ii document no. 4040-001-600 itexarkana, texas ... · document no. 4040-001-600 feasibilitkoppers...
TRANSCRIPT
IIIIIIIII
Document No. 4040-001-600
Feasibil ity StudyKoppers TexarkanaTexarkana, TexasVolume II - Appendices
portitetnvOOJV"*O
Prepared for
Pittsburgh, PAJune 1988
An ENSR Company
^^^^IIIIII
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORTKOPPERS COMPANY, INC.
TEXARKANA, TEXAS
CMinvOCM^—O
II
Prepared for:KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.
PREVIOUSLY OPERATED PROPERTYTEXARKANA, TEXAS
Prepared by:KEYSTONE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES, INC.
440 COLLEGE PARK DRIVEMONROEVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA 15146
PROJECT 157673-08
FEBRUARY 1988
™*^^IIIIII
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
II
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,,,,,,.,,.,,,,,..iiiLIST OF FIGURES ,.,,,,.,,,,.,,.,,,,..,,,.,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,..,,,,^EXECUTIVE SUMMARY,.,.,,.,.,,...,,.,,,,.,,,,,...,,,,...,,,.,,.,,,,....,,.,,..,,,,,,ES-^1.0 INTRODUCTION,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,,,,...,,,,.,...,,2.0 BACKGROUND,,,,.,,,.,.,,.,..,,,,,,,.,,,,,..,,,,,,.,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,2-1
2.1 Site FTistory,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,2-12.2 Site Description ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„,,,„,„,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„„,,,.,2-13.0 STUDY OVERVIEW.,.,,...,.,,.,...,,.,.,,,,.,..,.,.,,,.,,..,,,.,,,,,,..,.,.,,,,,,,,3-1 ^
3.1 Sample Collection ,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,.,,3-l c\J3.2 Sample Analysis.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,...,,,...... ,,„„„„„,„.„„„„„„ ..,3-1 ,_3.3 Groundwater Treatability,,,,,,,..,,,,...,,.,.,,,,.....,,,..,,,,,,,,,.,.,,,,3-l _3.4 Activated Carbon Adsorbtion Testing,,,,„,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,3-23.5 UV/Ozone Oxidation.,,,,,.,,,,.,.,,,,.,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,3-23.6 Biological Treatment ,„,,.„.,,,,,„„.,.,„.,,,.,.,,,,„„,,„.,,,,,„„,,,,.,,,.3-33.7 Soil Treatment,,,,,,,,„,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,„,,,„,„„.,,..,.,,,.,,,,3-4
4.0 TREATABILITY STUDY SPECIFICS AND RESULTS ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,4-l4.1 Sample Collection...... . . . . . . . . . . . . .,.,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,.. .,.. . . . . . . . . .,.. . . . .,,.. . . . . . . . .,.. . . . . . . . .,4-l4.2 Groundwater Treatability.....,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,.,,.,,,,,,,.,.,,.,.,..,,,.,4-34.3 Activated Carbon Adsorbtion „,„.,,,,,„,,,„„,,,,,,„„,,„,,,,,.,4-44.4 ExSitu Soil Treatment (Soil Washing).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .„„„,... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-64.5 InSitu Soil Treatment (Soi! Column) ,,,,,,,„„,„.„„,„„.,„„„„„,,4-64.6 UV/Ozone Oxidation 63 ,,,,,,,.,..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,4-74.7 Biological Treatment .,,„,.,,,„,,,,„,,,„,,,..,,„,„„„.„„„„.,,.,4-84.8 Biological Treatment Units Discussion of Results,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 4*12i 5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS... . . . . . . , . » . . . . . , . . » . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .^ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-I
APPENDICESAPPEND IX AAPPENDIX BAPPENDIX CAPPENDIX DAPPENDIX EAPPENDIX FAPPENDIX G
Groundwater QA/QC Sampling DataCarbon Adsorbtion ACT ResultsUV/Ozone Oxidation ResultsBiological Treatment Influet ResultsAeration Tank Treatment ResultsFixed Film Treatment ResultsFluidized Bed Treatment Results
it
^™™
II
II
I
3-13-24-14-24-34-44-54-6
4-1
LIST OF TABLES
PageAnalytical Methods - Water Analysis................................................................ 3-laAnalytical Methods • Soil Analysis ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-IbJar Testing Results............................................................................................. 4-4aCarbon Adsorption Isotherms............................................................................ 4-5aOyUV Screening Run Results .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-8a
*yUV/Ozone Treatment .................................................................................... . .4-8c ^Biological Treatment Comparison .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-12aBiological Treatment Phenolics Reduction.................................................... 4-13a ^~
O
LIST OF FIGURES
Groundwater Treatment Overview................................................................... 4-3aOzone Applied vs Naphthalene... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-Sb
ui
^^^IIIII
IIIII
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This document summarizes the results of performance testing conducted byKeystone Environmental Resources, Inc. for the purpose of evaluating the technicalfeasibility of various treatment processes for the remediation of groundwater and soilcontaminated with coal tar related organics. The coal tar organics present in the soiland groundwater originated from the past operations of a former Koppers woodtreating and preserving plant.
The technologies examined herein have passed the initial screening process and havebeen considered for treatability investigation. The technologies considered in thescreening where based on the characterization work performed during the remedialinvestigation. The analytical results from surface water, groundwater and soilsamples, were used as the basis to examine the different technologies.
With the exception of the Accelerated Carbon Testing performed by Calgon CarbonCorporation, all treatability work was performed by Keystone EnvironmentalResources at the Science and Technology Center in Monroeville, PA. Groundwaterand soil samples were collected by Keystone Field Service technicians for use in thetreatability work. All related analysis were performed by Keystone's AnalyticalDivision.
Following pretreatment for removal of oil and grease associated contaminants, threegroundwater methods were evaluated. These included: (i) carbon adsorption, (ii)chemical oxidation, and (iii) biological treatment. Carbon adsorption treatmentincluded carbon adsorption isotherms and Accelerated Carbon Column Testing.Chemical oxidation focused on UV/Ozone Oxidation treatment. The biologicaltreatment alternatives evaluated were: (i) activated sludge, (ii) aeration tank, (iii)fixed film, and (iv) fluidized bed.
In-situ and ex-situ soil treatment technologies were also evaluated. Five soil columnswere set up to investigate variations of bioreclamation treatment methodologies. Inaddition, soil washing was investigated for removal of contaminants from the soilmatrix.
ininvO
o
ES- l
•IBM*
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
With the exception of activated sludge treatment, all other groundwater treatmentprocesses tested were successful for reduction of groundwater contaminants. Thetwo activated sludge treatment reactors were converted to an aeration tank and afixed film reactor when the data indicated the groundwater organic substrate was tolow to support an activated sludge biomass.
Shortly following start-up of the soil columns , plugging occurred and the columnswere shut down. Soil washing was completed with preliminary successful results.Complete soil washing results will be issued as an addendum when all results areavailable.
Pretreatmem results showed an 83% reduction of oil and grease with acorresponding removal of 90.7% of total PAH compounds. Carbon adsorbtionisotherms and ACT results show reduction of TOC and naphthalene. UV-Ozone/Oxidation reduced the total PAH concentration 88%. Aeration tanktreatment reduced total PAH compounds >99%. Fixed film treatment reduced totalPAH compounds >86%. The best treatment was realized with the fluidized bed with>99.9% removal of total PAH compounds,
The data presented in this report can be used in a more detailed evaluation of theseand other technologies as needed for Feasibility Study (FS) purposes.
LAvDCMs—O
ES-2
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
1.0 INTRDDIJCTlpN
Presented in this document are the results from treatability work performed aspartial fulfillment of the Feasibility Study (FS) for the Koppers Texarkana formerwood-treating plant site in Texarkana, Texas.
Koppers and the U.S. EPA have conducted several separate surface and subsurfaceinvestigations and collected extensive soil and groundwater quality data at theTexarkana site. The results of these studies have identified the contaminants andextent of contamination. These data were used to select the treatability alternativesfor laboratory experimentation best suited for remediation.
The focus of the study is to evaluate cleanup methods for soil and groundwatercontamination from creosote compounds used in past wood treating operations.Data compiled during the remedial investigation was used in the evaluation andscreening of technologies to be considered for treatability investigation.
The results of the following studies demonstrate the treatability of groundwater andsoil at the Texarkana site. This data can be used to determine the most feasibletreatment alternatives and for generating cost comparisons of the various treatmentalternatives.
All results included with the exception of soil washing which will be issued as anaddendum.
Section 2 presents a brief background summary. A summary of each of thetechnologies is given in Section 3. The procedures and results from the treatabilitywork are presented in Section 4. Section 5 includes a brief summary and conclusionof the results.
LAvOOJ^~o
••"
I 2.0 BACKGJROJMn
2.1 SJteJBLstory
Wood preserving and treating operations were initiated in 1903 by National Lumberand Creosoting Company. National Lumber and Creosoting Company was acquiredin 1931 by the Wood Preserving Corporation (subsidiary of Koppers). Koppersoperated the facility from 1939 to 1961. Wood preservatives used at the site includedcreosote, pentachlorophenol and chromated zinc chloride. The total site occupiessome 62 acres. In 1961, Koppers sold the site to Carver Terrace Inc., who developedapproximately 33.5 acres for residential housing. Carver Terrace sold the southernhalf of the property to Bruce Kennedy, a local sand and gravel operator, who to date,has excavated two gravel pits approximately 700 feet long, 25 feet wide, and 15 feetdeep.
2.2 Site Description
The Koppers Texarkana site is located in Bowie County, the northeastern mostcounty of Texas, in the city of Texarkana. Texarkana, itself, is actually situated onthe Texas-Arkansas state line. The 62-acre Koppers site is located within the Texasboundaries of Texarkana in the southern section of the city about 1 mile from theTexas-Arkansas state line.
00LTv\OCMv-O
Locally, the site is bordered by the Texas and Pacific Railroad to the north, anunnamed tributary to the northwest, Wagner creek to the southwest, Jameson Streetto the south, and a drainage ditch to the southeast,
The Koppers Texarkana site is generally flat. There is a drainage ditch to the eastand the Wagner Creek stream valley and gravel pits to the south. The site gentlyslopes from the northeast to the southwest.
The site geology consists of deposits which range from gravels to silts. These depositsare found over the entire site from ground surface to a maximum depth of 24 feet,
Within the site, the area consists of a housing development, a former sand and graveloperation, and a church. The housing development, Carver Terrace Subdivision,
IIIIIIIIII
occupies the northern 33-1/2 acres and consists of 79 one-story houses. The Mt. ZionMissionary Baptist Church occupies a 1/2 acre lot just south of West Third Street andwest of Tilson Avenue. The remainder of the site, the southern 28 acres, is fencedand owned by Mr. Bruce Kennedy of Kennedy Sand and Gravel Company.
LT\vOCM«c—O
IIII
2 - 2
IIIIIII
3.0
III
3-1 Sample Collection
Groundwater and soil samples used in the treatability work were collected at theTexarkana site by Keystone Field Services personnel. Strict QA/QC and chain ofcustody procedures were followed during sample collection
Ground water
Groundwater samples used in the treatability work were collected from wells MW-2MW-4, MW-5. MW-6, MW-7 and OW-5. The samples were bailed and pumped into55 gallon drums for collection and transport.
Soil
Both shallow and deep samples were collected for use in the treatability work.Shallow samples were collected with the use of a shovel. Deep soil samples (7-8 feet)were collected with the use of a backhoe. A 55 gallon drum and 5 gallon pails wereused for sample collection and transport.
3.2 Sample Analysis
Both sample collection nd analysis were performed by Keystone EnvironmentalResources. The metii used for the analysis of water and soil samples wereperformed in accordance with strict QA/QC and chain of custody procedures. Thevarious analytical methods used in analysis of both water and soil samples arepresented in Tables 3-1 and 3-2, respectively.
3.3 Groundwater Treatability
Pre treatment
Prior to further treatment, gravity oil/water separation pretreatment was used for theremoval oil and grease and suspended solids. Both cationic and anionic polymerswere used to aid the separation and settling of the emulsified components and the
OvDvOCMT"O
3 - 1
IIIIIIIII
Parameter
TABLE 3-1KOPPERS COMPANY, INC
TEXARKANA,TX TREATABILITY STUDYANALYTICAL METHODSWATER ANALYSIS
MethodBOD5Carbon (TOC)CODCyanide, totalOil & GreasepHPhenols (total recoverable)Solids (dissolved)Solids (suspended)Solids (total;Solids (volatile)MetalsPurgeable AromaticsPhenolicsPoiynuciear Aromatic HydrocarbonsVolatile OrganicsSemi-Volatile Organics (AE/BN)
EPA 405.1EPA 415.1EPA 410.4EPA 335.3EPA 4 13.1EPA 150EPA 420.2EPA 160.1EPA 160.2EPA 160.3EPA 160.4EPA 200.7EPA 602EPA 604EPA 610EPA 624EPA 625
UCIC^UH f.invjj
1 mg/I1 mg/I
10 mg/I T~10 ug/I ^<? ^$mg/l ^
5ug/l Olmg/Ilmg/Ilmg/I1 nig/1CDCDCDCDCDCD
CD - Compound Dependent
3-la
TABLE 3-2KOPPERS COMPANY, INC
TEXARKANA,TX TREATABILITY STUDYANALYTICAL METHODSSOIL ANALYSIS
Parameter
PHCarbon (TOC)Solids (%)@ 105°CMetals
Be, Ed, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hi, ZLead (Pb)Mercury
Purgeable HalocarbonsPurgeable AromaticsPhenolicsPolynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPetroleum Hydrocarbons
Method
EPA9045Walkey-BlackASTM D2216
EPA6010EPA7421EPA7471EPA8010EPA8020EPA8040EPA8310EPA 3540/418.1
1000 mg/kg
CD500 mg/kg
Lff tor
100 ug/kgCDCDCDCD
100 mg/kg
C\JvOvOCVJ
O
CD - Compound Dependent
3-lb
^MH
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
water. PAH reduction is achieved by removing the portion that stays within the oilphase.
3.4 Activated Carbon Adsorption Testing
Activated carbon adsorption was evaluated as a potential treatment alternative.Carbon adsorption isotherm tests and Calgon's Accelerated Carbon Test (ACT)were performed to estimate the applicability of using activated carbon for removal ofcontaminants in the groundwater at this site. The carbon adsorption isotherm testswere conducted in order to estimate the adsorption capacity of the carbon atdifferent contaminant influent concentrations and the ACT test was performed udetermine the carbon usage rate.
CarboRLlsotherrns
Carbon adsorption isotherms can be used in the laboratory as a relatively simplemethod to determine the feasibility of using granular activated carbon treatment. Byusing a set of samples with graduated doses of carbon, the distribution of theadsorbable compound can determined and plotted. This will indicate the amount ofcompound adsorbed per unit weight of carbon verses the concentration of aparticular chemical compound in the applied influent.
Accelerated Carbon Testing
The accelerated carbon treatment was contracted to Calgon Carbon Corporation byKeystone. The purpose of this testing is to determine the carbon use rate for removalof TOC and Naphthalene. The results from this and carbon isotherm testing wereused in the development of design data for engineering evaluation purposes.
3.5 UV/Qzone Oxidation
UV/OxiJation using ozone for treatment of the groundwater was investigated.Ozone is a powerful oxidizing agent which has the ability to degrade organiccompounds through chemical oxidation. Among the list of chemicals that can besuccessfully treated are purgeable organics, phenolics, PAH compounds andnaphthalene. The use of ultraviolet light in combination with ozone has been shown
vO\oCM,.—o
3 - 2
:o enhance the reactivity of ozone with certain chemical constituents.
Ozone gas is produced in an ozone generator from either compressed air or oxygen.The ozone gas is injected into an enclosed reactor of which the water to be treated ispumped through. Also in the reactor are a number of ultraviolet lamps. The reactoris designed with several chambers separated by baffles to provide intimate contactbetween the ozone enriched gas stream and the water to be treated.
3.<> BiolQgicaLTreairoent
Activated Sludge
Activated sludge treatment is a proven technology for removal of biodegradablechemical compounds generally present in wood preservative site groundwaters andsurface waters. However, it is possible that the organic substrate concentration in thegroundwater is to low to sustain a microbial mass and thus maintain an activatedsludge treatment process.
The activated sludge process utilizes a biological slurry containing an active mass ofbacteria which is contacted with the wastewater in an aeration basin where microbialoxidation and assimilation (treatment) occur. In the basin, the organic componentsof the wastewater serve as carbon and energy sources for microbial growth. Theorganic matter is converted into microbial cell tissue and oxidized end products(mainly carbon dioxide). The mixture of the microbial mass and wastewater isreferred to as the mixed liquor. The mixed liquor flows from the aeration tank to asettling tank where the biomass is separated from the treated wastewater (effluent).A portion of the settled biomass is recycled to the head of the aeration basin tomaintain the desired mass of organisms in the basin. The remaining sludge isremoved from the system for final stabilization and ultimate disposal. The sludge isreferred to as the waste sludge. The treated effluent is then left for discharge.
Aeration .Tank
Aeration tank treatment is similar to activated sludge treatment with the exceptionthat the mixed liquor suspended solids are discharged with the effluent rather thanrecycled. As with activated sludge treatment, it is possible that the organic substrate
vDvOCMT~o
3-3
SPECTRIX MONROEVILLEPage- 3
III
TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF GC601 DATA
Sample : 87090546Date Co l l e c t e d : 0 <?/24/S7Date Rece ived : 09/25/S7Date Ex t ra c t ed : 10/03/87Date Ana lyz ed : 10/03/37
Source : TBDes c r i p t i o n : OA/DC SAMPLES
IIII
Pu.-geable Halocarbons1 . 1 , l-Tnch loro ethane. « • . . .1 , t ,2 ,2-Te l ra c : h l c ro e t hane . .t , 1 . S-T - ichlo roe thane. . . . . .1 , i~Dich lore-ethane . , . . . . . . «
t -D i e h lorc 'ethene. . . . . . . . .3-D i e h lorobenzene . . . . . . . .S-Dich lc«r c-athane . . . . * . . . .2-D i c h loropropane . . . . , . . .3-Dich Ic-robenrene . . . . . . . .
ch 1 orobenzene . . - . • . . .
I111112-Chloroe thy lv i ny l e t h e r . . .Dromcd i c h loromethanc . . . . . . .Brcmof c- rm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Carbon Tetrach l o r ide, . . . . . .Ch 1 orc-Dennene . . . . . . . . f . . . . .Ch lore-ethane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ch 1 orof c-.-ff l , . . . . . . . . , . . . . ...D ib romoch l o rome thane . . . . . . .Me thy 1 Bromide . . . . . . . . . . . . .Methy l C h l o r i d e . . . . . . . . . . . .Methv l sne Ch lor ide. . . . . . . . .Tetrach loroethene. . . . . . . . . .Tr i ch lorof luorome thane.Tr ich lorocthene, . . . . . . . . . . .Vinyl C h l o r i d e . . . . * . . . . . . . .c i s - l ,3-D i c h loropropene. . . .trans-l , S-Dich loroethene . . ,trans- l ,3-Dich lo ropropene . .
< }
LA\OMDCM*<r-O
The aLove resu l ts are reported in ug/L .All GC601 ident i f i ca t ions . r e from retent ion d * t * c- i
Drum Sample #ParametersTOCCODPhenols (4-AAP)
T-TX-1
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TCXARKANA, TEXAS
CROUNDWATER QA/QC ANALYSES
T-TX-2 T-TX-3 T-TX-4 T-TX-S T-TX-6 T-TX-7
45.9145
0.263
46.6250
0.254
75.53001.23
49.2300
0.332
49.8180
0.302
4.20<10.00.008
60.2200
0.341
Each sample is from I or more of the following wells: MW-2, MW-3, MW-4, MW-S, MW-6 and OW-S.AH values reported in units of mg/L.
0 1 2 6 6 6
iiiiiii
concentration in the groundwater is to low to sustain a microbial mass and thusmaintain an aeration tank treatment process.
Fixed _Fi Im .Reactor
The fixed film (or fixed bed) process is similar to aeration tank treatment. Thedifference is that the reactor is filled with a synthetic packing which provides supportfor microbial growth and contact between the organic substrate and microbes.
Fluidized.Bcd
Fiuidized bed treatment is a proven technology for removal of biodegradablechemical compounds generally present in wood preservative site groundwaters andsurface waters. The process consists of a cylindrical column with adistribution/support plate located in its base. The column is partially filled with a finegrained medium, such as sand, A tank is used as a reservoir from which water ispumped through the column at a high flow rate to provide a stream of waternecessary for fluidizing the bed. Growth of the microbes and contact with theorganic substrate takes place within the fluidized bed.
3.7 Soil Treatment
Both in situ and ex situ soil treatment were proposed for treatment of soils from thesite.
In.situ Soil Treatment
The in situ soil treatment methodology investigated is more specifically referred to asin situ bioreclarnation. In situ bioreclamation is a method for remediating soils andgroundwater aquifers contaminated with biodegradable materials through theaddition of water enriched with nutrients and oxygen into the subsurface. Thisresults in the enhanced growth and activity of bacteria which use the contaminants asa source of carbon and energy to convert these materials to carbon dioxide andwater.
Field and laboratory studies confirm that naturally occurring bacteria have the ability
r-vOvOCM<r=O
3 - 4
•••IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
:o degrade phenoh'cs and petroleum hydrocarbons (PAH compounds). In-situbioreclamation can be employed in conjunction with soil extraction where significantvolumes of soil are contaminated and existing structures make excavationimpractical,
Soil Teamen t
Ex situ soil washing involves the removal of contaminants from the soil substrate,using a washing technique. It is a physical separation procedure for detoxifyingcontaminated soil that involves the washing of the soil into a liquid medium. The exsitu process is carried out in equipment that is designed for contacting excavated soilswith the liquid.
Removal of contaminants from the soil matrix involves both physical displacement ofloosely held contaminants and desorption of the contaminants that are more tightlybound to the soil particles.
COvO\OCMVO
3 - 5
^•••BIII
4.0 TREATABILITY STUDY SPECIFICS AND RESULTS
4.1 Sample Collection
Groiindwatcr Samples
Groundwater samples to be used in the treatability work were collected from wellsMW-2, MW-4, MW-5, MW-6, MW-7 and OW-5. The samples were pumped orbailed and placed into 7 - 55 gallon drums for collection and transport. Each of thedrums contained samples from i or more wells.
An effort was made to collect water and immiscible layers within the wells. Forcollection of the well samples, bottom fill teflon bailers, top fill stainless steel bailersand peristaltic pumps were used.
Following collection of groundwater samples, a composite sample was made byobtaining an aliquot from each drum, mixing it in a clean jar and distributing it intoindividual sample jars for QA/OC analytical purposes. The results from thissampling indicate the initial quality of the groundwater to be used in treatability workand can be found in Appendix A. In addition, each drum was sampled for specificindicator parameters when it arrived at the research center in Monroeviile. Thesesresults can also be found in Appendix A.
Upon arrival at the research center in Monroeville, each of the 55 gallon drums weredesignated with a sample code number. The sample codes are as follows, T-TX-1, T-TX-2, T-TX-3, T-TX-4, T-TX-5, T-TX-6, and T-TX-7.
Soil Samples
Both shallow and deep soil samples were collected for use in the treatability work.Shallow soil samples were collected with the use of a shovel. Deep soil samples (7-8feet) were collected with the use of a backhoe,
A local contractor was hired to dig the deep sample with a backhoe. The deepsample was obtained at the 7 - 8 feet level, within the saturated soil zone. Thissample was used in the in situ (soil column) treatability work.
\D<M^"O
4 - 1
^^H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Shallow soil samples were collected by Keystone field services personnel. A cleanedshovel was used. These samples was placed in 5 gallon pails for transport. Theshallow samples were used in the ex-situ (soil washing) treatabilily work. Deepsamples were used for the in-situ (bioreclamation) treatability work.
Upon arrival at the research center in MonroeviJIe, the samples codes were specifiedfor each of the sample containers. The codes and corresponding descriptions arelisted below.Sample DescriptionDeep sample adjacentto church (55 gallon drum)Surface Soil near DW-01(S gallon pail)Surface soil under creosotecontaminated area (5 gallon pail)Surface soil from creosotecontaminated area (5 gallon pail)Surface soil, from heavy naphthalenecontamination area (5 gallon pail)
Sample CodeT-TX-8
T-TX-9
T-TX-10
T-TX-11
T-TX-12
The sampling plan for this site was reviewed by the KER Health and Safety Managerprior to the sampling trip. The normal safety level, level D, was required at this site.This is the minimal level of safety, requiring a standard work uniform, steel toedboots, safety goggles and a hard hat.
In addition to the standard safety gear, an HGNU meter for measurement of thepresence of organic vapors was issued to the sampling crew. The HGNU meter wasused to ensure that the level of vapors around soil and groundwater collection areaswere at a safe level.
4 - 2
IIIIIII
II
4.2 Gtomtdaater. TreatebUity
For all treatability work to follow, an equal aliquot of sample was taken from each ofthe 7 - 55 gallon drums, composited and utilized. An overview of the groundwatertreatment steps is presented in Figure 4-1 .
Prc treatment
Procedure
Standard jar testing procedures were used to screen several cationic and anionicpolymers for the removal of oil & greases and suspended solids from thegroundwater prior to further treatment. Composite samples of the groundwaterwere used in the jar testing evaluation.
The Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) #109, Jar Testing Procedures, wasfollowed in testing this water. These procedures are as follows:
1. Add the cationic polymer first while stirring at 100 rpm, Continue stirring forone minute.
2. Add anionic polymer and stir an additional thirty seconds.
3. Decrease the stirring speed to 20 rpm and stir for twenty minutes.
4. After twenty minutes shut off the stirrer and let the sample sit undisturbed forthirty minutes.
5. Remove the supernatant by siphoning and sample for the desired parameters.
Following the procedures described above, several combination of polymers wereevaluated. Polymers that have proven successful for treating water of similarcharacteristics were targeted. The screening process involved a visible evaluation ofthe various polymers and their effectiveness to enhance gravity separation andsettling of the emulsified compounds in the groundwater. From the visual screening,
vO
o
4-3
FIGURE 4-1Texarkana, TX
GROUNDWATER TREATMENT OVERVIEWGroundwater Samples
T-TX-1 T-TX-2 T-TX-3 T-TX-4 T-TX-5 T-TX-6 T-TX-7
GROUNDWATERCOMPOSITE
SAMPLE
PRETREATMENTOILyWATERSEPARATION
OZONE/UV CARBONADSORBTION
AERATtONTANK
RXEDFILM
FLUIDtZEDBED
0 1 2 6 7 2
warn
IIIIIIIII
the best polymers were used to treat a final sample for analytical testing forconfirmation. Both untreated and treated samples were submitted for analysis.
Results
The polymer combination that provided the best results were as follows;
Cationic polymerAnionic polymer
300 ppm Anierfloc 104 ppm Amerfloc 5260
The treatment results are presented in Table 4-1. As indicated, the sample wasanalyzed for pH, oil & grease and PAH compounds. The pH was in the range of 6.5- 7.0, so that pH adjustment was not required. Oil <£ grease removal was greaterthan 83 % with a corresponding removal of 90.7 % of the total PAH compounds.
Prior to all further treatability work, the groundwater samples were pretreated withthis polymer combination. When a sample was needed for treatability, a compositewas collected by taking an equal aliquot from each drum and compositing it in acontainer of sufficient volume required for the specific application. This sample wasthen pretreated and used in the treatability evaluation.
4,3 Adsorption
A composite sample of groundwater was pretreated to remove oil & grease prior toactivated carbon adsorption. Carbon adsorption isotherm tests and Calgon'sAccelerated Carbon Test (ACT) were performed to estimate the applicability ofusing activated carbon for removal of contaminants in the groundwater. The carbonadsorption isotherm tests were conducted in order to estimate the adsorptioncapacity of the carbon and the ACT test was done to determine the carbon usage.
vOCMV**O
4 - 4
TABLE 4-1
iiii
KOPPERS COMPANY. INCTEXAKKANA.TX TREATABILITY STUDYJAR TESTING RESULTS
SamplePacaJnaeterpH (units)Oil & Grease (mg/1)FAH_CornpmimisAcenaphtheneAcenaphthylene.AnthraceneBenzoBenzoBenzoBenzoBenzo
a)amhracenea)pyreneh)fluoramheneg,h,i)peryienek)fluoramheneChrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthraceneFiuorantheneFluoreneFrideno(l,2,3-c,d)pyrenePhenanthrenePyreneTOTAL DETECTABLE PAH
CarbazoleNaphthalene
6.682.6
3370<5GO84541816021712388
35696
155019705634560
15,726
81514,800
6.813,9
1,469.43
1767,950
Percent
83.2
98.7NA
97.099.999,999.999.799.999.999.798.688.799.995.499.8
r-vOCM*~O
90.7
78.446.3
N'A - Not Applicable
IIIIIII
Carbon Isotherms
Procedure
A composite groundwater sample was pretreated to remove emulsified oils & grease.In accordance with SOP #104, carbon adsorption isotherms were performed on thewater.
Ten 400 ml samples were combined with varying doses of carbon and agitated. Aone hour contact time was selected for the testing. The samples were allowed tosettle and then filtered. The filtrate was submitted for TOC and naphthaleneanalysis. A pretreatment and 0 dose (control) sample were included for analysis.
Results
The results of the adsorption isotherm testing are summarized and presented inTable 4-2. The adsorbate (naphthalene) was used to indicate the amount ofnaphthalene adsorbed per unit weight of carbon. As indicated in Table 4-2, thenaphthalene was reduced to below detectable limits.
From these results, amount of carbon necessary to adsorbed a given amount ofnaphthalene can be determined, A conservative estimate indicates that 0.8188 mgnaphthalene is adsorbed per 0.4 grams carbon.
Accelerated £arbon_Te_stine
Procedure
A fifteen gallon groundwater sample was pretreated by Keystone for removal ofemulsified oils and grease. The sample was shipped to Calgon Carbon Corporationfor accelerated carbon testing (ACT) for TOC and naphthalene removal efficiency.
The ACT method is used to determine breakthrough for TOC and naphthalene.The test simulated a 10 gpm flow rate for a 4' diameter adsorber system for a totalsimulated 2.588 million gallons treated.
r-
4 - 5
1II11111m
f
TABLE 4-2TEXARKANA,TX TREATABILITY STUDYCARBON ADSORPTION ISOTHERMS
ParameterSmuiite-grams carbon/400Raw*
00.20.40.87if410204080
fiHmi water)
6.26.97,17.17.172' •£*7.57 Q/.o7.8*7 Q/.o7.9
TQCto^)
44.535.4
3.4414,26.5
Q1 1oi.l1.742.15
24.42.012.98
>&p^hajejK(mr!/
6.202.05
.0054 ^< 0.003 vO< 0,003 oj< 0,003 T-< 0.003 °< 0.003< 0.003< 0.003< 0.003
It*)Raw is unflocc and unfiltered sample
I
4-5a
iiiiiii
The ACT test simulated an adsorber unit with 2000 Ibs. of FS-300 carbon. Flow andsurface loading rates were 10 gpm and 0.8 gpm/ft , respectively. The empty bedcontact time (EBCT) was SO minutes.
The ACT was run for seven days. No naphthalene breakthrough had occurred by theend of the study. At study termination, the simulated performance was 180 days on-line, 2.588 million gallons treated and a 0.8 lb/1000 gallon usage rate. The loadingwas 0.11 mg naphthalene/g F-300 carbon.
4.4 Ex^Uu,SmJJreatment (Soil Washing)
Procedure
The soil washing evaluation was performed to investigate the potential applicabilityfor soil excavation and decontamination and also to evaluate different surfactants forpossible use with regard to surfactant in situ bioreclamation. The surfactants will beused in bioreclamation for removal of tightly bound contaminants from the soilmatrix so that soil microbes can assimilate them more effectively.
A total of five soils were washed to determine the most effective surfactants for each.
Keystone's Standard Operating Procedures were followed for all five runs.
Results
Soil washing results are not yet available and will be submitted as an addendum tothis report.
4.5 In Situ Soil TreatmentJSoiJL Column)
Procedure
Five soil columns were set up to determine the effectiveness of in situ soil treatment
<Ms—O
4 - 6
on the degradation of soil contaminants. The columns were loaded with soil takenfrom the area adjacent to the Church, designated as T-TX-8. Three columns were torun aerobically. Two of these columns were to use Hydrogen peroxide (H^C^) as:he oxygen source (proton donor) with one as a control, and two columnsanaerobically, using nitrate (NO^) as a proton acceptor. Pretreated and nutrientenriched groundwater was pumped into the columns.
