the t3fl9£ liifmed .in C/u^ (i^iarne i4 not a4 *c«dabfeit i4 rfiia to w[)4.'Canda'ic( co^o/i o/i condition oft the o/iig.uia£ page,

(lied)

SUMMARY REPORT

SOIL AND GROUND-WATER INVESTIGATIONS

DELAWARE CITY, DELAWARE

STAUFFER CHEMICAL COMPANY

WESTPORT, CONNECTICUT

"""j FEBRUARY 4, 1983

I|( the page filmed in thi-6 ((/tame i^ wot a^ ^eadafafe on. legible ait i^ due to ^ub^tanda/id totan on condition od the o/iigi«af page.

ORIGINAL(ftorf)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Introduction s 1

Continued Investigation 2

Prior Investigations 4

Conclusions and Recommendations 5

flR300!50

the page dimmed in tkiA ij/tame i4 not M /teadabfe o/t fegib^e a.&it i^ due to ^ufa^tanda/id colo/i OA condition oii the o/iiginaf page.

. (IfiiClfJALIntroduction {f(i",'|)

••—s During the past ten months Stauffer Chemical Company has, onIts own Initiative, conducted an extensive Investigation into thepossible causes and impacts of ground water found to contain elevatedlevels of VCM and EDO, The elevated levels of VCH and EDC have beenobserved in ground water under properties of Stauffer Chemical Companyand Formosa Plastics Company located in Delaware City, Delaware.The purpose of this investigation has been to determine the degreeof hazard to human health and the environment presented by the con-taminated ground water, and to develop sufficient understanding ofthe site ground-water conditions to enable consideration of appropriatealternative remedial measures*

The observed ground-water contamination which prompted this in-vestigation consisted of elevated levels of EDC and VCM detected in awell supplying two residencies located at the northwestern limit of theStauffer Chemical property. The analytical results which were reportedto Stauffer management on April 20, 1982 indicated the presence of 5.8ppm EDC, 1.5 ppm VCM and 14 ppb TCE. These results were reported to theUS EPA Region III in a letter dated April 23, 1982.

In response to these findings Stauffer immediately undertookthe following program:

1. Residents from both houses were requested to temporarilyre-locate at Stauffer's expense. The Alger family did and

_^ the Koval family remained in the house for two additional.") days prior to leaving on a previously planned two-week

vacation.

2. An alternate water supply via tank truck was provided andeventually replaced by the Installation of 2 new hallowwells.

3. The residents did not re-occupy the houses until the tanktruck water supply was in operation and analysis had verifiedthat EDC and VCM were no longer present nt detectable levels.

4, A ground-water investigation was initiated on April 27, 1982.

Prior to initiation of the investigation in April, 1982 StaufferChemical Company conducted a subsurface boring investigation in areas onthe Stauffer property designed on aerial photos by the US EPA. Also, InMarch, 1982 Stauffer representatives accompanied an EPA contractor,Ecology and Environment, on an inspection of the Stauffer and Formosaproperties.

A R 3 0 0 I 5 I

Id the page dimmed in thi& iS/tame it not aA nna.do.bit on ttQibti HA thiAtabil, it J.A due to MtiAtandaid toian an condition orf the o/iiginaf page

Continued Investigationi •••*Throughout the period beginning with the finding of EDC and VCM in'

the residential supply well and continued to the present StaufferChemical Company has Investigated the area ground-water conditions and ^,monitored the water supplies of houses located on Stauffer property. v

On-Slte Residents; There are four houses located at the north-western limit of the property owned by Stauffer Chemical Company.Two of these homes, occupied by the Koval and Alger families, wereoriginally supplied with water from the one well which was 'found tobe contaminated. The remaining two homes occupied by the Tunlsonand Grey families are supplied with water from two separate wellsboth of which are screened In the upper portion of the aquifer and havenever been found to contain VCM or EDC. The new wells provided forth'e Koval and Alger homes are also screened In the upper portion ofthe aquifer.

