.••.-* JL

OSEsTQWNSHIP SITE

REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/

RTMENT OFRESOURCESNATURAL

*ECJORDANCXlEPA Region 5 Records Ctr.

231400

WORK PLAN

REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITE

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

DEPARTMENT PURCHASE ORDER

CONTRACT NUMBER 1525

E.G. JORDAN PROJECT NUMBER 4465-20

APRIL 1984

E.G. JORDAN CO.

2.84.1110001.0.0

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION TITLE PAGE NO.

1.0 WORK PLAN SUMMARY 1

1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT 11.2 OBJECTIVES 11.3 SCOPE OF WORK 31.4 BUDGET 51.5 SCHEDULE 5

2.0 PLAN SCOPE OF WORK 6

2.1 INTITAL ACTIVITIES (PHASE I) 6Task 1: Prepare Work Plan 6Task 2: Describe Current Situation 7Task 3: Prepare Safety Plan 9Task 4: Define Boundary Conditions 9Task 5: Preinvestigative Evaluation 11Task 6: Site Office 11Task 7: Community Relations 11

2.2 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (PHASE II) 12Task 8: Site Inventory 12Task 9: Air Investigation 13Task 10: Domestic Well and Existing Monitoring

Well Sampling 15Task 11: Surface Water/Sediment Sampling. . . 16Task 12: Geophysics 18Task 13: Pollutant Characterization 23Task 14: Monitoring Well Installation . . . . 24Task 15: Surface Soils 32Task 16: New Monitoring Well Sampling . . . . 39Task 17: Aquifer Testing 41Task 18: Analytical Program 43Task 19: Data Interpretation/Contamination

Assessment 45Task 20: RI Report 49

2.3 FEASIBILITY STUDY (PHASE III) 49Task 21: Description of Current Situation

and Scoping Update " . . . 50Task 22: Development of Alternatives 50Task 23: Initial Screening of Alternative . . 55Task 24: Laboratory Studies (Optional). ... 57Task 25: Detailed Evaluation 57Task 26: Evaluation and Recommendation of

Most Cost-Effective Alternative. . . 63Task 27: Interim Report 67Task 28: Conceptual Design 67Task 29: Final Report 71

2.84.1110002.0.0

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)

SECTION TITLE PAGE NO.

3.0

4.0

FIGURE NO.

MANAGEMENT PLAN 72

3.1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 723.2 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 75

COST AND SCHEDULE 78

4.1 PROJECT SCHEDULE 784.2 BUDGET 80

LIST OF FIGURES

TITLE PAGE NO.

EXISTING MONITOR WELLS 10

SURFACE WATER/SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS 17

GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY PLAN 21

PROPOSED MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS 25

SURFACE SOILS SAMPLING PLAN 34

EXAMPLE OF MATRIX EVALUATION CHART 65

PROJECT ORGANIZATION CHART 73

PROJECT SCHEDULE " 79

LIST OF TABLES

TITLE PAGE NO.

ANALYTICAL PROGRAM 44

MANHOUR BUDGET - INITIAL ACTIVITIES 81

MANHOUR BUDGET - REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION 82

MANHOUR BUDGET - FEASIBILITY STUDY 83

MANHOUR BUDGET SUMMARY 84

PROJECT COST SUMMARY 85

2-1

2-2

2-3

2-4

2-5

2-6

3-1

4-1

TABLE NO.

2-1

4-1

4-2

4-3

4-4

4-5"

2.84.1110004.0.0

"**•*' 1.0 WORK PLAN SUMMARY

1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT

The Rose Township Site is located in Oakland County, Michigan in a 12-acre open

field off the Demode Road. This site is believed to have been used for the

dumping of industrial waste between 1966 and 1968. During that period an

unknown number of tank trucks of liquid wastes were emptied at the site and

approximately 5,000 barrels which were deposited at the site. Following

initial legal action in 1968, the dumping at the site was discontinued but

cleanup was not initiated at that time. Personnel from the Michigan Department

of Natural Resources inspected the site in June 1979 and found many badly

rusted and leaking drums. Sampling of the drum showed that they contained a

variety of chemical waste products, including paint sludges, solvents, PCBs,

oils and greases. Results of analysis of nearby domestic wells indicated

elevated levels of lead, trichloroethylene (TCE), perchloroethylene (PCE), and

diethylhexylphthalate (DEHP). A detailed description of the site and the

levels and extent of chemical contamination that have been found at the site

are presented in the RAMP for the site which was prepared for the U.S. Environ-

mental Protection Agency (USEPA) by the firm of CH2M Hill.

1.2 OBJECTIVES

The objective of the remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) at the

2.84.1110005.0.0

Rose Township Site is to undertake studies which will determine the nature and

extent of the environmental contamination at the site, the public health and

environmental hazard posed by the site and to identify a cost-effective,

environmentally sound and socially acceptable remedial program for the site.

Following is a summary of several of the specific objectives which will be

addressed by the RI/FS.

1. Determination of the nature and extent of contamination on the project

site.

2. Definition of pathways of contaminant migration from the site as well as

the impact of contaminants on potential receptors.

j3. Determination of onsite features which could affect contaminant migration,

:• containment, or cleanup.

4. Assessment of the potential of possible direct contact with contaminated

soil by the public.

5. Determination if the site poses a public health hazard or environmental

problem.

6. Identification of viable remedial action alternatives.

7. Evaluation of remedial action alternatives.

2.84.1110006.0.0

8. Recommendation of an appropriate remedial program for the site.

9. Preparation of a conceptual design for the selected alternative.

10. Assisting the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) with its

community relations efforts for the site.

1.3 SCOPE OF WORK

The Work Plan for the Rose Township Site has been developed based on informa-

tion included in the Remedial Action Master Plan (RAMP) for the site and other

reports and information provided by DNR. The RI/FS for the site has been

divided into three general phases and twenty-nine detailed tasks which are

presented and discussed in Section 2.0.

Several assumptions have been made in preparing this work plan. They are:

o all drums previously stored on the surface of the site have been removed

as part of the cleanup action initiated by the DNR;

o DNR will provide a topographic survey of the Rose Township site;

o DNR will provide rights of entry and access to the site for purposes of

conducting the RI/FS.

2.84.1110007.0.0

o on the basis of a preliminary evaluation of available data, Level D

protection will be used for on-site work. The possible exception to the

use of Level D protection involves direct soil sampling in areas believed

to be contaminated by earlier waste disposal activities. The level of

protection is subject to modification on the basis of air monitoring

conducted during the initial phases of on-site work. If air monitoring

results indicate that a potential respiratory hazard exists or wastes are

encountered which pose dermal contact hazards, additional protection may

be required over and above that afforded by Level D protective equipment.

Higher levels of protection which may be required would result in adjust-

ments to cost and schedules;

o the area of investigation will be limited to the immediate vicinity of the

site, the current and former access roads leading to the site and the

swamplands around the site. The residential well survey which will

involve the collection of water samples from wells within approximately

3/4-mile of the site;

o the RI/FS will evaluate and use available data obtained during previous

investigations on-site; and

o the cost of analytical services are not included in the total cost for the

RI/FS. It is assumed that the analysis of environmental samples gathered

in the remedial investigation will be performed through the USEPA Contract:

Laboratory Program (CLP) and/or by the Michigan Department of Public

Health (MDPH).

2.84.1110008.0.0

1.4 BUDGET

The level of effort (manhours) required for each of the three phases of the

Rose Township RI/FS is as follows:

Phase 1 - Initial Activities 1082 Manhours

Phase 2 - Remedial Investigation 3230 Manhours

Phase 3 - Feasibility Study 1770 Manhours

A total of 6082 manhours will be required for the RI/FS. The total for Phase

III, Feasibility Study, does not include manhours needed to perform any labora-

tory or field studies which may be required (Optional Task 24). The manpower

estimates for these studies will be determined during the preparation of the

laboratory study work plan, if one is required. The manhour and cost estimates

for the RI/FS are presented in Section 4.0.

1.5 SCHEDULE

It is estimated that the RI/FS for the Rose Township Site will take 15 months

to complete following approval of the work plan and authorization to begin

work. Due to the availability of existing data and the relatively short period

of performance, individual tasks in the RI/FS will be integrated and overlapped

to allow efficient completion of the project. The RI/FS schedule has been

developed assuming a 60 day turnaround for analytical results from the USEPA

Contract Laboratory Program. In addition, the USEPA and DNR review time for

draft and final reports is estimated at one to three weeks as specified in the

schedule. The detailed schedule is presented in Section 4.0.

5

2.84.1110009.0.0

2.0 PLAN OF WORK

2.1 INTITAL ACTIVITIES (PHASE I)

A total of seven tasks have been identified for Phase I, Initial Activities.

Task 1: Prepare Work Plan

A Work Plan and a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) will be prepared for

the Rose Township Site Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS). The

work plan will describe:

o the initial activities to be undertaken prior to the RI/FS;

o the tasks to be completed during the RI to establish the nature and extent

of .contamination; and

o the tasks to be completed during the FS which will lead to the selection

of a cost-effective remedial alternative for the site.

The QAPP will describe the procedures to be used in the collection of samples,

generation of data and assessment of data during the RI/FS to assure that

valid, appropriate methods are consistently applied toward achieving project

2.84.1110010.0.0

objectives. The QAPP will acknowledge that the laboratory analyses will not; be

performed by Jordan. Laboratory QA/QC will be the responsibility of the EPA

CLP Laboratory and the Michigan Department of Public Health Laboratory.

Task 2: Describe Current Situation

The objective of Task 2 is to prepare an up-to-date description of the condi-

tions currently existing at the site. This description will be accomplished

through a detailed site reconnaissance by key members of the project team and a

thorough review and compilation of available site data. During the site

reconnaissance, air quality measurements and other observations will be made

for the purpose of establishing the appropriate level of safety for the site.

During the initial site reconnaissance, the provisions of Jordan's Corporate

Health and Safety Plan will be in effect for Jordan team members.

Although much of the available information on the site is included in the RAMP,

additional data has been developed since the RAMP was completed. We have found

that it is valuable to compile all available site data, including the input

from our site reconnaissance in single source.

In addition to the compilation of site data, this Task will include the final

selection of many sampling locations.

The description of the current situation will be presented in a brief report

which will compile site data in a single source. It is not the intent of this

report to reiterate data presented in the RAMP and other reports. This report

2.84.1110011.0.0

will compare recently gathered data with earlier data to determine if any of

the earlier conclusions on the site require modification. The report will

address the following areas.

a. Site Background. Site background has been summarized in the RAMP. If any

new information is uncovered during Jordan's site reconnaissance or data

review, it will be included in the Task 2 report and its effect on the under-

standing of the site conditions will be reviewed.

b. Nature and Extent of Problem. The nature and extent of the materials

deposited on the site has been reviewed in the RAMP. Data developed during

Jordan's site reconnaissance and the results of the recent analyses of domestic

well samples by the MDPH will be reviewed to determine if it is consistent with

the data presented 'in the RAMP. The new data and an updated description of the

nature and extent of the problem will be included in the Task 2 report.

The output of Task 2 will be a summary report describing the existing

conditions at the site. The report will include the use of graphics so as to

present a clear, concise description that is understandable to lay people as

well as professionals. This report will include data included in the RAMP, as

well as recently developed information. This compilation of site data will

form the basis for finalizing the site investigations to be undertaken during

the RI.