Results
Within the first week of operation, the columns plugged sufficiently to restrict flow.Ii was determined that the soil sample was not as permeable as indicated by previoussoil testing. The columns were shut down and dismantled. Because of theoperational problems encountered, not enough data was collected to properlyevaluate this technology. In-situ soil treatment should remain as an option but willrequire future field testing if deemed feasible based on FS results.
4.6 UV/Ozone Oxidation - O3
Procedure
This phase of the study involved the evaluation of chemical oxidation byozone/ultraviolet light (OyUV) for the destruction of groundwater contaminants. Agroundwater composite sample was pretreated for removal of oil and grease asdescribed in section 4.2.
Keystones standard Operating Procedure #110 for Q$/UV testing was followed. Abench scale ozonation unit was used for the testing. The unit consisted of an ozonegenerator and a 3-liter reaction vessel equipped with ultraviolet light.
An initial screening run was performed to determine the optimum 63 dosage andreaction time based on naphthalene removal. During the screening run, the unit wasrun in a batch mode with samples taken at the following time intervals (minutes):O(control), 1, 3 ,5, 7, 9, 11, 13 , 15 , 17 ,20.
ODr~\ocvj^__o
4 - 7
IIIIII
II
Results
Samples from the screening run were analyzed for pH, naphthalene and TOG Theresults from this testing are presented in Table 4-3- Also presented in this table areihe ozone usage rates indicating a 71% utilization rate. These results show that asthe ozone dosage (63 applied) increase, the naphthalene and TOC values decrease.From these results, the optimum dosage and reaction time was chosen and a final runwas performed to generate treated samples for analysis.
Figure 4-2 shows the relationship between the amount of ozone applied and removalof naphthalene. Based on this relationship, the first order reaction rate constant forUV/ozone treated groundwater for C = Ce - K(O^ applied);
4K - -5.54722 (mg O used/1)
The correlation coefficient for the fit of this line is r^-0.9732.
As indicated in Table 4-3, the greatest reduction occurred at approximately 7-9minutes. A 10 minute reaction time was chosen for the final run; this corresponds toan ozone dosage of approximately 244 mg/1. Treated and untreated samples weresubmitted for the analysis. Table 4-4 shows the analytical results, operatingconditions, and percent removals for the treatment run. The results show a goodremoval for most PAH's and purgeable aromatics. In addition, a sample wasanalyzed for purgeable halocarbons which can be found in Appendix C.
4.7 Biological .Treatment
Activated Sludge
Procedure
The activated sludge unit used in the bench-scale treatability work was a HorizonEcology bio-oxidation unit equipped with an internal clarifier. Biological solids in thereactor effluent were settled out in the clarifier and returned to the reactor mixedliquor. Sludge was wasted from the system as required to maintain a specified solidsretention time. Nutrient addition and pH control were provided to the unit as
r-\ocvi^_o
4 - 8
NC - Not Calcufatect
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TKXARKANA, TKXAS pop SITKSCKKKNINC RUN RKSIILTS
OSp
Reaction/minutes)
0I3579if13151720
O-* Appliedfmff oyi Sample) (
024.581.6153245220299398367462612
'me Oyi Sample)
NCNCNCNC174NCNC284NCNC473
Utilization Naphthalene TOC
71
6.06.46.66.76.76.66.66.66.56.56.5
1.9501.8501.0100.1750.009< 0.003<0.003<aOQ3<0.0030.0074<OJM>3
27.597.691.892.889.324.221.419.113. 117.914.6
0 1 2 6 8 0
ICOcr -J
\o>E
uv^1
c
FIGURE 4 - 2
EXRRKRNH.OZONE RPPLIED vs. NRPHTHRLENE
C - CONCENTRRTION OF NRPHTHRLENE
75 100 125 J50OZONE RPPLIED
0IIIIIIII
Reaction TimeOzone AppliedOzone UsedOzone Utilization
pH funits)TOO (mgl)Purgeable Aromatics (uBenzeneEthyl BenzeneStyreneTolueneTotal Xylenes
TABLE 4-4KOPPERS COMPANY, INC
TEXARKANA.TX TREATABILITY STUDYUV/OZONE TREATMENT
10 minutes244mg/l183mg/l75%
PAH CompoundsNaphthaleneAcenapthyieneAcenapht'heneFluorenePhenanthreneAnthraceneFluoranthenePyreneBenzo(a)anthraceneChryseneBenzo(a)pyreneBenzo(b)fluorantheneBenzo(k)fluorantheneDibenzo(a.h)anthraceneBenzofg^OpyerlyeneIndeno(l,2,3-c,d)pyieneTotal PAH*
Influent
6.323.1
Effluent6.920.5
40.822.2<30.077.1
164.0
20.4<20.0<30.0<20.0<30.0
Bia£s. Solubility
2333334444555566
31,700-3,9301,9801,290732601351423.8•-2.49•-
54.6010.033.73.62.150< 0.5000.4440.5080.053
<0.150< 0.0200.023<0.020< 0.030<0.050<JLQ50
<2,00<2.00<2.00<2.00
0.672< 0.500
0.5000.547< 0.020<0.150<0.020
0.0450.020
<0.030< 0.050<0.050
^Removal
XAH.3
50> 10NA>74
>80>94>9469NANANA>62NANANANANANA
CV00vOCMT—o
105.898 8.804 92
NA - Not Applicable(*) - Total PAH value includes < detectable values
I necessary to maintain optimum conditions for biological growth. In addition, atemperature controller and heat source were provided to maintain a constanttemperature.
The initial set up consisted of two 6.5 liter reactors with internal clarifiers. One unitwas operated with granular activated carbon and the other without carbon as acontrol.
The operation of the activated sludge reactor was to be carried out in two phases.Phase one consisted of startup and seed sludge washout. Phase two consisted ofsteady state operation to run for 21 days. The units were seeded with an acclimatedbiological seed sludge at an approximate concentration of 5000 mg/1. Initial influentfeed flow was set at .9 ml/min. Within 3 days the feed rate was increased to 2.3ml/min for an HRT * 2 days. Phase one was scheduled to run for 40 days.for anSRT = 20 days (2 x 20 * 40 days) and phase two only long enough to collect asufficient number of samples for a statistical evaluation.
Results
The TSS concentration within the activated sludge reactors steadily declinedfollowing start-up. An evaluation of the operation of each of the two units indicatedthat the organic substrate concentration of the influent feed was to low to support anactivated sludge biomass.
The activated sludge unit was converted to an aeration tank treatment process andthe control unit was converted to a fixed film reactor. Each of these unit wereevaluated separately and are presented below.
Aeration Tank
Procedure
The Horizon Ecology bio-oxidation unit was also used for the aeration tank reactor,although no clarifier was used. The volume was maintained at 6.5 liters. The unitwas operated as a continuous flow through reactor with no provisions for solidssettling or recycle. This unit was operated the same as the activated sludge unit
ccvOCM,—,o
4 - 9
IIIIIIIIIII
above, except for the removal of the clarifier and a different flow rate. This aerationtank influent flow rate was maintained at 1.29 ml/min.
Nutrient and pH control were provided to the unit. A temperature controller and aheat source were provided to maintain the reactor at 20 - 21 "C. The nutrients wereadded to the influent tank. The influent for this unit was the same as for the otherunits.
Results
The analytical results for influent sampling are summarized on weekly tables inappendix D. The influent was sampled on a weekly basis and is the same for each ofthe 3 biological treatment units. In addition to the weekly tables, raw data for PAHcompounds are included as well as a statistical summary for the data.
Analytical results fr; the aeration tank are presented in Appendix E. Daily resultsare summarized on weekly tables for the mixed liquor and effluent. GC/MS volatilesand semi volatile compounds for the effluent are also included in the appendix.Methylene chloride was detected at 10 ug/1 and acetone at 220 ug/1, though these twocompounds are used for cleaning the glassware which may account for the presenceof these compounds. Priority pollutant metals were analyzed and included in theappendix. Mercury was detected at 0.303 ug/1 and zinc at 246 ug/1. A statisticalsummary comparison with % removals for all biological units operated is presentedin Section 4,8.
ccvOCMT"-O
ELxed_Film_ReactQ_t
The Horizon Ecology bio-oxidation unit was also used in this application. Noprovision for solids recycle was provided. The "fixed film" consisted of a bed of bio-rings suspended by wire mesh. The purpose of the fixed film is to provide a growthsupport media for the bacteria. This allows a larger population of bacteria to stay inthe reactor by limiting flushing of the microbes.
4 - 1 0
iiiiiiiiii
Procedure
The activated sludge control unit was converted to a fixed film reactor by removingthe internal clarifier and packing it with bio-rings. The bio-rings provided supportfor biological growth. The volume of this reactor was maintained at 6.5 liters. Theinfluent flow rate was 1.29 ml/min. On November 11, the reactor was re-seeded withbiological sludge. Approximately 3000 ml of sludge was drained from the reactor andreplaced. The fixed film reactor was allowed to re-acclimate. Influent feed to theunit was from the same source as the other treatment units.
Following re-seeding, the fixed film reactor was operated for 17 days to allow forseed sludge washout prior to steady state sampling. On November 23, the first steadystate samples were collected,
Results
The summary of results for *he fixed film reactor are presented in Appendix F, Rawdata for the mixed liquor and effluent are included, GC/MS volatiles and semivolatile compounds are also included in the appendix. Methylene chloride wasdetected at 7 ug/1. Priority pollutant metals were analyzed and included in theappendix. Mercury was detected at 1.15 ug/1 and zinc at 1430 ug/1. Influent resultsare presented in Appendix D. A statistical summary comparison and % removals forall biological units operated is presented in Section 4.8.
The metals data is also presented in the appendix. The only compounds detectedwere mercury at 1.15 ug/I and zinc at 1430 ug/1.
Fliiidlzed Bed Reactor
Procedure
The fluidized bed was constructed using a 1" diameter glass commn. The column bedwas packed with a fine grained growth support medium. The influent flow rate wasmaintained at 1.29 ml/min. for an HRT =* 3 hours.
in00\OCMv~O
4- 1 1
^^H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Air and nutrients were introduced to the recycle chamber. Ammonium phosphatedibasic was used to supply ammonia nitrogen and phosphate to the bacteria. TheD,O. of the unit was measured in the recycle chamber and maintained at 7.0 orabove. Sulfuric acid (5%) addition was required to maintain the pH in the 7.0 • 7.5range with a pH controller as the pH steadily increased once steady state wasreached.
The summary of results for the fluidized bed reactor and recycle chamber arepresented in Appendix G. Raw data and a statistical summary are included. Dailyresults are summarized on weekly tables for the recycle chamber and effluent.GC/MS volatiles and semi volatile compounds for the effluent are also included inthe appendix. Methylene chloride was detected at 8 ug/1. Priority pollutant metalswere analyzed and included in the appendix. Cadmium was detected at 9.10 ug/1 andzinc at 125 ug/1. influent results are presented in Appendix D.
A statistical comparison of all biological units operated is presented in Section 4.8.Overall, the results from the fluidized bed treatment show reduction to below thedetection limit for nearly all soluble organics. No PAH compounds were detected inany of the five sets of effluent samples from the reactor.
4.8 )^ologi_cal_Treatment_Units Discussion of Results
A statistical comparison of influent and effluent data for each of the three biologicaltreatment processes is presented in Table 4-5. Each of the processes show goodreduction for concentrations of conventional parameters.
For the fixed film reactor, 51.6% of the TOC was removed, 48% of the BOD wasremoved as well as 32% of the COD. In addition, 86% of total PAH compoundswere removed as were 57% of the PCP and 93% of phenols (4-AAP).
In the effluent from the fluidized bed, oil & grease was detected at an averageconcentration of 7.32 mg/1. The concentration of oil & grease in effluent from theaeration tank and fixed film reactors averaged 81.42 and 92.65 respectively. Theseconcentrations indicate an increase in oil & grease levels. The geometric mean
CO\DCMv-O
4 - 1 2
01
TABLE 4-5KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.
TEXARKANA, TEXAS TREATABILITY STUDYSTATISTICAL SUMMARY
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT COMPARISON
AQUEOUSSOLUBILITY
3 , 9 3 0
ParametersPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBOD (5)-TotalCOD -TotalOil & GreasePCP (ug/1)Cyanide -Total
jf OFPAH COMPOUNDS (ug/1) RINGSAcenaphthylene 3Acenaphthene 3Fluorene 3Phenanthrene 3Anthracene 3Fluoranthene 4Pyrene 4Benzo(a)anthracene 4Chrysene 4Benzo(a)pyrane 5Benzo C b)fluoranthene 5Benzo(k)fluoranthene 5Di benz(ah)anthracene 5Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 6Indeno( 123~cci)pyrene 6TOTAL DETECTABLE PAHCarbazoleNaphthalene 2% REM - Indicates % removal(-} - Indicates an increase of the indicated parameterBDL. - Below Detection Limit
980290
7326013514
23 . 8
2 . 4 9
InfluentMean
0 . 2 62 5 . 8 724 . 187 2 . 8 36 . 1 ?4 1 . 2BDL
293. 131 8 2 . 3 31 0 5 . 5 796 .6?12 .3 1
9 . 0 68 . 3 90 . 4 80 . 4 50 . 1 90 . 2 80. 100 . 3 10 .280 . 2 0
364 . 501 1 2 .00
1 2 9 6 . 1 9
FixedMean0 . 0 1 91 2 . 5 31 2 . 6 3
4 9 . 69 2 . 6 5
1 7 . 80 .0 1 1
BDLBDLRDL0 . 9 40 . 6 41 . 3 42 . 2 91 . 5 91 . 7 65 .2 18 .862 . 1 17 . 7 2
1 1 . 3 48 . 1 7
5 0 . 1 8BDLBDL
FilmK REH92 .695 1 . 5 64 7 . 7 63 1 . 8 9+5 6 . 7 9
NA
>99 .99> 9 9 . 9 9> 99 .9999.029 4 . 8 08 5 . 2 072 .70
++*•i-•(-•(-.i.+
8 6 . 2 3>99 .99> 9 9 . 9 9
Aeration TankMean % RKH0.0 19 92 .691 4 . 8 8 4 2 . 4 81 1 . 1 1 5 4 . 0 54 8 . 6 33 .268 1 . 4 2 +
2 3 . 9 4 1 . 9 9BDL NA
>99 .99>99 .99>99 .9997.0270.834 4 . 4 4
•t-
BDL >99 .99BDLBDLBDLBDL0 .250 . 1 40 . 2 50 . 2 80 .49 +0 . 1 3 +0 . 4 6 +0 .60 *0 .45 *2 . 8 0 $9 .23BDL >99 .99BDL >99 .99
Fluidized BedMean % REM
BDL >99.997 . 3 5 7 1 . 5 93 . 3 1 8 6 . 3 11 3 . 2 8 1 . 887 . 3 2 +
BDL > 9 9 . 9 9BDL >99 .99
BDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDLBDL
>99.99> 9 9 . 9 9>99 .99> 99 .99>99 .99>99 .99>99 .99>99.99> 9 9 . 9 9>99 .99>99 .99> 9 9 . 9 9>99 .99>9S .99> 9 9 . 9 9
BDL >99 .99BDL > 9 9 . 9 9
0 1 2 6 8 7
IIIIIIIIIIIII
reveals an oil & grease concentration of 14.95 mg/I for the aeration tank and 16.53mg/I for the fixed film reactor. This number indicates that a large deviation wasexperienced for one of the data points, though this number remains comparativelyhigh, it is more representative of the oil & grease concentrations.
The aeration tank reactor showed a reduction of 93% for TOC, 42% for BOD and33% for the COD effluent concentrations. In addition, total PAH compounds werereduced 99%, PCP 42% and phenols (4-AAP) 93%.
For the fluidized bed reactor, 72% of the TOC, 86% of the BOD and 82% of theCOD were removed. No PAH, phenols (4-AAP) or Pentachlorophenol weredetected in the effluent for a removal >99.99%.
Acid extractable phenolics are summarized for each of the three biological units inTable 4-6. The results indicate a total reduction of 58.7% for the aeration tanktreatment process and 66.5% reduction for the fixed film reactor. The fluidized bedtreatment unit demonstrated greater than 99% removal for total phenolics. Phenolwas detected in the effluent at 1.56 ug/1 and all other compounds were below thedetection limit.
COCOvO
o
4 - 1 3
U;ftf
TABLE 4-6KOPPKRS COMPANY. I NC .
TEXARKANA, TX TREATABIL1TV STUDYBIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PHENOL1CS REDUCTION
Acid Extractabie Phenolics (uff/12,3,5,6~Tetrachlorophenol2,4,6'Trichlorophenol2,4-Dichlorophenol2,4-Dimethylphenol2,4-Dinitrophenoi2-Chlorophenol2-Ni trophenol2-Methyl-4 t 6-dinitrophenol4-Nitrophenol4 Chloro-3-methylphenolPentachlorophenolPhenolTotal Detectable Phenolics
NA - Not Applicable
Aeration TankInflut^t, Effluent % Removal
b^.b 1 9 .7 66 .32 3 . 94 .99
< 0 . 5 0 03 6 . 8
< 0 . 5 0 02 . 0 72 1 . 92 8 . 74. 145 1 . 42 . 1 8
2 3 4 . 5 8
4 . 9 61 . 7 5
< 0 . 5 0 Q14
< 0 . 5 0 00 . 7 57. 395 . 7 1
13 9 . 22 . 3 2
9 6 . 7 8
7 9 . 26 4 . 9
NA62. 0
NA6 3 . 866 .380. 175 Rt ij t nj2 3 . 7-t-5 8 . 7
FixedEffluent %
1 7 . 24 . 8 41 . 6 2
< 0 . 5 0 01 1 , 8
< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0
6 . 36 . 2 8
12 7 . 12 .42
7 8 . 5 6
Film. Removal
70 . 67 9 . 76 7 . 5
NA&7 <4U ( . C7
NA> yg . y71 .27 8 . 1*J £. Of £> . o4 7 . 3
•t-6 6 . 5
Fluidiaed BedEffluent % Removal
O .00 suu "a .00<U . 500< 0 . 5 0 0a .00<0 .500<0. i»00< i .oo< l .00<0 .500
< 1 . 0 01 .561. 56
'~ vr v* . O\. UQ Q> C7C7 , O•>. U> Ul U> c*y . t*
NA> 9 9 . 9
NA>^Q <4* C? CJ . c?>99 .9> 9 9 . 9>99 .9> 9 9 . 928 .49 9 . 3
0 1 2 6 8 9
IIIIIIIIIII
5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
In-situ treatment of soils at this site could prove to be the most cost effectivealternative and should remain as an alternative. The in-situ treatment alternativemust be further investigated with different soils prior to implementation.
Soil washing results will be forv/arded as an adendum when the data becomesavailable.
The results indicate that activated sludge treatment is not a feasible treatmentalternative for this site and should not be considered further.
Activated carbon adsorption showed good results for groundwater treatment. Bothcarbon adsorbtion isotherms and ACT results show reduction of TOC andnaphthalene.
The three biological treatment processes, aeration tank fixed film and fluidized bedshowed good results and should be included for further consideration. Aeration tanktreatment reduced total PAH compounds >99%. Fixed film treatment reduced totalPAH compounds >86% the best treatment was realized with the fluidized bed with>99.9% removal of total PAH compounds.
.Analytical results from UV-ozone/Oxidation show good removal rates. Total PAHwere reduced 88%. Good removal rates were also realized for individual purgeablearomatic compounds.
o
o
5 - 1
IIIIIAPPENDIX A(Groundwater QA/QC Sampling Data)
II
C".MDCMr—O
II
IIIII
III
KOPPERS COMPANY, INCTEXARKANA, TEXAS
GROUNDWATER QA/QC COMPOSITE SAMPLE ANALYSIS
IMLBlank
I
PARAMETERpH (units)BOD*CODTOC
METALS (ug/i)ArsenicBerylliumCadmiumChromiumCopperIronLeadMercuryNicke]Zinc
Purgeable Aromatics (ug/i)BenzeneEthyl BenzeneStyreneTolueneTotal Xylenes
6.727.5158.054.9
13.7<5.00<5.00
<10.0<25.016900<5.00< 0.200<40.0
1160
11.031.543.659.246.8
6.9<1.00<10.0<1 .00
<10.0<5.00<5.00
<10.0<25.0105<5.00<0.200<40.0
<20.0
<2.00<2.00<3.00<2.00<3.00
TdP Blank
8.1<LOO<10.0<LOO
<2.00<2.00<3.00<2.00<3.00
CM
< 10.0<5.00<5.00<10.0
<25.02466.00
< 0.200<40.0<20.0
vOCMT-O
i SPECTRIX MONROGVILLE
TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF GC&Ol DATA
iiiiii
Sample: 87090544DateDate
Col l e c t ea :Received: 09/84/87
Source: QA/QCDescr ipt ion : QA/DC SAMPLES
Date Ex t r a c t e d :Date Analysed: 10/03/87
10/05/87
Halocarbons1 , 1 , 1 -Tr i c h lore-ethane . . . . . . <0 ,0301 ,1 , 2,5-Tetrach lore-ethane . . <0 .0301 , 1 ,2 -T r i c h 1 oroethane. . . . . . - '0 . 1001 , 1 -Dich lo roe thane . , . . . . . , , , - 'O .OSO1 , l -D i c h l o r c - e t h e n e . . . . . . . . . <O .O501 ,S-Di ch lore-benzene . . . . . . . . :0. 1501 ,S-Di ch lore-ethane. . . . . . . . . <0 .0501 , 2 -D i c h l o r o p r o p a n e . . . . . . . . <0.10OI , ,3-Dich lorobenzene . . . . . . . . ,0 .30O1 ,4 -D i c h l o r o b e n z e n e . . . . . . . . <0 , ^502-Chloroethy lv iny l e t h e r . . . <0 .02OEromod i ch Ic-romethane. . . . . . . <0 . 100B r o m o f o r m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <0.130Carbon Tetrach lor i d e . . . , . . . <0.030Ch lore-benzene. . . . . . . . . . . . . . <0 ,25OC h l o r o e t h a n e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <0 ,250Chlo ro fo rm . , . , . . , . . . . . . , . . „ . < '0 .050Dibromc-ch Joromethane . . . . . . . <0. 100Methyl B r o m i d e . , . . . . . . . . . . <2 .00Methyl Ch l o r i d e . . . . . . . . . . . . - .0 .250Methylene C h l o r i d e . . . . . . . . . ^O .SSOT e t r a c h l o r o e t h e n e . . . . . . . . . . ^O . aOOTr ich loro-^luoroft ie thane. . . . . 0 . 05OTr ich lc-roethene, . . . . . . . . . . . - : 0 . 3 0 0Vinyl C h l o r i d e . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .55Oc i s - 1 ,3-D i c h l o r o p r op e n s . . . . '0 .030t r a r s - l .H-Di ch l o roe th ene . . . .'O . 050t r a n s - 1 ,3 -D i c h l o - o p r o p e n e , . O . O S O
vDCM^r-o
The abo\,e -esu l fcs ar. ' sported in ug/L .Al 1 GC601 i d en t i f i c a t i on s ^rc-m r e t en t i on data on ly .
IIIIII
SPECTPIX MONRCJEVILLEPage- a
TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF GC601 DATA
Sample : 87090545Date Col lected! 09/34/87
Received: 09/25/87
Source: FBDesc r i p t i on s GA/OC SAMPLES
Date Extracted: 10/03/87Date Analyzed) 10/03/87
Purgeable Halocarbons, 1 , 1 -Tr ichioroethane., 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane.
1 . 1 ,2-Tr i c h i o r o e t h a n e . . . . .1 , 1 -D i ch 1 o ro e t hane . . . . . . . .1 . 1 -D i c h l o r o e t h e n e . . . . . . . .1 .2 -D i c h l o r o b e n z e n e . . . . . . .i, 2-D i ch lore-ethane. . . . . . * .I ,2-D i c h l o r op r opan e . . . . . . .1 «3 -D i c n I o r o b e n z e n e . . . . . . .i , 4~Dich lore-benzene. . . . . . .S-Chloroethylvinyl ether . .Bromod i c h l o r om e t h a n e . . . . . .Bromof o rm . . . . . „ . . , . . . « . * . . .Carbon Tetrachlor i d e . . . . . .C h l o r o b e n n e n e . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ch l o r o e t h a n e . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ch lor of or fn . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . .D i b r omo c h l o r om e t h a n e . . . . . .Methyl B r om i d e . . . . . . . . . . . .Methyl C h l o r i d e . . . . . . . . . . .Methylene C h l o r i d e . . . . . . . .Tetrach l o roe thene . . . . . . . . .Trichlorofluoromethane. . - .Tr i c h l o r o e t h e n e . . . . . . . . . . .Vinyl C h l o r i d e - . . . . . . . . . . .cis-1»3-Dich1oropropens . . .trans-1 ,2-Dich loroethene . .trans-1,3-Dichloropropene.
. 030
. 030
. 020
. 050. 050. 150. 030. 030. 300.250. 130. 100. 200. 10O. 250.350. 050. 100.00. 250. 050. 030. O50. 100. 250. 300. 050. aoo
CM
O
The above results are reported in ug/L »All GC601 identif ications are from retent ion data only.
IIIIIIIIIII
APPENDIX 2-AMAXIMUM AND MINIMUM PCOC
CONCENTRATIONS in&vCCM•e—O
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
EW^
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX 2 -AMAXIMUM AMD MINIMUM CONCENTRATIONS OF PCOCs IN EACH MEDIUM
Tables summarizing maximum and minimiconcentrat ions , and their locations, are presented ::n thisAppendix, If a PCOC was analyzed for and not detected in apart icu lar medium, one half: of the contract laboratorydetection limit was used as a substitute value. For a list ofapplicable detection limits see Appendix K o£ the RI Report(ERT 1987 ) . Treble A-l presents the maximum and minimumconcentrat ions of PCOCs, and their locations, in Carver Terracesurface soi ls . Note that at some Carver Terrace surface soilsampling locations, two samples, one from 0 to 6 inches and theother from 6 to 12 inches, were taken. The arithmetic averageof these samples is used in determining maximum and minimumconcentrations. Maximum and minimum values in the RI Report(ERT 1987) are not based on the average of these samples andmay, therefore, be different than the maximums and minimumsreported here.
Table A-2 presents maximum and minimum concentrat ions ofPCOCs in Carver Terrace subsurface soi ls . Because utilityworkers were the exposed population and they were not expectedto dig deeper than 10 feet , deeper soils were not included inthe summary and scenario. Table A~3 summarizes maximum andminimum PCOC concentrations for Kennedy Sand and Gravel surfacesoi ls . Table A-4 summarizes maximum and minimum PCOCconcentrations in sediments and Table A-5 summarizes maximumand minimum PCOC concentrations is seeps. The concentration ofPCOCs in the groundwater well used to evaluate the hypothet icalfuture groundwater scenario is presented in Table A -6 .
CMr—O
A-l
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
Z . 693
TflfiLE
Summary of maximum and mini MUM PCOC concentrationssurface 501 Is
Carver-
PCOCPCPPOT, CARC. PAHTOTAL PAHTC0D/TCDF TE'sARSENICCHROMIUMCOPPERZINCLEADMERCURY
MAXIMUM
16OOO <ug/kg)20£0950 <ug/kg >
2.5446e8 <ug/kg)0.000767 (ug/kg)
53* 35 (tiig/kg)57.5 (mg/ky)
301 (r . iy/ky)337C' <nig/ kq)
23fl . 05 i M q / k g }0,355 <wg/kg )
LOCATION
BJ-L4f€>-L7
NUI-NAPH3550F-03P
1 r* _ i Qt>. L. Z*
B2-L9&^-L3CHURCHPS -LiPS-L 3 4
MINIMUMCQNCCNTRATION
80O <ug/kgJ960 <ug/kg)
2560 (ug/kg)3. 8E-OS (wy/ky)
1 (wy/kg)3 (wg/kg)
2. 5 (r-ig/kg)c1 (iiig/kg)
2. 5 <*cnj/kg)O. 3 ( idy/ky)
LOCATION
MANYM^;JYMANY
2268F-6MANYMANYMANYMANYPACEMANY
IIIII
„
IIIIIIII
HAXIHUH NAKinufl KiNiHLR mim-»- —.-..«„._... 1 II CCNC LOMT: °N CONC .cwTlfl * ,
CETEC-EC PCOCsw/w «w sin goo no**™ ?f° SL82 !60 M! »Y890 £L92 160 ,flvv,16 ? 130C SLS2 ,M MNYf* 1W «*^ !6) 14NV"e/<£ '300 SL£i - 6 ' ' v,,jv-? ; - 5 5900 5.3: .3 ; ' -ftv.r ' j ir.;0 =LS: ;. £ \5 3/CCO ! : i o *JS/^ t IC^O 1BY^-NE u£:-« ;;3*f;
B£? i22-Vf l ' f ?«F . f lCE> lE L ' & > * ?50B5«3i i :S^ £ iE U £ >3 4 , .5^:j ' . c ' f , jC : ;N"-: ' ( t ^ . . .3 a* ;> s *s £^ "-"-, . ' " " ' r:r :C ^v
. . " ' * • } • *•**.'**. * «-.;•;;«- i."^-:;crs£ . 5 ' . ;,., „,,, ;, ''- . :ES : . - . . : . : - : : = ' «V : ... .,, ^. -.- ^'• : : £N IC v;,i, . -,-: > • v ,: B' J s- : ----.:.;" J' : ^-.' ; -o,_ * ' " " " «.;, » -
• • • - "^" " ' n i , ,: " : . . . . . . .„ '3" 3 : : - : : " ' : - - ' •: XE :" -3/ sr:c s.a: :; ;.
COcr.vOCMvO
1A-3
Ur ,BIL KULTI
IIII
I
DETECTED PCQCtPENTflCHLOMPHENOL
UNITS
US/KG
HAK1HUH HAIIHUHCONC LOCATION
HANY
TOTAL PAH
HINIHUH HINIHUHCQNC LOCATION
00l) NANYACENAPHTHENEACENAPKTHYLENEANTHRACENE9EN20(6KI)P£RYLENEFLUORANTHENEfLUORENE2-HETHYLNAPHTHALENENAPHTHALENEPHENANTKfiENEPYRENE
BENZOfAJftNTHRftCENEBENMAJPYRENEBENZOtBUOFLUORANTHENESCHRY5ENEB !BENZO (A ,H }ANTHRAC £NEI NOEMO( 1 , 2 ,3 -CD )PVRENEARSENICCKRGHIUHCOPPERLE«HERCURYZINC
US/KBUS/KBUS/K6U6/K6US/KGUS/KGOS/KgUS/KBUS/KGU6/K8UG/K6US/KB05/KgU6/K6US/KSUS/KBH6/K6MG/K6K6/K6flG/KSH6/K6HG/KG
UO4600
UO160
29000160UO[60160
6WO160
10000220000
3000!60
If 0001 4 . 9
129 . 6 3
MANA
35.2
MNYSL56MANYHANYSL55HANY4ANYHANYHANYSLS8HANYSL56SL58SL56MANYSL56SL58sisa5158
NAt\nNA
SL55
160160160UO160160160160UO160160160160UO!60UO
1i2 . S
NANA
3 0 . 2
KANYHANYHANYHANYHANYHANYHANYNANYNANYHANYHANYHANYSANYHANYHAUVnun THANYMAtJVnKnTHANYHftNY
NAITH
NASLS8
vOCM^r-O
POTENTIALLYCARCINOGEN IC PAH
US/KG
29 1240
220800
SLS8
8L5S
2560 HANY
960 HftNY
A-4
STATISTICAL SWUHly OF ?CDC, FOUND IN feMKKT MKEI TKMU6KJUT THE SITE.
II
II
I
DETECTED PCOCs UNITSHINIHUH
CONC HINIHUHLOCATION mm*CQNC
HAXIHUHLOCATION
BENZENETOLUENETOTAL IYLENESACENAPHTHENEACENflPHTHYLEHEANTHRACENEBENlO<6HI)PEf iYL£NEFLUORANTHENEFLUGRENCNAPHTHALENE2-HEWLNAPHTHALENEPHENANTHRENEPYRENE
BENZG(A)ANTHRACENEBENZOIA1PYRENEBENZOfBJFLUQRANTHENECHRYSENED IBENZO(A ,H )ANTHRACENErNDENP ( l ,2 .3 -Cf l )PYR £NE
ARSENICCHROHIUHCOPPERHESCURYLEADHNC
TOTAL PAH
US/KGUS/KGU6/K6US/KBUS/KGUS/KGU6/KSUS/K6US/KGUS/KGU6/K6U6/KGUS/KGU6/KGUS/KGU6/KSUS/KG'JS/K6U6/KGH6/K6NS/K6
2.52.32,5160160160160160160160160160160160160160UO160160
HANVHANYftANYKANYMANYNAKYHAHYflANY«ANYHANYHANYHANYHANYHANYHANYHANYHANY
HANY
2139
17019000
16016000
1602900015000
670002700032000300001 100
1601400017000;to
160
S909S009$809S309KANYSD09HANYSD09SD093B09SD095009SD09S021HANY£D09SD09MANY
oor-CMVo
MG/K6«6/K6.1S/K6
If
2 . 50 . 10 .5
2
MNY".ANYHANYHANYSDOlHANY
1062
7 . 4 60 . 91603AS
SD0150073 D 1 5S D 1 5SDC7SD09
2560 250 120 sso?