Stauffer has throughout the period under discussion continued tomonitor the water supplies for r.hese homes, including the newly In-stalled wells at Alger and Koval homes, on a monthly basis beginning inJuly, 1982. The analyses performed as part of this monitoring throughthe month of January, 1983 have not detected the presence of EDC or VCMat concentrations greater than or equal to 1.0 ppb. The analyses havebeen performed by Stewart Laboratories, Inc., Knoxville, TN., are at-tached.

In addition, representatives of the Stauffer medical staff have in-terviewed with and answered questions for the families involved. Cur-rently Stauffer Chemical Company has extended an offer to and recom-mended that all present and former residents of the Koval and Algerhomes, who may have consumed the contaminated water, have a medical v«-screenlng examination by a doctor of their own choice at Stauffer'sexpense.

Hydrogeologic Investigation! Since April, 1982 Stau'ffer ChemicalCompany has been in the process of conducting an extensive hydrogeologicinvestigation of the site and surrounding area. The actual area ofthis investigation has extended well beyond the property limits ofStauffer Chemical Company and Formosa Plastics Company to includea total area of approximately 1,670 acres. The investigative workhas been conducted by Roux Associates, Inc. Hunt Ington, New York forStauffer Chemical Company. This ,vork has Included;

1. the Installation of 32 new observation wells, 24 on propertiesowned by Stnuffer or Formosa and 8 on properties owned byothers;

2. the drilling of 4 exploratory borings to define deeper strati-graphic conditions;

- 2 - (\R300152

the page ditmad in thi.4 iname. i^ not O.A /teadabfe on fegib^e a.4 thi.4it i.6 due to AubAtandand c.oHon on condition o< the. o/iiginaf page.

3. the excavation of 8 exploratory test pits on Stsuffer propertyto explore the possible existence of an additional unidentifiedsource of contamination;

/) 4. the conducting of an electrical resistivity survey, using 195points of measurement, to map the configuration of the uppersurface of the underlying aquitard; and

5. the analysis performed by Stauffer Chemical Company's EasternResearch Center, Dobbs Ferry, New York on ground-water sam-pies collected from all 32 new wells, 16 off-site residentialsupply wells, 3 Getty supply wells which withdraw groundwater from the deep Potomac aquifers, and on soil samplesfrom the eight test pits.

All the analysis of ground-water samples and soil samples fromthe test pits was conducted by Stauffer and followed the protocolsdescribed on Attachment A of this report.

The methods used In conducting this hydrogeologic investigationand the results of the work performed, including the ground-waterquality data, are discussed in detail in the February 4, 1983 reportby Roux Associates, Inc. which has been submitted in conjunction withthis report. In general, the key findings of the Stauffer investlga-

. tlon as presented in the Roux Associates Report include;

1. The extent of EDC and VCM in the Columbia aquifer appeart*. to be limited to the lower portions of the aquifer over an

area of the Stauffer and Formosa properties west of the PVC"N plant and possibly just beyond Route 13 onto property owned'....) by Getty.

2. The entire area of the Columbia aquifer which contains EDCand VCM is underlain by an aquitard composed of either theMerchantville Formation or the upper clay of Potomac Forma-tion.

3. The major sources contributing EDC and VCM to the aquiferappears to be the impoundments in the western portion of

j the PVC plant, in particular the "Off Grade natch Pits" other-• wise known as the "Earthen Lagoons."

4. EDC or VCM were not detected in any of the water samplescollected during this Investigation from off-site domesticor Industrial supply wells.

5. Ground water in the Columbia aquifer appears to dischargeto local streams.

1 Throughout the period of this investigation representatives ofi Stauffer Chemical Company have maintained cummunlcatlon with represent-'" atives of the US EPA - Region III and the State of Delaware Department

of Natural Resources and Environmental Control. At critical junctions

- 3 - AR300I53sj • •

Id the page />it.m<id i" thiA d^ame i-i not a.6 Aeadafa^e on ^egifa^e O.A thi*iabe.1, it iA due to AukAtandand noion on condition od the oniginat page.