2.84.1110012.0.0

Task 3: Prepare Safety Plan

The E.G. Jordan Co. will make out initial assessment of the potential hazards

associated with the Rose Township site from information currently available on

the contamination of soils, groundwater and surface impoundments. In reviewing

this information, Jordan will determine whether contact with these materials

will present potentially hazardous exposure levels for on-site personnel. A

preliminary site safety plan will be prepared. During the initial site visit

and ongoing site work, monitoring equipment will be used to determine whether

levels of organic vapors are present at potentially hazardous exposure levels.

The on-going generation of data will be evaluated and the safety plan updated

as required. The basis for hazard level determination, personnel protective

gear, decontamination, site safety facilities and contingency plans for the

Rose Township site will be discussed in detail. All data generated will be

provided to DNR to assist in comprehensive safety planning activities.t

Task 4: Define Boundary- Conditions

Site investigation boundaries will be set so that the subsequent investigations

will be limited in areal extent and yet cover areas of potential contamination,

in sufficient detail to support the feasibility study. Preliminary site

investigation boundaries have been assumed in the preparation of the work plan

(see Figure 2-1). These boundaries will be modified, if it is found to be

necessary, during the site reconnaissance.

2.84.1110013.0.0

EXISTING SHALLOW MONITORING WELL (18)

EXISTING INTERMEDIATE MONITORING WELL(4)

FIGURE 2-1

SCOFMT

SCALE

EXISTING MONITORINGWELL LOCATIONS

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITE

Michigan Department ofNatural Resources

ECJORDANCQ

Task 5: Preinvestigative Evaluation

Based on information developed during Task 2 - Description of Existing Condi-

tions, a list of potential remedial technologies and remedial alternatives will

be prepared for review by DNR and USEPA. By identifying potential remedial

alternatives at this time, it will be possible to review the RI tasks to be

certain that adequate information will be developed to allow the FS to be

properly completed.

Task 6: Site Office

A site office will be established for the duration of the on-site investiga-

tions. The site-office will be divided into two sections: 1) office space and

2) staging, equipment preparation, sample handling and storage space. Level D

safety procedures are anticipated for the site, therefore an isolated decon-

tamination facility is not anticipated to be required and a pressurized water

supply will not be provided for the site office. Decontamination and sanitary

facilities will be located outside, adjacent to the site office.

The site office will provide space for storing safety equipment and monitoring

and sampling gear to be used during the site investigation and will also

provide a clean work space for field staff.

Task 7: Community Relations

The community relations program for the Rose Township site will be conducted by

11

2.84.1110014.0.0

DNR with support from the E.G. Jordan Co. E.G. Jordan Co. is prepared to

provide support in the following areas, as directed:

o meet with local officials to determine their concerns and community

relations needs;

o periodically brief local and county officals regarding current activities

during the on-site activities;

o provide information for press releases during the remedial investigation/

feasibility study; and

o prepare information to be presented at public meetings.

Community relations activities will be ongoing during the entire projett.

2.2 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (PHASE II)

A total of twelve tasks have been identified during this phase of the site

investigations. Interim reports will be submitted to DNR at the completion of

each Task.

Task 8: Site Inventory

The objective of the site inventory is to identify, to the extent possible.from

12

2.84.1110015.0.0

available data, the quantity and character of pollutants which may be at the

site. The majority of the data required for this task will have been compiled

in the Task 2 Summary Report. Data from that report will be supplemented, if

necessary, through interviews with persons knowledgeable about the site and the

review of other data sources which may be identified. The objectives of this

Task will have been completed during Task 2; therefore no additional hours are

provided for Task 8.

Task 9: Air Investigation

An air monitoring investigation will be conducted in the vicinity of the Rose

Township site to provide data describing the nature and extent of on-site air

contamination and to aid in the establishment of site safety procedures for the

field investigation. Air monitoring data will also provide information useful

in evaluating potential remedial measures for the site.

The objectives of the limited air quality investigation proposed for the Rose

Township site are as follows:

o provide information to assess the respiratory protection requirements for

on-site personnel during field activities; and

o provide information on the degradation of ambient air quality during

excavations into buried waste and/or contaminated soils.

Initial air monitoring will be performed during the site reconnaissance (Task

13

2.84.1110016.0.0

2) with an HNU photoionization (PI) meter. This monitoring will include a site

perimeter survey, a site survey, and the monitoring of specific locations

on-site. Should initial air monitoring reveal total organic vapor concentra-

tions in excess of the level specified in the site safety plan, additional

monitoring will be performed with a Photovac Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA) to

attempt identification of vapor constituents. This data will be necessary for

the selection of respiratory protective equipment. Additionally, during the

initial air monitoring program, two Jordan team members will each wear personal

air sampling pumps with the appropriate sorbent sample collector tubes. Air

_ Camples will thus be collected over the eight hour reconnaissance period.

These sorbent tubes will be analyzed by the CLP for volatile organic compounds.

The site survey will occur on a regular basis during site activities to alert

on-site personnel to any change of conditions. Selected respiratory protective

equipment will be reviewed for adequacy as new data becomes available. Air

quality monitoring will also be conducted during borehole/piezometer installa-

tion. Each borehole will be monitored on the downwind side of the borehole

vhile being drilled. Elevated PI readings will result in respiratory protec-

tion review. All readings will be logged on field sheets and will become a

part of the data base to be used in preparing the RI report. Meteorological

information will be collected from a nearby weather monitoring station to

determine prevailing climatic conditions at the time of readings and assess

potential downwind receptors.

It is recognized that an additional potential respiratory hazard exists at the

site due to the presence of contaminated soils. The significance of this

14

2.84.1110017.0.0

hazard will be determined based on the results of the planned chemical and

physical soil testing. Chemical analysis will establish the level and nature

of contamination. The physical testing (e.g., grain size analysis) will allow

an assessment to be made of the potential for windblown transport of contamina-

ted dust during disturbance of surface soils. Measures to control this hazard

will be identified during the FS. The currently planned RI activities are

unlikely to present a contaminated dust hazard to downwind wind receptors.

However, should dust generation be observed, appropriate control measures will

be implemented.

The DNR site manager will be notified immediately of test results,, since these.

may require an increase in respiratory protection level.

Task 10: Domestic Well and Existing Monitoring Well Sampling

Water samples will be collected from nearby domestic wells and existing moni-

'• toring wells.

The Michigan Department of Public Health (MDPH) has analyzed a recent set of

samples which were collected from domestic wells in January 1984. A second set

of samples will be collected in the fall of 1984. The Oakland County Division

of Public Health will collect the samples and the MPDH will analyze them.

Approximately 20 domestic wells will be sampled. The analytical program is

described in Task 18.

15

2.84.1110018.0.0

In addition to the sampling and analysis program, the MDPH will provide survey

and inventory data they have collected for the domestic wells in the vicinity

of the site. The inventory data should include: location, date of con-

struction, depth, construction material and details, casing diameter, water

bearing formation, yield, and approximate static level. This data will be of

value in assessing public health hazards and in defining the extent of the

contaminant plume.

Twenty-two existing monitoring wells will be sampled by Jordan twice during the

RI: once early in the program, and once in the fall of 1984 at the same time

that the domestic wells are sampled. The locations of existing monitoring

wells are shown in Figure 2-1.

Sample collection and handling will be in accordance with the guidelines

contained in the User's Guide to the USEPA Contract Laboratory Program. The

analytical program is described in Task 18.

Task 11: Surface Water/Sediment Sampling

A total of 19 surface water and sediment samples will be collected. The

location of these sampling points is shown on Figure 2-2.

Surface water samples will be collected from the small pond located in the

wooded area southwest of the site and in the wetlands located to the east and

west of the site. The proposed sample sites in the wetlands have been selected

at points where surface water runoff from the site discharges to the wetlands

16

2.84.1110019.0.0

SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE COURSES(BASED ON TOPOGRAPHY)

SURFACE WATER AND SEDIMENTSAMPLING LOCATIONS

FIGURE 2-2

,230 ,5COnsrj ...USCALE

SURFACE WATER ANDSEDIMENT SAMPLING

LOCATIONS

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITE

Michigan Department ofNatural Resources

ECJCRDANCQ

(including previously identified seeps). It appears that these areas are most:

likely to show the presence 'of contaminants which have migrated from the site.

In addition, approximately four samples will be collected along the center of

the wetland leading to Cheese Lake and two samples will be collected from

existing seeps at the rear of the and properties. The precise

sample locations will be established during the site reconnaissance conducted

as part of Task 2.

A sediment sample will be collected at each of the surface water sampling

locations described above. The surface water and sediment sampling program

will be conducted early in the program, during the spring, when surface water

is likely to be present in the wetlands. Surface water and sediment samples

will undergo a full priority pollutant scan as described in Task 18. All

samples will be collected and handled in accordance with the guidelines pro-

vided in the User's Guide to USEPA's Contract Laboratory Program.

The sampling and analysis of surface water and co-existing bottom sediment will

allow a determination to be made of the extent of site derived contamination in

nearby surface water. This data will be used in assessing public health and

environmental impacts and in evaluating the remedial alternatives.

Task 12: Geophysical Investigation

The scope and objectives of the geophysical investigation are as follows:

18

2.84.1110020.0.0

o Magnetometer. A magnetometer/metal detector survey is proposed to locate

areas of buried drums and underground tanks that might exist at the site.

A magnetometer survey is proposed for a 20 acre portion of the site. A

more detailed magnetometer/metal detector survey is proposed for a 3-4

acre area.

o Electrical Resistivity. Electrical resistivity methods will be used to

assess subsurface geologic conditions at the site and vicinity, particu-

larly the thickness and areal extent of shallow clayey layers in granular

material and the depth to the "hard pan" or till layer that exists beneath

the site.

o Seismic Refraction. A limited seismic refraction program is proposed as a

contingency to determine the depth to the till layer in the event that the

resistivity program does not provide adequate information.

a^ Magnetometer Survey. Drum/tanks that formerly contained hazardous

materials have been excavated and removed from the Rose Township site. Most of

the buried materials were previously found in the western portion of the site

and along the access road leading to the site. Although buried materials have

not been previously found in the eastern portion of the site, the area is open

and accessible and could have potentially been used as a disposal area in the

past.

In order to assess whether additional buried materials are present, a

magnetometer survey will be conducted on the site according to the grid pattern

19

2.84.1110021.0.0

shown in Figure 2-3. An initial survey of the entire site on a 20-foot by

20-foot grid spacing is anticipated. Jordan recognizes that a solitary buried,

barrel has a small but finite potential to be missed with such a grid pattern.

Clusters of barrels represent the principal target of the program. Areas

having anomalous magnetic gradients will then be surveyed in greater detail

with a magnetometer or metal detector (a 10-foot or 5-foot grid) to delineate

subsurface conditons more completely. A magnetometer has a greater depth of

penetration than a metal detector (15-feet versus 2-3-feet, respectively). The

selection of the appropriate instrument to be used in the detailed evaluation

will be determined on the basis of the initial survey.

The initial phase of field measurements will cover an area of approximately 20

acres. However, we estimate that the detailed portion of the survey will only

be conducted in an area of approximately three acres (15% of the total area).