CARCINOGENIC PAN 960 1ANY 17800 SD08
n
IIIIIIIII
DETECTED PCOCs
ETHYL6ENZENETOLUENETOTAL XYLENESACENAPHTHENEACEHAPHTHYLENEANTKRACENEgEKZO(6HI)PERYLENETLUORAilTKENEFLUORENE2-METHYLNAPHTHALENENAPHTHALENEPHENANTHRENEPYRENE
3ENZCH A) ANTHRACENEBENZO(B)FLUORANTHENECHRYSENE!HOENO(],2,3-CD)PYRENEARSENICCHROM1UHCOPPERflERCURYLEADZINC
UNITS
US/KGU6/KGU6/K6US/KGUG/KGU6/K8UG/KGUS/KG(J6/KGUS/KfiU6/K0UG/K6U6/K6U6/K6US/KGU6/KGUS/KGKG/KGMC/k'tno/s.DKG/KGKG/KBUC /I/PRe/KbHG/KG
HtNlKUHCONC
tJOOSOO
36001300^0
1404iOOO
140100000120000170000400000310000100000250002200027000
16011
2 .50 . 10,5
20,7
KIN1MWLOCflTlCN
SD12-002SD12-002SD12-002SD12-002SD12-002SD12-002SD12-002SD12-002SD12-002SH12-001SD 12-002SD12-002SD12-002SD12-0025012-002SD12-002SD12-002UAUVnflniHANVHftNYSU lO-001SO 12-002SD 12-002
HAUHUMCQNC
540029005600
130000160
46000160
100000120000170000400000310000100000250002200027000
160i1
2.50 . 1 2
1222
HAH HUMLOCATION
SH10-001SH10-001SHJO-001SD12-002SD12-002SDI2-002SDI2-002SD12-002SD12-002SD12-0025012-002SD12-0025012-002SD12-0025D12-002SD12-002SD12-002KANVMAUVnHHTKANYS012-002SM10-001SHIO-001
TOTAL PAH US/KB
POTENTIALLYCARCINOGENIC PAH«^-*4tdtW*«4W«4vB * ,v4
(suaseeps)
U6/K6
1450480 S012-002
74 160 SD12-002
1450480 SD12-OC2
74UO SD 12 -002
Oh-CM•c-O
A-6
IIIIIIII
Table A-6
Sugary of PCOC Concentrations in the Groundwater Well (MW03-002 ,Used for Hypothetical Future Scenario.
INA:
PCOC CONCENTRATION (ug/1 )
CMOr-cvi«r-O
POT. CARC. PAHTOTAL PAHBENZENEETHYLBENZENETOLUENETOTAL XYLENESARSENICCHROMIUMCOPPERZINCLEADMERCURY
NANA3637
2 . 525NA5
1 2 . 55600NANA
indicates that the PCOC was not analysed for
A-7
IIII APPENDIX B(Carbon Adsorbtion ACT Results)
Or-CM*r-O
III
IICALGON CARBON CORPORATION
IIIITechnical Service Report No. 1 187-38
Feasibility Testing for the Removal of Naj&halene and TOG from Groimdwater
or-<M
O
Prepared For:Keystone Environmental
Monroeville, PA
DlSTRIBUTIpN^D. A* BiscanG, H. GunnerQonF. M* MendlcinoR. M, Moskal
Author
Date :T. P. Har t i | r6630January _U,__ 1988
KE WORDS;GroundwaterNapthaleneWood PreservativeFS-300ACT
Technical Service Report Mo. 1 187-38T. P. Hartig
January 14, 1988Page 2
The site of a former wood preservative plant in Texarkana, Texas la contaminatedwith napthalene and coal tar compounds* Clean-up procedures have been undertakenby Keystone Evnironmental Resources. This study will determine the applicabilityof activated carbon for decontaminating the groundwater around the plant.SUMMARY AJH) CONCLUSIONSAn ACT waa performed t with 100 ppb breakthrough of napthalene as the objective.* The groundwater sample for the ACT differed from the reported characterization.
1C contained 10 ppb of naptehalene and 20 ppra of TOC t versus a reported 2 ppmnapfthalene and 36 ppm TOC.
* No naphthalene breakthrough had occurred by the time of study termination.* At study termination the simulated performance was 180 days ->n-linet 2 .588
million gallons treated, and a 0.8 lb/1000 gallon usage rate. The loading was0 . 1 1 mg naffchalene/g F-300.
The water used for the ACT differed from the reported characterization. Spikingthe filtered groundwater to achieve the reported 2 ppm concentration of naj&haleneand running another ACT is proposed.DISCUSSIONThe ACT simulated a Model 3 adsorber with 2000 Ibs of FS-300. Flow and surfaceloading rates were 10 gpm and 0.8 gpm/sq . f t . j respectively. The EBCT wa-j 50minutes. See Table 2.The groundwater sample was brown and very hazy. This required a pref iltration stepthrough glass fiber pads. The filtrate was amber and slightly hazy* The samplehad the odor of creosote* No napfchalene odor was detected*The ACT was run for seven days. Pump failure resulted in study termination. Nonapfchalene breakthrough was detected, but five individual compound breakthroughswere detected by TOC. See Figure 1.All ACT effluents were water white and odorless.
inOr-CMv~O
^^^mmIIIIII
II
TABLE 1Keystone EnvironmentalTexarkana, Texas Site
ACT Data
Effluent Sample Simul. Gallons Simul. DaysInfluent »1468
10131618202224263034404448525668727576
1 7 , 1 3 91 1 9 , 9 7 7188 ,536257 ,094325 ,652428,49053 1 ,3286 3 4 . J 6 5702 ,7247 7 1 , 2 8 2839 .840908,399
1 , 045 , 5 1 51 , 1 8 2 , 6 3 21 , 388 ,3081 , 5 2 5 , 4 2 41 , 6 6 2 , 5 4 11 , 7 9 9 , 6 5 81 , 9 3 6 , 7 7 52 ,3 1 3 , 8462 ,450 ,9632 .553 .8002 ,558 ,080
1 . 1 98 .33
13 . 101 7 . 8 522.6029 .7536.9044.0348 .7953 .5558 .3 163.0772.608 2 . 1 196.40
105 .901 1 5 ,4125 .0134 .0161 .0170 .01 7 7 , 318G.O
TOGog/1
201 . 5
12
1 .52 . 53.02 .52 .53-53,53 .56 .56 .56 .5
10.010,013 . 514 .014 .514,518 .518 .018 .0
Napthaleneug/1
10<1<1<1<1<l< j< j<l<1< 1< j<1<;j<1<1<1< j<;j<1< j< j<1<1 6
Or-<Ms—O
QCarbon UsageLoading 0 . 1 1 Rate 0 . 7 7 lbs/1000 gallons
tag naj&halene/g P-300
TABLE 2
Keystone EnvironmentalTexarkana, Texas Site
ACT Simulation Conditons
Vessel: Model 3Carbon: FS-300
Flow Rate: 10 gpraSLR: 0 *80 gptn/sq. ft.
EBCT: 45 Min
oCMx—O
LH
FIGURE ITOG BREAKTHROUGH
IN USA
liftII
ill
•fi
!!itif
>V*f-
ill
n•ht
i {
i
1
24
22
20
I£ n•ti T
i ,t..ui litli. iif uflurl It
1412
10
86
4
Z
i tft II Ifi
t1 1 • ffir
fit-
1 .2 .3 1 .0MILLION GALLONS ' •5f > 1 2 7 Q 8 -2.0 2 .5
IIIII APPENDIX 2-BGEOMETRIC MEAN CONCENTRATIONS
IIIIII
OP-C\J*r-o
I2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
APPENDIX 2-BSUMMARY OF DATA USED TO ESTIMATE GEOMETRIC MEAN PCOC
CONCENTRATIONS IN CARVER TERRACE SURFACE SOILS, KENNEDY SANDAND GRAVEL SURFACE SOILS, AND SEDIMENTS
Ca rve_r__Te_r_r a.ae.
The following steps were performed to est imate thegeometric mean concentrat ion of PCOCs.
For each PCOC in Carver Terrace surface soils, thelowest measured value was identified and used toreplace any sampling points at which the PCOC was notdetected. The lowest measured values in CarverTerrace surface soils are shown in Table B-l .Once all substitutions wsre completed, total yp.u andpotential ly carcinogenic PAH were summed for eachsampling point .At sampling points where two soil samplos were taken(one from 0 to 6 inches and the second from 6 to 12inches), results of the two samples were averaged forall PCOCs.These data were then used to est imate the geometr icmean concentration of PCOCs in Carver Terrace surfacesoils.When estimating current PCOC concentrations in CarverTerrace surface so i l s/ areas covered by sod wereassumed to have PCOC concentrations equal to thelowest measured value. (The following samplingpoints are covered by sod: B2-L9 ; B2-L8 ; B2 - L7 ;PACE; STATION 10; STATION 9; B4-L 12 ; B6-L6 ; B6 -L7 ;B4-L22 ; B6-L8 ; B2-L6; B2-L5 ; B2-L4 ; B2-L2 ; B2 - L3 ;STATION 7 ; 2 0 2 2 ; 2 0 2 6 ; SL83-001 ; and, S L 9 0 - 0 0 1 . )PCOC concentrat ions for each sampl ing point are shownin Table B-2 . The geometric mean concentrat ion ofeach PCOC is also shown in Table B -2 .
CT—f*-*.
CMvO
2069T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0B-l
1111• Minimum Measured PiM PCOC
PCPm ACENAPHTHENE• ACENAPTHYLENEB ANTHRACENE
B( A) ANTHRACENE|B(A)PYRENE
B ( B&K ) FLUORANTHENESB(GHI)PERYLEN£
ICHRYSENEDIB (AH) ANTHRACENEFLUORANTHENE
— FLUORENE• I (CD123)PYRENE• 2METHYLNAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENEIPHENANTHRENE
PYRENEARSENIC
1 CHROMIUMCOPPER•7 T VI /""ZINC
ILEADMERCURY
Table B-i
•COC Concentrations at Carver Terrace
MINIMUM CONCENTRATION1 200 (ug/kg)
490 (ug/kg)260 (ug/kg)280 (ug/kg)200 (ug/kg)340 (ug/kg)240 (ug/kg)390 (ug/kg)320 (ug/kg)400 (ug/kg)330 (ug/kg)470 (ug/kg)350 (ug/kg)460 (ug/kg I490 (ug/kg)220 (ug/kg)390 (ug/kg)2 .5 (mg/kg)
2 (mg/kg)1 (mg/kg)6 (mg/kg)2 .5 (mg/kg)0 . 16 (mg/kg)
CMS—o
B-2
TABLE 8-2
CONCENTRATION OF PCSCs IN CARVER TERRACE SURFACE SOILS flSSlXlNS TWTCONCENTRATIONS IN SODDED AREAS ARE EQUAL TO THE LOWEST VALUE
r>€S£ VALUES (WE US£D IN THE CURRENT SCENARIO.ORGANIC PCOCS ARE IN US/KG AND INORGANIC ftOCS ARE IN H6/K6.
SAW>L£LOCATION&3-L1283-L1363-114K-H.3K-LflBM.7PACECHURCHSL53-OQ164-L1
E4-L20STATION 9B4-U2B6*t6B6-L7B4-C32B&-L8SL03-001SL03-014&4-USB4-L1STATION B84H.17
81H.4SL87-001B1-U8B1H.1081-12086-L366-148&<12K-U82-LS82M.4B3-L2B2-L3B5H-2
STATION 7B5-L2.185-U381-L21NU-HAPHB5-L2285-119SL36-001&55-001SL56-001S156-003SL8S-001a83-ooiSL34-001SL30-001
"PCP
120012001200120012001200120012001300130012CO12001300120012001200
120012001200teoo16000120014600130012001300120012001200120012001200120012001200120012001200120013001200
13001200
TOTALPAH5530SS5059010552055205S2055205520
44140383555205520552051 055205520
3977070953&8002446450180140188130338301103516070105905S20553055305530552055303500505520138330144S101804310552016299055206260
U7IOO614BO
CARC,PAH1SSOi8804240018501850iaso18501350
157054430185018501850185018501850
15300314518400561090844001033851813550157675
467518501850185018501850185012675018506709091920100940016507775018502610
7060038400
ARSENIC CHftOWl* COPPER2.52,353.32.52,52,52,52.S
23.252.52.5
2.52.532.52,5
2.552.62.52.53.53.52.52.52,52.52.52.32.5
2.5
5II1 1222221810. S2
22347
91254632232a6,52
2
6.525.535I11111081
111224
834923.5I1111101
1
ZINC3384.51056666
260326
3324245523431 14
353334136217 .5&666614336
6
LEAD34.85106.0531 .752.53,52,52,5
21 .3547.35
57.74.2
73.44 1 .622.9527.2539.817 .452.52.52.52.' 533fl, 05
KERCUflY0,220.130.3S50.160,160 , 160, 16
0 . 160. 16
0. 160. 16
0.2350. 160.3050.160 . 160, 160. 160 , 160 . 1 60 . 160 . 1 60, 16
CM^~r-CMr~O
GEOMETRIC«AN 1.35E+03 1.81E*04 MIE+03 2>77E*00 3.94E+00 2.57£*00 2,9S£*Oi 1.3SE+01 1.77E-OJ
B-3
I
I1IIII
When est imating future PCOC concentrat ions in CarverTerrace surface so i l s/ sod is assumed to not have aneffect on PCOC concentrat ions . The geometric meanconcentrat ion of each PCOC, is also shown in TableB-3 . These geometr ic mean concentrat ions of PAHs arethen used to est imate future concentrations and theeffect of degradat ion using half lives reported inthe scientific l iterature (see Appendices 2-C and2-F) .
CMNT-CD
B-4U ~ 1
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
P-3CN OF PCOCs IN CnRVER TEPRflCE SURFflCE SOILS fiSSUfllNG THAT
SODDING OF AN SftEAS *£ NO EFFECT ON PCX CONCENT RflT IONS. ONCt OEGSftDfiTIONOF PAHs t*D PCD0/PCDF IS ACCOUNTED FOR, n£5£ yflLUES flBE USED I« T>€ FUTURE SC&WRIO.
ORGANIC PCOCS flR£ IN U6M6 ftND J*RGflWIC PCOCS ORE IN afi/KG,
~SiWULOCATION634.12634.13834.14B24.3624.8ftM.7MCECHJRCHSI 58-001
B4-U84420STflTION 9844.12B64.6864.7644.22864.8SL03-001SL03-014044.15B44.1STflTION 8
644.17614.4
SL87-OOIB1-U8B1-L10&i4jK>864.3S&-L4864.12624.6K-i.5B24.4B24282-13854_2
STflTlOM 7B5-12385-U3B1-L21HHtfPHB5H22B54.19SL36-001SL3-001SL56-001SL56-003SL85-001SL83-001
SL84-001SL30-0016EWETRICHFJW 1
—— ——— --S-H.!- —— «————• ——— .-———
PCP1200120012001200120012001200120012001200120012001200120012001200
120012001200120016000120014600120012001200120012001200120012001200120012001200120012001200120012001200
120017000
. 44£*03SS:ss2S=2
TOTALPAH5520555059010121601316330524345501861335672710
44140983548310
235700112700
45233003779020540
2377070352680024464501801401381303382011025
160701059055202552160456661065293550050370413525005012525013S33014481018042102, 4£*0816239016064606280
U710061480
l.46£*05ssnssssii'
CflRC,PAH13501830
42400432514510403819201052040
44200015705442032800
14475073750
20203502170011520
1530031451840056109084600
10338518125501576754675185053766572149524901525550884925126750799006709091920100940018507775010344002610
7060038400
4.9SEXJ4»?*-,--*'*-•-'*-
-*-*———•».*—
af&NJC2.52.953.353.35171 0 . 1 5a. &s2.5
23.252.52 .5
2.52 .532 .52.5
2,552,62.52 .52.52 .510.45.653.52.54.952 .92.5
2.5
3. 38£*00sssassss
cram*51 11157.53114 ,510. 5
421810.56
u2947
9125n6919.536.5514 .56.56
2
6.13S+003S2S2 3S±3
COPPER6.525.52518 .520.516123210a27
1112i4
834923.5127955.510 .51011026
1
9.77E*00 1.
"*~^"'
ZINC3384.5105
£4253520540.53370260
32326
3324245523421 1 4
3533241362 1 7 . 5348
1072 .593.5338280.51433120
6
0
42£*025t*v^~Tfga
LEA034.85106.0591 .7510 1 .7543.9532.550. 6
21 .9547.95
5 7 . 74 .2
76.44 1 , 6^2.3327.2523.817 ,4553.1577.834.330.9527.3238.05
4. 2££*01•aasfajaas;
MESCURV0.2050 , 160.3S50 . 1 60, 160.340. 16
0 . 160.16
0. \\>0. 13
0,220 , 1 60.230 . 1 60 . 160 . 1 60 . 160 . 160. 160 . 1 60. 160. 16
0 . 1 8 1 3 7 1:SS£ sassiSSs
cvi•r-O
B-5
IIIIIII
II
Kennedy Sand arid Grave l
The following steps were performed to estimate thegeometr ic mean concentrat ion of PCOCs.
1. For each PCOC in Kennedy Sand and Grave l surfacesoi ls, the lowest measured value was identified andused to replace any sampling points at which the PCOCwas not detected. If a PCOC was not detected in anysurface soil samples, the method detect ion 1 imit wasused in place of no detects and J valves .
2. Once all substitutions were completed, total PAH andpotent ial ly carcinogenic PAH were summed for eachsampling point.
3. These data were then used to est imate the geometricmean concentrat ion of PCOCs in Kennedy Sand andGrave l surface soi l s .
4. When est imating current PCOC concentrat ions inKennedy Sand and Grave l surface soils degradat ion ofPAHs was not accounted for . The geometric meanconcentration of each PCOC is also shown in Table B-4
5. When est imat ing future PCOC concentrat ions in KennedySand and Gravel surface soi ls/ degradation of PAHs isassumed to occur. The future geometric meanconcentration of each PCOC, is shown in Table B -4 .The same method was used to calculate Kennedy Sandand Grave l degradat ion as was used for Carver Terrace(see Appendix 2~C ) .
in^~r-CMT-O
B-6
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
••IIIIIIIIIII
TABLE B-4
GEOMETRIC MEAN PCOC CONCENTRATIONS IN KENNEDY SAND AND GRAVEL
CONCENTRATION OF PCOCs IN KENNEDY SAND AND GRAVEL SURFACE SOILS ASSUMINGTHAT NON-DETECTS AND J VALUES ARE EQUAL TO THE LOWEST VALUE MEASURED OR
ONE HALF THE METHOD DETECTION LIMIT IF THE PCOC WAS NOT DETECTED ANYWHEREON KENNEDY SAND AND GRAVEL PROPERTY, TWO GEOMETRIC MEANS ARE PRESENTED.ONE NOT ACCOUNTING FOR DEGRAGDATION AND THE OTHER TAKING DEGRADATION OFPAHS INTO ACCOUNT (HALF LIFE OF 1385 DAYS IS ASSUMED) . ORGANIC PCOCS ABE
IN UG/KG AND INORGANIC PCOCS ARE IN MG/KG. ^
GEOMETRIC MEAN WITH NO ACCOUNT FOR DEGRADATION OF PAHv—r-CM
SAMPLELOCATION
SL58-001SL87-001SL55-001SL56-001SL56-003
38888
PCP.OOE+02.OOE+02.OOE+02.QOE+02.OOE+02
3 .9 .i.9.9 .
TOTALPAH
58E+05572+0499E+0557E+0458E+04
CARC.PAH
2.54E+055.63E4-041.17E+055.63E+045 .64E +04
ARSENIC1.49E+011 .49E4-011 .49E+011 .49E+01
CHROMIUM1.1.1 *1 *
20E+0120E+0120E+01aoE+oi
9.9 .9 .9 .
COPPER68E+0068E+0068E+0068E-fOO
C2INC
3.02E-+-013 .52E+013 .45E4-013 . 4 7 E + 0 1
GEOMETRICMEAN W/0 8 .OOE +02 1 .44E+05 8DEGRADATION
82E+04 1 .49E+01 1 .20E+01 9 .68E +OG 3 . 3 6 E + 0 1
GEOMETRIC MEAN ACCOUNTING FOR DEGRADATION OF PAH
SAMPLELOCATION
SL58-001SL87-001SL55-001SL56-001SL56-003
88388
PCP.OOE+02.OOE+02.OOE+02.OOE+02.OOE+02
2.6 .1.6 .6.
TOTAL CARC.PAH
55E+0482E+0342E+0482E+0383E+03
PAH1.81E+044.01E+038.36E+034.01E+034.02E+03
;s=2S3S*=ss=a:=— »=s==Sffl_
ARSENIC1.1.1.1 .
49E+0149E+0149E+0149E+01
CHROMIUM1.20E+011 .20E+011 .20E+011 .20E+01
9999
=s=s~=s— ss==,~._^=s_3!3:_
COPPER.68E+00.68E+00.68E+00.68E+00
ZINC3.02E- * -013 .52E+0 13 .45E +0 13 .47E +0 1
GEOMETRICMEAN WITH S.OOE-f-02 1-03E-I-04 6.29E+03 1 .49E+01 1.20E+01 9.68E+00 3 .36E+01DEGRADATIONONE HALF OF THE METHOD DETECTION LIMIT USED IN PLACE OF NO DETECTSAND J VALUES.
B-7
IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Sediments
The following steps were performed to est imate thegeometric mean concentrat ion of PCQCs.
1. For each PCOC in sediments, the lowest measured valuewas identified and used to replace any samplingpoints at which the PCOC was not detected. If a PCOCwas not detected in any sediment samples, the methoddetection limit was used in instead.
2. Once all substitutions were completed, total PAH andpotentially carcinogenic PAH were summed foe eachsampling point.
3. These data were then used to estimate the geometricmean concentration of PCOCs in sediments. Thegeometric mean concentrat ion of each PCOC is alsoshown in Table B-5 ,
CVJ«r=O
B-8
2069T 4040-001 -600
-GEOMETRIC mm CONCENTRATION OF PCOCs IN SEDIMENTS
CONCENTRATION Of PCQCS IN SED1NEMT 3*m£S ASSUHIN6 THAT PCOC CONCENTRATIONS IN SAMPLES WHERE MO ttOCS W£R£ DETECTEDflfiE EQUAL ro T}« LOWEST vflLJE MEASURED IN ANY S6D1HEXT SAMPU fiS£ 3HOUN . IF A COX «AS HOT DETECTED IN WYS£DI>€NT SAMPLE THE HETHOD DETECTION LiMT MAS SU&STJTUTE0 FQft YON DETECTS AND J VALUES- ORGANIC PCOCS Afi6 IN U6/K6AM) INORGANIC PCOCS ARE IN MS/KG. KGRAOTIQN is NOT ACCOUNTED POR,PCOC
SDO&-001SD05-003SD06-301
SDGI-OOlSDOI-OOl SBSMl-002S004-001
SD2 1-003SOS2-003$034-003$003-001$003-002SD15-OOISD15-002$007-001SW7-005SfXtS-001SD09-002SD09-001$009-003SD19-OQ!$050-001
00
£€NZEN£"a.ioE^ra. 106*01a.io£*oi2. 106*01a. ioe*oia, ioe*oia. ioe*oi2. 10£*012.106*012. 106*01a. 106*012,106*01a. ioe*oia. ioe*oi2. 106*012. 106*01a, ic£+oi2. 106*01a. ioe*oia. io£*oia. 106*01a. 106*01
TOLLSCT906*oT
3.906*013.906*013.306*01t/t jUfe^V 11 '3j\C *(^ 13.' 306*013.906*013,90£+0i3.906*013,906*013.906+013,906*013.306*013.906*013.906*013.906+013.906*013.906*013.906*013.906*013.906*01
TOTALIVL6N6S"oEtoT1
,70€*02.706*02.706*02.706+02.706+02.706*02,706*02.706*02.706*02.706*02.706*02.706*02.706*02.706*02.706*02.706*02.706*02.70£*02.706*02.706*02
TOTIJL CARCIN,WH PAH ARSENIC CHRWItJN COPPER ?:« LEAD SERCUfiY
.156*05 l, 626*044.306*00 5.2l£ *00 7,46E*00 2.506*01 a. 906*00 1.606-011.006*01 5,21E*00 7.46E+00 i.80E*01 1.506*01 1,606-01, 156+05.15E+05.I5E+05,15E*05.156*05.156*05
.17E+05.256+05,15£*05. I5£*05.156*05
.62E+04 6.006*00 5.216*00 7.466*00 6.806+00 2.306+00 1.606-01.626*04 4.306+00 5.2l£*00 7.466*00 1.306*01 1 .406*01 1.606-01.62£*04 4,306*00 5.216*00 7.46E*00 6.806*00 1.606-0!,626*04 4.306*00 S.21E*00 7.46E*00 9,606*00 3.206*00 1.60£^1.626*04 4.306*00 S,aiE+00 7.46E*00 1.556*01 1.606-Gl.62£+04 4.306*00 5.21E+00 7,466*00 6.806+00 7.206*00 1.S06-51.62E+04 4,306+00 5.21E+00 7.46£*00 1.336+01 1,606^1.62E*04,62£*04,62£*04.62£*044,306*00 5.21E*00 7.46E+00 4.406*01 4.40t*01 1.606-01.156*05 1.6^*04 ».306*00 5.2l£*00 7.46E+00 5.796*01 1 .606-014.806*00 5.216*00 7.46£*00 8.20£*0l I.10E+02 3.00E-01, 17E*OS 1.63+04 4.306+00 U2E*01 7.466*00 1. 366+02 2. 106-Cl7.806+00 6.20E+01 7.466+00 1 . 10£ *02 1.606*02 6.00EK-1,15£*05 1.62£*04 4.306+00 5.21E+00 7.46E*00 6.33C+01 3.S06-014.306+00 2.606+01 7.46tH» 3,10£*oa 5.006*01 7.006-01.31E*05 3.236*04 4,306*00 1.436*01 7,466*00 1.106*02 6.206-014.306+00 3.606+01 7.466*00 3.106*02 2.306+00 1.606-01.706*02 2.53£*05 1,626*04 4.306+00 1.696+01 7.466+00 3.656+02 1.906-014.306*00 7.26£*00 7.466*00 1.1.^+02 6.8aE+00 S.506-014.306+00 9.31E+00 7.466*00 1.206*02 7.33£*00 1.606-01
CVJ
o
3.906*01 9.30E+00
IIIIIIIIII
APPENDIX C(UV/Ozone Oxidation Results)
CMsr-O
D Ot
O O
C' O
o < CD
*-
*TO
rt>tC
ill3
C(t
__•«
u»- 0
u*O r*
>p- O
13
tVt»t
o OQ'
-i1
r*Q
c'fi
a-t, 0
33
r* 't-'ft rr
rft> 3 <-» - .-i "**, Ci U' a. .^. -"
r* r«
O <
-t -t
-t 2
2 2
Q O
G O
O (B
CD
fu11- - i
i ift ft
HI fli -
33
30
*1^ i1
0* Q
» U* 3
-
— r*
it rt
rt O
- —
—
1 O
O O
33 1 <
H el i 3
3 r, i O
O O
O ^
3
3<A
t* -*• —
3 3
(J* x
, < <
O T i
i 0
O O
-I
i -
_-(',
- - -
3 ._
, o
O 3
-»i
Cc O
— -
U> O
O C
' 3 t&
V
-n
(U O
O
- 1
•« -
( 3
"• i
—
3 ft
Qj i '<
',' it
tt -f
% i~> O
0* ft* Q
~ O
O O
(!)
3i3
i
3 3
fl> 3
3 il*
r l
- O
i*
•*» 1
-O —
BO
'Nrt
— rt
O O
O 1
rt -
O '•
O 3
'-'
3 0
> 1 O
3-
- 3
- 3
t T - -t
0> J
fli
ixa
n - -a
c& o
-D
O
a> n
o -
33
OtH
3i.
O'Q
f&3
3 3
C-~
1 CP
O i!&
1 (D
(6
—
(H -
OO
O
33
- ^
O -
r» 3
1 1
T3 •
0"f
l»u
- 3
• •
1 3
<O
O 1
rt rt
CU
—
f> -
O tH
O •
3 •
3 Q
• 3
1 r*
TT>
-^i
([»
t&
O i£i
O 3
ff
3
rtn
^ 3
i&
j
(TI "*,
it/ rtt
3 *f
iit
• .•
-• .-.
.- ,-
,-- /
,-. -'
,--[ . i i.H
t. .
[ u -•
f.n i . (.
[.'( f
*) ti'
-* '-'I' f
•! F' t
^ fl."
-*
-*O
O
«ft
O
-W
OO
C'l
Cfl1 O
O O
Cu
O -^'
O O
Oo o o c o o o c o o o o o o o o o o
*>. '*>
tw ro
r-> -»
— —
— —
.f
1 1
I 1
1 1
- -
-O
D O
1 O O
D O
fu t
u •*
o r>
n o
o o
o H
f" -H
33
33
33
31
t -i
O O
O G
O O
O O
fl»
rtll1llT
l3
r»3
OO
OO
OO
O-
i —
oa"O
i*Oi>c
[to&
»o(5
fl»1
rt(H
r»rt
iOi;
33
->3
33
3O
3O
W N
1? ftf
N *
C" it —
til"(H
(ftl
>3fl
>33
rtO
irt
3 3
3 it
3
i!6 fll 3
1
3Cft
it ftt
CD
(i
O fl<
3 C&
3(H
rt (D
3 Cti •
3 en
' ,*
,-•••
. .
.- .-v
,'
. /*•
--FVJ
<A'' tu
c."
-* C/
* ti
W tt>
6t*
w o
• w
• •
C' O
O
O O
O O
oooooooooo
"0 c _ (G (1 a- a (i* X Oi — o o a. 1 c* o 3 M
DO
O D
Ot (U
Of Q>
a> £t
a (p
> m a* n
3 X
f» O
_ ^
a -
< *
- o
N O
COQ
at Q
enD
a**
** ~*
S X
X
Xto
fu O
OX
X
-^ X
CO t
O (O
ft)
tl t
1 1
O *A O 1 - o r» - O 3 •H m -f > r- •H < r 6 -^
it H
it >
« GO
H r M m
f>* It
!>• H
(i>3 ;
••-
K U
>O
« C * 3
(D
» >
-J •
3J
•* n <
-JL •
O uO
-* ft
T|
> H
c* up » O
u &
« O
u -»
ti i* Q
N >
« H
H >
Ul O C 1 o tV 0 c T; _ 2 J> r- _ Z
\
Oi T) m O 3J _ X 5 5 2^ jj O 01 _ r r
u a* •o
012
720
^Mi
IIIII
! X MONRC6VJLLE
TABLc 3: SUMMARY OF GC601 DATA
871 10 146 source cu F I N A LDesc r i p t i o n T^EATAB i u i TVDate
Datec o l l e c t e d :°ece i vea£x tracteg
Date ana lyzed
III
1 1 / 0 0 / 8 71 1 /09/971 1 /23/8?i 1 / 2 3 / 3 7
ie1 , 1 -Tr ten i oroet nane1 ,3 , £ - r e t r a c n i o roe thane1 , a~Tr i en i o roe thane1-D i en t oroet nanei -O t oo toroe tnene2-0 i en i o-'ooenrene3-D i en f oroe t nane2-D i en i oropropane
1 , 3 - D r eniorooenzere2-Cn . oroetoy I v/ 1 ny i eSromoo p en i orometnaneBromof o*"mCar Don re t racn tor taeen i orooenzeneCh i oroet naneCh l o r o f o rm .D i cromocn i orometnane
i Bromidei en i or i ae- . .