\in the evolution of this investigation meetings were held betweenrepresentatives of Stauffer, Formosa, US EPA Region III and the Stateof Delaware to discuss the results of the Investigation to date andproposed additional investigative work. Specifically, this includeda meeting on:

1. May 12, 1982 to discuss the results of the initial phase of theprogram which included the Installation of 4 new wells andanalytical results. Also discussed was the proposed placemtjjii;|Q|?jfliof eight additional on-slte wells to better determine the 'direction of ground-water flow and determine the possiblesources of the ECC and VCM.

. 2. July 7, 1982 to discuss the results of the first 12 wells,Including analysis, and the location of an additional 11wells to better define the extent of EDC and VCM migrationon-site. In addition, the use of electrical resistivitywas proposed for the purpose of mapping the top of the under-lying aquitard both on the Stauffer and Formosa propertiesas well as areas beyond the property boundaries.

3. October 22, 1982 to review the results of all 24 on-slte wellsand the Initial resistivity map of the top of the aquitard, andto propose the Installation of an additional 8 off-site wells,expansion of the resistivity survey and the sampling ofoff-site residential supply wells In the then projected plumepath.

Our next such meeting is scheduled for February 16, 1982 at whichtime the results of the completed investigation will be discussed alongwith potential remedial options which are outlined in a later sectionof this report. A note of appreciation is extended to the membersof Delaware Department of Natural resources and Environmental Controlfor their assistance in obtaining data critical to completion of thisinvestigation. Such data Included information on the regional hydro-geology, logs for area wells and the collection of water samples fromoff-site residential supply wells.

Prior Investigations

Boring Investigation! During the week of December 28, 1981 areasof the Stauffer property Identified on aerial photos by US EPA as ques-tionable were investigated by performing subsurface borings and col-lecting samples for analysis. This work was conducted under the super-vision oi personnel from Stauffer's Eastern Research Center and con-sisted of conducting auger borings and collecting split spoon samples.A total of 50 samples were collected find analyzed for VCM and EDC fromthe 13 borings performed in 5 of the 6 areas identified.

The results of this work were provided to the US EPA in a letterdated April 6, 1982. The results of this work demonstrated that noburials other than those previously reported, the Old Sluge Ilurial oClfllSlv

- 4 -

Id the page dimmed in thi^ diame i-4 not O.A /teadabfe on iigibie. O.A tkiAf.abe.1, it iA due. to AubAtandund noion on condition od tlie. oniginai pa.ge,

Pits, exist on Stauffer property. It also demonstrated that the SlugeBurial Pits are not a significant source of contamination.

US EPA Contractor Inspection: On March 9 and 10, 1982 the US EPAcontractor Ecology and Environment conducted an inspection, which In-cluded the collection of ground water, surface water and sedimentsamples from the Stauffer and Formosa properties and the surroundingarea. Representatives of Stauffer Eastern Research Center accompaniedthe Ecology and Environment inspection teams and split samples withthem. The results of Stauffer VGA analyses for VCM, EDC and TCE of allsamples except the sediment samples were presented and discussed in theJune, 1982 P.M. Roux Report. Extractable Priority Pollutant analyses ofthese samples were completed In August, 1982. These analysis found thatphthalate esters were the only extractable Priority Pollutants found insome of the samples. The results of the extractable portion of theanalysis are presented on Tables I through III dated March, 1983 at-tached with this report.

Conclusions and Recommendations '

Upon review of the results of work completed to date, it is StaufferChemical Company's conclusion that the observed conditions do not •

. present an Immediate risk to human health, and that the extent of con-taminate plume migration and the principal sources of the observedground-water contamination have been sufficiently defined so that nofurther work of purely an irvestigative nature is warranted. RatherStauffer recommends that future efforts in this matter be directedtoward the development and completion of a feasibility study, and theImplementation of appropriate remedial action(s) as outlined below.

Regarding a plan for routine monitoring of representative wellsStauffer proposes the following;

t1. Continue monitoring on-site residential supply wells on a quar-

terly basis for VCM and EDC.

