O O ! 1 7
Signature
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 118: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/118.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 * SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
* %*/TJt _.* -V
Lab ID :Sample ID :Analysis Date:
GAS NO.
615509CHROMATEX4/22/88
WELL 10BClient: INTEXMatrix: WATERLab File: 615509V
COMPOUNDPESULTS(UG/L)
1 — --------74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-10061-0275-25-2-197 18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
- --------
------Hhlorome thane- - - - - -Bromome thane————— Vinvl Chloride------Chloroethane------Methvlene Chloride___*__1 r l-Dichloroethene___-__} t i-Dichloroethane------I ,2-Dichloroethene (total)------Chloroform^_-___l T 2-Dichloroethane——— ---1 , 1 , 1-Trichloroethane-.__-__Carbon Tetrachloride------Bromodichloromethane------1 . 2-Dichloropropane-5----cis-l .3-Dichloropropene------Trichloroethene-------Dibromochlorome thane------1 . 1 r 2-Trichloroethane------Benzene-6----trans-l . 3-Dichloropropene_ _ _ _ _ -Bromof orm______Tetrachloroethftne———— — 1 f 1 , 2 t2-Tetrachloroethane—— ---Toluene___ — -Chlorobenzene—— ---Etnylbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 010 010 U10 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 .05 U5 _ . _ U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 . __U5 U5 U5 05 U5 _.U5 05 U
— — -, — — — -^ — -. — — -» 4-
% RECOVERY9110198
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
Signature
A R I O O i 1 8 Narae/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 119: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/119.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 615510Sample ID : CHROMATEX WELL 10B FBAnalysis. Date: 4/22/88
Client: INTEXMatrix: WATERLab File: 615510V
CAS NO. COMPOUNDRESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3-7 A fl *3 Q
75-01-4-75-00-3-7S-09-2I \J w £7 £•
75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-2nc. c c-oo-b-C f* ** *} C56-23-5-7S-27-41 \J L- 1 1
78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-4Q-179-00-5-71-43-2-10061-0275-25-2-127-18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
------Chloromethane ! 10 II------Bromomethane— _ — -Vinvl Chloride ,_,____Chloroethane------Methylene Chloride— ____! 1-Dichloroethene------1 r 1-Dichloroethane------1 . 2-Dichloroethene ("total )_ _ _ _ _ -Chloroform------1 r 2-Dichloroethane ,------1 r 1 , 1-Triehloroethane------Carbon Tetrachloride------Bromodichloromethane______! r 2-Dichloropropane-5----cis-l r 3-Dichloropropene------Trichloroethene------Dibromochlorome thane------1 . 1 . 2-Trichloroethane------Benzene_6-___trans-l . 3-Dichloropropene-- ----Bromof orm------Tetrachloroethene— ----1 r 1 P2 ,2-Tetrachloroethane--- — -Toluene------Chlorobenzene____-_E-thvlbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 .2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 U10 010 U5 D5 05 D5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 D5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — _ _ _ _ _ + - _ _ _% RECOVERY
89105 _99
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ- Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB- Compound in Blank
R R I Q O ! 1 9
Signature
Name/Title Howard Whale/GC/MS Project Manager
C
![Page 120: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/120.jpg)
IW 17
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON, PA 18966-0514 * (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID :Sample ID :Analysis Date:
GAS MO.
61874410C *5/11/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: 10CVR
COMPOUND COMME1RESULTS(UG/L)
T-— -——--——
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-10061-0275-25-2-127-18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
--- —— Chlorome thane. — ---Bromome thane— ——— Vinyl Chloride— ----Chloroethane------Methylene Chloride- — ---1 T 1-Dichloroethene___ — _i r l-Dichloroethane_ — ---1 , 2-Dichloroe-thene (total )------Chloroform- —— --1 t 2-Dichloroethane------1 , 1 , 1-Trichloroethane- — ---Carbon Tetrachloride____ — Bromodichlorome thane__ — -_i r 2-Dichloropropane_5-___cia-l .3-Dichloropropene____,_Trichloroethene-------Dibromochlororoe thane—— — _1 f i ? 2~Trichloroethane______Benzene
_6----trans-l T 3-Dichloropropene------Bromoform-- —— --Tetrachloroethene————— 1 ,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane- — ---Toluene______Chlorobenzene_ _ _ _ . - E thy 1 "ben zene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 . 2-Dichloroe thaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 010 U10 D10 U5 U5 U5 U5 _ U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U.5 U5 U5 U5 ... U5 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY929999
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
A R 1 0 0 1 2 0 ,Signature
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
/ ciO
![Page 121: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/121.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID :Sample ID :Analysis Date:
GAS NO.