Metnv i ene Ch lor ioe .Tetr ach loroecneneTr i en (orof luoroT.e tn^'ieTr i en loroetnenev i ny i en lor idee t s - 1 ,3-D i c n loroprcpenet r an s - i , ,2 -D i e n t o r o e t n e n et ran s- 1 ,3-D t en ( oropropene
:3 OOv3 00'.I OO5 OO
• -S OO^ 15 O• S OO• 3. 00• . 30 . 0• 2 5 . 0< t 3 0' - 1 0 0''20 0• - 1 0 0•53 0' 35 O• 5 00' . 10 0• 50 0• 35 0• 5 OO• 3 00•.t 00• 10 0• .25 0« 30 0•.5 OO
SO C
Tne aoov/e r e su l t s are reoorteo in ug/-« .A i i OC001 i aent i f i cat i ons are r" rcm re tent i on ci&ta on i y
^^H
IIIIIIIIII1II
APPENDIX 2-CCALCULATION OF CARVER TERRACE HALF LIVES
r-CMs~o
I
II 2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
APPENDIX 2-CESTIMATION OF AVERAGE PAH AND TCDD/TCDF
CONCENTRATION IN CARVER TERRACESURFACE SOILS FOR THE NEXT 70 YEARS
The future scenario at Car ' er Terrace assumes that PAHsand TCDD/TCDF in the surface soil degrade. Thus exposure ofresidents will decrease with time. The following steps wereperformed to est imate the average concentration of PAHs andTCDD/TCDF in Carver Terrace surface soils for the futureexposure scenar io, i . e . the next 70 years .
1. The geometric mean concentrat ion of PAH in Carve rTerrace surface so i l s/ assuming no sod was in p lace ,presented in Table B-3 of Appendix 2-B was used toest imate the 70 year average concentrat ion .TCDD/TCDF equivalent concentrations were taken fromthe RI report .
2. The upper 95 percentile of half-lives reported in thel iterature for benzo(a)pyrene was used in this riskassessment. This value was equal to 1385 days (seeAppendix 2-F ) . The half-life of benzo(a)pyrene wasassumed to be representative of other PAHs. Ahalf-life of 12 years was used for TCDD/TCDF (EPA1986) .
3. Annual decay of PAHs and TCDD/TCDF was calculatedusing the following formula:
C x eo•kt
Where C is equal to PCOC concentrat ion at the timespecified by the subscr ipt ; t is equal to the timeperiod during which the PCOC is decaying; and, k isequal to the half-l ife of the PCOC.The concentrat ion at the end of each year of the 70year period was calculated.
C\Jr-<M_O
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0C-l
IIIIIIIII
The average soil concentrat ion for the 70 year per iodwas then derived by summing the concentrat ion at theend of each year and dividing by 70, the tota l numberof years . Initial concentrat ion, concentrat ions atthe end of each of the yea r s/ and the averageconcentrat ion for total PAH and for potent ia l lycarcinogenic PAH and 2 , 3 , 7 , 8 - T C D D toxic equivalentsare shown in Table C- l .
cvjr-OJv"o
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
III(%}*$&&«££§ ^!-
•"-:-
CM
I*_ ___—————.-«.«*«*sasi*«3
m3
2m!m
S8
;g;Sm<m !I
M*rt4
**ri^*f*^*4ri4
**4***ri**rif4
>4'4
i4i4
f4'4
<*'4*4
*4i4
**AA
i*i4»4
»4i*t4
f4*{A
f4*4
O
[Si
«^
W , , ,
r T r
rTrTY
YY
YY
YY
Y?Y
7Y
f??Y
^Y?^9
^Y^?
Y????Y
?Y
Y?^Y
Y?Y
YY
YY
Y?Y
Y?Y
YY
?Y
Y?Y
YY
fggggwiljieai^glggiH
i^^ 3
|8*- ^•^jj^rf^iH**V
J^^M^^A
M^--;~-----:-;-:~-'-'-
t-1 J-' • • • • • •
_._.,««„«-—.—.-^
-————————«^*a«i*WW
R»3
C«sifta^H
J«t;jilfi«?3i3
««<5*5asaaaBa(K3
lft33
a(3i3
a33
S2I§ Illlllllp
lppllllp
llll
?
YrTr$YYYY>rYrY?YyyWYW r
*J www^^www^w^^ww^wijjwwwjwMW
^^wywjyjw^ww^jwwwwJjwwwwwjw ^
EH •**• • l^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^i^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
it''''""'"~- *:*"• jj c
* *-
-
.........
r T T
TT
YY
YY
YyY
Y?Y
Y¥Y
Y:
Ht^^^3
«^^3jlS
K^^^I$^)l(^^^ie^i
j^j-«^-*-'«_;-:-*(a*wj^r.'jj»14**i4
^*" t-'-' JJ • •-
- ss==s=ssSE«a«aaKJJ«e«SSS!S*a^«a|RHttSV»5J9
tf51a^i3 UB• £
?, u. ?f5?????55??5?5??*?5*?l?55**555l5*f5?*l?5iFf?555?«s?Yf«*f?????f?§???*??? ^
?J5 ^^^^^^^^IK
p^
gY
TY
TY
TT
T|^f
TTY
Y?Y
YT
TfT
TT
TY
TJf Y
TY
YY
Y«*-****-
——————— ———— ' - ' 'Ijj SSSSSSS!S!iSISI?5^!?^ISS!?S!SS!£S!SI?!SSSSSSS!3"
t£ f£ (v *« isl *>J *f *» (n »» »«. *Z f* -*. rw ~ *. («. *>. fh,f«K. t>! fj f* f^ <» ^ ^.J-.*-'- - -
.. ,_,_.,_r^^, p. r»^. >.K
*""
fBBS"EC
ts i
C-3
IIIIIi:?w^y!s:*j§j;j£c^^&
:rt;;3^^#^^w;}j;'t-'j'S
*j y^£t~ **
- *^***'***""" "" "
lu jl" "°"'""""""*"* •«.ji«a'-
gs!l
I
^-3?
^S
^^'fl^^^^^^^yS
vV
^^^^^S
S^^vO
?^^^^^
«^^^^^^^^3
^^W
^^'^3
?^^^J^'S
j-Jj'O
'J?^v^l
,-.
* ^ *j \J
L- -j«;-*;.ij >; ,0 .*j >j -; H--; ."j ^ -j »j 'j^j.-J \i ••>} -^\ --j ->i ^j *'. \J -*j j«j-^i >>* -v^j •] ^j --j.^1 ^j -*i^J ^» --J ^ *j ->j U <; I *j ^ *'* .>J.»; j^lnj *j<»J,-j^ .0-j -j*\i-"j^j^j -J -J
£ 2! -" ?
v o *5 *-
-^*»*.5
--f O
v-f
iy»
;*^ ,
.»
».
^.
J^
]x
''"
"'"
"^
jA
-l"
'^
»'^
t'
1"
"^
k*J
*T
'«
rt
A"
A''
""
*"
'"
'*
''
.-
.-
..
..
-.
».
» ,
- J .
, .
. . ^
"^ "
at * ~
"
§ S
"" s"IaV
(I'tf^'y'T'S
jj'^X^
S^ia^.1^ —
'S^^J
^^rr^r^^^'^^^^X^V
^^*
-I«-«•*
SiC*!?S!8«SS8S*«?S?l(3»5ai5^]l!^^
— — -"e^ftf«i*'-t'^^rtJ
--'-''-jf*i.***«-viW ——--<»5
--J»i*-i-iv,\
;«J^; —
*» 4 »'«4
/•* .»i *i — —
-^ * «J uj .i V « «'-i
X *~* f^tr- tf*c****-<yn
S ~2
-?P
S?V ? d*
^^ - ?ft
fo
aPSfi^s^S
S-^^-sS
^** 1-^-?*:^
s-IJ' r«
fc'-t"^*i''»»^--->J
— aS»T ,3-i-
:*S<&
.>J.(<»»i-;*
^~
ff fta
-2
<X -3
ci „
' ~K
^->f>td>> »'-!-' -j\i — — — — *-^^>.i» - -«',>,-*-._. — «
--.i*
« «
.fl J> «, 64
Ji«.3
fi'i83
i
e-s
•MW
IIIIIII
APPENDIX 2-DORGANLEPTIC THRESHOLDS FOR TASTE
00OJf—CVJ^_o
I
IIIIII
I 2069T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
^•1
IIIIIIAPPENDIX D(Biological Treatment Influent Results)
CMr*-
o
IIIIIIIIIIII
Appendix DIRGANLEPTIC THRESHOLDS FOR TASTE FOR ORGANIC PCOCS
PCOC
BENZENEETHYL BENZENETOLUENEo,m-XYLENE
THRESHOLD(ug/l i ter)20500140250300
REFERENCE
cbc
c
Organoleptic thresholds have not been derived for allPAH. However, a threshold of 20 ug/liter is reportedfor acenapthene and has been used here to representall PAH.Sax, N . I . , ed* 1 9 8 6 . Hazardous Chgmicals InformationAnnual Ho*. 1^. Van Norstrand Reinhold informationServices, New York, N . Y . .Verschueren, K. . 1 9 8 3 . Handbook of EnvironmentalDa_ja on Organic Chemicals/. Sec.g_nd Edition. VanNorstrand Reinhold Company, New York, N . Y . .
o
o
D-l
v'E [Ml IA.t
*iZ ' frSAb'00 ' (if; ' yif:i tu: ' (7H 'fis: ' ti I 'LI y ' trie"; ':-A 'frerS S " I* If: s ' A T>: I ' f ;: £ft ' t:s t t':< ' t-'-T [AO'S^V oe; ot:t;
amvA n %of>
00 ' 066t?OO'ZU00'fr9Cl92 'yfr ' SL' '9E23 'K"Uy '19'as" 6i Ofi '9101 ' yl 00 ' Afrloo ' £si t)o ' y o i* *^ A ' *"» ** j 00 boA
xvw
frA ' 000" Zl Ioo • 9 AO'90'So 'fro 'SO'Alt 'ir: ' ^ i ' I f( ' c Tfr '££9 '9Oo T>:*o;r LA OO ' DOT0 fr " 2 fr
NTW
SA009Sfry r>o IS00yi £1OAu*-; r;o/>; Cl*tfs yfrAA•-,',
«JJ
C I(>IoIz20I!;;T1III
^
-SE>
ttl 'QVl(J D ' Z T 1oe; '8A Al 'b'c 'ti;*»o ' ZZ 'SI 'Ufro"-'frt; 9(i!-* .'.(^ I If;-; tuii;: uiMo y • ;; H i s A : r
MV^Wf)
t bp ' c u-;s frt? ' ;;.;yo 00 'oil 00 ' ol t
wa ' n;tj H^ ' st;i t.'i; ' :»ot;fr ' AO 'Sfr W Iy i ' l/o ' Hl> ' b'O '/:i;' sir (Ji* ' Io 'i A «. ' o
;:/. ' i* i HO ' o ^S'frl US'b'»:>: ' :«:; 1 A " E E 1 'SO-; b'A ' I L«;»; ' o i;; t/ 1 * b'o " vVjir AS ' bHUc <-<.-,! ^ b^. 'jt.:-»
fJM.i.ni tiawo'i III ",.SfrJ
00 ' UUfri.',00 't;b ' L'I:S ttO 'Al 'yo ' 90 'til *£ I "C.. '•ji 'L
1 0 ' 9
t: ; ' s n* s s '^ ' s: i/ frfr ' ~t',\f frO'uOlfi tj " t' A L'
axs
*j l ' ytiJ I v00 "oil IMS" fr^i; y uva M'i; (JiJ f -JU ..»X.I(y;j •; ^ti.-.*^ A.I.U" b' ^IU.C.L.H01 9 **U,Mf |U*82 y •-•'u.q |iub I ;»Sfr' n UV ' ;* ..sK'-'tf 1 1,' b ^*HOT. :*iv:'"l »:AH " v*»i L'AS'SOI n i; L' ' o fci I Kb
1! >:*;;; i;NV:dW I'AiHt
ji'» «
-iv.ua
11 V ! t 'J' ' 11 ( J
U I
.' ''- •: s .
J! *
i- *:'
i> ' '.I. A.I. ' ' >"•'!'*NV 1.^1' '..'
l.:>l.-I.|.|t>M012731
• /_ -.4 v .1 . • j .; - ' + U j
J^IK- .;. • , i.. - i [>n ;
i';. C(id • : •A It:!':' ' uo I V ' UA^K ' 0fr fr I ' 0AAfr ' (IfcCfc'Oi'f;*.; ' o 1C H • ' 0[8'92£' AOOS "0>oo y " o> **oo /;A'-'N- "H7 A«
'-Jo I::nW'jt'6 fr 2 ' ( JASt
1 ' 0
AfrS'Osy t ' o 81 y ' o £££"08 ' 0ITS'0AA " 98'IT219 " £AS ' 26IM&• 1 1^*-'H-K:: A
oo • ;; oo •;: 9OAO "'Jfrl "OL'O'6t'0 'I 8 U *080'b't^ "^ t 'oyz " 02 A 'ooy ooy ' 002"00 '?,Of) ' 2
,y A(>
H
'0(j0'u0000eeo > 00>91 ^
09OO 2^IK*USD ' i) -3 C?' W W
OKO '()>yo ' o y t ' o 280'£)tfiy ' o G'jH " 086 '82' IT£8 ' W2 ' r>;}2 ' E A00 Li' " ''t' !
.tf-AOM ;;o /.^H.LV'J I ;N ! '! k
-'*X [ ' 1 1 ' i ', ' A j i [ i
Otu;i/ OOA I fon i^ n t; EO';o ' o •O'io " o -0£0 ' 0 • G^ ' 2'/'CO ' 1)2 ;.; t ' o t)9(i ' 0 8 ' £AoiJ'o ;; 2 K ' 0 H (j '*>r ye i 6 "91 oy2 ! 'tfl CA
A fr- L el t; :.: i £'i i oy« t yof OCBKL'<' Ai-'f i o:: • ["'j IWV'.-: l
-t! HV.t iu.--ii[^ui'!'• i'.".tl X.!. '^wt-i(.
Ij
LJyyyyfrt' frt' et;£e£
3&'U I ,
EL'X^J,
HVJp.. £^i )otf->pud( 5 ' q • r* )<">'„• U;J'i tit,- ( qt.
1 ) v,'Uv>q t
'. -ti t JU Att
ou.:»_H.\u['p.u:( t: jotr
012732
A- " I , T f ' t i t . f j y j . • , ! • •\ ' H " t i ' l l ' ! ( • IK '
I ' ; , . - , - , . , t r . r . - r i "An 1 f r.v-"iv.-K lie 'tvut f h-.Ti'-Pyren*.-
Dij v » ( h If iM.'ir
i7« • ( k t f 1 t.n •riet j a ( .'ih )aritS ' - ' ( g , h , i )p
TOTAL
>H Her 87; ' Of !; : . oo
0 . ^00(.1 . MKI( i . S f fO3 . 4 1 03 . 0 Hif t .0 .o .0 . 149;!8f ) 1 . 2 5 0ft .mi0 . 2 1 8
9- • 2 . 0 0- 2 . 0 0
HE i i - ' i v : 1 ' ' ' • ; : ( AMY . ! N' '• M I , ' > ' Tf " t t - i h i I i t y . . M I (n t l ' i - M i Ai l ! " > ' - (
' . 'AM i ' L IN f ; [ »ATK
M. . t . **
"(V 3 n'•M- - t .-•.<-; j •• r "UP
I fr-te« ' t . ; ih lfrr levelt, i vo
0 1 2 7 3 3
pH (units)Total P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBOD(5)-TotalCOD-TotalOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (uff/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L>MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)Phenolics (EPA 624)Vol. Or*. (EPA 625)Phenols-Chemetrics
KOPPERS COMPAHY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TRKATABILITT STUDT
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSBIOLOGICAL TREATMENT INFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE16-Oct-87 17-Oet-87 18-Oct-87 19-Oct-87 20-Oct-87 21-Oct-87 22-Oct-
6 . 5<1
2 . 420
5 . 84 . 52 . 412
75
63 . 3<11810
80 . 3 5 838 . 1
311 12<6
188120
68
1 3 8 4 . 2 5
0 0unless
0 1 2 7 3
1 2 1 0KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.
TKXARJCANA, TX TRKATABILIT? STUDYWEEKLY DATA SHEETS
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT INFLUENT DATASAMPLING DATE
23-Oct-87 24-Oct-87 25-Oct-87 26-Oct-87 27-Oct-07 28-Oct-87 29-Oet-87pH <units)Total PQ4-Hach - 5.7NH3-N Ch«metrics - 4TSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBOD<5)-TotalCOD-TotalOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ufi/L)Total CyanideTotal 0et. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA €04)Phenolics <EPA 624)Vol. Org, <EPA 625)Phenols-ChemetricsAll values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
6 . 2 55 . 63 . 224022812
6 . 1 5
30 .7
0
9 £ LZ I 0
pH (units)Total PO4-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOOBOD(5)-TotalCOD-TotalOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPOP <ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(u«/L)MetalsPhenolics <EPA 604)Phenolics (EPA 624)Vol. Org. (EPA 625)Phenols-CheroetricsAll values are in mfi/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TRKATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSBIOLOGICAL TREATMENT INFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE30-Oct-87 31-Oct-87 01-Nov-S7 02-Nov-87 03-Nov-8T 04-Nov-87 05-Nov-87
6.8 -4 . 6 7 -- 4
— — _ 1C _J.O ~ —14— — — o — —. _
0 . 4 0 1 -2 9 . 7 -1 4 . 3 -
80<6 - -175 -
119 -56 - -
3 1 1 . 3 4 4
L £ L Z I 0
pH <units)Total FO4-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBOD(5)-TotalCOD-TotalOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP <ug/L)Total CyanideTotal 0et. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)Phenolics (EPA 624)Vol. Qrg. (EPA €25)Phenols-ChemetricsAll values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
KQPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TKBATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSBIOLOGICAL TREATMENT INFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE06-Nov-87 07-Nov-8? OQ-Nov-87 09-Nov-87 10-Nov-87 li-Nov-87 12-Nov-87
6.7 -5 _4.8 -
17 -- 98
8 £ L Z I 0
pH (units)Total P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSvssFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBOD<5)-TotalCOD-TotalOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPOP < us/I.)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA €04)Phenolics <EPA 624)Vol. Org. (EPA 625)Phenols-ChemetricsAll values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
KOPPERS CCMPAWY, INC-TEXARKANA, XX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSBIOLOGICAL TREATMENT INFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATEi3-Nov-87 14-Nov-87 15-Nov-87 16-Nov-87 17-Nov-87 18-Nov-87 19-Nov-8?
- 74.7 -4.8 -
45 -21 - . -- - - 24 - -
0 . 1 2 5 -18 . 1 -5 . 7 5 -
40 -7 . 0 5 -- - - 185 -
139 -46 -
7 . 7 7 3
6 £ L 2 I 0
pH (units)NH3-N Ch«aetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAF)TOCBOD(5)-TotalCQD-TotalOil & GreaseTDSTOFSTDVSPOP <u#/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAB(ug/L)MetalsPhenol ics <SPA 604)Phenolics (EPA 624 )Vol. Qrg. (EPA 625)Phenol s-CheroetricsAll values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted* See data 3n appendix.
KOPPERS COMPAHY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATAfllLITY STU3DY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSBIOLOGICAL TREATMENT INFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING PATE2Q-Nov-87 2l-Nov-87 22-Nov-8? 23-Nov-8? 24-Nov-87 25-Nov-87 26-Nov-87
6.9 -- - - 5 — _ _4 . 8
" " ~ ~ 1 0 ~ — * •8
•— — — *7
- 0 . 3 5 4 -_ _ _ 0 1021. o1 5 . 5 -
65 -<6
161 -123 -
38 -
4 5 7 . 5 4 2
0 17 LZ tO
pH < units)Total P04-HachNH3-N CheraetricsTSSvssFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBOD{5)-TotalCOD-TotalOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (us/L)Total CyanideTotal 0et. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)Phenolics <EPA 624)Vol. Org. <EPA 625)Phenol s -Cheme tries
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXAKKANA, TX TTIEATABILITT STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSBIOLOGICAL TREATMENT INFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE28-Nov-87 29-Nov-87 30-Nov-87 01-Dec-
— —• *7 —- 4
4 . 825
— — Q _
160 .2 132 1 . 4
1180<6
1581 12
464 1 . 2
< 0 .0 117 .3 15
Q2-0ec-87 Q3-Dec-S71
All values are in m#/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
I t7 LZ I KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKAJNA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSBIOLOGICAL TREATMENT INFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATEQ4~Dec-8? 05-Deo-8? 06-Dec-S7 07-Dec-87 08-Dec-87 20-Dec-87pH <units)Total P04-HacbNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSS -Phenols (4-AAP)TOCBOD<5)-TotalCOD-TotalOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP <ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. FAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)Phenolics (EPA 624)Vol. Qrs. <EPA 625)Phenols-CheaaetricsAll values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.# See data in appendix.
5 66 . 4O 161
813
0 . 1 2 421 .8C*7 SiD f . d60
<6163115
48
8 .591
Z 1 CK0PPERS COMPANY, INC.
TEXARKAJ4A, TX TREATABILITY STUDYWEEKLY DATA SHEETS
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT INFLUENT DATASAMPLING DATE
ll-Pec-87 12-Dec-87pH (units)Total PO4-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSS -VSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBOD<5)-TotalCOD-TotalOil & Greas«TDSTDFSTDVSPCP <u«/L)Total CyanideTotal Dot. PAH<«s/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)Phenolics (EPA 624)Vol. Or«. <EPA 625)Phenols-ChemetrlcsAll values are in mg/L unless othearwise noted.* See data in appendix.
IIWST IDSPECTRIX DC tt —— 0
SAMPLE NUMBER: TEX. INFORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET (PAGE 1)
LABORATORY NAME; SPECTRIX
KB SAMPLE ID NO. : 871200402MPLE MATRIX ; WATERTA RELEASE AUTHORIZED BY:
CASE NO, : —QC REPORT NO. : —CONTRACT NO. : 12-01-87DATE SAMPLE RECEIVED:
• VOLATILECONCENTRATION: LOW•ATE ANALYZED: ia/os/a?
t CAS # COMPOUNDCOiO CHLQRQMETHANE
I C015 BROMOMETHANEC020 VINYL CHLORIDEC025 CHLORQETHANE
I C030 METHYLENE CHLORIDEC035 ACETONEC040 CARBON DISULFIDE
- C045 1, 1-OICHLOROETHENE• C030 1, 1-DICHLOROETHANE" C055 TRANS-1 . 2-DICHLOROETHENE
C060 CHLOROFORHI C06S i, 2-DICHLOROETHANE
C 1 1 0 2-BUTANONEC 1 1 3 1 , 1 , 1-TRICHLOROETHANE
I C120 CARBON TETRACHLORIDEC125 VINYL ACETATEC130 BROMODICHLQROMETHANE
m C140 1. 2-DICHLQRQPRQPANE• C170 CIS- 1 , 3-DICHLOROPROPENEU)• C 1 SO TR ICHLOROETHENE
C 1 55 D I BROMQCHLORQMETHANEI C160 1 , 1 ,2-TRICHLQROETHANE
C165 BENZENEC145 TRANS-1. 3-DlCHLQROPROPENE<E>
I C175 2-CHLOROETHYLVINYLETHERC190 BROMOFORMC205 4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
— C210 2-HEXANONE• C220 TETRACHLOROETHENEm C223 1. 1 ,2 , 2-TETRACHLQROETHANE
C230 TOLUENE
I C233 CHLOROBENZENEC240 ETHYLBENZENEC24S STYRENE
M C230 TOTAL XYLENES
:sDATAFILE: SU12004V02DILUTION FACTOR: 1. 00
UG/L10 U10 U10 U10 U
5 . . . . . . . . 4 J10 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U5 U
10 U3 U5 U
10 U5 U5 U5 U3 U3 U3 U5 U5 U
10 U5 U
10 U10 U3 U3 U5 U3 U3 U3 U5 U
PO— ——— -sjr-
CM•r-O
U *1 UNDETECTED AT THE LISTED DETECTION LIMITCOMPOUND IS PRESENT, BUT BELOW THE LISTED DETECTION LIMIT
^^H
I
I«=,***
I
I1
I
NST ID : 4 S 1 OJ t t iX DC *t -•
SAMPLE NUMBER: TEX iNF
ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET'ABORATORY -NAME: SPECTS IXAS SAMPLE ;0 NO. : 9712004C
MPLE MATR IX : WATERTA RELEASE AUTHORIZED BY
NCENTRATI3N: LOWT£ EXTRACTED . .TE ANALYZED: I S/ 14/87
CASE NO. : —QC REPORT NO. : ——CONTRACT NO. : —-DATE SAMPLE RECEIVED:SEMIVOLATILS3
DATAFILE: 9U12004C02DILUTION FACTOR: . . . .
. . !+/'/*
COMPOUNDDETECTION
LIMIT(MICROGRAMS
AMOUNTFOUND
LITER)fBlIlll••
C3 15C325C330C335C340C345C350C355C360C365C370C375C410C 4 1 5C420C425C430C435C440C44SC450C455C46OC465C470C310C 3 1 3C520C525C330C535C540C545C550C555C360C565C57CC375
PHENOL3 1 S < 2-CHLOROETHYL > ETHER2-CHLOROPHENCLI , 3-DICHLQROBENZENEi , 4-DICHLCROBENZHNEBENZYL ALCOHOL1 , 2-DICHLOROBENZtNE2-METHYLPHENOL& I S < 2-CHLOROI SOPROPYL ) ETHER4-METHYLPHENQLN-NITROSODIPROPYLAMINEHEXACHLOROETHANENITRODENZENEISOPHORONE2-NITROPHENOL2. 4-DIMETHYLPHENQLBENZOIC ACID0 1 S ( 2-CHLQRQETHOX Y ) METHANE2. 4-DICHLQRQPHENOL1 , 2.4-TRICHLOROBENZENENAPHTHALENE4-CHLOROANILINEHEXACHLOROBUTADIENEP-CHLORO-M-CRESOL2-METHYLNAPHTHALENEHEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE2. 4, 6-TRiCHLORQPHENQL2. 4, 5-TRICHLOROPHENOL2-CHLORQNAPHTHALENE2-NITROANILINEDIMETHYL PHTHALATEACENAP4THYLENE3-NITRQANILINEACENAPHTHENE2. 4-DINITRQPHENOL4-NITROPHENOLDI0ENZQFURAN2. 4-DINITROTOLUENE2. A-DINITROTOLUENE
40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 . . . . . . . . . . . 45
200 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U
200 U40 U
200 U40 U40 U
200 U40 . . . . . . . . . . . 29 J
200 U200 U
40 U40 U40 U
o
DC » ——— *
SAMPLE NUMBER: T£X INF
MIVOLATILE CRSANIC3 ANALYSIS DATA SHEET, CONTINUED1-iiiB
•
r*FILE;
C530CS85C590C595C6 10C & 1 5C625C630C635C640C&45C650C65SC 7 1 SC720C725C730C735C740C760C763C770C775C780C785C790
9'Ji2C04C02
COMPOUND
DIETHYL PKTHALATJE4-CHLQROPHENYL Pf-ENYL ETHERFLUORENE4-NITRQA.MILINE4, 6-DINITRO-2-.METHYLPHENCLN-NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE4-BROMOPHENYL PH£NYL ETHERHEXACHLOROBENZENEPENTACHLOROPHENOLPHENANTHRENEANTHRACENEDI-N-BUTYL PHTPALATEFLUORANTHENE
PYRENEBUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE3. 3'-DICHL3ROBENZIDlNEBENZO C A ) ANTHRACENEB I S ( 2-ETHYLHEX YL ) PHTHALATECHRYSENEDI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATEBENZO < B ) FLUQRANTHENEBENZO < K ) FUUORANTHENEBENZO(A)PYRENEINDENOd, 2. 3-COPYRENEDIBENZOCA. HJANTHRACENEBEN20(GHI )PERYLENE
DETECTION AMOUNTLIMIT FOUND
(MICROGRAMS / LITER)
40 U40 U40 U
200 USCO U
40 U40 U40 U
2OO 4-3 i* • • * * t * P . - . , * - . , , * ^ j ^ j40 U40 U40 U40 . . . . . . . . . . . 10 J40 . . . . . . . . . . 9 J40 U80 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U
in<^rr-CM
o
UNDETECTED AT THE LISTED DETECTION LIMITCOMPOUND 13 PRESENT, BUT BELOW THE LISTED DETECTION LIMIT
IIIST ID: SPECTRIX DC ft —— 8
SAMPLE NUMBER: TEX. INF.
ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET - PAGE 4•SGRATORY NAME; 5PECTR IX HOUSTON CASE NO. ; «
)C REPORT NO : — ANALYST: R8 DATAFILE: SU120Q4VQ2I Q. TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS
I VOLATILE COMPOUND NAMES SCAN** PURITY AMOUNT vO
IIIII
NO NON-HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > JOX OF NEAft^ST INT. STD.
UG/lfM
O
J = ESTIMATED VALUE - A 1: i RESPONSE FACTOR IS ASSUMED
i
IIJ.A30RATQRY NAME.
03C afiPORT NO. : •
SF5CTRIX DC
SAMPLE: TEX INF
8
ORGAN;c2 ANALYS:S DATA SHEETSPSCTR IX CORPORATION
CS2
PAGE 5CASE NO. :
DATAFILE. 9UJ2004CO;3. TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIES COMPOUNDS
GAS 8
f!"/-«*-•*••M-*1-1
wn-ft-7I _a A* j v d*
|*»7-'-^/>/*• -/> -JI"/-0-J
t tj-n-o/-t>-y-i•
SEMIVOLATtLE COMPOUND NAMES
PYRIDINE, 2. 6-DtMgTHYL-BENZONITRILE, 2-METHYL-CYCLOHEXANEMETH&NOL> . ALPHA. , . ALPHA. , 4-TRETHANGNE, 1 - ( 4— iYDROXYPKENYL ) -SENZOCBJTHIOPHENEPHENOL/ 2, 4, 6-TR1METHYL-BENZENE, i ~£THYL~4~METHQXY-ISOQU INCLINEIH-INDEN-l-ONE. 2, 3-DIHYDRO-QUINOLINE. 2*METHYL-UNKNOWN-DQESN'T MATCH ANY LIBRARY SPECTRAUNKNOWN-DOESN 'T MATCH ANY LIBRARY SPECTRA1 (2H)- ISOQUINOLINQNEUNKNOWN-DOESN 'T MATCH ANY LIBRARY SPECTRAUNKNQWN-DOESN'T MATCH ANY LIBRARY SPECTRA
SCAN**
3596277 19
735766793©21836854983922
1186123912871333
PURITY AMOUNTT*
ue/£7 V 46 CMo ** f)a --*.ftCJ £j|
*7^*1» 41^ X
?*** 22£*3 26*5/ 36i?vC so5^1- 24•*> ^ «^ A/7 7 OO
^^ 613829
^7^ 2103129
IMATED VALUE - A 1:1 RESPONSE FACTOR IS ASSUMED
111111111
BIO
Parameter fug/I)AntimonyArsenicBerylliumCadmiumChromiumCopperLeadMercurvNickelSeleniumSilverThalliumZinc
KOPPERS COMPANY, INCTEXARKANA, TX TOEATABILITY STUDYBIOLOGICAL TREATMENT INFLUENT METALS DATA
Influent<60.0<iO.O<5.00<5.00
<10.0<25.0<5.00<0.200
<40.0<5.00
< 10.0< 10.0461
00<sjr-CM_o
^^^M
IIIIIIIIIIIII
APPENDIX E(Aeration Tank Treatment Results)
o
I
KOPPER5 COMPANY, INC.7EXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
STATISTICAL SUMMARYAERATION TANK MIXED LIQUOR DATA
1Parameters (pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)D. O. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.
* OF5BVS
5151455050504950
00
MEAN7 .34
21 .971 . 30
222 .961 9 9 , 0 8
2 3 . 8 89 . 0 8
. 25.0000.0000
STD.32
1 .34. 0 4
562 .7 15 1 5 . 6 8
4 9 . 2 5. 52. 4 1
.0000.0000
95* CLOWER
7 .252 1 .591 . 286 0 . 2 24 9 . 9 4
9 . 6 48 . 9 3. 13
.0000.0000
:iUPPER
7 . 4 322.351 . 3 1
385 .703 4 8 . 2 2
38 . 1 29 . 2 3
. 3 7.0000.0000
GMEAN7 .33
21 .931 .294 1 . 6 73 1 . 16
8 .859 . 0 7
.90
.00
.00
GSTD1 .051 .061 . 0 35 . 1 45 . 7 03 . 4 41 . 0 61 . 2 9
.0000
.0000
HIM6 .20
18 ,001 . 1 85 . 0 04 . 0 0
.008 . 0 0
.00. 0000.0000
MAX7.70
26.001 .40
2940.002660 .00
280 .001 1 . 2 0
1 .50,0000. 0000
90% LTVALUE
7 .7623.68
1 . 3 53 2 8 . 0 62 7 9 . 5 3
4 1 . 9 69 . 7 11 .24
.0000,0000
All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit.