2. Observation wells 5, 12, 13, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 28, and29 be monitored on an annual basis for EDC and VCM startingApril 1, 1983. This is to be continued until remedialmeasures are initiated at which time the program wouldsubject to revision.

Stauffer proposes that it along with Formosa Plastic CorporationUSA undertake a feasibility study to evaluate potential remedial optionsfor degree of risk reduction, practicality of Implementation and costeffectiveness. Remedial alternatives proposed for consideration wouldInclude:

RR300I55- 5 -

Id the. page dilmid in thiA diame J.A not O.A /ieadafafe on tigibte. O.A thiAla.be.1, it iA due. to ^ub^tandaAd c.oton on condition od the. oniginai page.

1. Source Abatement

- No action

- Modification plant operations

- Modification source structures ',!.i-'3'i

- Removal of primary sources from plant operation >

2. Contaminated Ground Water

- No action

- Plume management, to Include additional plume definition,long term monitoring and a commitment to remediate individualImpacts if and when they occur

- Prevent the migration of contaminated ground water beyondStauffer or Formosa property.

At the present time the above listed activities should beconsidered as a general grouping which will undoubtedly become morespecific during the feasibility study.

Stauffer believes that the proposed additional alternatives listedabove can be initiated as soon as can be agreed upon. It is estimatedthat the proposed feasibility study can be completed with a three monthperiod. The proposed program for routine monitoring can be intltiatedupon agreement to do so.

(\R300156.

Id the. page dimmed in thi.4 diame iA not aA ma.da.bie. on le.gibte. o.*,labii, it iA due. to AubAta.nda.nd e.oion on condition od the. oniginat page..

ATTACHMENT A

Summary of the Analytical Procedures Used forAnalysis of Vinyl Chloride Monomer (VCM) and1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) in Delaware City Area

Water and Soil Samples

WATER ANALYSIS

Initially, water samples were analyzed according to EPAMethod 624, purge and trap gas chromatography with massspectroscopic detection (GC/MS). Subsequent samples wereanalyzed by EPA Method 624 and also by purge and trap gaschromatography with flame ionization detection (GC/FID).This additional technique was used because the quantitativeanalysis was more precise and accurate with GC/FID. Asexperience was gained with the analysis of additional.samples by GC/FID, the use of GC/MS was discontinued unlessinterferences were encountered in the sample matrix.Confirmation of compound identity by GC/FID was obtainedby overspiking with standards.

SOIL ANALYSIS

Two sets of soil samples were analyzed for VCM afnd EDC. Thefirst set was analyzed according to a protocol outlined in areport prepared for the EPA by the Midwest Research Institute(MRI) entitled, "Analytical Protocol for Screening PubliclyOwned Treatment Work Sludges for Organic Priority Pollutants".Using this method, the soil samples were suspended in waterfollowed by purge and trap GC/FID.

The second set of soil samples, collected November 30, 1982,was analyzed according to EPA Method 8240, with two modifica-tions:

(1) The soil was extracted with chlorobenzene instead ofpolyethylene glycol. Based on Stauffer 's internalexperience, chlorobenzene is a better solvent for thisparticular analysis.

(2) The samples were analyzed by GC/FID, as they were in thewater analysis. RR300157

Id the page dimmed in thi* h/iame. iA not O.A nudabie. on .(legible aA thi.4ta.be.lt, it iA due. to AubAtandand aoion on condition od the. oniginat page..

ATTACHMENT A (Cont.) 0ftJ3!,',VU(Reel)

QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR WATER AND SOIL ANALYSIS

The quality assurance program consisted of: (1) adminis-trative sample control and security, documented by Chainof Custody forms; (2) technical procedures.

The technical procedures consisted of analyzing laboratoryblanks, field blanks, duplicate samples and spiked samples.Laboratory blanks were analyzed daily and after analysis ofany sample containing high levels of VCM or EUC. Fieldblanks were collected for all samples, but only analyzedwhen either VCM or EDC were detected. Duplicate sampleswere analyzed as a continuing check on the reproducibilityof the method. Spiked samples were analyzed at least oncefor every set of samples.