The grid pattern identified in Figure 2-3 may be modified on the basis of the

site reconnaissance visit to be made as part of Task 2. Positive indication of

buried metallic material will be verified by backhoe. Sampling and analysis of

identified buried wastes will be done as part of Task 13 and will take place

prior to conducting subsurface explorations as part of the remedial investiga-

tion.

b. Electrical Resistivity Survey. On the basis of previous studies, it

appears that the subsurface conditions at the Rose Township site consist of

discontinuous silt/clay layers in granular glacial deposits. Geologic condi-

tions appear to be well-suited for characterization by surface resistivity

surveying. We propose to conduct a series of approximately 50 vertical elec-

trical soundings at 200-foot intervals along the profiles shown in Figure 2-3.

20

2.84.1110022.0.0

EXPLANATION

SEISMIC SURVEY (CONTINGENCY ACTIVITY)

RESISTIVITY SOUNDINGS

MAGNETOMETER SURVEY (20-FOOT GRID)

FIGURE 2-3

290 . SCOFWT

SCALE

GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY PLAN

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITE

Michigan Department ofNatural Resources

ECJORDANCQ

A Schlumberger electrode array will be used for the vertical soundings, as this

configuration is less sensitive to lateral variations in electrical properties

than other conunmonly used electrode arrays. These measurements will allow the

construction of geoelectric sections and permit the delineation of the

three-dimensional extent of subsurface clay deposits. The specific objectives

of the surface resistivity survey are to ascertain the thickness and areal

extent of subsurface clayey layers and to determine the depth to the till

layer. Since clayey layers tend to retard and redirect the downward

percolation of precipitation and dissolved waste material, it is important to

understand the extent of their presence in the subsurface. The results of the

resistivity survey will influence the location of surface runoff and subsurface

soil sampling points and the location of monitoring wells.

The RAMP noted that a subsurface gas pipeline owned by Consumers Power Co.

crosses the southwest corner of the site. A concern was expressed for the

potential corrosivity of waste materials on the pipeline and a geophysics

program was suggested. The presence of the pipeline itself will interfere with

resistivity testing in the area, therefore the technique is not propsed for

use. The presence of corrosive materials such as chlorides and sulfates in the

subsurface can best be detected by soil sampling. It is proposed that a

limited program of subsurface soil sampling be conducted adjacent to the

pipeline as part of Task 15. The program will be coordinated with representa-

tives from Consumer Power Co.

c. Seismic Refraction. In the event that resistivity techniques do not

provide adequate information on the depth to the till layer, a limited seismic

22

2.84.1110023.0.0

survey consisting of 3200 feet of seismic refraction profiling is proposed to

be conducted at the site. The principal objective of the seismic survey is to

determine the depth and slope of the "hard pan" or till layer that has been

identified at depth in previous studies. It is anticipated that the upper

surface of the till deposit represents the greatest depths to which borings

will be made for monitoring well installations. An understanding of the

configuration of the till surface is necessary to allow selection of an appro-

priate number and distribution of deep monitoring wells for the site. The

costs associated with the proposed seismic program have not been included in

the proposed budget. If it is deemed necessary to conduct a seismic survey, a

work plan will be submitted for DNR and EPA approval.

Task 13: Pollutant Characterization

The character, level and distribution of pollutants in each medium at the Rose

Township site, i.e., for air, water, and soil, will be done as described in the

RI tasks included in this section. Although it is assumed that all drums and

tanks have been removed from the site, it is possible that containerized waste

deposits may be detected during the magnetometer survey. If drums, tanks, or

other concentrated waste deposits are located during the geophysical survey, it

may be necessary to conduct a pollutant characterization investigation beyond

that proposed herein for air, water, and soil. If that is the case, a specific

work plan for Task 13 (Pollutant Characterization) will be prepared for DNR

review. That task description would include excavation, sample collection and

analysis procedures and compatibility testing.

23

2.84.1110024.0.0

Task 14: Monitoring Well Installation

There are curently 22 monitoring wells at the Rose Township, Demode Road si'te

(see Figure 2-1). During 1980, 8 monitoring wells were installed in the

immediate vicinity of the major known drum burial/waste disposal area. The

monitoring well array was expanded in 1982 by the installation of 14 more

monitoring wells. Additional groundwater samples were obtained from screened

auger borings during the 1982 investigations. The groundwater analyses com-

pleted to date reveal that contaminated groundwater exists over a large area

but the vertical and lateral extent of such contamination has not been

precisely defined. It appears probable that the contaminants originate from

more than one location on site. The maximum depth of contamination has not

been determined.

The proposed locations of 20 additional monitoring wells (locations MW 101-11)

are shown on Figure 2-4. The proposed locations have been based on Jordan's

interpretation of the existing information as presented in the RAMP and in the

reports of the two hydrogeologic investigations completed at the site. As

additional field information (from geophysical surveys, soil sampling, etc.) is

obtained and evaluated, the proposed locations may be modified. The monitoring

wells will be installed in boreholes drilled using hollow-stem augers with

split-spoon samples taken at 5-foot intervals and/or change in geologic media

in the deepest hole at each well cluster location. No samples will be taken in

the shallower holes at a given location. All drilling and sampling equipment

will be cleaned with high pressure water jets between each sampling event and a

detergent wash and high pressure water between each borehole. The quality

24

2.84.1110025.0.0

EXPLANATION• EXISTING SHALLOW MONITORING WELL(18)

• EXISTING INTERMEDIATE MONITORING WELL(4)

PROPOSED SHALLOW MONITORING WELL (4)

PROPOSED INTERMEDIATE MONITORING WELL(9)

PROPOSED DEEP MONITORING WELL(7)

FIGURE 2-4

900ncr

SCALE

MONITORING WELLLOCATIONS

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITE

Michigan Department ofNatural Resources

ECJORDANCQ

of the water used for the decontamination program will be verified prior to

use.

The specific rationale for the selection of locations for each well/well

cluster is given below:

MW 101 (One intermediate and one deep well at the location of existing

shallow well No. 18). Low levels of contamination have been detected at

existing well No. 18. Materials may have deposited along the access road

to the site. This location is downgradient from the access road at the

northernmost point at which contaminants are expected to have been

depos ited.

MW 102, 103, 104 (Two shallow-intermediate well clusters and a single

shallow well at new locations). The two well.clusters (MW 102 and MW 104)

are located to the east of the anticipated groundwater divide that is

likely to coincide with the north-south ridge. Low to moderate levels of

contaminants have been detected to the west of the ridge but no wells have

been previously located to the east of the ridge. Contaminated

groundwater may be flowing to the east in this area. A single well (MW

103) is proposed to be located at the top of the ridge to assess the

maximum height of the shallow groundwater regime.

MW 105 (One three-well cluster at a new location). Moderate levels of

contaminants have been detected at existing well location No. 14. The

three well cluster (MW 105) is located to the west of the ridge,

26

2.84.1110026.0.0

^^ downgradient from location No. 14. This group of wells will be useful ill.*;.- providing vertical gradient data and assessing the vertical and lateral

r° distribution of contaminants.

b _»

p MW 106 (One deep well at the location of existing shallow and

intermediate wells). Moderate levels of contamination have been found atr-

; existing well location No. 1. The new deep well proposed for this

location provides a three well cluster that will be useful for determining!t-- vertical gradients on the site and assessing the vertical extent of

r~ (*"* contamination.

MW 107 (One intermediate and one deep well at location of existing

shallow well No. 9). The existing shallow well has been found to be free

^ ^ of contamination during previous sampling events. The reasons for the

lack of contamination at the well location may be that the well screen is

positioned in granular soils between upper and lower confining clay

layers. An intermediate and deep well at this location are more likely to

^^ detect contaminants that are suspected to exist beneath the clay layers.

This well cluster is located directly downgradient of the most severely

contaminated portions of the site.

MW 108, 109, 110 (Intermediate-deep well clusters at locations of

existing shallow wells No. 15,12 and 13, respectively). Low levels of

contaminants were previously found at well locations 13 and 15, no

contaminants were found at well No. 12. With the addition of intermediate

. and deep wells at the three locations, which are downgradient from the

27

2.84.1110027.0.0

site, the horizontal and vertical extent of contamination to the east,

southeast and south of the site will be assessed.

MV 111 (One intermediate well at the location of existing shallow well

No. 16). Low levels of contaminants were detected in existing well No.

16. The addition of a second well at this downgradient location to the

southwest of the site is intended to the assess the extent of contaminant

migration to the southwest.

The monitoring wells identified in Figure 2-4 are classified as shallow,

intermediate and deep. On the basis of information in the RAMP and for

the purpose of cost calculation, the following depth ranges have been

assigned to the three categories:

o shallow wells <40 feet

o intermediate wells 40-75 feet

o deep wells 75-130 feet

Cost estimates have been based on the greatest depth assigned to each category,

i.e., 40, 80 and 130 feet. The total program (20 monitoring wells) will

involve approximately 1,800 feet of drilling.

A 2-inch diameter monitoring well will be installed in each borehole with the

screen set at appropriate intervals as determined by photoionization meter

28

2.84.1110028.0.0

scans of split-spoon samples and visual examination of soil conditions. It is

planned that all wells will be constructed according to the method described

below, however actual borehole conditions may require modification in some

cases. Installation of wells (galvanized well pipe with stainless steel well

screen section) will be through the hollow-stem augers with a cement/bentonite

grout placed between the well casing and borehole wall. All monitoring well

components will be steam cleaned prior to their use.

The well will be assembled as it is inserted into the augers. Once the well is

set at the designated elevation, the augers will be withdrawn as silica sand

backfill is placed around the screen. The sand backfill will be poured slowly

down the annulus between the well casing and augers or injected by means of air

actuated diaphragm pump through a tremmie tube. Once the sand backfill is in

place, a bentonite seal will be installed by one of two methods as dictated by

site conditions. If the seal is to be placed a substantial depth below the

water table, a thick bentonite slurry will be placed by means of a tremmie.tube

or by filling the annulus between the well and augers with the slurry and

withdrawing the augers. If the seal is to be installed at moderate depths

below the water table, dry bentonite pellets will be placed as the augers are

withdrawn. In either case an adequately thick seal will be placed to isolate

the screened interval from the rest of the borehole. The remainder of the

borehole will be backfilled with a cement bentonite grout as the augers are

removed.

The well will be developed by hydraulic surging using the air lift technique.

The air compressor used will be screw type equipped with a Deltech Engineering

29

2.84.1110029.0.0

Inc. Model 130 hydrocarbon filter. The filter is designed to change color with

use and will be replaced with sufficient frequency to ensure that no oil enters

the well. The filter will be inspected prior to and during each well develop-

ment episode. Upon completion, each monitoring well will be provided with a

protective steel casing with a locking cap securely by grouted in place.

There are a number of exploration methods available to assess subsurface

conditions. Some of the methods enable the investigation to assess the causes

for a specific contaminant distribution pattern, whereas others provide

information only about the effects or the resultant pattern, i.e., the

contaminant distribution pattern as it currently exists without providing

information on how the pattern developed. The geologic characteristics of a

site control the groundwater flow pattern. The groundwater flow pattern, in

turn, strongly influences the distribution of chemicals in the subsurface

environment. Jordan's experience has shown that an understanding of the

subsurface geology is critical in developing an understanding of the

groundwater regime and the distribution of chemicals in the subsurface.