0 1 2 7 5
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STEJ0Y
STATISTICAL SUMMARYAERATION TANK EFFLUENT DATA
ParameterspH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhinols (4-AAP)TX JBO0(5)-TotalBO0(5)-SolubleOOP-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseT0ST0FST0VSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Oet, PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)
3VS510
5050505050
5b5555555511b00
MEAN7.00
.00003.431 . 00
20 1 .87182 .40
19 ,47.02
14 .8811 .11
3 . 7 84 8 . 6 03 3 . 0 081 .42
177.80121 .80
56.0023 .90
.0 12 .80
.0000. 0000
ST0.27
.0000.66.03
4 9 7 . 8 74 5 9 . 9 4
39.66.00
3.289 .223 .839 .6 15 . 7 0
166.9222.4817 .926 .96
.00
. 001 . 3 0
.0000.0000
95%LOWER
6.92.00003.24
.995 7 . 8 84 9 . 3 8
8 . 0 0.01
12 . 14- . 34- .72
3 6 . 6 72 5 . 9 2
- 1 2 5 . 8 0149.9099.5547.3523.90
.0 11 . 1 8
.0000.0000
CIUPPER
7 .07.00003.621 .00
3 4 5 . 8 63 1 5 . 4 2
3 0 . 9 4.02
17 .6122.55
8.286 0 . 5 34 0 . 0 8
2 8 8 . 6 4205.70144 .0564.6523.90
.0 14 . 4 1
.0000.0000
GMEAN6 .99
.003 .371.00
3 9 . 4 83 1 . 3 8
6 . 9 602• V b*
14 .577 . 192.71
4 7 . 8 03 2 . 5 91 4 . 9 5
176.72120.7855.6323.90
.0 12 .5 1
.00
.00
GST01 . 0 4
.00001 .211 .034 . 9 75 . 2 93 . 5 7. i5
1 .253 .422 .431 . 231 . 206 . 161 . 131 . 151 . 14
.00.00
1 . 73.0000.0000
MIN6 . 1 5
.00002.00.806 . 0 06 . 0 0
.00
.0110 .501 .001 .20
35.0025 .00
6 . 0 0155.00100.0045.0023.90
.0 11 . 2 4
.0000.0000
MAX7 . 4 0
.00005 .301 .00
2400.002240 .00
1 8 0 . 0 0.02
20.8024.90
9 .8860.004 0 . 0 0
380 .00214 .00150.0064.0023.90
.013 . 9 5
.0000
.0000
90% LTVALUE
7 . 3 4.00004.281 .04
297.892 5 6 . 1 5
3 4 . 5 5. 0 2
19 .2033 .88
8.2962.084 0 . 8 7
1 4 7 . 6 7206 .08144.8065 .58
.00.00
5 .0 1.0000.0000
All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.
0 1 2 7 5 1
T' -xa r k a n a , TX Trr-,-, t- oh i 1 i ty : ' > t n r lyStat i r.t i 'M I Summary
An rat, ion Tank F'AH Data
AcfriaphtheneFI l it »r«n*- j
F'henanthreneAnthraceneKiuorantbe.nePyreneCenso(a )anthraceneChrysenr-
}f luoranthene
Indenof 123 .,-dTOTAL DETECTABLE"PAH^arba^ole
tt OFOBVS
00(!000'>535Sc i
5r>s5o0
MRAN. (Hi Off. onoo. O O O O. O O O O. O O O O. 0 0 0 0
. 2 5- 14. 25. 2 8. 4 9. 13. 4 6. 604Sr \ *
2 . 8 0. oooo. O O O O
STD. 0 0 0 0. O O O O. 0 0 0 0. O O O O. 0 0 0 0. oooo
. 0 1
. 07. 04. !6
07. ii i. 0 6. 2 3. 25*"> / i. 20
1 . 30. 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 ( 1
95% CMLOWRH (
. noon. onno. ( 1 0 0 0. oooo. oooo. 0 0 0 0
. IS. 0 5. 16. on. is
F\ L •. l f r >. 18'' Q. . ' .0
. 201 . 18. oooo. o o oo
!Tf 'KK
. O f K K )C H K K f
. O O O O. O O O O. EKH lO. 0 0 ( 1 ( 1
. 36. 2 3. 3S. 4 7. 8 2. 21. 7 4.in. 70
4 . 4 1. 000! ). Of) 00
f ' .MKAN. on. 00. 0 0. 0 0. 00. 0(1. :-: s. 12
r • C~. ^.s. 2 4. 4 0. 12. 41. 55. 4 0
2 . 5 1. no. 0 0
oirrtt. oono. 0 0 0 ( 1. 0 0 0 0. oooo. 0000. oooo1 .051 .901 . 1 71 .93r> nc;*'.. . i-O1 .76i .8 11 .501 . 7 61 . 7 3
. Oi 'K». 0 0 J O
H I N. oooo. ( I U ( I O. 0 0 0 0. Oft 00. oooo. 0 0 0 0
. 2 5. 0 5. 2 1. n. n. 0 5. 1H. 3 1. 16
1 . 2 4. oooo. 000"
MA VI tl\ A
. oooo. oooo. oooo. 0 0 0 0. oooo. 0 ( 1 0 0
. 2 6. 2 2. 2 8. 4 5. 7 2. 20. 6 H. 9 1. 6h
3 . US. 00 (Hi. oooo
'xn . i . iVAI .UF :. < t O ( l M. oont. oono. oooo. oono. 0 0 0 0
. 27, 27. 30£ £. 55
1 . If!; :4. H6. f f < *. H;:
s . (J 1. oooo. O O O O
Note : N^gat. ivo numberNul^ ; -o- indioato- ) for ;>S% Lower CI ind i
* :-ntry L^ 1 ow Dr-tectabLe [ , . - - v f -i -*c a 0 parameterC BDL . ) f 'f respective parameters
0 1 2 7 5 2
AcenaphthyleneAcenaphtheneFluorenePhenanthreneAnthraceneFiuoranthenePyreneBenzo (a}anthraceneChryseneBenzo(a)pyreneBenzo(b)fluorantheneBenzo(k}fluorantheneDibenzCah)anthraceneBenzo(g,h, i )peryleneIndenoC123-cd)pyreneTOTAL DETECTABLE PAHCarbazoieNaphthalene
KOPPEPS COMPANY, INC .Texarkana. TX Treatabil ity Study
Aerat ion Tank PAH DataRings Sol ,<-f
3333444455*.i-r56
2
393019801290
7326H135142
3 . 8
2 . 4 9_
3 1 7 0 0
SAMPLING DATE23- -N o v -87
< 2 . 0 0<2 .00
< 0 . 2 0 0< 0 .500< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 . 2 0 0< 0 . 2 0 00 . 1800 .2070 . 3 9 80 . 7 1 30 . 1590 . 6 9 40 . 9 1 40 . 6 8 23 . 9 5 2< 2 . 00< ? . . 00
30-N o v -< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
< 0 . 2 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 2000 .2460 . 2 2 50 .2760 . 4 5 30 . 6 4 90. 1650. . 5 7 90 . 7 2 50 . 4 9 13 . 8 0 9<?.. 00• • 2 . 0 0
-87 04 -Dec R< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
< 0 . 2 0 0< 0 . 500< 0 . 500< 0 . 2 0 0< 0 . 2 0 0
0 . 068<0 . 1500 . 1260 . 2970 . 0 8 4
0 . 2 50. 3680 . 352I . 545- 7. . 00• • 2 . 0 0
7 08 Dec< 2 . 0 0<? . oo
< 0 . 2 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 . 2 0 0< 0 . 2 0 0
0 . 1 7 10 . 27
0 . 3 1 50 . 6 5 40 . 2 0 2
O . f l0 . 662O . S 6 33 . 437• 2 . 00< 2 . 0 0
87 12 Dec< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
< 0 . 2 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 . 2 0 00 .2620 . 0 5 4
<0 . IS':0 . 1 1 20 . 1 0 70 . 0 5 20. Ifttf0 . 3 0 80 . 1 6 !i . : :4?• 2 . 00< 2 . 0 0
87
0 1 2 7 5 3
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (rals/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)0. O. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
KOPPERS CQHPAHY, INC.TKXARKAHA, TX TREATABIUTY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE23-Oct-87 24-Oct-87 25-Oct-87 26-Oct-87 27-Qct-87 28-Oct-87 29-Oct-
6 . 7 520
29402660
2801*
6 . 221
22602120
1406 . 80 . 5*
6 . 4 521
14201260
1609 . 1
1*
6 . 921
1 . 2 9940860
80q&0 . 5*
6 . 8 521
1 . 2 9760740
208 D. 0
0*
6 . 921
1 . 2 9
0*
721Cf Jk.
1 . 2 9G60570
9091*
0 1 2 7 5 4
(units)Temperature (0eg C)Flow-rate (mls/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic tfsage (mis)D. 0. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates Influent flow to unit
KOPPERS COMPANY, IKC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE30-Oct-87 31-0ct~87 Ol-Nov-87 02-Nov-87 03-Nov-87 04-Nov-87 05-Nov
7 . 523
. 2 9685513
91
6 . 921
1 . 2 9410350
6080
722
1 . 2 9210187
236 . 9
0
6 . 921
1 . 2 914613016
90
7 . 321
1 . 2 91 10
9614
9 . 40
723295044
690
7 . 223
1 . 2 95246
68 . 9 5
1*
0 1 2 7 5 5
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/siin)TSSvssFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic tfsage (mis)D. O. UptakeMicroscopic Observ. *All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates Influent flow tc unit.
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STtTY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE06-Nov-87 07~Nov-87 08-Nov-87 09-Nov-87 lO-Nov-87 l l-Nov-87
7 . 321
1 . 2 4756114
9 . 10 . 5
7 . 42 1 . 51 . 2 8
202170
328 . 90 . 5
7 . 422
1 . 2 9917219
91 . 5
7 . 324
.294943
690
7 . 323
L . 2 921\6
59 . 3
0
7 , 418
L . 2 92418o
9 . 50
7 . 419
. 2 912
93
100*
0 1 2 7 5 6
(units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mis/min)TSSvssFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)D. 0. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXAftftAKA, TX TRKATASILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK MIXED LIQUOR DATA
13-Nov-8T 14-Nov-877 . 421
. 2914113
9 . 60
7 . 525
1 . 3514110
90
All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
SAMPLING DATE8V 18-Nov-87 17~Nov-87 13-Nov-87 19-Nov
7 . 425
. . 2 8695118
9 . 21
7 . 426
1 .281510
58 . 9
7 . 524
1 . 292924
590
7 . 623
. . 2 99908 . 90
7 . 521
. . 2 9853
8 . 60
1 2 7 5 7
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSvssFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (inls)D. O. UptakeMicroscopic Observ. * *All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicate* that the test was performed.Note; Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
(TOPPERS COMPANY, INC. ^TEXARKANA, XX TRKATABILITY STtfi Y
WEEKLY DA'iA SHEETSAERATION TANK MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE20-Nov-8T 21-Nov-87 22-Nov-8T 23-NOV-87 24-Nov-8? 25-Nov-87 26-Nov
7 . 522
1 . 2 92811
71 0 . 8
0
7 . 622
1 . 42416
89 . 5
7 . 522
1 . 31912
79 . 3
0
7 . 722
I . 2 92115
6I I .2
0
7 . 7225734239 . 4
0*
22L . 2 9
543321
9 . 20**
7 . 523
1 . 3 440
8 . 70
0 1 2 7 5 8
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, XX TRKATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE27-Nov-87 28-Nov-37 29-Nov-87 3Q-Nov-87 Ol-Dec-87 02-Dec-87 03-DeV
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mJ s/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)D. 0. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
7 . 622
.38453510
8 . $0-*
7 . 622
1 . 32281711
8 . 7 50
-*
7 . 5 522
1 .29301812
90 . 5-*
7 . 622
1 .29963
8 . 40 . 5-~
7 . 622
1 . 27972
8 . 90**
7 . 522
1 . 27844
3 . 70
-*
7 . 622
1 .2211
74
9 , 20-*
0 1 2 7 5 9
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC,TKXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE04-Dec-87 05-Dec~87 Q6-Dec-87 07-D©c-87 08-Dec-87 G9-Dec-87
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic 0sage (mis)D. 0. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
7 . 622-11
8390-*
7 . 422
1 . 1 8954
9 . 1 50**
7 . 422-11
74
9 . 20 . 5-*
7. 522
. 3875290-*
7 . 422
1 . 3 98629
0 . 5**
7 . 622
1 . 4972
8 . 50-*
7 . 622
1 . 2913S4
8 .850-—
0 1 2 7 6 0
KOPPERS COKPAJIY, INC.TKXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE
pK (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Qsage (mis)D. O. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the te> was performed.Note: Flowrate indictees influent flow to uuit
H -Dec-877 . 4
221 .29
7438 . 70
12~Dec-877 .55
221 .22
5418 . 00
0 1 2 7 6 1
KOPPKRS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANfK EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE
pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-M ChemetriesTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBOD{5)-TotalBOD(b)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD~SolubleOil & GreaseTOSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
Oct-876 . 8-12010812
24-Oct-876 . 1 5
4 . 324002240
160
25-Oct-876 .24 . 3
2040186C180
2G-Oct-876 . 64 . 3
16001440
160
27-Oct-876 . 64 . 3900880
20
28-Oct.-876 . 7
4-
29-Oct7
4 . 3630560
701 1 . 7
0 1 2 7 6 2
pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSvssFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOOBOD(5)-TotalBOD(5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolIcs (EPA 604)All values are In mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
(COPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABIUTY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE30-Qct-87 3l-Oct-87 OI-Nov-87 02-Nov-87 03-Nov-87 04-Nov-87 05-Nov-
73 . 7<1
420380
40
6 . 73 . 5<1
37033535
7 . 13 . 8<1
19618016
7 . 13 . 5<1
1 1810216
6 . 93 . 2<18256
6
6 . 73< 15448
6
73 . 2<1706010
17 . 1
0 1 2 7 6 3
K0PPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA* TX TREATASILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE~pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBQD(5)-TotaiBOD(5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCQD-SolubleOil & GreaseT0STDFSTDVSPOP (us/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)All values are in rag/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
6 . 93<1
9 4 . 577
1 7 . 5
v t «(JV-O (
6 . 82 . 1< 1
240204
36
us-Nov-876 . 83 . 3<1
138113
25
09-Nov-876 . 93 . 2<1645311
10-Nov-876 . 93 . 2< 13024
6
11 -Nov- 8 76 . 9 53 . 1< 12116
5
12-Nov73<11915
4
0 1 2 7 6 4
KOP-PERS COMPANY, (NC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABIUTY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE-pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOOBOD(5)-TotalBOD(5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)All values are in m.g/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
7 . 23 . 2< 114113
~
•«• * fcTi_< v y* t
73< 13224
8-
l i > -WOV-»Y
6 . 93< 1473710
16-Nov-877 . 12 . 9< 11813R\s
17-Nov-877
3. 1< 12321
18~Nov-877 . 34 . 3< 1
660
19-Nov7 . 1 53 . 6<110
73
1 0 . 5
0 1 2 7 6 5
pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N CheiaetrlcsTSSvssFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBOD(5)-TotalBOD(5)-SolubIeCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAHCug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
KOPPERS CQMPAtfY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TEtEATABILETY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE20-Nov-87 21-Nov-87 22-Nov-87 23-Nov-87 25-Nov-87 26-Nov-7 . 13 . 2<118106
-~
7 - 4 7 . 2 7 . 43 3 . 2 " 3<l <1 <119 17 1012 10 77 f
7 30 . 0 1 8
1 2 . 78 . 72 . 3
48~ ~ 40~" ~ s RCo
1641 19
45
7 - 4 7 . 2 7 . 2 53 - 2 3 3 .3oi <l <i37 31 2822 18 1915 13 9__— _— _~
~* __ _— _
3 . 9 5 2
0 1 2 7 6 6
KGPPERS COMPANY, INC.TKXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STETOY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE27-Nov-87 28-Nov-87 29-Mov-67 30-Nov-87 Gl-Dec-87 02-Dec-87 03~0ec
7 . 12
<X3222ZO
7 .252 . 6< 114
95
(units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)rocBOD(5)-TotaIBODC5)-Solub leCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTOPST0VSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L>MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604}All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
7 . 23
21156
7 . 13 . 3
972
0 . 0 1 91515
4 . 2 56030<6
178120
582 3 . 9
<0 .0t3 .809*
*
7 . 43< 11410
4
7 . 23<1
981
73
12il
0 1 2 7 6 7
04-Dec~pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricstssvssFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBOD(5)-Total800(5}-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det, PAH(uff/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)All values.are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKAtfA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING 0ATE87 05-Dec-87 06-Dec-87 07-Dec~8? 08-Dec-87 09-Dec-87
7 . 33 . 2<1
972
0 . 0 1 715 .4
6 . 63<11611
5-
6 . 93<113103
7 . 1 54 . 30 . 8
761
1 . 24525
380155100
55
1 . 5 4 5
7 . 1 54 . 6<110
91
0 . 0 1 42 0 . 82 4 . 99 . 8 8
5535<6
214150
64
7 . 1 54 . 6< 111
92________—
74 . 1<1
862
3 . 4 3 7
0 1 2 7 6 8
KOPPERS COMPANY* INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABII.ITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSAERATION TANK EFFLUENT DATA
1 1-Dec-87 12-Dec-87 SAMPLING DATE
6 . 94 . 2<1
862
(units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBOD(5)-TotalBOD(5)-SolubleC00-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)
All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
75 . 3< 1
660
0 . 0 1 41 5 . 85 . 9 31 . 2 7
3535
9 . 1178120
58
1 . 2 4 2
0 1 2 7 6 9
IIST ID' SPECTRIX DC * —— 8
SAMPLE NUMBER: AERATION TANK EFF.ORGAN1CS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET <PA<JE 1)
LABORATORY «VAME: SPECTRIX
X3 SAMPLE ID NO. : 871200404MPLE MATR IX ; WATERTA RELEASE AUTHORIZED BY:
CASE NO. : —QC REPORT NO. : —CONTRACT NO. : 12-01-87DATE SAMPLE RECEIVED: /1 VOLA TILES
CCNCENTRAT I ON: LOW»TE ANALYZED: 12/08/87
1 C010• C0 15• C020
C025
I C030C035C040
m co45
• C030• C055
C060I C063
C 1 1 0C 1 1 3
I C120C125C130
_ C140• C170• C130
C I33I C160
C 163C 143
I C173C180C203
_ C2101 C220• C223
C23OI C233
C240C243
gi C230
CAS * COMPOUNDCHLORQMETHANEBROMOMETHANEVINYL CHLORIDECHLOROETHANEMETHYLENE CHLORIDEACETONECAR80N DISULFIDE1, i-DlCHLOROETHENE1, i-DICHLOROETHANETRANS-1. 2-DICHLOROETHENECHLOROFORM1. 2-OlChLOROETHANE2-0UTANONE1 , 1 , 1~TRICHLQRO£THANECARBON TETRACHLQfclDEVINYL ACETATEBRQMODICHLQROMETHANE1, 2-DICHLOROPROPANECIS-1 . 3-DICHLQROPROPENE<2)TRICHLOROETHENED I BROMGCHLQROMETHANEI, 1 ,2-TR I CHLOROETHANEBENZENETRANS-1, 3-DICHLOROPROPENE(E)2-CHLORQETHYLVINYLETHER0ROMOFQRM4-METHYL~2~PENTANONE2-HEXANONETETRACHLOROETHENE1 , 1 . 2 , 2-TETRACHLOROETHANETOLUENECHLQROBENZENEETHYLSENZENESTYRENETOTAL XYLENES
DATAFILE; 5U12004V04ADILUTION FACTOR; 1. 00
UG/L10 U10 U10 U10 U
3 . . . . . . . . 101 0 . . . . . . . . 2 2 0
5 U5 U5 US U3 U5 U
10 U5 U5 U
10 U5 U3 U5 U3 U5 U3 U3 U3 U
10 U3 U
10 U10 U3 U3 U5 U5 U3 U5 U3 U
O
C\J
o
UNDETECTED AT THE LISTED DETECTION LIMITCOMPOUND IS PRESENT, BUT BELOW THE LISTED DETECTION LIMIT
IIST ID" 45 10
SPECTRIX DC * — -SAMPLE NUMBER: AERATION TANK EFF
^ s
ORGAMICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETLABORATORY NAME? SPECTRIX
SAMPLE ID NO. : 371200404£ MATRIX : WATERRELEASE AUTHORIZED BY:I
CONCENTRATION: LOW -^T£ EXTRACTED: . . . **/+/*.}.m»TE ANALYZED: 12/14/37
CASE NO. : -—QC REPORT NO. : ——CONTRACT NO. : ——DATE SAMPLE RECEIVED:
SEMIVQLATILE3DATAFILE: 9U12G04C04DILUTION FACTOR: . . . .1
111
C31SC32SC33OC335C340C345C3SOC355C360C365C370C375C410C415C4SOC425C430C435C440C44SC430C455C460C465C470C S l OC315C520C523C330C535C540C54SC530C535C560C565C370C373
COMPOUND
PHENOL3 IS ( 2-CHLOROETHYL ) ETHER2-CHLQRQPHENQLI . 3-DICHLOROBENZENE1 , 4-DICHLOROBENZENESEN2YL ALCOHOL:, 2-DICHLOR00EN2ENE2-METHYLPHENOL3IS(2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHER4-METHYLPHENOLN-NITROSODIPROPYLAMINEHEXACHLOROETHANENITROBENZENEISOPHORONE2-NITROPHENOL2< 4-DIMETHYLPHENOLBEN20IC ACIDB I S ( 2-CHLOROETHOX Y ) METHANE2* 4-DICHLOROPMENOL1, 2. 4-TRlCHLQROBENZENENAPHTHALENE4-CHLOROANILINEHFXACHLOROBUTADIENEP-CHLQRO-M-CRESOL2-METHYLNAPHTHALENEHEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE2, 4, A-TRICHUQROPHENOL2, 4, 5-TRICHLaROPHENOL2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE2-NITROANILINEDIMETHYL PHTHALATEACENAPHTHYLENE3-NITROANr.INEACENAPHTHENE2, 4-DINITROPHENOL4-NITRQPHENOLDtBENZOFURAN2i 4-DINITHOTOLUENE2,6-DINITROTQLUENE
DETECTION AMOUNT ^~LIMIT FOUND r-
(MICRQGRAMS / LITER) ^40 U W
40 U ^40 U O40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U
200 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U
SCO U40 U
200 U40 U40 U
200 U40 U
200 U200 U
40 U40 U40 U
SPECTRIX DC * ———
SAMPLE NUMBER. AERATION TANK
'SMiVOLATtLS GRGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET, CONTINUED•ATAFILE: 9ui20^4co*iiiI1I
i•
C580C595C390C59SC610C615C625C630C635C640C645CA50C655C715C720C723C73CC73SC740C760C765C770C775C780C795C790
COMPOUND
DIETHYL PHTHALAT?4-CHLOROPHENYL PHENYL ETHERFLUORENE4-NITRQANIL INE4, 6-DINITRQ-2-METHYLPHENOLN-NITROSQDIPHENYLAMINE4-3ROMOPHENYL PHENYL ETHERHEXACHLOPOBENZENEPENTACHLOROPHENOLPHENANTHRENEANTHRACENEDI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATEFLUORANTHENE
PYRENEBUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE3- 3 ' -D ICHLOROBENZID lNEBENZO ( A ) ANTHRACENE3 I S < 2-ETHYLHEXYL ) PHTHALATECHRYSENEDI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATEBENZO ( B ) FLUORANTHENEBENZO(K) FLUORANTHENEBENZO<A)PYRENEINDENO( 1- 2, 3-COPYRENEDIBENZO(A * H)ANTHRACENEBENZO<GHI)PERYLEN£
DETECTION AMOUNTLIMIT FOUND
(MICROGRAMS / LITER)
40 U40 U40 U oj
200 U .200 U '
40 U ^40 U CVJ40 U T-
200 U O40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 USO U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U
UNDETECTED AT THE LISTED DETECTION LIMITCOMPOUND IS PRESENT, BUT BELOW THE LISTED DETECTION LIMIT
ST ID S I £F SPECTRIX DC * — eiiiCRGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET - PAGE 4
*BORATORY NAME. SPECTRIX HOUSTONm CASE NC. • —OC REPORT MO : — ANALYST SC• ' DATAFILE: SUISC04V04A
SAMPLE NUMBER: AERATION TANK EFF
ANALYST: SG
B. TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDSIIr^S ** VOLATILE COMPOUND NAMES SCAN* PURITY AMOUNT
CM
NC NON-HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > 10% OF NEAREST OINT. STD.
J » ESTIMATED VALUE - A 1: 1 RESPONSE FACTOR IS ASSUMED
i
H
IABQRATORV NA.^ESFPORT NO. . -
SPECTR IX DC * ——
SAMPLE: AERATION TA*K
QRGANIC3 ANALYSIS DATA SHEET * pA5E 5SPECTS IX CORPORATION CASE NO. : -_
ANALYST. CE3 DATAFILE. 9UI2004C04B- TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS
8
3EMIVOLATILE COMPOUNDPURITY AMQUNT
UO/L
l NO NCN-HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > I OK OF NEAREST INT. STD. CVJT"o
ESTIMATED VA"JE - A 1:1 RESPONSE FACTOR IS ASSUMED
1111111111
•*»4
Parameter (ue/l)AntimonyArsenicBerylliumCadmiumChromiumCopperLeadMercuryNickelSeleniumSilverThalliumZinc
KOPPERS COMPANY, INCTEXARKANA,TX TREATABILITY STUDYAERATION TANK METALS DATA
<60.0<10.0<5.00<5,00
<10.0<25.0<5.00
0,303<40.0<5.00
<10.0<10.0246
inr-r-cvjs~*o
BI
IIIIIAPPENDIX 2~E
HISTORIC USE DATA
CM^~O
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
^M
IIIIIIIIIIII
APPENDIX 2-E
HISTORIC USE AREA SURFACE SOIL DATA
Four historic use areas identified for the KoppersTexarkana Site a r e : (1 ) process area, (2) drip track area , (3)treated lumber storage areas , and (4) untreated lumber storageareas . Figure E-l presents the locations of the fourabove-mentioned areas within the site boundaries . It isestimated that the process area covers approximately 4.1 ac re s/the drip track area covers approximately 4.3 acres, the treatedlumber areas cover approximately 9,4 acres, and the untreatedlumber areas cover approximately 44.2 acres .
Table E-l presents a listing of the number of surfacesoils analyzed for individual potential contaminants of concern(PCOCs) per historic use area . Table E-2 lists the number ofsurface soil samples analyzed per acre for each h istor ic usea r ea . This table was developed by dividing the number ofsamples (Table 1) by the approximate size of each historic usearea. Table E-2 indicates that an average of 2.1 surface soilsamples per acre were analyzed within the drip track area , 0.40samples per acre were analyzed within the treated lumberstorage areas, 0.43 samples per acre were analyzed within theuntreated lumber storage areas,
CMT—o
2069T 4040-00 1 -600
8 LLZ 10B 1
NUMBER OP SWRFftCE SOIL SAMPLES ANALVZ6D WITHIN 6901 HISTORIC USE ARRA
- —— -JKK9.ArswnicChromium'CopperL««aMercuryTotal PAHPotentially Carcinogenic PAHP*nt «ch lorophvno 1zinc
Pror«aa_Ar_Q«™
999
79999
—— ———— • ———————— «M—
l>r]p Tirwi__ Area
S55228885
f--** v*, _^sa.itfl£g _ j>o i i_:h Tr**i^,s ij«n**r_ __ Ar«a$
33322«
«3
-SSfflPiLes. *rL«ljC5ed_Vntt*«t«d Unnb____ Ar eag.
181318121225252519
er— !«?y.ia
353535232,348484836
Approximate size of Kacih4. 1 •9.4 44.2 62.0
4Q40 001 600
III8-2
NUMBER OP SURFACE SAMPLES ANALYZED PER ACRE FOK BACH HISTORIC USE AREA
IIIIIII
Process
ArsenicchroaiunCopperLeadMercuryTotal PAHPotentially Carcinogenic PAHPentachlorophenol2tnc
2 . 192. 192. 191 .711 .712. 192 . 192. 192. 19
IIIII
Drip Track-Area1 , 161 . 161 . 160 .470 . 4 71 .361 .861 .861 . 16
Treated Lumber——Smas0.320.320.320.210 .2 10 . 6 40 . 6 40 . 6 40 .32
Untreated Lumber
0 .4 10 .4 10 .4 10.270.27O .S7O . S 7O .S70 .43
r-CMo
E-3
i
IIIIIIIIIUNTREATED APEAS
-: ,,-i-\ '>^*^* --Ccs- - ' _v* ^%F> "-<*****? \^ -g-^'^.1^ •- • *'^Z^jL^r • -.^l^-." \*? \ v ^^ i X^ • i .'• t ';^^-^^X^^^- sf^^^S^y-, ^^JL^——**«JU;
E-4
IIIIIIIAPPENDIX F(Fixed Film Treatment Results)
00
o
III
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
STATISTICAL SUMMARYFIXED FILM MIXED LIQUOR DATA
)Parameters CpH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)D. 0. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.
* OF)BVS
5050434949494950
00
MEAN7.26
2 1 . 641 .28550 .455 0 0 . 0 4
50 .4 19 . 1 7
.44.0000.0000
STD.34
1 . 17.07972 .328 9 3 . 6 3
84 . 19.4 1
1 .04.0000.0000
9556 £LOWER
7 . 162 1 . 3 01 .26
266 .392 3 8 . 9 7
25 .8 19 . 0 5
. 14.0000.0000
?IUPPER
7 . 3 52 1 . 9 81 .30
834 .6076 1 . 1 1
75 .009 . 2 9
.74. 0000.0000
GMEAN7 . 2 5
2 1 .6 11 . 289 9 . 0 38 4 , 2 113 ,26
9 . 1 6.89.00.00
GSTO1 .051 .051 .067 . 5 07 . 9 35 .591 .041 . 54
.0000.0000
WIN6.25
2 1 .001 .003 . 0 02.001 .008 . 5 0
.00.0000.0000
MAX7.70
25 .001 .453770 .003390 .00
380.0010 .80
7.00. 0000. 0000
90% LTVALUE
7.7023 .061 .38
1 254 .731 143 .361 15 .89
9 . 6 81 .53
.0000
. 0000
All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
0 1 2 7 8 2
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
STATISTICAL SUMMARYFIXED FILM EFFLUENT DATA
*Parameters CpH (units)Pheno Z.S -Chemet ricsTotal PO4-HachKH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBOD(5)-TotalBOD( 5) -SolubleCOD-To talCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Pet. PAH (ug/L)MetalsPheuolics (SPA 604)
f OF>BVS
500
4949494949
585555555511500
MEAN6.99
.00003 . 8 81 .36
5 5 3 . 5 6500 . 88
5 2 , 6 8n ?12 .5312 .632 Q"7. 0 (
4 9 . 6 027 .0092.65
1 8 6 . 4 0125.8060.601 7 . 8 0
.015 0 . 1 7. 0000.0000
STD.31
.0000. 7 9.95
1009 .85921 .74
9 2 . 1 3.00
2.618 . 6 52 23
1 4 . 7 79 . 7 5
190.282 8 . 3 226 .2010.62
.00r><~\. U8 7 . 1 2.0000.0000
95%LOWER
6.90.00003 . 6 51 .08
2 5 8 . 5 4231 .60
2 5 . 7 7.0 1
10.351 . 8 9. 10
31.261 4 . 9 0
- 143.581 5 1 . 2 4
9 3 . 2 747.4117. GO
.01- 5 7 . 9 8
.0000
.0000
CIUPPER
7.08. 00004 . 1 11 .64
8 4 8 . 5 8770. 16
79,59£.
14 .722 3 . 3 7
. 6467.943 9 . 1 0
328.872 2 1 . 5 61 5 8 . 3 373.791 7 . 8 0
.011 5 8 . 3 3
.0000. 0000
GMEAN6,99
.003 .8 11 . 19
9 6 . 0 582 .4012.63
.0212 .23
8 . 6 62 . 2 7
48.122 4 . 8 416 .43
1 8 4 . 6 41 23 .8 159.831 7 . 8 0
.011 7 . 5 3
.00.00
GST01 .05
. 00001 . 2 21 .567 . 8 28 ,096.031 . 2 31 .293 . 2 82 . 1 61 .301 . 6 76 .351 . 1 71 . 221 .20
.00
.004 . 5 1
.0000.0000
MIN6 . 1 5. 00003 .001 .005 .004 . 0 0
.00
.016 .771 .201 .00
40.0010 .00
6.00146.00100 .0046.0017. SO
.014 . 1 1
.0000.0000
MAX7.60
.00005 . 7 04.80
4800.004310 .00
490.00.02
15 .5022 .50
6 . 5 07f 0035 .00
433.00226 .00169 .0072.001 7 . 8 0
.01205 .59
.0000
.0000
90* LTVALUE
7.40.00004 . 9 02 .09
1282 .691 147 .32121 .53
.0216.853 8 . 7 6
5 . 9 867.134 7 . 4 0
168.90224 .57158 .4675 . 17
. 0 0
.001 1 7 .04
.0000
.0000All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.