RR300I58

Id the page dimmed in thiA dname. iA not HA Aeadafa.Ce on tegibte. aA thiAla.be.1, it iA due. to AubAtandand noton on condition od the oniginai page..

. . ,TABLE I (,?jf;)

Extractables Found in Monitoring HellsDelaware City Site

.._ ' March, 1982

Compounds Found (ppb)

Site PEHPt DBPt POPI

Well SI 38 ND* NDWell U (Dup.) . ND ND NDWellJ3 ' 47 10 10Well JJ5 10 .Well «B 14Well 39 35Well S10 < 10Well Sll * 13Well £12 < 10 < 10Well S13 13 < 10

2> * LLD = 10 ppb for each component

t DEHP = Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

DBF a Di-n-butylphthalate

OOP a Di-n-octylphthalate

flR300IS9•—/

Id the page dimmed in thi4 (,name. iA not aA ne.ada.bie. on ie.gibte. aA thiAiabit, it iA due. to AubAtandand noion on condition od the. oniginai page..

••.TABLE-.II 1'1•——————•Extractables Found in Surface Waters

Delaware City SiteMarch, 1982 .

Compounds Found '(ppb)

Site DEHPt

SI 42

S6 < 10

S7 ND*

W5 26•n

W6 ND

ERG Blank < 10

Lab. E.xtr. Blank ND

o* LLD = 10 ppb

t DEHP = Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

Id the page dimmed in thi4 d^ame i^ not a^ ne.adab£e. on ie.gibie. aA thiAlabe.i, it iA due. to AubAtandand c.oton on condition od the oniginat page..

,. TABLE III

Extractables Found in Sediments' Delaware City-Site

i March, 1982

Compounds Found (ppb)

Site PEHPt PBPt DOPi DEPt

SO-1 36 35 < 10 < 10

SO-2 ' ND* ND ND ND

SO-2 (Dup.) < 10 ND ND ND

SO-3 24 < 10 10 11

S-7 30 < 10 16 < 10

w * LLD ~ 10 ppb

"x t DEHP = Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

DBP = Di-n-butylphthalate

OOP = Di-n-octylphthalate

DEP = Diethylphthalate

AR300I6I

Id the page (liHme.d in thiA dtame iA not aA nudable. on £e.gib£e. aA thiAtabe.£, it iA due. to ^ub^tanda/td colo/i on condition od the oniginai page..

'•'•jjtcfaart jCaboraioricg, ffitc/-'5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE 37921

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIST0, Stauffer Chemical Company_____ DATE REPORTED: J"ly. 13» *982

ATTN: Rick Ullrlch • .P. 0. Box 215Delaware City, DE 19706 .,

COPF'ORDER No,:,

• : .: . REQ. NO.

SCN 14939

570618 .';.'." '•' • i

• •• •

Sample Description: Three (3) water samples and one (1) Travel Blankreceived June 30, 1982 .

Concentration units are iig/Hter (ppb)

«. Vinyl Chloride Dlcnloroethyleng __ _

Travel Blank ND ND ^'"' v_,-

ir/cr A, Plant, 6/29/82, 0945* ND ND • •• ^

B, Plant, 6/29/82, 0910 ND ND ., ' • ;',

'-> C, Plant, 6/29/82, 0920 ' ND ND Vt-

-,1'V

* Sample contained high level of dlchloroethaneNPi = Not detected at a detection limit of 0.5 ppb

flfi300!62_rjuly, 19B2____________ STEWART LABORATORIES, INC.

( \ NOTARY PUBLICMy commission expiresJ?P.£B.iJ!!?£r J_'b._l2§i__ Ry /*J< k^AL /y /f ''f'tJ_/LL.

Id the page dimmed in thiA dname. iA not aA ne.adabie. on £e.gibte. aA thiAiabe.i, it iA due. to AubAtandand c.olon on condition od the. oniginai page..