Furthermore, such an understanding is critical for evaluating the effectiveness

of the potential remedial technologies. Given the subsurface geologic

complexity of the Rose Township site, Jordan favors taking split-spoon samples

at 5-foot intervals over the entire depth of the deepest borehole at each

monitoring well location. The specific objectives of the borehole sampling and

monitoring well installation program are as follows:

o verification/calibration of geophysical data;

30

2.84.1110030.0.0

o delineation of subsurface materials and the tops and bottoms of

geologic formations (elevations);

o determination of the cation-exchange capacities and adsorption poten-

tial of subsurface clay samples obtained during drilling with

specific reference to the heavy metals and organic chemicals found

on-site;

o determination of groundwater quality downgradient from the site in

all directions; and

o determination of potentioraetric surface (water level) .elevation in

all wells to define:

direction of groundwater movement in shallow intermediate and

deep groundwater regimes;

potentiometric gradients in both horizontal and vertical 'direc-

tions; and

hydraulic communication between surface water bodies and ground-

water regimes. Two- and three-well cluster locations comprised

of new wells or combinations of new and existing wells will

provide information on vertical gradients at these locations.

31

2.84.1110031.0.0

Monitoring wells will be surveyed by the DNR to determine their location and

elevation.

.Task 15: Soil Sampling

As mentioned in the Task 14 Section, subsurface geology controls the flow in

the groundwater regime. Therefore a detailed and comprehensive understanding

of the subsurface rock and soil conditions are necessary to decipher the

groundwater regime. In the same manner, the ultimate subsurface distribution

pattern of chemicals in soil and groundwater is controlled by the initial

placement of contaminants on the surface of the site. For this reason Jordan

considers it very important to obtain detailed information on the present

distribution of chemicals in surface soils .

Several sources of information (RAMP and other previous studies) indicate that

chemicals may have been distributed at the Rose Township site in areas other

than the 14 acre open area. High levels of contamination have been found in

monitoring well No. 14 located 500 feet north of the open area and low levels

of contamination have been found in two monitoring wells (Nos. 11 and 18)

located up to 2,000 feet north of the drum removal area. Also, aerial photos

of the site, taken prior to the DNR cleanup, show barrels, tanks and surface

debris distributed over a wide area. Jordan considers it important to assess

surface soil conditions over the entire area where chemicals are likely to have

been deposited. Although the soil sampling program as described herein

involves a substantial analytical program, Jordan considers it to be a

cost-effective effort in that it will serve to delineate the sources of

32

2.84.1110032.0.0

chemicals that are present in the subsurface. This data will be used to

identify the location, distribution and quantities of contaminated soil, if

any, which need to be considered during the feasibility study. The quantity of

contaminated soils at the site and the level of contamination they exhibit

will, to a large extent, determine the practicality of the available remedial

technologies.

At sites where volatile organic compounds are prevalent, assessment of surface

soil contamination can quite easily be accomplished by screening with

photoionization meter over a surface grid system. At the Rose Township site,

PCBs and metals are a principal concern. The distribution of these materials

cannot be evaluated by means of a photoionization survey or other field

screening methods, but instead, have to be evaluated by means of laboratory

analysis of soils. Jordan's soil sampling program for the Rose Township site

will consist of a two-phased program:

o surface soil sampling on an established grid system over a 45-acre

area (high density and low density sampling surveys are proposed

(Figure 2-5) ; and

o subsurface soil sampling by means of borings at locations selected on

the basis of surface sampling and, knowledge of the site operation.

The two sampling phases are described below and the proposed extent of the

program is illustrated in Figure 2-5.

33

2.84.1110033.0.0

EXPLANATION

D

HIGH DENSITY SURFA§|MS

p^^sfAMPLING GRID

LOW DENSITY SURFACE SOIL SAMPLING GRIDSAMPLES)

SITE BOUNDARY

^ PRELIMINARY LOCATION OF SUBSURFACE SOIL9 BORINGS. (A TOTAL OF BORINGS PROPOSED)

FIGURE 2-5

230 300FKT

^^^M23O

.TwJSCALE

SURFACE SOILSAMPLING PLAN

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITE

Michigan Department ofNatural Resources

ECJCRDANCQ

Surface Soil Sampling. Surface soil sampling will be done in the areas indi-

cated in Figure 2-5. Approximately 50 samples will be taken from the high-

density sampling grid (100 by 100 foot spacing) which covers the western

portion of the Rose Township site and the southern portion of the access road

to the site. One sample will be collected from each grid element and analyzed

in the field (headspace analysis by means of the photoionization meter) and in

the laboratory. Sample components will be taken from each quadrant of the grid

element and composited to form the sample. To the extent possible to do so on

the basis of surface characteristics, sample locations will be selected so as

to include zones of maximum contamination. The analytical program for surface

soils is described in Task 18.

Compositing of surface soil samples is a standard practice that offers

advantages and disadvantages. The principle advantage is that it enables

sampling to be conducted over a broader area, thereby increasing the chances of

encountering wastes. The disadvantage of compositing is that it has the

potential to dilute contaminant concentrations if a number of clean sample

components are mixed with one containing contaminants. The latter scenario has>

greatest impact if wastes have been placed on the site surface in a distinct

and specific pattern rather than spread in a random manner. Jordan has

conducted surface soil sampling investigations at nearly all the hazardous

waste sites where the firm has conducted a remedial investigation. The

proposed approach has been found to be valuable in that, at the majority of

sites, wastes have been deposited in a manner that is conducive to compositing

techniques. We believe that the proposed approach will be effective at the

Rose Township Site.

35

2.84.1110034.0.0

Approximately 30 additional surface soil samples will be taken from the low-

density sampling area (Figure 2-5) which extends from Demode Road to 300 feet

south of the southern boundary of the site. The samples obtained from the low

density sampling area will not be taken on the basis of a grid, but will be

selected on the basis of the physical characteristics of the ground surface

such as:

o photoionization meter screening;

o disturbed or stained surface areas;

o visibly distressed vegetation;

o topography; and

o information obtained from previous studies or interviews with persons

familiar with the site history and usage.

Samples taken from the low-density area will be composited from up to five

samples obtained within a six-foot radius of an identified sample location.

The field technician will remove any surface or organic mat at the sample site

and sample the uppermost portion of the soil profile by means of a clean trowel

(the limits of excavation will be 6 inches). Equal volumes of soil will be

obtained from each sample component site. The composite sample will be mixed

and split and samples will be placed in containers appropriate for the intended

36

2.84.1110035.0.0

analyses. All sample collection labeling and sample control documentation will

be completed in accordance with the provisions of the QAPP.

The analytical data obtained from the high density and low density surface soil

sampling programs will be compiled, and if possible, contoured on the basis of

the specific detected chemical compounds of interest. The contoured map(s)

will be examined to see if they reveal discernable patterns of contaminant

distribution which is reflective of original deposition or subsequent

transport. The results of the surface soil sampling and analysis program of

the Rose Township site will be utilized to define areas of high concentrations

of organic and inorganic compounds or "hot spots".

Subsurface Soil Sampling. Upon defining of the surface "hot spots," up to 10

boreholes will be drilled for the purpose of obtaining subsurface soil samples.

Care will be taken to differentiate between in-situ and transported surface

soils in establishing the location of surface "hotspots". Drilling will be

accomplished using hollow-stem augers and soil samples will be taken with split

spoons. Two-foot-long split spoons will be used to obtain continuous samples

to a depth of not more than 25 feet. All downhole sampling equipment will be

decontaminated between each sample and the rig and tools will be decontaminated

between boreholes. All boreholes will be plugged with a heavy bentonite/cement

slurry. At some locations, 3/4-inch peizometers may be installed and sealed in

boreholes that have been drilled for the purpose of soil sampling. These

piezometers will be used for the purpose of obtaining detailed information on

the configuration of the water table.

37

2.84.1110036.0.0

Upon obtaining each soil sample, the sample spoon will be opened. A photoion-

ization meter survey will be made of the entire length of the undisturbed

sample. An additional photoionization meter analysis will be made on the same

cores after the outer soil layer has been scraped away. Clean spatulas will be

used for each core to prevent cross contamination. On the basis of the photo-

ionization meter readings and visual inspection of the core, samples will be

selected and placed in jars. A head space analysis of the samples will be made

with the photoionization meter after allowing the samples to out-gas. The

selection of samples to be submitted for GC/MS analysis will be determined on

the basis of the head-space analysis and visual inspection by the field geolo-

gist. It is anticipated that 30 soil samples from the ten (10) borings will be

submitted for more detailed analysis by GC/MS. The tentative location of 7

soil boring locations are shown in Figure 2-5. These locations have been

selected on the basis of surface soil contamination and site history

information presented in the RAMP. These locations are subject to modification

on the basis of information obtained in the field.

Additional soil sample locations may be required as the data are evaluated.

Deeper soil sampling may also be required should the photoionization meter

indicate increasing or high concentrations near the bottom of the 25-foot

borings. In these cases, continued soil sampling will be undertaken in the

field.

Sample collection and handling will be in accordance with the guidelines

provided in the User's Guide to the USEPA Contract Laboratory Program.

38

2.84.1110037.0.0

Task 16: New Monitoring Well Sampling

The 20 new monitoring wells installed in Task 14 will be sampled once during

the late summer at the same time that the domestic wells and existing monitor-

ing wells are sampled. The sampling and analysis of the domestic wells,

existing monitoring wells and new monitoring wells at the same time will

provide a comprehensive data base reflecting water quality conditions at a

single point in time. This data will be used to calibrate the model to be

developed for the site in Task 19.

Monitoring and sampling of the groundwater wells will proceed from the upgradi-

ent or background wells to the downgradient or contaminated wells as can best

be determined.

The well will first be checked for proper identification and location. The

height of protective casing will be measured and recorded. The photoiohization

meter will be used to measure the ambient air levels at each well site

location. After removing the well caps, the ambient and well-mouth vapor

levels will be measured and recorded. If the ambient air quality at breathing

level reaches 10 ppm, as described in the Health and Safety Plan, sampling

personnel will utilize the appropriate safety equipment.

The electronic water level meter will be used to measure and record the static

water level in the well and the depth to the well botton. Upon removing the

water level measuring line, it will be rinsed with methanol and distilled

water.

39

2.84.1110038.0.0

Following these measurements, sampling will commence in the sequence below:

1. Lower the submersible pump into the well. If the water level is signifi-

cantly above the top of the screened interval, flush the well with the

pump intake in the middle of the screened interval. Remove a minimum of

three well volumes of groundwater from the well.

2. Obtain sample by means of the submersible pump.

3. Record the in situ parameters immediately after sampling.

4. Remove the pump from the well and decontaminate the pump and tubing by

flushing two gallons of methanol/water mix through the pump and tubing

followed by 2 gallons of distilled water. Using paper towels and

methanol, hand-wipe the outside of the teflon tubing and pump. Rinse with

distilled water.

5. All sample bottles will have the appropriate labels attached beforehand.

The chain-of-custody forms will be completed after each well is sampled.

6. Volatile organics samples will be taken from a 150 ml glass beaker that

has been cleaned using the same procedures as for the sample vials. The

beaker should be filled from the pump discharge tubing with as little

agitation as possible. The VOA vials will then be filled from this beaker

with minimal agitation. All other samples will be filled directly from

the discharge tubing of the pump.

40

2.84.1110039.0.0

7. Secure the well cap and lock.

The monitoring well samples will be collected by Jordan for analysis by the

CLP. Domestic well sampling will be collected by the Oakland County Division

of Public Health. Analysis will be performed by the MDPH. Sample collection

and handling will be in accordance with the guidelines contained in the User's

Guide to the USEPA Contract Laboratory Program. The analytical program is

described in Task 18.