0 1 2 7 8 3
0 •t 3
i -j
o.2 :r~ 2
2C"
> -T
* N f
t- -)
Cl t3
M "
C
N -^
-^
-
> i.
rl *< •<
ii .-»•
-*•^.
i— o
^r s*
N "
^ 3*
2" •
i-t-
-r
I
-t> "<
H-1 |_,
. •ft-
."5
'•
-o ;•:
'jo -_n
-* —
t-j
o CD
•O
CO -T
CO ~
J *-*
CO 10
~J
I*1 E
-1 tO
-71 "-
C O
00W
W '3
0 O5
t J 0
> ™
O S
:ji r:
Oi
^ j;
-.1 X
4* C
O
O r~i
Ji- .
C
J
O
n~f
"^. . •—
3 'J3
.Co 3
0 *j
CDM >
if X
.i <
. >
'i tr
x £
O r1
I IX
I I I I I I I I I
AcenaphthyleneAcenaphtheneFluorenePhenanthreneAnthraceneFluoranthenePyreneBenzo(a)anthraceneChryseneBenzo(a)pyreneBenzo(b)fluorantheneBen2o(k)fluorantheneDibenz(ah)anthraceneBenzo(g,h,i)peryleneIndeno(123-cd)pyreneTOTAL DETECTABLE PAHCarbazoleNaphthalene
KOPPERS COMPANY, INCTexarkana, TX Treatabi 1 ity
Fixed F i lm PAH DataStudy
SAMPLING DATEt inge333334444555566--2
Sol-
39301 9 8 01290
73260135
142
3 , 8--
2 . 4 9----
31700
23 Nov H7< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
< 0 . 2 0 00 . 9 3 80 . 6 4 2
3 . 2 69 . 8 26 . 3 16 . 9 0
2 1 . 7 03 6 . 3 0
8 . 4 23 1 . 004 6 . 8 03 3 . 5 0
2 0 5 . 5 9< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
30 Nov< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
< 0 . 2 0 0< 0 .6 00< 0 . 5 0 0
0 . 5 4 30 . 7 7 20 . 8 7 80 . 8 9 7
2 . 0 43 . 3 4
0 . 7 8 83 . 7 04 . 8 53 . 18
2 0 . 9 9< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
H7 (M [ I * . , '< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
<Q, 200' 0 . 6 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0
0 . 2 1 70 . 2 9 00 . 1900 . 2 8 60 . 6 8 3
1 . 3 90 . 4 1 3
1 . 0 01 . 4 31 .287 . 18
< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
K7 OH [ >nc BY< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
< 0 . 2 0 ( 1< d . ^ 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 . 2 0 0
0 . 3 2 60 . 4 1 50 . 5 5 2
1 . 2 32 . 5 6
0 . 7 6 62 . 1 32 . 6 72 . 3 5
1 3 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0<2 . 00
12 Itao< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
< 0 . 2 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 . 5 0 0< 0 . 2 0 0
0 . 2 6 20 . 1 500 . 1 8 00 . 4 0 00 . 7 0 50. 1760 . 7 7 60 . 9 4 00 . 5 2 6
4 . 1 2< 2 . 0 0< 2 . 0 0
BY
0 1 2 7 8 5
KOPPERS COMPANY» INC.TEXARKAWA. TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE23-Gct-87 24-Oct-87 25-Oct~87 2S-Qct-87 27-Oct-87 28-Oct-8? 29-Oct-
pK (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/mtn)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Qsag© (mis)0. O. QptakeMicroscopic Observ.All values are in ms/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit.
8 . 621-
34203160
260-1
6 . 2 52 1 . 5-26&02560
1208 . 91
6 . 521
-17801640
1409 . 3
1
6 . 8 521-
12401160
808 . 8
0
6 , 621-
9008001008 . 9
0
6 . 921
1 . 2 9---
8 . 9 51
8 . 621
1 . 2 9290270
2090*
0 1 2 7 8 6
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)D. 0. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TKXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE30-Oct-87 31-Oct-87 Ol-Nov-87 02-Nov-87 03-Nov-87 04-Nov-87
7 . 421
1 . 2 9170150
2091*
7 . 421
L . 2 97872
69 . 10
All values are in rag/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.: Flowrato indicates influent flow to unit
7 . 521
. 2 93830
890
721
L . 2 92016
49 . 6
0
7 . 422
L . 2 92218
49 . 30
7 . 623
1 . 2 22422
29 . 10 . 5
7 . 723
L . 2 948,36109 . 1
0 . 5
1 2 7 8 7
Cunits)Temperature (0eg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSvssFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)0. 0. UptakeMicroscopic O'bserv. *All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
KOPPEKS CQMPAKY, BNC.•TRXARKAMA, TX TREATABltlTY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE06-Nov-87 07-Nov-87 Q8-Nov-87 09-Nov-87 10-Nov7 . 621
1 . 2 92620
69 . 3
6 . 9 521
1 . 2937703390
3808 s. t>
7
723
1 . 2 932803040
2408 . 5
2
7 . 122
1 . 2 918401680
1608 . 91
721c. JL
1 . 2916001440
1608 . 8ft
l l-Nov-87 12-Nov-6 . 921
1 . 2912801030
2509 . 41
0 1 2 7 8 8
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C>Flowrate (mis/sain)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (nils)0. O. tfptafceMicroscopic Observ.
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM MI3CED LIOTOR DATA
SAMPLING DATEl3-Nov-87 14-NO-V-S7 lT-Nov-87 18-tJov-87
7 . 121
1 . 2915001360
1409 . 4
7 . 225
1 . 3610560
509 . 30
All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Mote: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
7 . 125
1 . 29430
409 . 1
0#
7 . 125
1 . 3208176
3290
7 . 224
1 . 3£93262
369 . 1
7 .4524
1 .29246224
228 . 70
7 . 22 1 . 51 .29
270230
408 . 90 . 5
0 1 2 7 8 9
K0PPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TOEATABJUTY STWDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE22-Nov-87 23-Nov-S7 24-Nov-87
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C>Flowrate (»ls/min)TSSvssFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)0. 0. 0ptakeMicroscopic Observ.All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
26-Nov-d7 . 2
221 . 29
206174
321 0 . 20 . 5-#
7 . 521
1 . 3756510
9 . 80-*
7 . 321
1 . 376641210
0 . 5-*
7 . 721
1 . 29645410
1 0 . 80-*
7 . 6 522
1 . 296052
39 . 6
0-*
7 . 421
1 .29665412
9 . 50 . 5#*
7 . 623
1 . 344236
68 . 7
0-*
1 2 7 9 0
pH (units)Temperature CDeg C)Flowrate (mis/mira)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)D. 0. OptafceMicroscopic Observ.
K0PPEKS COMPAQ. INC.TEXARKAMA, TX TRBATABIUTT STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE27-Nov-87 28-Nov-87 29-No—87 30-Nov-87 Gl-0ec :-Dec-87 Q3-Dec-6|
7 . 521
. 2756560
59 , 2
0
7 . 421
1 . 2 24036
49
0 . 5
All values are In mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
7 . 421
326
9 . 2
7 . 621
U361814
48 . 90 . 5
7 . 521
.4575290**
7 . 5211
1915
490
7 . 421
1 . 29981
9 . 7 50 . 5*
0 1 2 7 9 1
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)0. G. QptakeMicroscopic Observ.All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TKXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM MIXED LIQUOR DATA
SAMPLING DATE04-Dec-87 05-Dec-87 06-Dec-87 07-Dec~87 08~Dec-87 09-Dec-87 10-Dec-
7 . 521
. . 3 22722
59 . 1
0
7 . 321
L . 0 43023
79 . 30 . 5**
7 . 4212420
49 . 3 5
0
7 . 521
. 2 986290*
7 . 4 521
1 . 2 9541
9 . 10**
7 . 521
L . 2 9972
8 . 80
7 . 522
U3865190 . 5
0 1 2 7 9 2
KOPPERS COMPANY* INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM MIXED LIQUOR DATA
l l-Dec-87 12-Dec-87 SAMPLING DATE
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)0. 0. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.All values are in mg/lt unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
7 . 321
L . 2 43219
0 . 5*
7 . 521
. 2276190
0 1 2 7 9 3
KOPPERS COMPANY , IKC.TEXARKAHA, TX TREATABILITY ST0DY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM EFFLUENT DATA
6 . 4
860780
80
6 . 1 55 . 7<1
31802980
200
pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachWH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAF)TOCBO0(5)-TotalBG0C5)-SolubleC00-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTPST0FST0VSPCP (uff/L)Total CyanideTotal Bet. PAH(mg/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
SAMPLING DATE23-Oct-87 24-Oct»87 25-Qct-87 26-Oct6 . 2 5
5<1
23202100
220
6 . 5 55 . 3<1
1420134080
•87 27-Oct6 . 44 . 6< 1
10401000
40
28-Gct-87 29-Oct6.4 R .94 . 6 4 . 6
<1430380
506 . 7 7
0 1 2 7 9 4
KQPPEES COMPAKT, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITt STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE30-Oct-87 31-Oct-87 Ol-Nov-87 02-Nov-87
7 . 351
26023030
3 . 32 . 4
463313
pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSvssFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBOD(5)-TotalBQD{5)-SolubleCOO-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPOP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAHCwg/LMetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
7 . 33 . 52 . 4
52466
7 . 23 . 24 . 8
22166
1 4 . 2
7 . 234
20164
04-Nov-87 Q5-Nov-8|7 . 2 7 . 63 . 1
436324
3 . 24
815823
1 2 7 9 5
3 . 33 . 2
3 4 . 52 7 . 5
7
pH (units)Phenols-ChensetrlcsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBOD(5)-TotalBOI>( 5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDS -TDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)Metals - —Phenolics (EPA 604)All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
KOPPERS COKPAWT> IKC.TEIARKAMA, TX TREATABELITY STODY
VfEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE06-Nov-87 07-Nov-87 08-Nov-87 09-Nov-87 10-Nov-87 l l-Nov-87
6 . 83 . 3<1
48004310
490
4<1
31302900
230
6 . 83 . 8< 1
21401940
200
6 . S4 . 1< 1
18401660
180
6 . V4 . 2<1
1070870200
0 1 2 7 9 6
KOPPERS COMPANY > INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABtLITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM EFFLUENT DATA
13-Nov-87 14-Nov-87pH (units)Phenols-ChemetrlcsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSvssFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBQD(5)-TotalBOD(5)-SolubleOOD-TotalCGD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (uff/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)All values are in aig/L unless otherwise noted.* Sea data in appendix.
SAMPLING DATE
6 . 84 . 4< 1
1020920100
J- K It ^ V \J 1
6 . 84 . 2< 1
800700100
i i> - r< Q v - a j6 . 7
4< 1
580520
60
I&-NOV-BT6 . 8
4< 1
232200
32
17-Nov-876 . 84 . 1<1
296270
26
18-Nov-8774<1
17216012
19-Nov7 . 1~ ^3 . 3< 1
372314
581 3 . 7
0 1 2 7 9 7
Rf>PPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATEpH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal PO4-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBOD(5)-TotalBOD(5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (FPA 6 0 4 )All values a^re in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
n **s v y (
74< 1
234198
36
--
£l-«OV-tt i
7 . 151
1251 1015
--
<^-Nov-87 23-Mov-877 . 1 7 . 44.2 3< 1 <168 5558 4710 8
0 . 0 1 81 1 . 6
192 . 5
43< 10<6
226169
57
24-Nov-877 . 1 5
3<1665313-
-—__-_-
25-Nov-877 . 0 5
3<1604812__
--
26-Nov7 . 1
3<14844
4
--
2 0 5 . 5 9
0 1 2 7 9 8
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, .TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY 0ATA SHEETSFIXED FILM EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE
403 6 . 73 . 3
(units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal PO4-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCB00(5)-TotalBQ0(5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseT0STDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal 0et. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
7 . 23 . 3< 12622
4
«.*/ v-uv-y, au-Kov-o/ Ul-tfec-87 02-0ec-87 Q3-Dec'7 - 1 7 - 2 7 . 2 5 7 . 3 7 . 2
3 3 3 3,3 3<1 <1 < l < i < j31 14 10 9 1224 12 8 7 117 2 2 2 l0.019 -
13 -2 2 . 5
6.5 -75 -35 -<6 - _ *
186 -128 -
581 7 . 8 -
0.01 1 -2 0 . 9 8 8 -— # — _
0 1 2 7 9 9
pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetrlcsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBODC5)-Tota lBODC5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(Kg/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TIC TREATABILITV STWE>Y
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE04-0ec-87 05-Dec-87 06-Dec-S7 077 . 4
3< 11311
20 . 0 1 7
1 2 . 31 . 2<14030
433146100
46
7 . 1 7 9
6 . 93 . 2<1
871
3< 110
82
7 . 35 . 3< 1
541
03-0ec-87 09-0ec-877 . 3 7 . 3 54 . 6<1
651
KQ151 5 . 51 3 . 33 . 2
5030
6 .S31951 13
72
12 .999
4 . 3<110
82
10-Dec7 . 2 5
4< 110
9I
0 1 2 8 0 0
KOPPERS COKT/JfT,, IWC.TEXARKANA, TX TREAfABILITY STTOY
WEEKLY" DATA SHEETSFIXED FILM EFFLUENT DATA
1 1 -Dec-87 12-Dec-8774:i651
pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSvssFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBOD(5)-TotalBOD(5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP CUS/L)Total CyanideTotal Oet. PAH(ug/L)Me t QL Is — —Phenolics (EPA 604)
All values are in rng/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
7 . 25 . 3< 1
550
0 .0 1 11 3 . 27 . 1 51 . 1 5
4030
1 1 .61891 19
70
4 . 1 1 5
SAMPLING DATE
0 1 2 8 0 1
!I ANAL''3 I 3 CATA SHg£T (PAGE 1>
-ASE *vC3C «?E.»ce" N-CNTi^AC" ^C.DATS SAHPU2 12— Oi =3*III ANALYZE 12/08/3 DILUTION PACTCP: : . CO
1111•1111I•
0IB
r
CO 10CO 13CC200023C030C03SC040C043COSOCOS50060C065CHOCHSC120C 1 2 5C130C 1 4 0C I70C 1 5 0C 1 5 5C160C 1 6 5C 1 4 SC175C 1SOC205C 2 1 0C220C22SC230C235C240C245C250
A3 * CCI^PCUNDCMLCSCNETHANESRC^CMETHAfcE' J f S lV ! • * * Wl / "D" * * ?' A ' •• * U- '** < • Li W " « te d
OWLwRCaTHANErlETHYL£.NE CHLCR !SEACETONECARBON DISULFIDE1 . 1-OICHLOROETHe.ME* , 1 -OICHLORCETHANETRAMS- 1 . 2-DrCHLCRQETHENeCHLOPOKORM1 . 2-DICHLORQETHANE2-3UTANCNE1 . I , 1-TRlCHLOROETHANECARBON TETRACHLORIDEVINYL ACETATEDROMODICHLORQMETHANE1 , 2-DICHLOROPROPANECIS - 1 , 3 -O ICHLCRQPROPENE <Z )TRICHLOROETHENEDIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE1 / 1 * 2^TR ICHLQROETHANEBENZENETRANS-1 , 3-DICHLOROPROPENE(E)2-CHLOR3ETHYLVINYLETHERBROMOFQRM4-METHYL*2-PENTANONE2-HEXANQNETETRACHLQROETHENEi , 1 .2 , 2-TETRACHLQROETHANETOLUENECHLOROBENZENEETHYLBENZENESTYRENETOTAL XYLENES
1010to10
•s.10535353
1055
1055555555
105
1010S555553
UC/LUUUU
. - . . . . 7
. . . . . 5 JUUUUUUUUUUUU(_,UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
C\Jc00CMs~*o
• UNDETECTED AT THE LISTED DETECTION LIMIT* COMPOUND IS PRESENT, BUT BELOW THE LISTED DETECTION L IM IT
IIi1i
ANALYSIS DA~A SHEET
SAMPLE :: NO gri lseAC 5LS -1A" v ^TE^«EL£A=£ AUTMCa rZE j 3V
7
CASE NO.OC SS?CPT M
L
f c ANALYZED. I 2 / 1 4 / S 7
DATE SAMPLE RECEIVED . '->/'/* 7
DAr.-iFTLE 9'jl £004C3fD ILUT ION FACTOR. . . T> &
\I11
IIIHI*
C 3 ! 5C325«330C335C34CC345C350'.« «• w vC360C365C370C375C 4 1 0C 4 1 5C420C425C430C435C440C445C450C455C460C465C470C 5 1 0C515C520C525C530C535C540C345C550C555C360C565C570C573
-CCMPCUND
PHENOL3 I S < *-CHLCRO£THV. ) ETHER2-OHLCRCPHENCLI . j -OiCHuORCOEiMZaNE1 > 4-DICHLCRC3ENfaiNE3ENZYL ALCOHOL1 , 2-DICHLCRCBEN2=N£^-^lETHYLPHEMOL3 1 3 < 2-CHLDRO I SCPSOP YL > ETHES4-:1ETHYLPHENCLN-NITPOSODIPROPYLAMIWEHEXACHLOROETHANENITROBENZENEISOPHORONE2-NITROPHENOL2. 4-OIME"HYLPHENQLSENZOIC ACIDD I S C 2-CHLOROETHOXY ) METHANE2. 4-DICHLORCPHENQLi, 2, 4-TRICHLORCOEN2ENENAPHTHALENE4-OHLOROANILINEHEXACHLOROQUTADIENEP-CHLORO-M-CRESOL2-METHYLNAPHTHALENEHEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE2, 4, 6-TRICHLOROPHENQL2, 4, 3-TRICHLOROPHENOL2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE2-NITROANJLINEDIMETHYL PHTHALATEACENAPHTHYLENED-NITROANILINEACENAPHTHENE2. 4-DINITRQPHENOL4-NITROPHENQLDIGEN20FURAN2, 4-D1NITROTOLUENE2. 6-DINITROTOLUENE
DETECTION AMOUNT ^uIMIT FOUND
4O U CVJ40 U ^40 u o40 U e
40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U
200 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U
200 U40 U
200 U40 U40 U
200 U40 U
200 U200 U
40 U40 U40 U
11,f1111
1IHP
•• ft
MrvOLAr
"* Ar I Ls.
C3SO058505^0C595wO-i wC 6 1 SCo30C£25Cc45C6SOCi55C 7 1 5C720C72SC730C7 j5C740C760C76SC770C775C790C795C790
: _ I ORGAN: : s ANALYS IS CATA 3n•" , 1 & C C 4 C C 5
;C^PCL;IVIS
* I^T'-*YU "HTHALAT^^-CHLCROPHE.NVL ?.-i £NYL 2">£?"LUCRENE- 1 -WiTROANlL lNE-*j o — w 4. Ni , . , LJ— e.-i*lt« HYL. HENCLN— M I ""ROSCD IP^EMYLAMI N£- i -3RCttGP u £NYL PH£NYL £THE,^HEXACnLCSCSEMZENE"ENTACHLIRGPHENCLANTHRACENE01-W-3UTYL PHTHAUATE-LUCRANTHSNE
PY° £NE3UTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE3, 3 ' ~D ICHLORGBENZID INE3ENZO \ A ) ANTHRACENE3 IS < 2-ETHYLHEXYL 'PHTHALATECHRYSENEDI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATEDENZO i 3 > FL'JOR ANTHENE3ENZO < K J "UUCRANTHENE3ENZO <A )PYRENEINDENO( 1 . 2. 3^CD)PYRENED I D £ N Z O < A . H)ANTHRACENE3ENZOfGHI )PERYL £NE
S.A^PL-i
£ £T. CONTINUED
"T— i r *T * r *MOM • k. v< i * 'jrl
* ^ * !C$COSA
40 U40 J40 U
200 Ue.00 ;J
4C U^\f *J
4C -J40 U
SCO U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U30 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U40 U
* ; » > *3H^ " I X E D c" M ~- =
AMOUNT.VS . L lTHrt i
OCOCMT-O
UNDETECTED AT THE LISTED DETECTION LIMITCOMPOUND IS PRESENT, BUT BELOW THE LISTED DETECTION L IMIT
t DC 4 -
I 3AMPL3 NUMBE2
;:cs ANALYS IS A SHEET - PAGEJ3CRA . CRY;-: »E?CRT
___ _.o i*1
.AfE === :~^ :x -CUSTOM CASE uc.NiC — ANALYST: 33 DATAFILS. 5U12004V05
3 -SNTATTVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS
' ,CLAT:L£ : r ^PCUND NAMES SCAN# PURITY AMOUNT - — tr\o00rt t
NCN-HSL COWOUMDS FOUND > 10X OF NEAREST INT. STD. o
II J * ESTIMATED VALUE - A 1.1 RESPONSE FACTOR IS ASSUMED
SAMPLE
«• — * ^ ' * ' * ^ > = *3 »« */*•* i A "H£""~
ANALYST
3- T £ ; ITAT:VEL>1:-S fc =£^:vGL.^T:i. £ :«MPQIJND NA.^ES SCAN** P'jftr1• NC NCN — SL CGMPCUNDS FOUND > 10!; CF NEAREST I NT 3T&.l1m ESTIMATED VALUE - A 1:1 RESPONSE FACTOR IS ASSUMEDIB11
:~Y AMOUNT" ~~*QJ
UG/u°COOJT-o
wwIIIIIIIciiiii
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA.TX TREATABILITY STUDYFIXED FILM METALS DATA
Parameter fug/I)AntimonyArsenicBerylliumCadmiumChromiumCopperLeadMercuryNickelSeleniumSilverThalliumZinc
<60.0<10.0<5.GO<S,00
< 10.0<25.0<5.00
1.15<40.0<5.00
<10.0<10.01430
O00CM
O
^^^BIIIIIIIIIIIII
APPENDIX 2-FESTIMATION OF A HALF-LIFE FOR
BENZO(a)PYRENE IN SURFACE SOILS CDO00CM
I
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
W"IIIII
APPENDIX 2-PESTIMATION OF A HALF-LIFE FOR BENZO(aJPYRENE
IN SURFACE SOILS
The USEPA has reported a half-l ife of 480 days for benzo-( a )pyrene B ( a ) P in soils ( EPA 1 9 8 6 a ) . Because this value i snot supported by a citat ion from the scientific l i terature , thel i terature was reviewed in order to develop a more reliableestimate of the degradation of B ( a )P in surface soils. (AllPAHs are assumed to degrade at a rate equal to B ( a )P becausethe cancel potency of B ( a ) P is used herein to character ize allcarc inogenic PAHs , )
Table P-l lists the half-l ives found in the l i teraturethat may be of re levance to the condit ions found at CarverTerrace and Kennedy Sand and Grave l . The half-lives rangedfrom 10 days to 1 9 5 7 days, with a mean of 375 days and standarddeviation of 614 days. (The mean was calculated by using 15days as the half life reported by Shi l ina et al . ( 1 9 8 0 ) . }
To be protect ive of the public health, a half-l ife of 1 3 8 5days was se lected. This half- l ife represents a value belowwhich 95$ >J: half-l ives are expected to fall, assuming that thevalues reported in the l iterature are representative of thereal world. Ninety-five percent of all values in a normaldistr ibut ion are expected to fall below the mean plus j . , 6 4 5s tandard dev ia t ions * Thus, the upper 95 t h percent i le ofhalf-l ives was calculated by adding 1 . 6 4 5 standard deviat ions( 6 1 4 days) to t h e mean ( 3 7 5 days ) .
The half-lives reported in the l iterature varied a greatdeal, probably because many site-specific factors can influencethe rate at which B ( a )P degrades. Thus, the value used in thisrisk assessment should not be interpreted as necessari lyrepresentat ive of soils in Texarkana or any other part of theUnited Sta t e s . More detailed analysis of the factorsinfluencing degradation is needed to derive site-specificvalues* Of special note is the apparent relatively rapiddegradation of B ( a )P in -soils that have contained oil and PAHsfor a long time compared to soils to which B ( a ) P has onlyrecently been added. This indicates irhat accl imation of the
OCOCMv-o
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
>-J»-*' " ' " • • -
'^ '""•" ->L ' .^ l . - , . . . -• P^^I •!i1
_____________ _ ———————— - ——————————— - —————
TABLE F-l
__ ———————— ————— ————— ——————— ——— 1i• SUMMARY IN THE LITERATURE 1llllll_.—lll
Half-Life (days)1957
530290220
57147
8 5 . 67 6 . 2
10-15( a ) Bos se r t , T . D . a n d R . Bartha . 1 9 8 6 . ^w, .«v,w«. .w
References(a)(b)(b)<b)(c)(d)(d)( 3 )(e)
Struc ture-biodegradability relationship of polycyclic aromatichydrocarbons i n soil. Bull . Env . Contam. To x . , 3 7 : 4 9 0 - 4 9 5 .
( b ) Cooker , M . P . a n d R . C . Sims . 1 9 8 7 .temperature on polycyclic aromaticin an unacclimated agricultural soiMat. , 4 : 6 9 - 8 2 .
( c ) Groenewegen, D. and H. stolp. 1 9 7 6 .of polyaromatic hydrocarbons. Zbl.Or i g . , B 162 : 2 2 5 - 2 3 2 .
1 A \ v L. - - -• - -
The effect ofhydrocarbon persistence1. Haz. Waste Haz .
Microbia l breakdownBakt. Hyg. I. Abt:
o 1^— 1co 1CM I«T"* BO 1
1
I1
( e )
. . . . ...~ , ^. ,^ , .^ i ,L/au* , u . n. snaDad, and I . S .Vosfcrov. 2 9 6 9 . Benzpyrene breakdown by the soilmicrof lora . Byulleten Ekxper imenta l ' noi Biologii iMedits iny . , 6 8 : 7 0 . As cited in Sims and Overcash 1 9 8 3 .Fate of polynuclear aromatic compounds (PNAs ) insoi l-plant systems. Residue Reviews, 88 : 1 -68 .
Shi l ina, A . I . , L . V . Vaneeva a n d A .V . Zhurav leva , 1 9 8 0 .Benzo (a )pyrene pers i setnce in the soil when it isintroduced with soil dust part ic les . M i g r . Zagryas . VeshPoch. Supred . Sredaleh, Tr . Vses , Sove s . , 2nd Bobvnikova,Malakhovs , eds . p p . 100 - 105 C A 9 5 : 1 9 8 7 6 5 .
9 7 7 6 A
i rr icrobio log ica l community in the soil to the presence of PAHsmay be necessary for rapid degradat ion . I£ true, the PAHs inCarver Terrace and Kennedy Sand and Grave l surface soi ls , whichhave contained PAHs for many years , may degrade fas ter than therates assumed in this risk assessment .
i
iii
COCMvO
g
F-3
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
IIIII APPENDIX 2-G
ESTIMATION OF INHALATION RISKS OF UTILITY WORKERS FROMVOLATILIZATION OF POTENTIALLY CARCINOGENIC PAH FROM
SUBSURFACE SOILSCM•T-
00CMs--O
II
I
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
IIIIII APPENDIX G(Fiuidized Bed Treatment Results)
II
CO
o
I
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
STATISTICAL SUMMARYFLUIDIZED BED RECYCLE CHAMBER DATA
ParameterspH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSvssFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)Acid Usage (mis)0. O. UptakeMicroscopic Observ,
#OBVS
232320
000
230
180O1
MEAN7 . 2 2
2 1 . 6 71 . 29
. 0000. 0000.00008 . 4 1
.0000. 72
. 0000.0000
95% CISFD LOWER UPPER GMEAN GSTD
.341 .72
.20.0000.0000.0000
. 92.0000
.65.0000.0000
7 .0720.93
1 . 1 9.0000.0000.00008 .0 1
. 0000. 40
.0000.0000
7 .3722.421 . 3 8.0000.0000.00008 . 8 0
. 00001 . 0 4
.0000.0000
7.2121 .601 . 2 7
.00
.00
.008.36
.001 . 0 0
.00
.00
1 .051 .091 . 1 6
.0000.0000,00001.11. 00001 . 4 0
.0000
.0000
6 .8017 .00
92.0000.0000.00007. 10
.0000.00
.0000.0000
MAX8 . 0 0
24 .002 .00.0000.0000.00001 1 . 0 0. 00002 . 0 0
.0000. 0000
90% LTVALUE
7 . P S
.0000
.0000.00003 .5Z
.00001 . 5 3
. 0000
. O C O O
0 1 2 8 1 4
KOPPFRS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
STATISTICAL SUMMARYFLUIDIZED BED EFFLUENT DATA
* OFParameters OBVSPH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal PO4-HachNH3-N CheraetricsTSSvssFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBOD(5)-TotalBODC 5) -SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolublQOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH { ug/L)MetalsPhenoZics (SPA 604)
2302323222222
565555555511500
MEAN7 . 2 0
. 00003 . 5 21 . 9 44 . 6 83 . 4 11 . 2 7
.007 . 3 53 . 3 11 . 7 2
1 3 . 201 0 .40
7 . 3 21 5 4 . 2 01 2 9 . 4 0
2 4 . 8 01 . 0 0.0 1
. 0000.0000.0000
STD.24
.0000.98
1 . 0 62 . 4 61 . 7 41 . 2 0
.008 . 3 33 . 3 91 .6 16 .6 1
. 8 92 . 9 5
18 . 3 1' . 0 . 9 21 2 . 3 6
. 00
.00.0000.0000.0000
95%LOWER
7 . 0 9.0000
3 . 0 91 . 4 83 . 5 92 . 6 4
. 7 4. 0 0
- 1 .40- . 90- . 284 . 9 99 . 2 93 . 6 6
1 3 1 . 4 71 1 5 . 8 4
9 . 4 61 . 0 0. 0 1
.0000.0000.0000
CIUPPER
7 . 3 0. 0000
3 . 9 42 . 4 05 . 7 74 . 1 81 . 3 1
.001 6 . 0 9
7 . 5 23 . 7 2
2 1 . 4 11 1 . 5 11 0 . 9 8
1 7 6 . 9 31 4 2 . 9 6
4 0 . 1 41 . 0 0.0 1
.0000.0000.0000
GMEAN7 . 1 9
.003 . 3 91 . 683 . 9 72 . 9 61 . 4 7521
1210
61531292111
.0 1
. 1 7
.26
. 36
. 24
. 3 7
.96
.27
.05
.05.00.0 1.00,00. 0 0
GSTD1 . 0 3
.00001 . 3 21 . 7 41 . 8 91 . 7 81 . 4 91 . 0 02 . 2 72 . 5 81 . 9 81 . 4 91 . 0 81 . 3 91 . 1 31 . 0 82 . 0 8
. 00.00
1 . 0000.0000.0000
MIN6 . 8 0
,00002 . 0 01 . 0 01 . 0 01 .00
.00
.002 . 1 91 . 0 01 . 0 0
1 0 .001 0 . 0 0
6 . 0 01 2 5 . 0 01 19 .00
6 . 0 01 . 0 0.0 1
.0000.0000.0000
MAX7 . 7 0
.00005 . 6 03 .60
1 0 .007 . 0 04 . 0 0
.0024 .20
9 . 0 04 . 6 0
2 5 . 0 012 .0012 .60
172 .00148 .00
39 .001 . 0 0. 0 1
. 0000.0000.0000
90% LTVALUE
7 . 5 0.0000
4 . 8 03 . 3 78 . 8 76 . 1 32 . 4 2.0 1
1 4 . 5 27 . 4 73 . 2 1
20 .301 1 . 491 0 . 5 7
1 7 9 . 4 41 4 2 . 9 7
5 3 . 0 9. 0 0.00
1 .0000.0000.0000
All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.