618744Field Blank5/11/88
COMPOUND
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: 10CFBVR
RESOLTS(OG/L)
""T A Q *7 O74-87-3-7 A ft Q Q/ 4 o j-y —7S-01 4-1 %J U A ^t
7*\ nn *H-I ij U U *J
75-09-2-1 w* \J J £•
7*S-^S~4-J 4J *J feS ^
7^-^4-T-i «j <j i «jSUO-^q O<J *± U iJ «? U(57 CC QD / — OO-O —In 7 r\c oU / -Uo-^;71 C C fc!l-oo-o-c.c_o(a_«i_7S ?7 4-' tJ £• I T70 O*7 C/ o-B r -o-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-i *j w W iJ71 j *"i •"»1-43-2-10061-027el-PS-P1 tj £i%s £.
127-18-4T ^ O A C79-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
___ — _-__
--- — -Chlorome thane------ Bromorae thane— ——— Vinyl Chloride---- — Chloroe thane------Methylene Chloride_____-l , l-Dichloroethene— — __1 1-Dichloroethane------1 . 2-Dichloroethene ( total )— ----Chloroform— — --1 f 2-Dichloroethane—— ---1 t 1 r 1-Trichloroethane- — ---Carbon Tetrachloride .— ----Bromodichlorome thane------1 . 2-Dichloropropane-5----cis-l ,3-Dichloropropene------Trichloroethene------Dibroraochloromethane------1 . 1 . 2-Trichloroethane------Benzene-6----trans-l r 3-Dichloropropene— ----Bromoforra
i t= Lii eac-iii cj j/oe i*rieiie__ii _ ._------1 r 1 r2 r2-Tetrachloroethane------Toluene------Chlorobenzene------ Ethvl benzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 .2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromoflurobenzene
10 U10 n10 n10 U5 05 - a5 U5 : U5 a5 U5 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY88 _104102
COMMENTU- Not DetectedJ- Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
A R I O O I 2 ISignature
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 122: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/122.jpg)
QC inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 - (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 618744Sample ID : Field BlankAnalysis Date: 5/11/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: 10CFBVR
GAS NO. COMPOUNDRESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3—74-83-9—75-01-4—75-00-3 —75-09-2—75-35-4—75-34-3—540-59-0-67-66-3—107-06-2-71-55-6—56-23-5—75-27-4—78-87-5—10061-01-79-01-6 —124-48-1-79-00-5 —71-43-2 —
-----Chloromethane , 10 0- - - - -Bromome thane—— — Vinyl Chloride-----Chloroethane_ — --Methylene Chloride_ — __i f i-Dlchloroethene-----1 T 1-Di chloroethane——— -1 , 2-Dichloroethene (total)_- —— Chloroform-----1 , ?-Dichloroethane-----1 r 1 f 1-Trichloroethane_ — --Carbon Tetrachloride—— --Bromodichlorome thane_ _ _ _ _ ! r 2-Dichloropropane5 — -~cis-l , 3-Dichloropropene-----Trichloroethena__-__nibromochlororoethane———— 1 r 1 r 2-Trichloroethane-----Benzene
10061-02-6 — — -trans-1 . S-Dichloroorooene75-25-2 —127-18-4-79-34-5 —108-88-3-108-90-7-100-41-4-
-- — -Bromoform— — -Tetrachloroethene— ---1 , 1 , 2 , 2-Tetrachloroethane— — -Toluene-----Chlorobenzene_ _ _ _ _ E t h y l benzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 , 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBroraof lurobenzene
10 D10 0
._ 10 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U_5 . U_5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 ... U.5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 _ U
% RECOVERY88
104102
, + _ _COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB- Compound in Blank
ARSignature
00 1 22Narae/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Managei