Task 17: Aquifer Testing

Aquifer testing will be completed to determine the hydraulic characteristics of

the aquifer underlying the Rose Township site. Falling head and/or rising head

tests will.be completed on selected monitoring wells to determine the permea-

bility of the soils in the screened interval. This data, in conjunction with

the observed piezometric levels will provide the basis for calculating ground-

water flow patterns and rates. The wells to be tested will be selected based

on the findings of the geophysical investigation, the subsurface exploration

program and groundwater sampling and analysis program. The wells will be

selected to delineate the range of permeability of the granular sediments

beneath the site. In order to assess the permeability characteristics of the

clay soils underlying the site, Shelby tube samples will be obtained and tested

in Jordan's soils laboratory to determine the hydraulic conductivity of these

less pervious soils. This approach is necessary since the monitoring wells

will be placed in pervious granular strata, not in the less pervious clay

layers.

41

2.84.1110040.0.0

It is possible that the evaluation of potential remedial technologies will

require aquifer characterization in addition to the activities described above.

One or more pump tests are proposed to determine aquifer transmissivity and

storage coefficients. Existing and proposed monitoring wells will be employed

to the extent practical to monitor water level declines caused by pumping and

recovery of the water table after pumping has been stopped.

Due to the substantial thickness and high permeability of the water bearing

zone, it will be necessary to install a special well for the pump test. A

minimum 4-inch diameter test well will be naturally developed and capable of

being pumped at substantial rates. The screen will penetrate about 50 percent

of the saturated zone and be sized based on mechanical analysis of soil samples

recovered from nearby borings. Currently it is estimated that the test well

will be about 100 feet deep and located in the south central portion of the

site. The exact location of the well will be determined after completion of

the subsurface exploration program. Jordan proposes to conduct a constant

discharge pump test of at least 16 hours duration. The pump rate will be

selected to cause at least 30 feet of draw down at the test well. The dis-

charge will be monitored for volatiles periodically. The discharge will be

sampled during the first hour of pumping, during the fourth hour of pumping,

and immediately prior to turning off the pump. These groundwater samples will

be analyzed for the same parameters as groundwater samples from the monitoring

wells.

If a pump test, as dsecribed above, is deemed to be necessary for the collec-

tion of data for the feasibility study, a work plan will be submitted for

approval of the DNR and the EPA.

42

2.84.1110041.0.0

Should significant vertical partitioning of the groundwater system due to low

permeability zones become evident during the investigation, additional pump

testing or modification of the proposed test may be necessary.

The objectives of the aquifer testing program include:

o Determine aquifer characteristics (e.g., transmissivity and storage

coefficient or specific yield). This information will provide the

basis for evaluation of potential remedial technologies such as purge

well systems, slurry walls or drain systems.

o Determine aquifer permeability or hydraulic conductivity. This

information will be used to define groundwater flow patterns and

rates under static conditions and is necessary input for any modeling

efforts.

The proposed aquifer testing program will quantify the groundwater regime at

the site. Such quantification is necessary to assess current and future

impacts of contaminant migration and the practicality of potential remedial

technologies.

Task 18: Analytical Program

The proposed analytical program to be conducted in conjunction with the Rose

Township site RI is described in Table 2-1. Analyses will be performed by the

CLP with the exception that domestic well samples which will be analyzed by the

43

2.84.1110042.0.0

SAMPLING SOURCES

TYPE

DOMESTIC WELLS

SITE SOIL

EXISTING MONITORING WELLS

NEW MONITORING WELLS

SURFACE WATER SEDIMENTS

NUMBER OFLOCATIONS

20

110

^ O**

20

19

QZ0o0UJ

I 0.Q. (/)

• •

4 •

• •

• •

• •

Q._lO(/)Oz

cr0z

•

•

•

•

•

Q._lOI/)Oz^JCO ^Oa: a0 1-

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

|_1

oX

pQ.UJ

O

O

NOTE: TWO SORBENT TUBES USED FOR AIR MONITORINGWILL BE ANALYZED FOR VOLATILE ORGANICS.

TABLE 2-1ANALYTICAL PROGRAMROSE TOWNSHIP SITE

LEGEND' £ ANTICIPATED ASSAYS FOR ALL SAMPLING EVENTSO ANTICIPATED ASSAYS FOR SELECTED SAMPLES

* SAMPLE° TW'CE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCESECJORDANCQ

Michigan Department of Public Health. All sample collection and handling

procedures will be in accordance with the User's Guide to the USEPA Contract

Laboratory Program.

Task 19: Data Interpretation/Contamination Assessment

Based on data developed during Tasks 8 through 18 of the RI, the Rose Township

site will be characterized and the extent of contamination will be delineated.

In addition, a contaminant exposure assessment will be conducted to assess the

risks posed by the site and to assist in the establishment of project objec-

tives. A key element of this task is the development of an appropriate analog

model of the site. The development and use of the analog model is discussed

later in this section. Based on discussions between Jordan and DNR on March

20, 1984, a phased approach will be followed regarding the use of models at

this site. Following the initial data interpretation, Jordan and DNR will

review the usefulness of modeling in meeting the project objectives. If a

decision is made to use a model at this site, Jordan will provide DNR with

specific information on the documentation and application of the selected

model(s). The following discussions related to the Data Interpretation Task

assume that some form of modeling will be appropriate for the site.

This task has been divided into two subsections: Data Interpretation and

Exposure Assessment.

a. Data Interpretation. The surface and subsurface pathways available for

surface and groundwater flow and potential contaminant migration and the

interrelationship of these pathways will be be evaluated by means of the data

45

2.84.1110043.0.0

generated by the investigations described above. In particular, the direction

and rate of groundwater movement, dilution and dispersion factors, soil attenu-

ation properties and the ultimate destination of surface water and groundwater

in all flow regimes associated with the site will be quantified.

Data obtained from the field investigation will be used to generate the follow-

ing:

o geologic maps, profiles and isopachs;

o horizontal and vertical flow nets; and

o contaminant plume maps and profiles.

Concentration contour mapping of specific contaminant substances in this work

plan will be made on the basis of the sampling and analysis program presented

and the analytical data obtained from previous studies. The mobility of

specific contaminants in air and water will be evaluated on the basis of

theoretical considerations and empirical data derived from the field program.

Because multicomponent contamination is present, it may be necessary to use one

or more surrogate species to characterize multicomponent plumes. Attenuation

via degradation, decomposition and chemical complexing/mixing will be assessed

on the basis of analytical results and literature data. Utilizing the site

data as input, a computer based groundwater flow and solute transport model

will be developed for the site following discussions with DNR.

46

2.8.4.1110044.0.0

The development of a comprehensive and well-calibrated model is a valuable tool

•in achieving an understanding of present and future transport pathways for

toxic compounds. Upon receipt of analytical data from USEPA Contract Labora-

tories, sufficient information will be available to calibrate the model to

simulate conditions at the site. This model is an integral feature of our work

program, since it provides the basis for predicting the behaviour and disper-

sion of contaminants at the site under a "no action" alternative and is used to

estimate the effectiveness of selected remedial action alternatives.

The hydrogeologic regimes present at the site will be simulated in a computer-

based model. The model will be calibrated with estimated infiltration rates

(rainfall minus evapotranspiration and runoff) and permeabilities. Model-

generated piezometric levels will be compared to the field-observed groundwater

levels, and the model will be adjusted (calibrated) until an appropriate degree

of agreement is obtained by varying permeability and boundary conditions.

Following calibration of the model, the resulting output will be used to

simulate and predict groundwater flow and solute transport. The existing

plumes will be superimposed on the groundwater model and the model run at

selected time increments into the future to determine the paths and concentra-

tions of the plume. The effects of the plume on groundwater quality in the

vicinity of the site and its discharge into nearby wetlands can be projected.

The model will be used to predict future areal and vertical contaminant distri-

bution and concentration. This prediction will enable us to determine trans-

port routes, contaminant exposure levels and duration at selected receptors.

47

2.84.1110045.0.0

Based on these levels of exposure, an exposure assessment can be undertaken to

identify and describe potential threats to public health and the environment.

During the FS (Task 25) remedial action technologies will be superimposed on

the model to determine their effectiveness in mitigating the plume.

The results of the field investigation will be analyzed with respect to the

potential remedial technologies and remedial alternative identified in Task 5.

The evaluation will assess: 1) if the data is adequate to conduct the FS; 2)

if the list of potential remedial alternatives should be modified, and 3) the

need for additional data to conduct the FS.

b. Exposure Assessment. At the completion of the data interpretation, an

exposure assessment to be conducted. Based on the results of the exposure

assessment, Jordan will recommend response objectives or cleanup goals to DNR

for the Rose Township site (see Task 22).

The hazardous nature of the chemicals associated with the site pose a potential

tisk to public health and to the environment. Exposure assessment will be

performed for the site to evaluate the effects of the "no action" remedial

alternative and to provide the baseline comparison of the effectiveness of

remedial action alternatives in reducing risks.

Screening of known chemical compounds associated with the site will be per-

formed to identify those compounds of greatest concern with respect to public

health and the environment. Information that will be used in this selection

process will include: 1) the concentrations of the chemical compounds present

48

2.84.1110046.0.0

in the air, water and soil; 2) the mobility and environmental persistence of

the chemical compounds with respect to intermediate partitioning, transport

mechanisms and pathways, and degradation processess; 3) exising exposure limit

criteria or standards (e.g. established by DNR, USEPA, WHO) as well as other

data derived from documented epidemiological and animal studies.

Task 20: RI Report

The findings of the RI will be summarized in a written report incorporating

illustrations, drawings and diagrams. The report will be comprehensive in all

technical areas, and will be written in a style that can be understood by a lay

audience as well as the professional. It will serve as a public document and

as a technical report that provides a basis for the FS. Illustrations will be

colored where appropraite as a means of portraying technical information in a

clear and meaningful manner. Field and laboratory data will be compiled in

appendices.

The report of the RI will be delivered in draft form to allow DNR to have input

into the report prior to release of a final report. Report preparation will

commence with a detailed report outline, the contents of which will be

coordinated with the DNR prior to report preparation.

2.3 FEASIBILITY STUDY

The Feasibility Study (FS) for the Rose Township site will be conducted using

49

2.84.1110047.0:0

the data developed during the Remedial Investigation (RI) described above. The

objective of the FS is to develop and evaluate remedial alternatives, recommend

an appropriate'cost-effective remedial alternative and prepare a conceptual

design for the cost-effective remedial alternative selected by the DNR and the

U.S. EPA. The following information describes the nine tasks which will be

completed as part of the FS.

Task 21: Description of Current Situation and Scoping Update

Prior to initiating work on the FS, the FS work plan will be reviewed in light,

of the results of the RI. Based on this review, the need for any changes in

the FS work plan will be determined. If it is found that the work plan should

be-modified, the recommended changes will be submitted to DNR for review and

approval.

Task 22: Development of Alternatives

Based on the results of the RI, a limited number of applicable remedial alter-

natives for the Rose Township site will be identified and evaluated. The

assessment of the alternatives involves several steps which are described

below.

a. Identify Remedial Response Objectives. The first step in evaluating the

effectiveness of a remedial alternative for an uncontrolled hazardous waste

site is the establishment of the response objectives and the evaluation

criteria. The response objectives of the proposed remedial action will be

50

2.84.1110048.0.0

established in accordance with the guidance provided in the National Oil and

Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan (NCP) (40 CFR Part 300.68), DNR, the U.S.