0 1 2 8 1 5
t ( * • • ( UNI - i (N'MM i i r i n , U- 1 f i l ( U UL- i iCa lr ! MJ m /f- t > F J T V
F R R
F ' f l H ( r lMPn! . »Wl > ( nq/ i
hvl{"» f n t i f -d iF- I nor f^ntf 'h< *n < * f li hfinf.hr a-' fi-nt-*t- 1 nor <-u it hf- int'f 'yp f?rtra
f'F'n.'o < -•( J an* bir < i t . r?( ,hr v* ; * f '(7)
Hr^n. t-. '. t - i ) pvr ^-niF'-'! (RI u"'') ( b > f i f.trir . - - » ( t ff.-it?ru't) '-I > f ( uor iJr:t.) » t hf?i't.' t ,nf i / Anthr ,• *f i f - n •- • i i | , h , J J por •/i i td '- >n ; it f .' '. T d > P'/1 t l ( f 4 l . Ufc ( t i
f ar bt-sro I1 *"*f i .« i ' ( i t f t . - 1 J f-Ti
but L t h i f i (•at '.^S f;
i .'( X t
u. S< su
J / "? . ( - > /S/ KVO4/B7 t ' .VOB
< i. t'l'^O' > . O.' ' . ( . »0. OSO
I . '/ 1 2 / B 7
00f H
0 1 2 8 1 6
KQPPERS COMPANY, INC.TRXARKANA, TX TREATABILITT STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFLUID!ZED BED RECYCLE CHAMBER DATA
SAMPLING DATE20-Nov-87 21~Nov-87 22-Nov-87 23-Nov-87 24-Nov-87 25-Nov-87 26-Nov-
7 . 622
1 . 2 9
8 . 4
7 . 817
1 . 3
11
pH (units)Temperature (Beg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSvssFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)Acid Usage (nils)D. 0. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit.
7 . 717
1 . 3
10 .6
7 . 919
1 . 2 8
9 .4
822
1 . 2 9
8 . 9
723
1 . 2 9
8 . 92*
7 . 2 524
1 . 2 4
7 . 11
0 1 2 8 1 7
KOPPERS COKPAJfif, INC.TEX/RKANA, TX TREATABILITT STtTC>Y
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFLUIDIZED BED RECYCLE CHAMBER DATA
SAMPLING DATE27-Wov-87 28-Nov-87 29-Nov-87 30-Mov-87 Ol-Dec-87 02-Dec-87
7. 322
1 . 3 57 . 0 5
220 . 9 8
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/nvin)TSSvssFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)Acid Usage (mis)D. O. ap-takeMicroscopic Observ,All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Mote: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit.
7 . 1 522
1 . 2 97
222
6 .9523
1 . 36 . 8
221 . 1 4
221 . 1 8
8 . 22*
8 . 3 51
_
8 . 51*
7 . 91
_
7 . 80*
8. 151*
8 . 31*
01 28 1
pH (units)Temperature (Peg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)Acid Usage (mis)0. 0. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.
6 . 922
8 . 2 5t*
KOPPERS C0HPAPTT. INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STITOY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFLUIDIZED BED RECYCLE CHAMBER DATA
SAMPLING DATE05-Dec-87 06-Dec-87 07-Dec-87 08-Dec-87 09-Dec-87
6 . 922
1 . 2 9
8 .05
All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit.
6 . 9 522
7 . 222
1 . 2 97 . 1
221 . 3 2
7 . 223
1 . 3 57 . 1
23
8 . 1I*
8 .250*
8 . 10*
7 . 20*
7 . 70
_
0 1 2 8 1 9
pH (units)Temperature (Deg C)Flowrate (mls/min)TSSVSSFSSDissolved OxygenCaustic Usage (mis)Acid Usage (mis)D. O. UptakeMicroscopic Observ.
KOPPERS COMPANY, IMG.TEXARKANA, XX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFLUIDIZED BED RECYCLE CHAMBER DATA
SAMPLING DATEU-Dec-87 12-Dec-87
7 . 1 522
0 . 9 2
7 . 90 . 5*
7 , 22 1 . 51 . 32
7 . 80 . 5*
All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* Indicates that the test was performed.Note: Flowrate indicates influent flow to unit
0 1 2 8 2 0
ROPPERS COMPANY, IMC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFLUIDIZED BED EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATEiO-Nov-87 Xl-Nov-87 12-Nov-87 13-Nov-87 14-Nov-87 16-Nov-f
2 4 . 2
pH (units)Phenols-Chemetr *csTotal PQ4-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOG3OD(5)-TotalBOD{5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GraasoTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)All values are in rag/L unless otherwise noted* See data in appendix.
0 1 2 8 2 1
17-Nov-87 .lS-Nov-87(units)
Phenols-ChemetricsTotal PO4-HachNH3-K CheraetricsTSSvssFSSPhenols (4-AAF)TOOBOD(5)-TotalBOD(5)-SolubleCOD-TotaiCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)TotalTotal Det, PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenolics (EPA 604)
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TT TREATABELITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFLUIDIZED BED EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE•Nov-87 20-Nov-87
7 . 422-Nov-87 23-Nov-i
7 . 4
All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted* See data in appendix.
0 1 2 8 2 2
7 . 6
0
7 . 7 7 . 1pH (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal P04-HaeUNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOCBQD(5)-TotalBOD(5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDF3TDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenollcs (EPA 604 )All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATASILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFLUIDIZED BED EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATE24-Nov-87 25-Nov-87 26-Nov-87 27-Nov-87 28-Nov-87 29-Nov-87 30~Nov-(
7 . 2 5 7 . 1 6 . 8 5 7 . 12 . 73 . 2
642
2 . 73 . 2
651
2 . 72 . 4
431
43 . 6
761
4 . 32 . 4_—
3 . 83 . 2
6&.Tt
2
6 . 94 . 31 . 6
963
<0 .0054 . 5 8
91
2512<6
172148
24<1
<0 .0 10**
0 1 2 8 2 3
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABIHTY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFLUID!ZED BED EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATEGt-Dec-87 G2-Dec-87 Q3-Dec-87 Q4-Dec-87 Q5-Dec-87 Q6-Dec-87 07-Dec-
7 . 22 . 8
1 . 2 510
73
73 . 3<1
220
pK (units)Phenols-ChemetricsTotal PO4-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBOD(5)-TotalBOD{5)-SolubleCOD-TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH(ug/L)MetalsPhenollcs (EPA 604)All values are in mg/L unless otherwise noted.* See data in appendix.
6 . 82 . 8
30422
0 . 0 0 55 . 3 2
<6150127
23
0
6. 7 . 45 . 6<1110
0 1 2 8 2 4
pH (units)Phenol s-ChemetricsTotal P04-HachNH3-N ChemetricsTSSVSSFSSPhenols (4-AAP)TOGBOD(5)-TotalBOD( 5) -SolubleCOD -TotalCOD-SolubleOil & GreaseTDSTDFSTDVSPCP (ug/L)Total CyanideTotal Det. PAH ( ug/L)MetalsPhenol ics (EPA 604)
KOPPERS COKPANY, TNC.TEXARKANA, TX TREATABILITY STUDY
WEEKLY DATA SHEETSFLUID!ZED REP EFFLUENT DATA
SAMPLING DATEQ8-D©c-87 09~Dec-87 10-De c -87 l l-Dec-87 12-Dec-87
7 . 3 54 . 3<1
220
< 0 . 0 0 53 . 3 13 . 8 5
4 . 6
<6166127
39
0
7 . 45< 1
220
7 . 34 . 5<11I0
7 . 24 . 3< 1
862
7 . 25<1330
0 .0054 . 4 7
1 . 7
1 2 . 6158126
32
0
All values are in mgr/L unless otherwise noted,* See data in appendix .
IST ID
B^BORATORY NAME; SPECTRIXLAB SAMPLE ID N O . : S71200403
MPLE MATR IX : WATER t \TA RELEASE AUTHORIZED BY: M
DC ft -— SSAMPLE NUMBER: FLUID12ED BED EFF,
ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET <PAGE 1)CASE NO. : —QC REPORT NO. : —CONTRACT N O . . 12-01-37DATE SAMPLE RECEIVED:
03VOLATILES
NCENTRATI3N: LOWANALYZED: 12/06/87 DATAFILE: 5U12004V03
DILUTION FACTOR: 1. 00
llII
I
CAS # COMPOUND UC/LC010C 0 1 5C020C025C030C035C04OC045C050C055C060C065C i lOC 1 1 5C120C125C130C140C170C 13OC133C160C165C145C 173C 1QOC205C210C220C225C230C233C240C243C250
CHLOROMETHANEBROMQMETHANEVINYL CHLORIDECHLOROETHANEMETHYLENE CHLORIDEACETONECARBON DISULFIDEl. 1-DICHLQRQETHENE1. 1-DICHLOROETHANETRANS-1 , 2-DICHLOROETHENECHLOROFORM1- 2-D I CHLOROETHANE2-BUTANQNE1, 1, 1-TRICHLOROETHANECARBON TETRACHLORIDEVINYL ACETATEQROMODICHLOROMETHANEi , 2-DICHLOROPROPANECIS- l i3-DlCHLQRQPROPENE(Z)TRICHLCROETHENEDIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE1 , 1 , 2-TRICHLOROETHANEBENZENETRANS-1, 3-DlCHLQRQPRQPENE(E)2-CHLORQETHYLV I NYLETHERBROMQFORM4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE2-WEXANONETETR»XCHLOROETHENE1 , 1 . 2 * 2-TETRACHLOROETHAN£TOLUENECHLOROBENZENEETHYLBENZENESTYRENETOTAL XYLENES
10 U10 U10 U10 U
5 . . . . . . . . S10 U
3 U5 U5 U3 U5 U5 U
10 U3 U5 U
10 U3 U3 U3 U3 U3 U3 U3 U5 U
10 U3 U
10 U10 U3 U3 U3 U3 U3 U3 U3 U
«*-— w
CMCOCVJV"o
l« UNDETECTED AT THE LISTED DETECTION LIMITLJ » COMPOUND IS PRESENT, BUT BELOW THE LISTED DETECTION LIMIT
••IINST ID:
DC # ——SAMPLE NUMBER; FLUIDIZED BED £~F
LABORATORY NAME«AS SAMPLE ID NOAMPLE MATR IX :ATA RELEASE AUTHORIZED
CRGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSP2CTRIX
3712C04C3
ICONCENTRATION : LOW /
IATE EXTRACTED: . . /V*ATE ANALYZED: 1 2/ 14/97
CASE NO. : ——OC REPORT NO. —-CONTRACT NO : ~—DATE SAMPLE RECEIVED.
SEMIVOLATILE3DATAFILE; 9U12004C03DILUTION FACTOR: . . . .
'*/'/*.?.
1r•ii••a••
C3 15C325C330C335C340C345C350C355C36QC36SC370C375C410C4 15C420C425C430C435C440C445C45OC455C4AOC463C470C310C3 i3C520C523C330C535CS40C343C5SOC555CS60C5A3C370C373
COMPOUND
PHENOL3 I S < 2-CHLCROETHYL ) ETHER2-CHLOROPHENQLi , 3-D ICHLOROBENZENEI . 4-DICHLOROBENZENE3ENZYL ALCOHOL1 ,2-DlCHLQRQBENZENE2-METHYLPHENOL3IS (2-CHLOROISQP 3OPYL)ETHER4-METHYLPHENOLN-NITROSODIPROPYLAMINEHEXArHLDROETHANENITROBENZENEISQPHORONE2-NITROPHENOL2» 4*DIMETHYLPHENOLBEN20IC ACIDB IS (2-CHLOROETHQXY) METHANE2. 4-DICHLOROPHENQL\. 2, 4-TRICHLQROBENZENENAPHTHALENE4-CHLORQANILINEHEXACHLOROSUTADIENEP-CHLORO-M-CRESOL2-METHYLNAPHTHALENEHEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE2- 4, A-TRICHLOROPHENQL2. 4, 5-TRrCHLQROPHENOL2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE2-NITROANILINEDIMETHYL PHTHALATEACENAPHTHYLENE3-NITROANILINEACENAPHTHENE2« 4-DINITROPHENOL4-NITROPHENOLDIBENZOFURAN2. 4-DINITROTOLUENE2. 6-DINITROTOLUENE
DETECTION AMOUNT ^L IMIT FOUND ,-.,
<M ICROGRAMS / L ITER) tM
20 U CM20 U ^>-20 U 020 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U
100 U20 U20 U20 U2O U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U
100 U20 U
100 U20 U20 U
100 U20 U
100 U100 U
20 U20 U20 U
^^^H
I
ISEMIVGLATILE QRCANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET, CONTINUED
JDATAFILE: 9U120Q4C03
SPECTRIX DC # »—— 8 "
SAMPLE NUMBER; FLUIDIZED BED
•
111111I1i
C580C535C590C595C 6 1 0C& iSC625C630C&35C&40C645C650C655C 7 1 5C720C725C730C735C740C760C765C770C775C780C785C790
COMPOUND
DIETHYL PHTHALATE4-CHLOROPHENYL PHENYL ETHERPLUORENE4-NITROANILINE4, 6-DINITRO-2-METHYLPHENOLN-NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE4-BROMOPH£NYL PHENYL ETHERHEXACHLOROBENZENEPENTACHLOROPHENOLPHENANTHRENEANTHRACENEDI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATEFLUOR ANTHENE
PYRENEBUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE3. 3'-DICHLOROBENZIDINEBENZO ( A ) ANTHRACENEB I S ( 2-ETHYLHEXYL ) PHTHALATECHRYSENEDI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATEBENZO < B > FLUOR ANTHENEBENZO < K ) TLUORANTHENEBENZO<A)PYRENEJNDENOd, 2. 3-CD)PYRENED!BENZQ<A , H)ANTHRACENEBENZO<GHI )PERYLENE
DETECTION AMOUNTLIMIT FOUND
(MICROGRAMS / LITER)
20 U20 U20 U
100 U100 U20 u20 U20 U
100 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U40 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U20 U
00CM00CM^_o
UNDETECTED AT THE LISTED DETECTION LIMITCOMPOUND IS PRESENT, BUT BELOW THE LISTED DETECTION LIMIT
IIIST ID: 31EF
MORATORY NAME:QC REPORT NO. : -IIIl
SPECTRIX DC ft —— a
SAMPLE NUMBER: FLUIDIZED BED EFF.
OROANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET - PAGE 4SPECTRIX HOUSTON CASE NO. : —
ANALYST: RCJ DATAFILE: SU12004V03B. TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS
S * VOLATILE COMPOUND NAMES SCAN* PURITY AMOUNT
NO NON-HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > 10X OF NEAREST INT. STD.
llii
* ESTIMATED VALUE - A 1:1 RESPONSE FACTOR IS ASSUMED
CM""00
O
SPECTRIX DC # ——
I SAMPLE: FLUIDIZE& B&O
ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET - PAGE 5ABORATORY NAME: SPECTRIX CORPORATION
me REPORT NO. : —— ANALYST. CEB
B. TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS
CASE NO. : »»-DATAFIL£: 9U12004C03
1rfCAS # SEMIVQLAT1LE COMPOUND NAMES PURITY AMOUNT
IIlI
UG/
NO NQN-HSL COMPOUNDS POUND > 10X OF NEAREST INT. STD.o
ESTIMATED VALUE - A 1:1 RESPONSE FACTOR IS ASSUMED
II
m^m
IIIIII
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.TEXARKANA,TX TREATABILFIY STUDYFLUIBIZED BED METALS DATA
AntimonyArsenicBerylliumCadmiumChromiumCopperLeadMercuryNickelSeleniumSilverThalliumZinc
Bed
<6Q.O<10.0<5.00
9.10<10.0<25.0<5.00< 0.200
<40.0<5.00
<10.0<10.0125
00CM•<r~O
f^mIIIIIII
APPENDIX 2-GESTIMATION OF INHALATION RISKS OF UTILITY WORKERS FROM
VOLATILIZATION OF POTENTIALLY CARCINOGENIC PAH FROMSUBSURFACE SOILS
Risks associated with air concentrations of potential lycarcinogenic PAH are derived in this appendix. The airconcentrations are based upon the maximum measuredconcentration of detected carcinogenic PAH in Carver Terracesubsurface soils. The calculated air concentrations onlyconsider volatil ization and do not account for dispersion.Utlit ifcy worker exposures were estimated based on theassumptions detailed in Table 2-4.
Computation, of Potentially Carcinogenic PAH .ConcentrationsIn Air Above ^oil and Risks ^As.so_ci_ated _with .Those. A compoundin soil may be partitioned between the soil water , soil air andthe soil constituents. The three main transport processes fora compound in soil to enter the atmosphere are :
• compound in soil to compound in solution• compound in solution to compound in vapor phase in
soil air• compound in vapor phase in soil air to compound in
atmosphere (Lyman et a l . 1 9 8 2 ) .
A compound may adhere strongly to dry soil, reducing itsvolati l ization rate/ but when soil is wetted the strongeraffinity of the water displaces the compound allowingvolati l ization to occur at a faster rate . However, if theconcentration of a compound in soil becomes high enough so thatits chemical activity approaches that of a pure compound, thepresence or absence of water will not affect its volat i l izat ion(Lyman et al. 1 9 8 2 ) . A pure compound can volat i l ize directlyinto a vapor . This calculation assumes that no pure compoundex i s t s .
CMK\00CM*"-O
G-l
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
i The partit ioning of the compound between soil and water isdetermined by the part it ion coeffic ient/ Koc and fract ion 06organic carbon/ f , as shown by the fol lowing equat ion
W \*r
(Mills et al . 1 9 8 5 ) :
iiiiiiii
(l) c o_n c e n t rat i_o n__ i.n _s Q i 1concentrat ion in soil water
K foc oc
The partitioning of the compound between soil water and soilair is determined by Henry's Constant, K.., as shown by theHfol lowing equation (Mills e t a l . 1 9 8 5 ) :
(2) concentration in soil airconcentration in soil water
4 1 . 6 K(atm~m /mole) ,at 20°C
The concentrat ion of a compound in soil air can thus becalculated for a given concentration of the compound in soil bycombining equations 1 and 2.
(3) c o_nc_e n_t r.aJb i_o n _.in_ sol 1.., a i.rconcentration in soil K foc oc
Table G-l shows the concentrat ion in the soi l aircalculated from the maximum concentrat ions of detectedpotentially carcinogenic PAHs in Carver Terrace subsurfacesoi ls . The concentrations of potentially carcinogenic PAH inthe soil air surrounding the soil containing the PAH are verylow (Table G- l ) . Summing the concentrat ion of each individualPAH results in a total potentially carcinogenic PAHconcentration of 1 . 3 9 x. 10~ b (mg/m ). The concentration ofpotentially carcinogenic PAH in the atmoshpere above the soilcannot exceed this concentrat ion . Assuming that a util ityworker breathes 16 cubic meters of soil air per day, that he orshe is on site for 10 days per year and one year per lifetime,
COOJ•r-O
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
IIi
that the util ity worker weighs 70 ki lograms, and that allpotential ly carcinogenic PAH are as potent as benzo (a )pyrene ,
_Qhis or her excess lifetime cancer risk is 1 .43 x 10True risks will likely be orders of magnitude lower
because true air concentrat ions will be orders of magnitudelower. Some of the mechanisms that have not been accounted forin this analysis and that would result in lower atmospher icconcentrations are listed below.
1. The soil containing the PAHs may be dry par t of thetime, causing a decrease in the rate ofvolat i l izat ion. If there is no soil water , the PAHscannot dissolve and then volat i l ize into the a i r .
2. A cycling rate of the air above the soil will dilutethe atmospheric concentrat ion because fresh a i r , airnot containing PAHs from the site, will continual lybe introduced into the area above the s i te .
COCMv-O
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0 G-3
Table G-1
CALCULATION Of POTENTIALLY CARCINOGENIC PAH IN AIR DUE TO VOLATILIZATION
Shown are the conentratioos of PCQCs in soft vapor. Concentrations were cot cut a ted only torpotentially carcinogenic PAH detected in Carver Terrace subsurface soils. The air
concentrations are based on the maximum concentrations detected.
MAXIMUM SOILCONCENTRATION 1C FG
PCOC <ppb> °° (£?S==a==Sa=SB=SIXXa£=XXaSS=S
8enzo(a)anthraceneBenzoC a >pyrene0enzo(a)f tuorantheneChrysen*
saa=3*a»=a==»«iE*9.506*024.70E*028.30E*02t. 006*05
B39XaSC«»»S3
2,00£*055.50E*04S.50E+032.00E*05
A:R AIR(C X41 .6 CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATIONCa) (ppb) Cmg/m )Cb>
SBBBEEaEESBSE:
4.166-052.94E-05S.62e-044.37E-05
:Bsasa==a=aisa:aas2.00E-05t .70E-07«.50E-052.20E-05
=aa=3==a=aaa3
I.WE -071 .70E-09B.5GE-073.50E-07
Total Potentially Care. PAH t.J9E-06Clt.& (a> taken from: Mabey, W.» , J .K. Smith, R .T . Podotl, H . L . Johnson, T. M i l l , T.U. Chow,J. Gates, !.u. Pfiptridge, H. Juber, and D. Vandenberg. 1982. Aquatic F&te ProcessData for Organic Priority Pollutants. 6PA Rept. No. 44/4-3T-OU.
Cb) Conversion factors were taken from: Verschueren, K. 1983. Handbook of EnvirorxnencatData on Organic Chemicals (second edition). Van Horstrand Refrtfiolcf Co-, Mew Iforfc,
0 1 2 8 3 5
IIIIIIIIII
vOf^\COCM*—o
APPENDIX 4-A
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORT
I
2069T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
SOIL WASHING RESULTSADDENDUMTREATABILI1Y STUDY REPORT
KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.
Prepared for:KOPPERS COMPANY, INC
PREVIOUSLY OPERATED PROPERTYTEXARKANA, TEXAS
Prepared by:KEYSTONE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES, INC.440 COLLEGE PARK DRIVE
MONROEVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA 15146
PROJECT 157673-08
MARCH 1988
••••
ITABLE OF CONTENTSiiiiiiiiiiii
PageLIST OF TABLES1.02.0
3.02.1 Ex Situ Soil Treatment (Soil Washing) ................................................................2-1PROCEDURES .................................................................................................................J-l3.1 Soil Sampling.................3.2 Laboratory Procedures.
4.0 RESULTS
.3-1.3-2.4-1
4.1 Phase I and Phase II ..«.........M.............«..........«........................«.....................«....4-14.2 Phase IIL,........................,.....,.........,...,.........,..,..,.........................«,....,.....,.,.....445.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS............................................................,.,.................5-1REFERENCES
00roCOCM«r-O
a
I11111111111111
LIST OF TABLES
4-1 Soil Washing Phase II Results -Screening Run .............. ........................................................t/
4-2 Soil Washing Phase III Results -Soil Sample T-TX-8 ........................................................4-3 Soil Washing Phase III Results -Soil Sample T-TX-9 ........................................................4-4 Soil Washing Phase III Results -Soil Sample T-TX40...........................................................4-5 Soil Washing Phase III Results -Soil Sample T-TX-li... ........................................................4-6 Soil Washing Phase III Results -Soil Sample T-TX-12...........................................................
Page
.............................. 4-la
4-lb
4-1r
............................. 4-1 d
.............................. 4-2a
4-^b o
IIIIIIII
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The following report presents the results from the treatability evaluation for soilwashing for samples collected at the Koppers Company, Inc. Previously OperatedProperties in Texarkana, Texas, This report is an addendum to the"TREATABILITY STUDY REPORT1, issued in February, 1988.
Included in this report is a background section describing the basics of soil washing,followed by the procedures and the results from the laboratory testing performed.Keystone's standard operating procedures for soil washing were followed throughoutthe testing. o
^rooCVJ«r-O
IIII
I
IIIIII
2-0 BACKGROUND
2.1 Ex Situ Soil Washing
Ex situ soil washing refers to the excavation of contaminated soils and the subsequentmechanical washing of the soils in a slurry type reactor. The soil contaminants aretransferred into the liquid phase. The soil reduced in contaminants is placed backen-site with the washwater containing the contaminants treated.
Ex situ soil washing involves the removal of contaminants from the soil substrate,using a mechanical washing technique. It is a physical separation procedure forcontaminant removal from soil that involves the washing of the soil into a liquidmedium. The process is carried out in equipment that is designed for contactingexcavated soils with the liquid. Removal of contaminants from the soil matrixinvolves both physical displacement of loosely held contaminants and desorption ofthe contaminants that are more tightly bound to the soil particles.
The separation of contaminants from soil particles depends on the relative wetabiliryof the particle surfaces. The surface free energy of a particle is lowered by theaddition of surface active agents, i. e. surfactants. This creates a hydrophobic surfaceon the soil particles and therefore separates the soil from the contaminant particles.The surfactant/water solution is then physically separated from the washing solution.The cleaned soil particles are dewatered and returned to the site.
The soil washing evaluation results can be used for more than one purpose. Soilwashing can be used at the site for ex situ washing , following excavation of thecontaminated soil, or the surfactants can be applied to in situ treatment of thecontaminated soils.
COCMv™O
2 - 1
IIIIIIIIII
3.0 PROCEDURES
3.1 Soil-Sampling
Both shallow and deep samples were collected for use in the treatability work.Shallow samples were collected with the use of a shovel. Deep soil samples (7-8 fee*)were collected with the use of a backhoe. A 55 gallon drum and 5 gallon pails wereused for sample collection and transport.
A local contractor was hired to dig the deep sample with a backhoe. The deepsample was obtain at the 7-8 feet level, within the saturated soil zone.
Shallow soil samples were collected by Keystone field services personnel. A cleanedshovel was used. These samples was placed in 5 gallon pails for transport. Theshallow samples were used in the ex situ (soil washing) treatability work. Deepsamples were used for the in situ (bioreclamation) treatability work.
Upon arrival at the research center in Monroeville, the sample codes were specifiedfor each of the sample containers. The codes and corresponding descriptions arelisted below.
CM^rcoCM^—O
Sample DescriptionDeep sample adjacentto church (55 gallon drum)Surface soil near DW-01(5 gallon pail)Surface soil under creosotecontaminated area (5 gallon pail)Surface soil from creosotecontaminated area (5 gallon pail)Surface soil, from heavy naphthalenecontamination area (5 gallon pail)
Sample CodeT-TX-8
T-TX-9
T-TX40
T-TX-11
T-TX-12
3 - 1
3.2 Laboratory Procedures
The procedure for determining the applicability of soil washing treatment wasconducted in 3 phases.
Phase I involved the washing of several soil samples with different surfactants andvisually evaluating the soils and wash solutions. Following each wash, the soil wasemersed in methylene chloride solution. The addition of creosote compoundsdarken the methylene chloride solution in relation to the concentration. From thisobservation the choice of surfactants is narrowed down.
Phase II work involved washing the soil with the best visually observed surfactant orcombination of surfactants. Generally, oil & grease (freon extractables) andmethylene chloride extractables analysis were performed on these samples.
These two methods of analysis have been chosen because they indicate gross removalof contaminants. Oil & grease analysis was performed because it is an EPA acceptedmethod. Methylene chloride analysis was performed due to its greater affinity forcreosote compounds making it a better choice.
Phase III work involved the evaluation of the results obtained in Phase II andchoosing the best surfactant(s). A final washing is then conducted and the sample issubmitted for more extensive chemical analysis.
A total of five soils were washed to determine the most effective surfactant orcombination of surfactants for each different soil type collected. A two wash cyclewas selected for soils from this site. A greater number of wash cycles can beperformed on a particular soil depending on the cleanup criteria.
The soil samples were screened with a 74 inch mesh prior to soil washing to removelarge pieces of foreign matter, i.e. pieces of wood, large cinders,and rocks.
The following procedure was followed for all five runs:
1. Ail raw samples are premixed.
00CM
O
1 - 2
IIIII1IIIIIII
2. Impeller speed is set at 900 rpm.
3. 1000 grams of hot tap water within the temperature range of 45-50^C isadded to the soil wash unit.
4. pH of .solution adjusted to 10 with 20% (by weight) NaOHL
5. Surfactant added.
6. 500 gm raw soil in the soil wash unit.
1, Air is applied at a very low flow rate.
8. Soil is washed for 15 minutes while maintaining pH=10.
9. Wash procedure is repeated using 50% of initial surfactant dosage. Water isadded, the pH adjusted and surfactant added and washed another 15 minutes.
10. In the final step, the washed soil is rinsed one or more times with warm water,the impeller speed maintained at 900 rpm and the air flow rate set on high.
00CM
O
3 - 3
I40 RESULTS
iiiii
4.1 Phase! and Phase II
Two separate screening runs were performed on each of the soils, using differentsurfactant combinations that were visually chosen in Phase I (described above). Twosurfactant combinations (#1 and #2) were evaluated based on Phase I results. Oil &grease (freon extractables) and methylene chloride extractables analysis were used toevaluate surfactants from the screening run and are presented in Table 4-1. The %removals are also included. These results were used in choosing the surfactantcombination for the final Phase I! runs.
4.2 PhascJII
The screening run for T-TX-8 indicated better removals using the surfactantcombination #2, which was chosen for the final run. As evidenced by the results inTable 4-2, for the final run, both methylene chloride extractables and oil & greaseshowed similar reductions as in the screening run. The results indicate goodremovals for other compounds. Pentachlorophenol (PCP) was reduced 87%.Toluene was reduced 97% and xylene 99%. PAH removal showed very good resultswith a total PAH removal of 85%.
inrCOC\JT**o
For soil T-TX-9, surfactant combination #2 showed better removals and was chosenfor the final run. Soil washing results from the final run for soil T-TX-9 arepresented in Table 4-3. Results from the final run show good overall removals. Oil<& grease and methylene chloride extractables were reduced 97 and 9irrespectively.Both toluene and xylene were reduced >99.9%. Total PAH compounds werereduced 60%.
The results from the final treatment run for soil T-TX-10 can be found in Table 4-4.Surfactant #1 was chosen for the final treatment run. The results showed greaterthan 90% removals for both oil & grease and methylene chloride extractabtes. PCPwas reduced 86%. Petroleum hydrocarbons, benzene, and xylene were all reduced>99.9%. PAH concentration were relatively low in the soil and thus a total PAHreduction of 35% was achieved.
4 - 1
TABLE 4-1KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.
TEXARKANA, TX TREATABIMTY SSOIL WASHING PHASE I I RESULTS
SCREENING RUN
Sample OilT-TX-8 RAWT-TX-8 #1T-TX-8 #2T-TX-9 RAWT-TX-9 #1T-TX-9 #2T-TX-10 RAWT-TX-10 #1T-TX-IO #2T-TX- I 1 RAWT-TX- 1 I 9lT-TX- l l $2T-TX-12 RAWT-TX- 12 # 1T-TX-12 #2
Wet Weigh tGrease Me
738660520
16200820967
2040240253
1 8 8 0 01 6 5 01 3 9 0
342001 5 7 03320
Chl ExtJ 4 8 0I'll393
4 2 7 0 076108 1 2 0
12700833653
5 2 7 0 09 7 4 08 1 2 0
6550050008700
Oil &Dry Weight ,
Grease8 9 18 1 8624
1 6 9 8 1981
1 1 4 62 3 2 1
2983 1 4
207052 1 0 21 7 6 2
4 3 4 5 619904 2 4 0
Me Chl Ext1 7 7 0
8584 5 3
4 4 7 5 99 1039 6 2 1
1 4 4 4 81035B I O
580401 2 4 0 81 0 2 9 283227
6337mn
% RemovalsOil & Grease Me Chl Ext
83094938786909 19590
52748079939479829287
Note; Me Chl Ext indicates Methy l ene Ch lor i d e ExtractabiesAll values in units of mg/L
0 1 2 8 4 6
TABI>E 4-2KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.
TRXARKANA, TX TREATABI I . I7Y STUDYSOIL WASHING PHASE I I I RESULTS
SOIL SAMP1.F T-TX-8(Surfactant Combinat ion #21
tH*cr
SampleParameter (mg/Kg)Oil & GreaseMethy Iene Chlor i de ExtPentachlorophenolPetroleum HydrocarbonsBenzeneTolueneXylene
PAH Compounds ( ing/Kg >NaphthaleneAcenaphthyleneAcenaphtheneFluorenePhenanthreneAnthraceneKluoranthenePyreneBenzo(a)anthraceneChryseneBenzofa}pyreneBenzof b(fluorantheneBenzof k > floorantheneD i b e n z o ( a , h I anthraceneBenzo (g rh , i )pery l eneI nd eno f 1 » 2 r3-od )pyreneTotal PAHMA - Not Appl icable
t OfRings
2333334444555566
AqueousSo lub i 1 i t y
at . 25 C, ug/L3 1 , 7 0 0
3 , 9 3 01 ,9801 , 290
73260! 351 4
23 . 8
2 . 4 9
Wet[ni tial
7 3 814803 3 . 5
300< 0 .040
\ . 5 3 09 . 9 5 0
Weigh tFinal
4 7 3733
4 . 6 01 30
0.032O . O 4 O0 . 0 9 7
Fni tial89 1
177040. I
359<0.048
1 . 8 4 81 2 . 0 1 7
Dry Weight-Final %
552855
5 . 3 71 5 2
0.0380 . 0 4 60. 1 13
Reffltov38528758MA9799
3 4 13 8 . 8
2002 6 648 1t 162 16188
4 7 . 15 0 . 22 3 . 03 8 . 41 4 . 81 1 .823. 11 2 . 51968
211 1 . !4 5 . 82 0 . 46 0 . 51 5 . 54 1 . 12 9 . 41 6 . 216. u3 . 7 56 . 9 52 . 6 37 . 3 25 . 4 34 . 1 1
308
4 1 24 6 . 9
24220058114026!227
5 6 . 96 0 . 62 7 . 84 6 . 41 7 . 91 4 . 327 .91 5 . 12376
2 4 . 51 3 . 05 3 . 423. 87 0 . 618. 14 8 . 03 4 . 31 8 . 91 9 . 3
4 . 48 . 13. J8 . 56 . 34 . 8359
94727888888?8285676884838340776885
0 1 2 8 4 7
TABLE 4-3KOPPKttS COMPANY, INC.