'..

5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE 37921

C E R T I F I C A T E OF A N A L Y S I S

Tn. Stauffer Chenlcal Company _____ DATE REPORTED: LATTH! Rick Ullrich __________ CODE; SON 15068

Sfl0ple Description: Four W water «*!« received Ju!y », 1982

Concentration units'are g/liter (ppb)

** Vinyl Chloride 1,2-Pleh.loroethane

••v < f\Hf —o A ND 7600.

•—•' t\Uf(. rlWtfj6H JHfHfJ k "

..il.i ND

ND ""IOC

vm x A •

Mlf. fn>KtTtf CND NDTAP D NU

ND • Not detected at a detection level of 0.5 ppb

<1. • Detected, but at a level less than 1 ppb

LABORATORIS;

_ _ - / ,\NOTARY PUBClC ^ / , . / ) - /(\, Pocombrt I'l, 1983 By— /M.<" 'S -WOA-A -•——My commission <wpires__....... ———— •• —— ----- '

Id 'the. page, dimmed in thi^ diame i-4 not a^ ne.ada.bie. on fegib^e aA thiAiabe.i, it iA due. to AubAtandand aoion on condition od £he oniginat page..

ORIGINAL

5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE' KNOXVILLE, ..TENNESSEE 37921

C E R T I F I C A T E OF A N A L Y S I SDATE REPORTED: September 9, 1982CODE: ______ SCN 15212ORDER. No.:.

TO; Stauffer Chemical Company

Sample Description: Five (5) water sables received August 26, 1982

Concentration units are ug/liter (ppb)

Vinyl chloride 1 • 3-Dlchloroethane

"<?,« Saaple 1, 8/25/82, 10:00 a.m. ' ' ' »ND ND

„,„. rfl? Sample 2, 8/25/82, 10:00 a.m. • •un ND

iR« W sW?le 3, 8/25/82, 10:00 a.m., . ND MSaDPle 4, 8/25/82, 10:'00 a.m. ND

'Samples, 8/25/82, 10:00 a.m. NT) *"

ND • Not detected at a detection limit of 0.5 ppb

SEf'131882

Swo-n to and • STEVART LABORATORIES, INC

/ /.. . Docrabcr 11, 1983 _My commission oxpi(B5....1'iii!ll_- — i— - ——

Id the page dimmed in thiA inatne. iA not aA ne.adabie. on ie.Qi.bie. aA thiAtabtt, it iA due. to AubAtandand toton on conditioH od the. oniginai page..

ricg, ,3hic. <w»|i.-.„ . ==;i

1 v 58)5 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE 37921

C E R T I F I C A T E OF A N A L Y S I STO, Stauffer Chemical Company_____ DATE pFpr)RTFn, October 21, 1982

' ATTN: R1ck UUricti________ CODE: SCN 15429P, 0. Box 21S____________ ORDER Mn- Reg. No. 570949Delaware City, DE 19706______ ____"_____________

Sample Description: Two (2) water samples received October 14, 1982

Concentration units are tig/liter (ppb)

Chio'ride Uj^ichloroethane 1.2-Dlchloroethane.

m "C"-Company House ND. 10/13/82, lOiOOam ND ND .

• j G&y• "D"-Compafiy House ND1-/13/82, 10:00am ND ND

ND = Not detected at a detection limit of 1.0 ppb

•

Sworn to and subscribed before me this._Qctobur, 1982__________ STEWART LABORATORIES, INC.

_(' \ NOTARY PUBLIC

, ,..) , Dooombor , ByMy commission expires —————— .-' ———— °>~ —

Id the page dimmed in thi^ diame iA not aA ne.adabie. on £e.gib£e. aA thiAiabe.i, it iA due. to AubAtandand a.oton on condition od the oniginai page..