![Page 123: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/123.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY * P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
«fc/ft
Lab ID : 617359Sample ID : Well »1:Analysis Date: 5/04/88
Client: Intextfatrix: WaterLab File: 617359V
CAS NO. COMPOUND COMMERESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-10061-0275-25-2-127-18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
------Chloromethane 10 U- —— --Bromome thane————— Vinvl Chloride------Chloroethane— ----Methylene Chloride______ ! m l-Dichloroethene--- — -1 . 1-Dichloroethane------1 r 2-Diehloroethene ( total )------Chloroform______! r 2-Dichloroe thane--- — -1 r 1 r 1-Trichloroethane__ — --Carbon Tetrachloride- - - - - -Bromodichlorome thane-_-___! .2-Dichloropropane .-5----eis-l . 3-Dichloropropene------Trichloroethene------Dibromochlorome thane- — —— 1 , 1 , 2-Trichloroethane------Benzene-6----trans-l r 3-Dichloropropene------Bromoform______Tetrachloroethene————— 1 r 1 r 2 r 2-Tetrachloroethane_ —— — Toluene__ — --Chlorobenzene______Ethylbenzene___«. _ _ _ _,__ _ _ _ _ _ — __ — — _^ — __•._ — _-tSURROGATE RECOVERY DATA
D4-1 . 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromoflurobenzene
10 010 U10 U.5 D28037010305 U5 U130005 U5 U5 05 U17000. 5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U355 U1405 U29
% RECOVERY998498
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJz Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
R R I Q O I 2 3Signature .
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
133
![Page 124: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/124.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18965-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID :Sample ID :Analysis Date:
GAS NO.
617359FBField Blank5/04/88
Client; IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: IntexFB
COMPOUNDRESULTS(UG/L)
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-
————— Chloromethane 10 ! 0--- — -Bromo me thane————— Vinvl Chloride------Chloroethane------Methylene Chloride__ — __i r i-Dichloroethene--- — -1 r 1-Dichloroethane___-__! t 2-Dichloroethene ( total )------Chloroform___ — _i r 2-Dichloroethane--- — -1 j 1 r 1-Trichloroethane------Carbon Tetrachloride__ —— -Bromodi chloromethane___ — _1 ( 2-Dichloropropane-5----cis-l , 3-Dichloropropene------Trichloroethene----- -Di broraoch lor ome thane- —— __1 r i . 2-Trichloroethane------Benzene
10061-02-6-- — trans-1 . S-Dichlorocrooene75-25-2-127-18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
------ -Bromo form-- —— -Tetrachloroethene———— -1 , 1 r2 ,2-Tetrachloroethane______Toiuene______Chloroben7,ene__ — --Ethvlbenzene
_ — — _ — _ — — _—— — — — _ _ _ _ -(SURROGATE RECOVERY DATA
D4-1 .2-DichloroethaneDa-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
10 U10 010 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U_5 U5 U ._5 U5 U5 . U5 . U.5 U
% RECOVERY919099
COMMENTOr Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
ARSignature
j 0 L Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 125: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/125.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 617359FBSample ID : Field BlankAnalysis Date: 5/04/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: IntexFB