EPA interim guidance, and the requirements of any other applicable Federal or

state statutes.

The remedial response objectives will provide a benchmark by which to evaluate

the effectiveness of remedial alternatives and to subsequently select the most:

appropriate type and level of remedial action. The response objectives will

relate to the protection of public health and the environment.

The exposure assessment described in the RI Task 19 Data Interpretation/Contam-

ination Assessment will have identified contaminant transport routes,

receptors, and acceptable exposure levels for the compounds in question.

Recommendations for response objectives for the remedial action at the Rose

Township site will be developed in close consultation with EPA and DNR.

b. Identification of Remedial Technologies. The objective of the FS is to

identify the cost-effective remedial alternative for the Rose Township Site.

Remedial alternatives are developed from specific technologies which are

applicable to the conditions at the site. The first task in the FS is to

identify remedial technologies applicable to the Rose Township site. Potential

remedial technologies are normally divided into three broad categories:

o waste removal alternatives which remove material or render contami-

nants non-toxic through treatment (e.g. excavation, scavenger wells,

stabilization/neutralization, bacterial treatment);

51

2.84.1110049.0.0

o waste containment actions which minimize exposure by reducing the

rate at which contaminants are released (e.g. slurry walls, clay

caps); and

o impact avoidance actions which minimize contact or exposure (e.g.

relocating residents or providing alternate water supplies).

Based on our review of the conditions at the site, it appears that a combina-

tion of remedial technologies from these categories may be applicable to the

Rose Township site. Remedial technologies that appear to be. applicable to the

Rose Township site are described below. Upon completion of the RI, the list of

technologies will be refined to identify those most applicable to the site

conditions and those that appear capable of meeting the response objectives.

1. Removal. Removal actions that are considered applicable may include:

o excavation of contaminated soils and waste deposits,

o excavation of contaminated sediments,

o extraction via pumping, of on-site or off-site contaminated ground-

water, and

o removal of ponded water and wastes.

52

2.84.1110050.0.0

2. Containment. Remedial actions that may be used to contain the wastes

and chemical substances at-site include for example:

o covering of deposits of waste and areas of contaminated soil,

o slurry wall to prevent the migration of contaminants to surrounding

areas, and

o a clay cap or some other capping mechanism as a part of the final

site closure.

3. Treatment. Treatment technology that may be feasible to destroy or

remove hazardous substances at site or in the groundwater include:

o land treatment,

o chemical treatment,

o physical treatment, and

o solidification.

c. Identification of Remedial Alternatives. From the remedial technologies

identified above, we will develop appropriate, comprehensive, site-specific

remedial alternatives designed to meet the response objectives established for

the Rose Township site.

53

2.84.1110051.0.0

The development of appropriate remedial alternatives for an uncontrolled

hazardous waste site requires a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of

the physical setting and contaminant sources at the site. The NCP (300.68 -

Remedial Action) identifies procedures to be followed in selecting the most

cost-effective remedial alternative.

Criteria for identifying appropriate, site-specific remedial alternatives will

be established based on the NCP. These criteria include factors such as:

applicability to identified contaminants; reliability of the technology; site

physiography; expected duration of action; lead time for potential future

impact; operational and maintenance requirements; safety requirements during

and subsequent to implementation; installation, operation and indirect costs;

and others, as appropriate.

A number of appropriate remedial action alternatives will be identified through

the application of our accumulated understanding of the site setting and the

established response objectives. In addition to waste removal and waste

containment alternatives, the remedial alternatives identified will include

"no-action" and impact-avoidance alternatives.

Because of the complexity of the on-site conditions and hydrogeologic setting,

it is anticipated that several combinations of remedial technologies will be

included in the selected remedial alternatives. These alternatives will be

selected on the basis of their ability to protect public health and the envi-

ronment .

2.84.1110052.0.0

In developing the remedial alternatives, Jordan will maintain close coordina-

tion with DNR. The identified remedial alternatives will be reviewed with DNR

and the USEPA prior to proceeding with the screening phase. The alternatives

identified will be described in a series of brief technology synopses describ-

ing their advantages, disadvantages, and applicability. Once DNR and USEPA

have concurred with the potential remedial alternatives identified for the Rose

Township site, we will proceed with the initial screening task.

Task 23: Initial Screening of Alternatives

This task involves the initial screening of remedial alternatives identified in

Task 21. The objective of the initial screening is to reduce the number of

alternatives that will undergo detailed analysis. The screening will consider

cost, the effects and effectiveness of the alternatives, and acceptable engi-

neering practices. The purpose of the screening will be to eliminate alter-

natives that are considered costly, complicated or of limited effectiveness.

o Cost. Preliminary order-of-magnitude cost estimates will be prepared

for the remedial alternatives based on data available from EPA

technical manuals, data from contractors and equipment vendors, and

Jordan's cost estimators. Total costs of the alternatives will be

considered including construction, operation and maintenance, long

term monitoring and indirect costs (eg. crop loss, property value

loss). High-cost alternatives that do not provide greater public

health or environmental benefit will be eliminated.

55

2.84.1110053.0.0

Environmental Effects and Protection. The .effect of the alternatives

will be considered in two ways: 1) does the implementation of the

alternative have any adverse effect; and 2) how effective is the

alternative in achieving the response objectives.

If the alternative has the potential for significant adverse effects,

it will be eliminated. Potential adverse effects could include the

future release of contaminants and the potential release of contami-

nants during the implementation of the remedial action (eg., vola-

tilization of organic compounds during site excavation).

The identified alternatives will also be screened to determine if

they meet the specific response objectives established for the Rose

Township site clean-up.

Implementability and Feasibility. In conducting the initial screen-

ing, consideration will be given to the feasibility of implementing

the alternative and the technology being used. Because of the

critical nature of the uncontrolled hazardous waste sites, it is

imprudent to use unproven or experimental technology. The feasibil-

ity of each option will be evaluated considering such factors as

applicability to identified contaminants, proven reliability of the

technology, expected duration of the action, applicability to the

site operational requirements, and hazards of implementation.

56

2.84.1110054.0.0

Upon completion of the initial screening, a limited number of remedial alter-

natives appropriate for the Rose Township site will have been identified.

Task 24: Laboratory Studies (Optional)

In developing and evaluating remedial alternatives for the Rose Township site,

there may be insufficient data available to enable definitive conclusions to be

reached concerning the applicability of certain technologies. The objective of

laboratory and bench-scale treatability studies is to develop, if necessary,

additional process effectiveness data for use in the detailed engineering

evaluation of remedial alternatives.

To determine the need for laboratory studies, Jordan will review the adequacy

of available site data and literature regarding the treatability of the waste

substances found at the Rose Township site by those technologies identified as

being appropriate for use at this site. If the available information is found

to.be inadequate to allow evaluation of one or more specific technologies the

need for and scope of bench-scale laboratory or pilot-scale field studies will

be presented to and reviewed with DNR and submitted to the USEPA for approval..

This work plan does not include any budget for laboratory studies.

Task 25: Detailed Evaluation

The objectives of this task are to evaluate the remedial alternatives that are

selected in Task 23; and to identify the cost-effective remedial alternative

for the Rose Township site. The evaluation process will involve the develop-

57

2.84.1110055.0.0-

merit of the alternative, an environmental assessment, cost analysis, and cost-

effectiveness analysis. The evaluation process will use the contaminant

transport model developed as part of Task 19. The use of the analog model will

allow the effectiveness of various remedial alternatives and combinations of

alternatives to be thoroughly and efficiently evaluated. As outlined in Task

19 and as discussed on March 20, 1984, the specific use of a computer based

model in conjunction with the RI/FS for the Rose Township site will be

determined jointly by Jordan and DNR. The following discussion assumes that

some form of modeling will be used. However, a final decision will be made

during Task 19.

In discussion between the DNR and Jordan on March 20, it was proposed that the

Konikow-Bredehoft model would be suited for this site. The Konikow-Bredehoft

model would be used to describe subsurface movement of groundwater and contami-

nants. In addition we would utilize the universal soil loss equations to

determine the amount of contaminated sediment that might have been removed from

the site as a result of erosion.

o Detailed Development of Remaining Alternatives. To evaluate a

remedial alternative it is necessary to develop them in sufficient

site-specific detail to allow comparative evaluation. The develop-

ment will involve the generation of preliminary design data and the

establishment of operational requirements. In developing the alter-

natives, consideration will be given to the following items:

58

2.84.1110056.0.0

Refinement and specification of the remedial alternatives in

detail;

Special engineering factors which must be considered prior to

implementation, including laboratory or bench-scale treatability

studies, or additional investigations required to design the

alternative;

Environmental impacts of the proposed alternatives, including

discussions of steps to mitigate these impacts. An example of

an impact is the volatilization of organic compounds during

onsite excavation of contaminated soils;

Offsite waste disposal and transportation needs. If offsite

disposal is required, potential sites will be reviewed with DNR;

Temporary storage requirements will be identified. The duration

of storage, volume of material, containment requirements, etc.,

will be considered;

The need for site-specific measures to assure the protection of

public health during the implementation of each remedial alter-

native will be considered; and

As noted earlier, several remedial technologies may be included,

in the remedial alternatives being evaluated for the site.

59

2.84.1110057.0.0

Where this is the case, it may be advantageous to implement a

remedial alternative in phases. Where this is advantageous, the

phases and their sequence of implementation will be described.

Operation and maintenance/monitoring requirements;

Evaluation of Effectiveness and Environmental Assessment. An envi-

ronmental assessment will be performed for each of the remedial

alternatives selected for detailed analysis. The assessment will

initially evaluate the effectiveness of the remedial alternative in

meeting the response objectives for the site and in protecting public

health and the environment. This assessment will be conducted by

projecting the effectiveness of each alternative in controlling the

future release of contaminants from the site. These projections will

be made through the use of the environmental process and contaminant

transport analogs developed for the site, as described in Task 19 of

the RI section.

Remedial action alternatives will be imposed on the model to deter-

mine their effectiveness in mitigating contaminant release from the

site and the impact of off-site receptors.

Conditions which can be imposed on a groundwater and contaminant

transport model, depending upon the model used, include:

60

2.84.1110058.0.0

multi-dimensional steady and nonsteady flow in aquifers under

confined or unconfined conditions;

physical constraints such as site topography, geology and local

meteorology;

constraints on an aquifer that are imposed by vertical barriers

such as cutoff walls and clay caps;

legal constraints such as access limitations and riparian

rights;

groundwater withdrawal and injection;

natural and artificial recharge;

water exchange between surface and groundwater regimes; and

specification of water-quality conditions (i.e., solute tran-

sport) in any part of the model including injection well water,

leachate from landfills, and leakage from overlying source beds

and surface water.

TEe conditions to be imposed on the model will be those determined

necessary to appropriately define contaminant transport in the

groundwater at the Rose Township site.

61

2.84.1110059.0.0

The model will then be run to project the distribution and concentra-

tions of contaminants at specific receptors at selected future times

and for varying levels of implementation. Although this approach

involves the evaluation of many different scenarios, the approach can

be quickly and efficiently completed once the model has been

developed and calibrated for the site.

The output of the computer runs will enable a determination to be

made of the level and duration of contaminant exposure that the

receptors will see for each remedial alternative.

The mitigated levels of exposure to the contaminants, as predicted by

the modeling, will form the basis for the risk assessment to be

performed for each remedial alternative. This risk assessment will

be conducted using procedures described in Task 19.

o Cost Analysis. The estimated cost of each alternative will include

direct construction and operating costs as well as indirect costs.