TO:

IP £Unt TUdobri* <fe "S»« ft*® 5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE

CERTIFICATStauffer Chemical CompanyATTN: Rick UllMchP. 0. Box 215Delaware City, DE 19706

•

KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE 37921 " y-'!M

E OF ANALYSISnATF RPPnRTPn. October 21, 1982

. CODE: ,flRpFR Nn;

SCN 15446Req. No. 570956

[L

Sample Description: Three (3) water samples received October 19, 1982

Concentration units are ug/llter (ppb)

VinylChloride 1.2-Dichloroethane I.l-D1ch1oroethane————

A, Rental Homes - NewHaHs,'10/18/82, 0930 hrs weu. • • ND • •

' B, Rental Homes - flewHstts, '10/18/82, 0930 hrs wu, ND ND • ' NOt

. C, Rental Homes - New Malls,• 10/18/82, 0930 hrs %<£_ ' ND 8,600. • ND

i «• Not detected at a detection limit of 0.5 ppb ,,-COi

|t

A R 300166 Bv^:;Sworn to and subscribed before me this _iiS^——dayo( _.. October, 1982_ _________ STEWART LABORATORIES, INC. ^"

( . \ NOTARY PLfi3L1C"My

Id the page dimmed in thiA iname. iA not aA ne.ada.bie. on ttgibte. aA thiAf.abe.1, it iA due. to AubAtandand aoion on condition od the. oniginai page..

ORIGIftAiv(ftKl)l

'jitfcftwrt pthnralnrics, liic.prIS;

3

W&W'M'Ty 5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE 37921 K??"

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

TO' Stauffer 'Chemical -Company DATE 'REPORTED'- December 17, 1982ATTN: Rick Ullr'ich cnr>F;

• P. 0. Box 215 :ORDERNo.:• Delaware Citv/DE '19706 .

SCN 15615571087

J Sample Description: Four (4) water samples received November 23, 19B2

£ Concentration units are (ig/liter (ppb)

Vinyl Chloride 1.1-DichlorDBthane 1.2-DichloroethiIO •J— Sample A, Gray house, 11/22/82

B:40 a . m . . . . N D N D N D

Sample B, Tunison house, 11/22/828:50 a. m. ND ND ND

Sample C, Alger house ND ND ND

~. Sample D, Koval house, cold water| J tap 11/22/82, 9:00 a. m. ND ND ND

ND = Not detected at a detection limit of 1.0 (ppb) parts per billion

DSworn lo and subscribed before me Ihis 17th fl R 3 0 0 I fi 7

O dayof_Peceinber. 1982 ______ STEWART LABORATORIES IliC.;,

, > NOTARY PUBLIC ' , .// .My commission expircsJ2fiJMtaJA,_U.B3__ By____Q _((A.A( (,tL*(.S &

Id the page dimmed in thiA dname. iA not aA ne.ada.bie. on ie.gibie. aA thiAiabti, it iA due. to AubAtandand cofo/i on condition od the oniginai page..

r* , . . „ MMMK^abnratcirtcs, j. 5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE KNOXVILLE,'TENNESSEE 37921

C E R T I F I C A T E OF ANALYSIS

TO: Stauffep Chemical Company_____ DATE REPORTFDr January 11. 1983.ATTNi Rick UHrich_________ CODE: ______SOL

r P.' 0.' Box 215____________ ORDER No.:____±[J . Delaware City, DE '19706______ ___________

5L]

I-,| J

Sample Description: Six (6) water samples and one (1) travel blank receivedDecember 21, 19B2

Concentration units are ng/L (ppb)

Vinyl 1,2-Diehloro-Chloride 1,1-Dichloroethane ethane

"A" Kovau, 12/20, 9:40 ND NO <1."B" Lab, 12/20, 11:00 ND ND ' 9,000"C" Tuniaon, 12/20, 9:25 ND ND ND"D" Alger, 12/20, 9:30 ND ND ND"E" Gray, 12/20, 9:20 ND ND ND"F" New Well, Rt. 13, 12/3, ND ND ND

piA^inl

DHL V*'"1/' •' '<1. = Detected, but at a level less than 1. ppb

...„ 141633 [ND = Not detected at a detection limit of .5 ppb

Sworn to and subscribed before me this ......Uth fl" y « 0 I 6 8'. _____ STEWART LABORATORIES, INC.

v, NOTARY PUBLIC . •My comVriinsTon explres..P££SO!lEr_]ii..i?i3__ fy.Y7t.ii' .