CAS NO. COMPOUNDRESULTS(OG/L)
7A-fi7_'*_-/** o / o74 — fl'l—Q — —( H — OO 37*s_m 4__j »j u j. *t75-00-3—75-09-2--75-35-4--7S_Q4 •*_-1 J O^l 3<^40- SQ~n-«J *1 U *J 3 U
67-66-3—1 n7_nc_o_*7 1 C C Ofl -OD-D--PC_9^ *__3O £O O7^_P7_A-_rj t(*t*7 Q Q *7 CI O-O f -O--
10061-01-7 o_ni c124-48-1-79-00-5--71-43-2--10061-02-75-25-2--1 97-1 R- AA ^ / X O * i79_q4_S _In o o o oUo-Ho- J-108-90-7-100-41-4-
-- — -Chlorome thane— ---Bromomethane———— Vinvl Chloride— — -Chloroethane_____Methylene Chloride-----1 r 1-Dichloroethene-----1 . 1-Dichloroethane-- — -1 t 2-Dichloroethene (total )__ — -Chloroform-- — -1 r 2-Dichloroathane ._———— 1 r 1 r 1-Trichloroethant-----Carbon Tetrachloride nii m— — -Bromodichloromethane--- — 1 r 2-Dichloropropane5__ — cia-1 . 3-Dichloropropene , ,-----Trichloroethene- - - - -Di bromochlorome thane- — --1 r 1 . 2-Trichloroethane-----Benzene ,. ,6----trans-l .3-Dichloropropene-----Bromoform-----Tetrachloroethene-- — -1 r 1 t 2 r 2-Tetrachloroethane
— ioj.uene_ _ __ .,- — --Chlorobenzena-----Ethylbenzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 .2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromoflurobenzene
10 II10 H10 1110 U5 05 05 U5 U5 [J5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 05 D5 U5 U5 05 U5 U5 U5 U5 U
% RECOVERY919099
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ= Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
9S(_ J
Signature x
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manager
![Page 126: GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION STUDY REPORT · 2019-12-16 · levels of volatile organic chemicals in the soil gas on the Chromatex property suggest that the facility is a possible source](https://reader034.fdocuments.in/reader034/viewer/2022042409/5f25fdab4005557cdc779c32/html5/thumbnails/126.jpg)
QC Inc1205 INDUSTRIAL HIGHWAY • P.O. BOX 514 • SOUTHAMPTON. PA 18966-0514 • (215) 355-3900
VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETMethod 624
Lab ID : 618743Sample ID : 10DAnalysis Date: 5/11/88
Client: IntexMatrix: WaterLab File: 10DVR
GAS NO. COMPOUNDRESULTS(UG/L)
COMMI
74-87-3-74-83-9-75-01-4-75-00-3-75-09-2-75-35-4-75-34-3-540-59-067-66-3-107-06-271-55-6-56-23-5-75-27-4-78-87-5-10061-0179-01-6-124-48-179-00-5-71-43-2-
-- —— -Chloromethane 10 U- — —— Bromo methane————— Vinvl Chloride------Chloroe thane------Methylene Chloride- — ---1 , 1-Dichloroethene_ _ _ _ _ _ ! r l-Dichloroethane______! ( 2-Dichloroethene (total )--- —— Chloroform-- — — 1 , 2-Diehloroethane- — ---1 , 1 , 1-Trichloroethane---- — Carbon Tetrachlorid*_ —— --Bromodif7hloromethane------1 , 2-Dichloropropane-5- — -cia-1 , 3-Dichloropropene--- — -Trichloroethene------Dihromoehloromethane------ltlr 2-Trichloroethane-- — --Benzene
1 O061-02-6 —— -trans-1 . S-Dichloroorocene75-25-2-127-18-479-34-5-108-88-3108-90-7100-41-4
-- — - -Bromof orm------Tetrachloroethene_ —— __1 ,1,2, 2-Tetraohloroethane-_ — --Toluene---- — Chlorobenzene, —— --Ethyl benzene
SURROGATE RECOVERY DATAD4-1 t 2-DichloroethaneD8-TolueneBromof lurobenzene
101010559.884552055555705555555555
U__ 0U
__ U._ u_
__ U0
__ U.__ U__ U.
0.
U.
UUUU
__ 0.aUU
% RECOVERY82110105
COMMENTU= Not DetectedJ- Detected But Below Method Detection LimitB= Compound in Blank
A R I 0 0 1 2 6Signature ,
Name/Title Howard WhaleyGC/MS Project Manage
lie.