The long-term operating costs of a remedial plan are not typically

considered to be an eligible cost of CERCLA-supported, site-cleanup

operations. Consequently, capital and operating costs will be

independently considered in developing strategies. These costs will

be expressed as a total cost of implementation and the present worth

of operating costs over the period that the plan must be implemented.

The cost assessment will include an analysis of the sensitivity of

cost to the degree or level of implementation. For example, the cost

62

2.84.1110060.0.0

.of excavating 50 percent of the contaminated soils at a site will be

compared to the cost for excavating 90 or 100 percent of the soils.

Due to variances in contaminant concentrations, the cost is generally

not uniformly proportional to the degree of implementation. Cost

estimates will be prepared using data from Jordan's project files,

EPA technical reports, quotations from equipment vendors, and Jor-

dan's estimators.

Based on the information developed in this section the following will have been

prepared for each remedial alternative under consideration: 1) detailed des-

cription, 2) effectiveness and environmental assessment, and 3) cost estimates.

This information can serve as the basis of the comparative evaluation of the

remedial alternatives and the selection of the cost-effective remedial alterna-

tive as described in Task 26.

Task 26: Evaluation and Recommendation of Most Cost-Effective Alternative

As a final process in the analysis, the remedial alternatives will be evaluated

and the most cost-effective remedial alternative identified. The evaluation of

remedial alternatives will consider technical, environmental and economic cri-

teria. These criteria will include reliability, implementability, operation

and maintenance, environmental effects, safety, and total costs. This evalua-

tion of the remedial alternatives will review the relative advantages of one

alternative over the others.

63

2.84.1110061.0.0

The cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted by establishing the effec-

tiveness of each alternative in meeting the response objectives and in mini-

mizing risk to public health and the environment. This effectiveness will

relate primarily to controlling releases of contaminants to the environment and

controlling receptor exposure. The lifetime cost of the remedial alternatives

will then be compared to their effectiveness to identify the least costly

alternative which is technically acceptable, meets the response objectives, and

provides adequate protection to public health and the environment.

A matrix method will be used to select the most appropriate alternative if the

number and complexity of alternatives is too great to enable selection of the

final alternative based on a simple inspection of cost, effectiveness, and

environmental impacts. In the 'matrix method, the candidate alternatives are

rated against each other according to several measures of suitability,

effectiveness and cost. Weighting factors are applied to the individual

measures, which are rated for each alternative, and a final score (sum of

weighted ratings) is calculated for each alternative. An example of a

cost-effective matrix is given in Figure 2-6.

The criteria for which the various alternatives are to be rated are called

"effectiveness measures." These measures are evaluated during the technical

analysis in previous tasks. The measures include the following:

o Technical

performance

64

2.84.1110062.0.0

oa

mxo

2 ^> -oH m

1 «^ 3>

i =s

3 S3> g £

>Iii• ^BS ic3)

C3)

2 m

a § > ?m *H 05

EVALUATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION ALTERNATIVESNORTH HOU.YWOGO PUhP. MB*HS, TEMCSSS

CORPAC

ALTER

ECTIVET10NNATIVES

.MflMUIMMM

• 1 w-Mt

.. — ->. 5SS.U

•' K.1Z.-3.

" asiia

.,

.. ~~—

., — .•< nisei

_ fr*-..

" •crl<..

•• --"•'

>" •££»»- -rJSS

•u jets.

•j

.. — ~

.,

M aaatz

~«

>• suaa•• .£=.

" •!&••!<

f XPI&

a

-I™-.: s=s-.

rjjsj^iss_;i.-;-r;..

— IS".!"1"

."-"-v...

,*i_^^jira!;ajjL"S"

-^^-r.isr.s.:

•:vj ;:•:;;."— IS.T—•"•'•':"•?'

?££J£r"

._ — «.

J£££TS£,£

S'l'jSZU'LSlB,'

"rj jntii'ii"

"HTL — «

!•• UM

oNATION Q

L :IW

EVALUATION CHTERA

NA

3

O0Oooo9

NA

39993Oe

3933993

NA

O

C3Ob"oQ

NA

O

O

(339333

_

NA

"b0bo0oo3

NA

O

O

O

33e9.3

33

e9

NA

0

O

Oo03

NA

O

O

b30933

—. .

•MtM

NA

O

O

b(3(3O03

NA

Ooo33333333

"3(30"61

NA

'(3

0

0

3OO

NA

O

O

33b"b(5

~.L—

•3Ob"o(3o0o

ooooo0oooo0bb

-O-

~b

99O0O

JO.

99OOOOb(3o

" 4J,'"-tr?M

NA

93333333

NA

3

33O

•••e

2•

NA

333

"-*.NA

9

33

'o'.€»

M

Oo"oQOO3

O

•••o(3OOO

"b"o0b333

0

•o

obQ

0

o0obo

.-s

Ob"oooo0

NA

NA

NA

NA

O

O

O

O

O

Q

0

O

0"NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

3

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

9339339

0eo•0ooo0ooo09b"o

••

•o

"3b~

.0

ob"3(3b

CM«IMMIMta_

*", ^-^*"

M*

3bo30o3

••0

•0(3o0o00o(3obb

••

b"b0

~b~bob"6

9

999999

•e••ooo0oob"oo

J?_~b

99

•OO"b

ioooob

ML-*.

••»

99(3"bO0O(3O

,NA_

NA

NA

NA

(3

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

.0-NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

(3

bNA

NA

NA~LffiS'.

Z2S

9993"33339

9999OO0oo0oooooo

9999boo9999OO0b

"0

«~

•MM

Ooo"3"

939e•

OOOoo99

•••o•99

J3L

"O"

OO

"boo3

oboo

_3L

390

•-*

o3C33339C3

O3O3OOOOOOOOOOOO

O0o0"oC3O

O"6OOOb"0

_p_

--.—

"—

03o3939O9

O3O3

•99

•O

•O

•99

.«_

OQ

_0_

OO3

0OO09e39

.9"

- --

—

03Ob"3O33O

•993o33O33 •O33

f-

93

"b~oob

9993"3"693

¥

reliability

implementability

safety considerations

o Public Health

reduction of health and environmental impacts

level of cleanup

o Institutional

acquisition of necessary federal, state and local.permits

community impacts

o Environmental

beneficial effects of the response

adverse effects

The trade-off matrix scoring provides an aggregated measure of the "relative

desirability" of a remedial action, when compared to other actions for a given

site. The numerical value of the score obtained for a given alternative does

not indicate the absolute degree to which the alternative affords protection to

public health, welfare or the environment. It is only_the score in comparison

with other alternatives against which it has been compared that is of concern.

Consistency in scoring the alternative against others is essential. By the use

66

2.84.1110063.0.0

of score (e.g., 1-10) and weighting factors (e.g., 0.1-1.0), a reasonable

spread of points between alternatives generally results.

Because some measures of effectiveness are not amenable to quantitation, a/"

trade-off matrix method may be used to eavluate the cost-effectiveness of

remedial action alternatives. /

Through this evaluation process, the most cost-effective remedial alternative

for the Rose township site will be identified. The evaluation of remedial

alternatives and the selection of the cost-effective remedial alternatives will

be reviewed with be continuously reviewed with DNR during Tasks 25 and 26./

/

Task 27: Interim Report

Prior to preceding with the conceptual design of the cost-effective alternative

selected in Task 26, an interim report will be prepared summarizing the cost-

effective analysis and its conclusions. The report will be submitted to DNR

for review and comment. The interim report will summarize Tasks 21 through 26

of the FS. Once DNR and EPA have concurred with the selection of the cost-

effective alternative, Task 28, Conceptual Design, will be initiated.

Task 28: Conceptual Design

The objective of this task is to provide a clear definition of the cost-effec-

tive remedial alternative. The design data developed in Task 22 will be

augmented for the most cost-effective remedial alternative to provide a de-

67

2.84.1110064.0.0 .

tailed engineering description of the proposed remedial alternative. The

conceptual design will include traditional engineering elements associated with

conceptual designs, as well as other data necessary to prepare a budget level

cost estimate and to provide adequate information to enable subsequent activi-

ties to be initiated. The conceptual design will be described in a narrative

format and will include the following items:

o A conceptual plan view drawing of the overall site, showing general

locations for project actions and facilities;

o Conceptual layouts (plan and cross-sectional views where required)

for the individual facilities, other items to be installed, or

actions to be implemented;

o Conceptual design criteria and rationale;

o Description of types of equipment required, including approximate

capacity, size and materials of construction;

o Process flow sheets, including chemical consumption estimates and a

description of the process, if applicable;

o Operational description of process units or other facilities;

o Approximate piping sizes, capacities,, and rationale for their selec-

tion;

68

2.84.1110065.0.0

o Estimate of quantities of material or equipment required and ration-

ale;

o Description of construction techniques and .operation and maintenance

requirements;

o Construction material requirements and rationale;

o Utility requirements and rationale;

o Institutional requirements including environmental permits;

o Identification and evaluation of potential construction problems,

associated risks, and the proposed solutions;

o Outline of technical specifications and protocol;

o Outline of operation and maintenance manual;

o Outline of safety plans including cost impact on implementation;

o Right-of-way requirements;

o Description of technical requirements or environmental mitigation

measures;

69

2.84.1110066.0.0

o Additional engineering data required to proceed with design;

o Construction permit requirements;

o Temporary hazardous material storage and disposal requirements and

rationale;

o Offsite disposal procedures, including transportation and vehicle

constraints, and final disposal and treatment facility options;

o Closure and long-term monitoring requirements and rationale;

o Performance standards to define what levels of cleanup will be

required to complete the remedial action;

o Criteria for subcontractor selection;

o Prepare a budget level cost estimate (including capital and operation

and maintenance costs);

o Prepare a project schedule; and

o Any additional information required as the basis for the completion

of the final remedial design.

70

2.84.1110067.0.0

Task 29: Final Report

Jordan will prepare a final report at the completion of the FS. The report

will describe the studies and identify and describe the most cost-effective

remedial alternative. Graphics will be a prominent feature of the report. The

report preparation will involve the expertise of key project staff, with the

final report edited for consistency by the Project Manager.

71

2.84.1110068.0.0

3.0 MANAGEMENT PLAN

This section of the work plan outlines the management plan which will be used

to complete the Rose Township Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study. The

following information describes the project organization, project staffing plan

and the project management procedures which will be followed in the conduct of

this RI/FS.

3.1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION

Figure 3-1 outlines the project organization and project staffing plan for the

Rose Township RI/FS.

As prime contractor, Jordan will have responsibility for subcontracted activi-

ties. Subcontractors and consultants will be utilized during the conduct of

the Rose Township RI/FS. A listing of these subcontractors and consultants

and their role in the project is as follows:

1. KECK Consulting Services, Inc. KECK will place borings and install

monitoring wells required in conjunction with the RI at the Rose Township

Site. In this assignment KECK will provide drilling equipment, materials

and drillers. JORDAN will direct the driller's activity, provide drilling

specifications, locate drilling sites, and interpret geologic conditions.