Id the' page d-^med in thiA ^name. iA not aA ne.adabie. on ligibit aA thiAiabe.2, it iA due. to AubAtandand colon on condition od *he oniginai page..

0b

laboratories,• ... .

5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE 37921 *'

C E R T I F I C A T E OF A N A L Y S I STO; .Stauffer Chemical Company _____ nyr-p ppnBTFh' January 19, 19B3

ATTN: Rick Ullrich _______ CODE: ____ SCN 15824 _____P. 0. Box 215 __________ ORDER No,:. 571241Delaware City. DE 19706______ _____________

I'-) Sanple Description: Five (5) water samples received January 13, 19B3I I • ' J A N 811983

Concentration units are ug/liter (ppb) j

VinylChloride 1,1-Dichloroethane 1.2-DichloroBthanB

' ———— .A bl*A ND ND ND

B fjud ND ND ND

C Aty* ND ND ND

D TW.UO* ND ND ND

E 6r* ND ND ND

ND = Not detected at a detection limit of 1. (ppb)

Pn|Brl Sworn to and subscribed before me Ihis .„ 19th - RIf . ' J day of January. 19B3 ___ ™ J " 0 | &§EV/ART' ———— - —— " —— ....--.-.-..- ————— •„.day of January. 19B3 ___ ™ " EV/ART LABORATORIES, INC.' ———— - —— " —— ....--.-.-..- ————— •„.

^ ^ - - - .I NOTARY PUBLIC^ v\ "/

\] MycommiTsibn'expireL..P£tB!!ieJLl'!jJ l_ By_. _ 'I"'*'

Id the fiage dimmed in thi4 d*ame iA not aA ne.ada.bte, on ie.gibie. aA thiAlabel, it iA due to AubAtandand colon on condition od the oniginal page..

Stauffer Chemical CompanyWeslporl, Conneclloul 06881 / Tel, (203) 222-3000 / Cable "Staulchem"

February 4, 1983

Mrs. Christine AltomarlRemedial On-Scene Coordinator noirMMALSuperfund Remedial Section iu ITU.S. Environmental Protection Agency (RW»Region III6th and Walnut StreetsPhiladelphia, Pennsylvania 19106

RE: Summary Report of Soil andGround-Water InvestigationsStauffer Chemical CompanyDelaware City, Delaware

Dear Mrs. Altomari:

This report has been prepared to summarize the events and investi-gative work that have taken place over the past 12 months In the generalarea of and around the Delaware City PVC plant site In Delaware City,Delaware. In addition, the report presents Stauffer's conclusionsand recommendations regarding future work to be conducted at the siteand proposed remedial alternatives to be considered during the Feas-ibility Study.

Submitted In conjunction with this report is the February 4, 1983report on Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Conditions prepared by RouxAssociates, Inc., Huntington, New York. The Roux Associates, Inc. reportprovides a detailed discussion of the subsurface Investigative work con-ducted, and the subsurface conditions encountered and provides conclu-sions and recommendations regarding the need for future work at thesite. That report also forms the basis for the conclusions and recom-mendations presented In Stauffer's summary report.

If you have any questions regarding this submission please donot hesitate to call*

Very truly your,

Bruce S, McClellan • ' '

BSM016;dm

cc: Robert Touhoy, Manager nonn I "70Delaware Department of A R 3 0 U I / UNatural Resources andEnvironmental Control

Robert Hoyer, Formoan PlnstJcsCharles II. McAnllffe, Formosa Plastics

Id the page (,itme.d in thiA iname. iA not aA ntadabie. on le.gible. HA thiAlabe.1, it iA due. to AubAtandand colon on condition od the. oniginai page..