72

2.84.1110069.0.0

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF

NATURAL RESOURCES

QUALITY REVIEWTEAM

WWHEINLRTS.C.WALKER

PROJECT MANACERJS. AT WELL

QUALITY CONTROLQUALITY ASSURANCE

OFFICER-IN-CHARGED.R. COT£

HEALTH AND SAFETY

TECHNICALPROJECT DIRECTOR

J.O. TEWHEY

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATIONn

REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION£.& HILL

FEASIBILITY STUDY* K AHLERS

GEOPHYSICSR.K ALLEN

HYOROGEOLOGYWA HURRAY

FIELD ACTIVITIESf.6 HILL

BORINGS A MONITORING)WELL INSTALLATIONKECK CONSULTING

SERVICES, INC

RING!ON Ill

FIELD SAMPLINGRU BURCER

CONTAMINATIONASSESSMENT

AND MODELINGHA LfWlS

CHEMICALENGINEERINGO C 4LLEHA.K AHLERS

ENVIRONMENTALENGINEERING

JA CARUTHERS

_E

RISK ASSESSMENTD.C ALLENR HARTUNS

COST ESTIMATINGKW AJA

FIGURE 3-1PROJECT ORGANIZATION

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITEMICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

E.CJORDANCQ-

2. Walter Meinert. Mr. Meinert will participate in this project as part of

the quality review team. In this role, Mr. Meinert will review the site

exploration program prior to initiating project activities and will

provide quality'reviews at selected times during the conduct of the RI/FS.

3. Rolf Hartung, Ph. D. Dr. Hartung will serve as a consultant to the

project team in matters related to exposure assessment, toxicology and

response objectives.

The project organization for the Rose Township Site will ensure close interac-

tion between DNR and the contractor. Jordan, as prime contractor, will provide

the project management and technical supervision on the project. James S.

Atwell, P.E., will be the Project Manager and will be the primary contact

between DNR and the proejct team on issues relating to the contract, the scope,

\schedule, budget and subcontractor relationships. He will have ultimate

responsibility for technical matters. Administratively, his responsibilities

are to ensure that the project is proceeding on schedule and that the budget

for the various tasks is maintained.

As Technical Project Director, John D. Tewhey, Ph.D., will have responsibility

for technical direction of the project and coordination with the various

technical disciplines. As part of the coordination role, he will oversee field

activities associated with the Remedial Investigation. Dr. Tewhey will also be

responsible for coordination with USEPA CLP and for the transfer of information

generated during preceding project phases, as appropriate.

74

2.84.1110070.0.0

Mr. Earl Hill will be the Task Leader for the Remedial Investigation. Mr.

Alvin Ahlers will be the Task Leader for the Feasibility Study.

3.2 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

To assist in the overall management of the project and to track project and

work assignment schedules, budgets and manpower requiremnts, including those of

the subcontractors, Jordan will utilize computerized management information

systems. Through the use of these systems, Weekly Project Status Reports will

be produced. These reports will be submitted to DNR by Friday of the following

week.

To monitor manpower utilization and costs, separate account numbers will be

assigned for each phase of the project. Labor expenditures will be allocated

to the appropriate account on a weekly basis. This information will be com-

piled weekly in the Weekly Project Status Report. This report will include the

following information for each phase:

o name of each employee and number of hours charged to the work phase that

week;

o total hours charged to the work phase by technical discipline for that

week;

o total hours charged to date to the work phase by technical discipline;

75

2.84.1110071.0.0

o total hours charged to the work phase that week;

o dollar value of labor expenditures for that week;

o cumulative labor cost for the work phase;

o cumulative labor rate per hour versus budgeted rate; and

o other direct costs for the month and on a cumulative basis.

These weekly data will be compared to project budgets to determine project

status. These administrative tools will be used by Jordan in scheduling of

work assigments and allocating staff resources.

This report will be used to: 1) determine if sufficient resources are being

committed to each assignment; and 2) identify staff or budget problems as they

develop. The reports will also be valuable in determining the status of the

project on a weekly basis for preparation of weekly progress reports.

The budget for each phase will provide the basis for tracking project expendi-

tures. The weekly computerized project status reports will be submitted to the

DNR Project Administrator on the following Friday. This data will be supple-

mented by a brief written summary of work accomplished during that week,

problems that developed, and steps taken to resolve problems.

76

2.84.1110072.0.0

Project invoices will be submitted to DNR every four weeks. At a minimum,

Jordan's Project Manager and DNR's Project Administrator will meet bi-weekly to

review project status.

77

2.84.111007.3.0.0

4.0' COST AND SCHEDULE

4.1 PROJECT SCHEDULE

The schedule for the Rose Township site RI/FS is shown in Figure 4-1. The

schedule indicates that 15 months are required to complete the RI/FS following

approval of the Work Plan.

Completion of the RI/FS on schedule is contingent upon 60-day turnaround of

analytical results from EPA's Contract Laboratory Program (CLP). Also, DNR

review must be completed in a timely manner to allow for completion of the

RI/FS within the designated time period.

Deliverables (reports) will be submitted to DNR at the conclusion of the

following Tasks:

Task 1 - Work Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plan

Task 2 - Description of Current Situation

Task 3 - Health and Safety Plan

Task 5 - Preinvestigative Evaluation

Task 20 - RI Report

Task 21 - Scoping Update

Task 22: o Response Objectives

o Remedial Alternatives

78

2.84.1110074.0.0

M O N T H S

TASKS

INITIAL ACTIVITIES (PHASE I)

Task 1: Prepare Work PlanTaka~2: Describe Current SituationTask 3i Prepare Safety PlanTask 4: Define Boundary ConditionsTask 5; Prelnvestlgattve Evaluation

Site OfficeTask 7: Community Relations

REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (PHASE II)

Task 8: Site InventoryTask 9; Air InvestigationTask 10: Domestic Well and Existing Monitoring

Well SaapllnTask 11: Surface Water/Sediment SamplingTask 12: GeophysicsTask 13: Pollutant CharacterizationTask 1A: Monitoring Well InstallationTask 15: Surface SoilsTask 16: New Monitoring Well SamplingTask 17: Aquifer TestingTask 18: Analytical ProgramTask 19: Data In te rpre ta t lon /Contamina t Inn

AssessmentTask 20: RI Report

FEASIBILITY STUDY (PHASE HI)

Task 21: Description of Current Situationand Scoping Update

Task 22: Development of AlternativesTask 23: Initial Screening of AlternativesTask 24; Laboratory Studies (Optlonnl)Task 25: Detailed EvaluationTask 26: Evaluation and Recommendation uf

Most Cost-Effective AlternativeTask 27: Preliminary FS ReportTask 28: Conceptual DesignTask 29: Final Report

-4-CONTINUOUS ACTIVITYINTERMITTENT ACTIVITY «• — — — •• — —CLP ANALYSIS IIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIREVIEW ••••••••••••••DELIVERABLE S #

© CONTINGENT ACTIVITY

FIGURE 4-1PROJECT SCHEDULE

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITEE.CJORDANCQ-

Task 27 - Interim Report

Task 29 - FS Report

In addition to these reports, interim reports and preliminary data anaylses

will be submitted to DNR at the completion of each individual Task.

4.2 COST AND BUDGET

The total estimated cost of the site Remedial Investigation and Feasibility

Study, including initial activities is $374,989.

Total man-hours required for the RI/FS have been estimated at 6082. Manpower

requirements by task are presented in Tables 4-1 through 4-3. Project cost

summaries are presented in Table 4-4.

80

2.84.1110075.0.0

TABLE 4-1

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITEREMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY

E.G. JORDAN CO. HOURS BY LEVELINITIAL ACTIVITIES (PHASE I)

TASK

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Prepare Work Plan and QAPP

Describe Current Situation

Prepare Safety Plan

Define Boundary Conditions

Preinvestigative Evaluation

Site Office

Community Relations

Hours by Level

Secretarial/Clerical

Subtotal Hours

4

120

40

4

-

8

4

80

256

PROFESSIONAL3 2 1

120 70 80

60 40 40

24

8

1 6 - 8

16

80 40 60

324 150 188

TECHNICAL2 1

20 20

20 8

4 8

8

8

8

20

44 80

TASKTOTAL

430

208

40

16

40

28

280

1042

40

1082

81

2.84.1680001.0.0

TABLE 4-2

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITEREMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY

E.C. JORDAN CO. HOURS BY LEVELREMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (PHASE II)

PROFESSIONALTASK 4 3 2 1

8. Site Inventory -

9. Air Investigation 10 10 80 10 •

10. Domestic Well and Existing 20 20 10 40Monitoring Well Sampling

11. Surface Water/Sediment Sampling 20 20 40 20

12. Geophysics 200 - 40 140

13. Pollutant Characterization

14. Monitoring Well Installation 20 40 290 40

15. Surface Soil Sampling - 20 40 100 20

16. New Monitoring Well Sampling 10 10 30 30

17. Aquifer Testing 10 40 20 20

18. Analytical Program 30 40

19. Data Interpretation/ 150 180 160 80Contamination Assessment

20. Remedial Investigation Report 150 180 90 80

Hours by Level 640 540 900 480

Secretarial/Clerical

Subtotal Hours

82

2.84.1680001.1.0

TECHNICAL TASK2 1 • TOTAL

-

40 - 150

50 10 150

40 10 150

60 20 460

20 10 420

80 20 280

10 90

90

40 - 110

60 20 650

80 20 600

470 120 3150

80

3230

TABLE 4-3

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITEREMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY

E.G. JORDAN CO. HOURS BY LEVELFEASIBILITY STUDY (PHASE III)

PROFESSIONALTASK

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

Description of Current Situation

Development of Alternatives

Initial Screening

Laboratory Studies

Detailed Evaluation

Evaluation and Recommendationof Cost-Effective Alternative

Preliminary FS Report

Conceptual Design

Final Report

Hours by Level

Secretarial/Clerical

Subtotal Hours

4

10

40

40

-

30

40

40

50

80

330

3

10

60

50

-

60

80

80

100

60

500

2

-

40

20

-

60

60

60

80

50

370

1

-

20

20

-

50

60

40

70

10

270

TECHNICAL TASK2 1 TOTAL

10 - 30

10 20 190

10 - 140

-

10 210

20 20 280

20 240

40 40 380

20 220

90 130 1690

80

1770

2.84.168nnno n n

83

TABLE 4-4

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITEREMEDIAL INVESTIGATION AND FEASIBILITY STUDY

BUDGET SUMMARY

Phase

Initial Activities

Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study

TOTAL

Hours L

1082

3230

1770

6082

Labor2

38,231

106,718

59,576

204,525

OtherDirect

7,760

48,840

7,110

63,710

COSTS ($)Sub-

Contracts

1,000

59,265

6,000

66,265

Fee

6,222

24,375

9,892

40,489

Total

53,213

239,198

82,578

374,989

1Prime contractor hours.2Direct labor and overhead.

r

84

2.84.1680003.0.0

TABLE 4-5

ROSE TOWNSHIP SITEREMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY

OTHER DIRECT COST SUMMARY

Transportation Est. Cost

Airfare: 20 RT @ $ per RT Vehicle Charges:

Subsistence

94 days @ $ per day

Other Direct Costs

Word Processing: 110 hours @ per hour

Computer Services:

Printing: 1,000 copies @ $0. per copy10,000 copies @ $0. per copy

Telephone:

Expendables (Bottles, Coolers, Ice,Sampling Supplies):

Safety:

Geophysics Equipment:

Equipment Charges:OVA PI Meter Sampling (Air and Water)

Shipping:

Decontamination Trailer (water, phone, etc.):

Site Access Road (culvert and fill):

85

2.84.1680004.0.0