TKXARKANA, TX TREATABIL1TY STUDYSOU, WASHING PHASE III RESULTS
SOIL SAMPLE T-TX-9(Surfactant Combinat ion #2*
SampleParameter (rug/Kg fcOiI & GreaseMethylene Chloride ExtPentachloropheno1Petrot euro HydrocarbonsBenzeneTolueneXylene
PAH Compounds Cmg/Kg *Naphtha leneAcenapht hyi eneAoenaphtheneFJiuorenePhenamthreneAnthraceneFI uoranthenePyreneBenzor a (anthraceneChrysene0enzo( b* f luorantherceBenzo( k ) f luorantheneDi benzo(a , h JantBen 20 ( g r h , i ) pery leneIndenof 1 , 2 f 3-cd >Totai PAHNA - Not Appl i cab le
# OfRings
23333344445555e>
AqueousSolubi 1 ir.y
at 25 C, ug/L3 1 , 7 0 0
3 ,930I ,290
731351 4
23 . 8
2 . 4 S *
< 1< 158
4£9
61221397 1 110590
2 1867
227,1 52 ,1 4 5 ,
2065,
101550020000oo0060007000000007
1 8 . 2 0< 1 . 0 030.00
4 . 9 71 9 . 506 . 13
92. 107 5 . 4 06 0 . 4 078. 102 B . 7 065 .702 4 . 6 090.207 0 . 7 051 . 1O
7 1 5 . 8 0
1 4 8 1 t450630 . 2 7 8
22904\ * • -vw . li t £,0 . 0 3 30. 139
< 1 .00< t .0561 .03
4 . 3 620 .48
6 . 3 2128 . 15146 .0 17 4 6 . 8 51 1 0 . 2 995 . 17
228.9971 . H
238 .45I S9 .661 5 2 . 3 1
2 17 ) .29
4934 1 0 4
0 . 0 3 71 4 5
G .03O< 0 . 0 2 4<0 .036
2 2 . 0 0< J . 2 1:i6 . 32
6 . 0 223 .6 1
7 . 4 21 1 1 . 5091 .2873 . 129 4 . 5 53 4 . 7 57 9 . 5 42 9 . 7 8
109 .208 5 . 5 96 1 . 86
8 6 7 . 8 0
NANA4ONANANA1 337901 463655854465960
0 1 2 8 4 8
TABLE 4-4KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.
TRXARKANA, TX TRRATABffLITY STUDYSOIL WASHING PHASE I I ! RESULTS
SOU. SAMPLE T-TX-10(Surfactant Combination »2>
SampleParameterOil & GreaseMet hylene Chlor ide BxtPentachloropfaenolPetroleum HydrocarbonsBenzeneTolueneXy lene
Wet WeightIni tial
22001 1500I .440
83O0 . 0 2 70.0580. 125
Final1 13920
0. 186< 1 0 0
<0 .02O0.020
<O .O30
Initial2469
1 29071 .6 16
9320 .0300.0650 . 1 4 0
0ry WeightFinal
1 381 121
0 . 2 2 7< 1 2 2
< 0 . 0 2 40.024
< 0 . 0 3 7
X Remo949186
> 9 9 . 9>99 .9
62"> 9 9 . 9
PAH Compounds (nag/Kg *NaphthaleneAcenaphthyleneAcenaphtheneFluorenePhenanthreneAnthraceneFluoranthenePyreneBenzo(a)anthraceneChryseneBenzo(a fpyreneBenzol bJ fIuorantheneBenzo(k } t tuorantheneDibenzo(a,h^anthraceneBenzo(g fh ti^peryleneInrfeno(1 * 2 > 3-cd }pyreneTotal PAH
* OfRings
2333334444555566
AqueousSolubi J ity
at 25 C, ug/L31 ,700
-3 ,9301 ,980I ,290
732601351 4
23 . 8_-
2 .49--
3 . 8 1I NT
4 8 . 4I NT
1 .69O .S20
6 . 5 81 2 . 75 . 0 07 . 5 07 . 3 92 2 . 84 . 7 12 5 . 414. 11 6 . 7
1 7 7 . 4
2 . 8 0< 1 .00< 1 . 00
«0 .2002 .34
0 . 6 5 01 5 . 813. 17 . 3 48 . 2 65 . 8 21 5 . 64 . 4 41 1 .57 . 7 28. OS*
1 O 5 . 6 6
4_ . _54_ _ _
2I7
146
8 . 4 28 .292 5 . 65 . 2 928 .5
1 5 . 8 21 8 , 7 4
199
3 . 4 E< 1 . 22< 1 . 2 2
< 0 . 2 4 42 .85
0 . 7 9 21 9 . 21 6 . 08 . 9 4
10 .067 .091 9 . 05 . 4 11 4 . 09 . 4 09 .85
129
2098---N&NAMAMANANA1526NA5E4 14 735
Note; IMT indicates interference encountered during an&lysiQi 1
The results for soil T-TX-11 are in Table 4-5. Surfactant combination #2 was chosenfrom the screening run to be used in the final run. Oil &, grease and methylenechloride extractables were /educed 94 and 89%, respectively. PCP was reduced 82%and petroleum hydrocarbons 93%. Benzene was reduced 60% and both toluene andxylene were reduced >99.9%. Total PAH compounds were reduced 42%.
Surfactant combination #i was chosen from the screening run for soil T-TX-12, tobe used in the final treatment run. Results from the final treatment run for soil T-TX-12 can be found in Table 4-6. Results indicate that oil & grease,pentachlorophenol, petroleum hydrocarbons and xylene were all reduced >99.9%.Methylene chloride extractables were reduced 99.9%. Reduction of PAHcompounds showed excellent results with 99% reduction of total PAH compounds.
4 - 2
TABLK 4-5
CO
SampleParameter fnag/Kg)Oil & GreaseMethylene Chlor ide ExtPentachIorophenolPetroleum HydrocarbonsBenzeneTolueneXyiene
PAH Compounds (mg/Kg)Naphthalene•AcenaphthyleneAcenaphthenePhenanthreneAnthraceneFluoranthenePyreneBenzo( a )> anthraceneChryseneBenzo ( a > pyreneBenzo{ b> f 1 uorantheneBenzo(k f f luoranthenePi benzol! a, h i anthraceneBenzo ( g, h t i ) peryleneIndeno ( 1 , 2 f 3-eeiTotal PAHMA - Not App l i cab l e
KOPPERS COMfANY, INC.TKXARKANA, TX TRRATABII.ITY STUDY
SOIL WASHING PHASE I IE RESULTSSOIL SAMPLE T -TX- l l
{ Surfactant Comhi nat ion #2 )
_ _-
# OfRings
2333334444555SvJ66
---
AqueousSolubi li ty
at 25 C, ug/L3170O
393019801 2 9 073
2601 3 5
142
3 . 8
'S 4 <tb . *T Z7
WetIni t ia j
183005450030 .70
4 7 3 00 . 0 6 90 .2020 . 4 1 6
18 .0< 1 . 0 02 6 . 47 .3
2 8 . 910
2863251962 4 3
6 7 . 5169
6 5 . 9I T •7 11 12
85. 11 8 1 2
WeightFinal
92052504 .80
3000 . 0 2 5
< 0.020< 0 . 0 3 0
34. 1< I .00< 1 .000.985
3 O . 67 , 35
209198
90 .3105
30. i70 .02 7 . 64 6 . 344. 14 3 . 3
939
Initial202886042 13 4 . 0 4
52400 . 0 7 70.224O . 4 6 1
20.0< 1 . 1 1
29 .08.093 2 . 01 1 . 1
3 1 7360217269
7 4 . 8187
73. 1190124
9 4 . 32009
Dry WeightFinal X Remov1 14765465 . 9 9
3740 . 0 3 1
<0 .025< 0 . 0 3 7
42 .5< 1 . 2 5< t .251 .233 8 . 29 . 22612471 131 3 1
3 7 . 58 7 . 33 4 . 45 7 . 755 .05 4 . 0I 170
H t89829360
>99 .9> 9 9 . 9
NANA9685NA1 7183148515O53*i '**-* *)
70564 't*t v*420 1 2 8 5 1
TABLK 4-6KOP-PKRS COMPANY, INC.
TKXARKANA, TX TRKATABILITY STUDYSOU- WASHING PHASE III RESULTS
SOJ [ , SAMPLE T-TX- I2(Surfactant Combinat ion # 1 }
toCT
SampleParameter (mg/Kg)Oi I & GreaseMethylene Chloride ExtPentachlorophenojPetroleum HydrocarbonsBenzeneTolueneXyiene
PAH Compounds (ing/Kg >NaphthaleneAoenaphthyleneAcenaphtheneFluorenePhenanthreneAnthraceneFluoranthenePyreneBenzo(a >anthraceneChryseneBenzo(a }pyreneBen20(b)f iuorantheneBenzofk * fluoranthene0ibenzo(a ,h)anthraceneBen zo f g » h , i JperyleneI n d e n o ( 1 ,2 ,3- c d >pyreneTotal PAH
# OfRings
233333444455556
AqueousSo lub i 1 i ty
at 25 C,
Wet WeightInit ialion ooo1 1 2 0 0 0
0 . 0 9 44300
<0 . 2QO< 0 . 2 0 0
5 . 2 6
Final< 50 .0
1 7 3< 0 . 0 1 0
< 100<0 .020< 0 . 0 2 0< 0 . 0 3 0
In i t ia l1355701 5 0 3 3 60 . 1 2 7
5772<0 .268< G . 2 6 8
7 . 0 6 0
Dry WeightFinal< 6 3 . 0
2 1 8< 0 . 0 1 3
< 1 26<0 .025< 0 . 0 2 5< 0 . 0 3 8
% Reno> 9 9 . 9
9 9 . 9> 9 9 . 9> 99 .9
NANA
> 9 9 . 9
1 ,700-
3 , 9 3 01 ,980I ,290
732601 3 514
23 . 8_-
2 . 4 9--
197001 120
3 1 7244
13306 9 . 7
5 1 2230163165230
7 0 . 83 1 .56 3 . 45 2 , 24 5 . 4
2 4 3 4 4
1894 . 9 88 . 8 08 . 6 2
5 7 . 4 02 .8 !1 8 . 81 0 . 54 . 7 44 . 8 3
0 . 7 1 72 . 2 31 .013 . 5 62 . 6 61 .81
322
264431503
426328
17859 3 . 6
687309219221309
9 5 . 04 2 . 385. I70. 16 0 . 9
32677
2386 . 2 71 1 . I1 0 , 97 2 . 33 . 5 42 3 . 71 3 . 25 . 9 76 .08
0 , 9 0 32 . 8 11 .274 . 4 83 . 3 52 . 2 8
406
9999 .6
S797969697969797
9 9 . 7979795959699
NA - Not App l i c a b l e 0 1 2 8 5 2
IIIIIIII
5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The laboratory treatability results presented show that ex situ soil washing is effectivein reducing soil contaminant concentrations measured.
Based on a two wash cycle, soil washing of five different soils achieved the followingreductions in soil contaminant concentrations with results reported on a dry weightbasis: (i) oil & grease was reduced from an initial range of 900 - 136,000 mg/Kg to140 - 1,150 mg/Kg, (ii) methylene chloride extractables, from an initial concentrationrange of 1,770 -150,336 mg/Kg to 218 - 6,546, (iii) pentaehlorophenol, from an initialconcentration range of 0.127 - 40.1 to <0.013 - 5.99 mg/Kg, (iv) petroleumhydrocarbons, from an initial concentration range of 359 - 5,772 mg/Kg to < 122 - 374mg/Kg, (v) benzene, from an initial concentration range of 0.030 - 1.848 mg/Kg to< 0.025 - 0,046 mg/Kg, (vi) toluene, from an initial concentration range of 0.033 -1.848 to < 0.024 - 0.046 mg/Kg, (vii) xylene, from an initial concentration range of0.139 • 12.017 to <0.037 - 0.113 mg/Kg, and (viii) total PAH's, from an initialconcentration range of 199 - 32,677 mg/Kg to 129 - 1 , 170 mg/Kg.
The variations in the treated soil concentrations among the different soils tested ismainly attributable to the different physical/chemical interactions between a specificchemical and a specific soil type. These interactions account for the fact thatchemical compounds such as pentaehlorophenol measured between <0.013 to 5.99mg/Kg in treated soil while individual PAH's measured between < 0.244 - 1 1 1 mg/Kg;total PAH's in the treated soil ranged between 129 - 1,170 mg/Kg. The level ofPAH's in the treated soil is due to the fact that the particular soil type tested is suchthat PAH's are tightly bound to the treated soil and will not solubilize into solution.Pentaehlorophenol on the other hand, is not as tightly bound to the soil as PAH's are.
The absorptive capacity of a soil for PAH's has been investigated and shown to behighly correlated with the organic carbon content of the soil. The ability of the soilto tightly bind hydrophobic contaminants can hinder the complete removal of thesecompounds. The relationship between organic matter in soils and the organic carboncontent of the soil can be estimated. Likewise, an estimation of the amount of thesecompounds that will not readily be released from the soil matrix, can be determined.It is recommended that prior to further treatment, the organic carbon content and
in0000r-O
5 - 1
MMI
IIIIIIIIIIIIII
clay content of the soil should be investigated and an estimation of the absorbedcarbon be determined.
The fact that PAH's are so tightly bound to the treated soil infers that incineration,some type of solvent washing, or thermal desorption may be needed if furtherreductions in soil PAH's are needed. In lieu of incineration, it may also be possibleto support higher levels through a risk based approach which draws upon the factthat PAH,s are very tightly bound to the soil. It is also possible that lower soil PAHconcentrations could be achieved with more wash cycles.
mODCM«c-O
5 - 2
IIIIIIIIIII
1.REEEREKCES
Fu J. K. "Aromatic Compound Solubility and SorptionSolvent/Water Muctures/PhD DtertaSon,
oo
o
IIIIIIIIIIIIII
vDinCDCM
OAPPENDIX 6-A
COSTING TABLES ASSOCIATED WITH THE UNSATURATEDSOIL RESPONSE MEDIA UNIT ALTERNATIVES
3069T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
IIIIIIII
APPENDIX 6-A
UNSATURATED SOIL, ALTERNATIVE COSTING TABLES
This appendix presents pert inent informat ion associatedwith the detai led eva luat ion of the unsaturated soila l ternat ives (Sect ion 6 . 0 ) . for the purposes of the detai ledcost est imate for Alternat ives SL-1/ SL-2, SL-3, and SL-4, i thas been assumed that the areas to be sampled and/or possiblyremediated are those that had been previously sodded aa shownon Figure 1, This assumption was used solely for costest imat ing purposes . Actual areas to be sampled and/orremediated will be determined in the Record of Dec i s i on .
Included in this appendix are the present worth tables forthe basel ine cost evaluat ion; the capital and present worthcosts for the low cost evaluat ion; and the capital and presentworth costs for the high cost evaluat ion. Also included inthis appendix is a l ist ing of the major basel ine unit costs andtheir correspond ing source s .
r-inGO
O
2 0 6 9 T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
•<:~>Ay\ •••$..-„.? ** 4 ' ">* - M' f V ;r ' 1 i -an, / j1
^R?4JiK3J ^iS'V^
IIII
II
ALTERNATIVE SL - 1 : PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
10 11 12CAPITAL COST0£M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DlSCOUh^ RATE310%
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X
NET PftESeWT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X
NET PRESET WORTH
27.0U .O U.O
27 .0 14 .0 V.. 01 0.909 0.826
2?.0 1 2 .7 1 1 .6
13 K 15
U.O U.O 14.014 .0 14 .0 U .O0.29 0.263 0.239
4 . 1 3 .7 3 .3
26 27 28
U.O U.O U.O14.0 14 .0 14 .0
0.084 0.076 0.069
1 -2 1 . 1 i . o
14 ,0 U .OU.O 14 .0
0.751 0.683
10.5 9.6
16 17
14 .0 U .OU.O U .O
0.218 0 . 198
3. 1 2 .8
29 30
14 .0 U .OU.O 14 .0
0.063 0.057
0.9 0.8
14 .0 U .O U.O U.O 14,0 14.0 14 .0 14 .014.0 14.0 U.O U.O 14.0 14 .0 14 .0 14.0
0.621 0.564 0 .5 13 0.467 0.424 0.386 0.35 0.319
8.7 7.9 7.2 6.5 5.9 5.4 4,9 4,5
18 19 20 21 21 23 24 25
U.O U.O U.O U.O U.O 14 .0 U.O U.OU.O 14 ,0 U.O U.O U.O U.O U.O U.O0. 18 0. 164 0.149 0 . 135 0. 123 0 . 1 1 2 0 . 10 1 0.09Z
2 - 5 2 .3 2 . 1 1 ,9 1 ,7 1 .6 1 .4 1 .3
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND J 'S )
159.0
Oin00CMs—o
(PU-SL 1 )
I
IIIIIIIIIIIII
COST COMPONENT
AlTEfiNATIVE SL - 1 ; LOW CAPITAL COSTS
MO AGTION/KONITOfilMG
QUANTITY UHIT UNIT COST TOTAL. COST COMMENTSSENSITIVITY TOTAL
FACTOR COST
CARVER TERRACE SOILS: NO CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
SULK SOLIDS TO 86 TREATED UITK GROUND WATER:
LOAD BULK SOLIDS 160 CY 4100 (16,000 FOUR 40-CY ROLL'OFFSCONTAINING SOIL CUTTINGSFROH THE 8!
ON-S ITE HAULING 160 CY (3 (480 HAULED TO THE GRAVEL P ITS10 31 TREATED BY GROUNDUATER
HEALTH « SAFETY 1 WEEK 44,000 44,000 INCLUDES A K4S OFF ICERDURING REMEDIATION; HWJ,RESPIRATOR, CLOTHING
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING & DESIGN ( 1 1X)
CON AGENCY (20X)
S3ass3a = 332===s»s»=Bsssssss33a3sassssasS33B«asissssBBffassa««s»s3aBBSK3issaaasBE3saM23:tssa»sss*aBss3S3:
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
0.95 (15,200
O1.0 4480 ^>
000.95 43,800 ^
^~O
(19,480
42 , 143
43,&96
ssatt3£3a===o=a3=s=S3a==s
(25,519************
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST 426,000
(LOU-SL1 )
II ALTERATIVE SL- 1 : LOU PRESENT UORTK ANALYSIS
COST PER YSAR PER J1000
1 1 12CAPITAL COSTOftH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT BAT ESI 01
NET PPESENT M5CTH
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310*
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COST08H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RAT631CX
NET PRESENT WORTH
26.014,0
26.0 U.O1 0.909
26.0 1 2 .7
13 U
U.O U.OU.O U.O0.29 0.263
4 . 1 3 .7
26 27
U.O U.OU.O U.O
0,084 0.076
1 .2 1 . 1
1«'..0U.O
0.826
1 1 .6
IS
U.OU.O
0.239
3 .3
28
U.OU.O
0.069
1 .0
U.OU.O
0,751
10.5
16
U.OU.O
0.218
3 , 1
29
U.OU.O
0.063
0.9
U.OU.O
0.633
9.6
tr
U.OU.O
0.198
2.S
30
U.OU.O
0.057
0.8
U.O U.O U.O U.O U.O U.OU.O U.O U.O U.O U.O U.O
0.621 0.564 0.513 0.467 0.424 0.3S6
«.7 7.9 7.2 6.5 5.9 5.4
IS 19 20 21 21 23
U.O U.O 14 .0 U.O U.O 14 .0U.O U.O U.O U.O 14.0 H.O0 . 18 0 . 1W 0 . 149 0 . 135 0,123 0 . 1 1 2
2.5 2,3 2. 1 1 .9 1 .7 1 .6
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND $'S)
158.0
U.O 14.0U.O U.O0.35 0.319
4.9 4.5
24 25
U.O 14 .014.0 U.O
0.101 0.092
1 .4 1 .3
COCM^-o
(LPWSL1)
IIII CCS!
CARVER TEMACC SOILS:
ALTERNATIVE S L - 1 : HIGH GAPITAt COSTS
HO ACTION/HONITOftlNG
OUAHTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST CCW4EHTS
WO CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
SENSIT IV ITYFACTOR
IIIIIIIIII
SULK SOLIDS TC BE TREATED UJTK GROUND WATER:
LOAO SULK SOLIDS 160 CY
OH-S ITE HAULING
HEALTH 4 SAFETY
160 CY
1 WEEK
t100 $16,000 FOUR 40-CY ROLL-Off8CONTAINING SOIL CUTTINGSFROM THE R|
$3 $4dO HAULED TO THE GRAVEL PITSTO 8£ TREATED BY GROUNDWATER
14,100 £6,000 INCLUDES A H&S OFF ICERDURING REMEDIATION; HI1U,RESPIRATOR, CLOTHING
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING ft DES IGN ( IDE)
CONTINGENCY (20%)
aSaaaiSIiSSBSSSSaaHaBsassas-:;
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
TOTALCOST
1.1 4^,600
1 .0
1 . 1
OJ
o
(22,460
APPROXIMATE tOTAL CAPITAL COST
429,449* * * * * * * * * * * *
429,000
(H I -SL 1 )
^^^ •1IIIIIIIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL- l : HIGH PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER StOOO
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RAT£«310%
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTG4H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RAT631C%
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310%
NET PRESENT WORTH
29.0
29.01
29.0
13
14.0U.O0.29
4 . 1
26
14.014 .0
0.084
1 .2
14,0U.O
0.909
12.7
14
14.014 .0
0.263
3 .7
27
U.O14.0
0.076
1 . 1
U.O14.0
0.826
1 1 .6
15
U.O14.0
0.239
3.3
28
14 .0U .O
0.069
1 .0
U.O14,0
0.751
10.5
,6
U.O14 .0
0.218
3 . 1
29
14 .014,0
0.063
0.9
14 .0 14 .0 14 .0U.O U.O 14.0
0.633 0.621 0.5<M
9.6 8.7 7,9
17 18 19
U.O 14 .0 14 .014.0 14 .0 U.O
0. 198 0 . 18 0.164
2.8 2 .5 2 .3
30
U.O14.0
0.057
0.8
14.0 14 .0 1 4 . 0 14 .014.0 14 .0 14.0 14.0
0.513 0.467 0,424 0.586
7.2 6.5 5 .9 5 .4
20 21 21 23
U.O 14 ,0 14 .0 14 .014 .0 14 ,0 14 .0 U.O
0. 149 0 . 135 0. 123 0 . 1 1 2
2 , 1 1 ,9 1 .7 1 .6
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND $ 'S )
16 1 .0
U .O 1 4 . 014.0 14.00.35 0.319
4.9 4 .5
24 25
14.0 14.014 .0 1 4 .0
0. 101 0.092
1 .4 1 .3
(HPUSL1 )
00C\J<r-O
I
ALTERNATIVE SL -2 : PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER * 1000
10 1 1
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RAT€aiO%
N6T PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE31QX
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT ftATE3lO%
NET PRESENT UOftTH
759.0
759.01
759.0
13
5 .25 .2
0.29
1 . 5
26
5 .25 .2
0.084
0.4
5 .25,2
0.909
4 ,7
14
5 .25 .2
0,263
1 .4
27
5 .25 .2
0.076
0.4
5 .25.2
0.326
4,3
15
5 .25 .2
0.239
1 ,2
28
5 .25 .2
0.069
0.4
5.25.2
0.751
3.9
16
5 .25 .2
0.218
1 . 1
29
5 .25 .2
0.063
0.3
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0.683 0.621
3.6 3 .2
17 18
5 . 2 5 . 25 .2 5 .2
0 . 198 0 . 1 8
1 .0 0.9
30
5 .25.2
0.057
0.3
5 .2 5 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.5M 5.513 0.467 0.424 0,366 0.35
2.9 2.7 2,4 2.2 2.0 1 ,8
19 20 21 21 23 24
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0. 164 0. 149 0 . 135 0. 123 0 . 1 1 2 0 . 10 1
0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND $ ' s )
808.0
5 .25 .2
0.319
1 .7
25
5 .25.2
0.092
0 .5
00CVJV"o
(PW-SL2)
I
IIII
TABLE 6-3: ALTERNATIVE SL-2: LOU CAPITAL COSTS
CAPPlNG/MONtTORINO/INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS
COST COMPONENT
SITE PREPARATIONIN IT IAL MONITORING
SAMPLINGANALYSIS
CAPPING:PREVIOUSLY SODDED AREAS:
eXCAVATION- < 12 " )OM'SITE HAULIHGTOPSOIl-dO")TOPSOIL-SPREADINGSOO- (2" )
NgWLY SCODED AREAS:TOPSOIL-dO" )TOPSOIL-SPREAOINGSOO (2")
ESTABLISHHEHT OF SORXSOO BARR IER :PERJOOIC INSPECTIONSFERT I L I Z INGMOWINGWATER
BULK SOLIDS TO BE TREATED BY GROUND WATER:LOAD BULK SOLIDS 160 CY
SENSITIVITY3UAHTITY UMIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST COMMENTS FACTOR
4 .40
22176
ACRES
DAYSSAMPLES
$1 ,450
$400*315
46,380
$8,800 8 SAMPLES/DAY COLLECTED$55,440 8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZED
0.95
0.950.95
TOTALCOST
$6,061
$8,360$52,668
7900790055005500
19800
450450
1300
4222222
CYCYCYCYSY
CYCYSY
INSPECTLOTSLOTSLOTS
$15 .00$3
$7.50$2.00$3.55
$7.50$2.00$3.55
$1,200$180$720
$90
FOR PAHS AND ARSENIC
$1 18 ,500 178,000 SF; 20% BULKING$23,700 HAUL TO PITS, TREAT VIA GW$41 ,250 178,000 SF; 20% SULKING$1 1 ,000$70,290 INCLUDES MATERIAL AND LABOR
$3,375 12,000 SF; 20% BULKING$900
$4,615 INCLUDES MATERIAL AMD LABOR
$4,800 $400 LABOR + TRAVEL/INSPECT$3,960 $30/HONTH/LOT
$15,840 $120/MONTH/LOT$1,980 $15/HOHTH/LOT
ON-S 1TE HAULING
HEALTH & SAFETY
160 CY
4fi WEEKS
$100
$3
$16,000
$480
$4,000 $192,000
FOUR 40-CY ROLL -OFFSCONTAIN ING SOIL CUTTINGSFROM THE ft!HAULED TO THE GRAVEL P ITS ,tO BE TREATED BY GROUNDWATERH&S OFFICER DURING IN IT IALMONITORING AND EXCAVATION<2 WEEKS/LOT); HNu,RESPIRATOR, CLOTHING
0.95 $1 12 ,5751.0 $23,700 ^
0.95 $39,188 MD0.95 $10,450 CO0.95 $66,776
0.95 $3,2060.95 $8550.95 $4,384
1 .00.950.950.95
$4,800$3,762
$15,048$1 ,881
0.95 $ 15 ,200
( .0 $480
0.95 $182,400
DIRECT CAPITAL COST $551 ,794
o
ENGINEER ING & DES IGN
CONTINGENCY (20%)
$60,697
$ 1 10 ,359
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $722,849* * * * * * * * * * *
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST $723,000
<LOW-SL2)
ALTERNATIVE SL-2: LOW PRESENT UOSTH ANALYSIS
IIIIIIIII
I
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 1 1 12
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL iOSTANNUAL DISCOUST RATES! OX
NET PRESENT UORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE31CX
NET PRESENT UORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE31GJS
NET PRESENT WORTH
723.0
723.01
723.0
13
5 .25 .2
0.29
1 .5
26
5.25 .2
0.084
0.4
5.25.2
0.909
4 . 7
14
5 .25 .2
0.263
1 .4
27
5.25 .2
0.076
0.4
S .25.2
0.826
4 .3
15
5 ,25 .2
0.239
1 .2
28
5.25 . 2
0.069
0.4
5 .25.2
O.fSI
3.9
16
5.25 .2
0 .2 18
1 . 1
29
5.25.2
0.063
0.3
5 .2 5 .25.2 5.2
0.683 0.621
3.6 3.2
17 18
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0. 198 0. 18
1.0 0.9
30
5.25 .2
0.057
0.3
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2
0.564 0 .5 13 0.467 0.424 0.386
2.9 2.7 2.4 2.2 2,0
19 20 21 21 23
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0. 164 0. 149 0 . 135 0.123 0 . 1 1 2
0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6
TOTALNET PRESENT
UORTH(THOUSAND t 'S)
772.0
5.2 5 .25.2 5 .2
0.35 0.319
1 .8 1 .7
24 25
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0. 101 0.092
0,5 0.5
00CM^"o
(LPUSL2)
^••HII ALTERATIVE SI-2; HIGH CAPITAL COSTS
CAPPIMG/KONITORING/INSTITUTIOKAL CONTROLSSENSIT IV ITY TOTAL
COST COMPONENT QUANTITY UNIT
SITE PREPARATION 4 .40 ACRESIN IT IAL HONITWING
SAMPLING 22 DAYSANALYSIS 176 SAMPLES
CAPPING:PREVIOUSLY SODDED AREAS:
EXCAVATION- < 12 n > 7900 CYON-SITE »OUJLIHG 7900 CY
TOPSOU < 10") S500 CY
TOPSO I L • SPREAD I NG 5500 CYSOO-(2 H ) 19800 SY
NEULY SODOED AREAS:TGPSOH- ( 10 " ) 450 CY
TOPSOIL-SPREADING 450 CYSOD <2") HM SY
ESTABLISHMENT OF SOILNSOD BARRIER:PER IODIC INSPECTIONS 4 INSPECTFERTILIZING 32 LOTSMOWING 22 LOTSWATER 22 LOTS
BULK SOLIDS TO BE TREATED BY GROUND WATER:LOAD 8ULK SOLIDS 160 CY
ON-SITE HAULING 160 CY
HEALTH & SAFETY 48 WEEKS
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING & DESIGN ( 1 1X)
CONTINGENCY (20%)
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
UNIT COST
$1 ,450
$4004315
$15.00$3
$7.50
$2.0043.55
47.50
$2.0043.55
41,2004130$720$90
$100
$3
$4,000
TOTAL COST
*,3SO
$8,800$55,440
$118,500$23,700
$41 ,250
41 1 ,000470,290
$3,37*;
4900$4,615
44,80043,960
$15,84041,980
416,000
4480
4192,000
COMMENTS
8 SAMPLES/DAY COLLECTED8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZED*#t PAHs AND ARSENIC
1' OVER 178,000 SF; 20%SULKING HAULED TO THEGRAVEL PITS, TO BE TREATEDBY GROUND MATES10" OVER 178,000 SF; 20XBULKING
INCLUDES MATERIAL AND LABOR
10" OVER 12,000 SF; 20XBULKING
INCLUDES MATERIAL AND LABOR
4400 LABOR * TRAVEL/INSPECT430/HONTH/LOT4120/MONTH/LOT415/MGNTK/LQT
FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFFSCONTAINING SOIL CUTTINGSFROM THE RIHAULED TO THE GRAVEL PITS ,TO BE TREATED BY GROUNDWATERH&S OFFICER DURING INITIALHCNITOSIHG AND EXCAVATION(2 WEEKS/LOT); HNu,RESPIRATOR, CLOTHING
.
FACTOR COST
1 . 1 $7,018
1.1 49,6801.1 460,984
1 . 1 4130,3501 .0 $23,700
i.l $45,375
1 . 1 $ 12 , 1001 . 1 $77,319
1 . 1 $3,713
1.1 $9901 . 1 $5,077
1 .0 44,8001.1 $4,3561 . 1 $ 17 ,4241 . 1 $2,178
1 .1 $17,600
1.0 $480
1 . 1 $211,200
4634,3*3
$69,778
4126,869
^830,989
r-vfj\u00CM*-O
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST 4831,000
(H 1 -SL2 )
IIIIIIII
CAPITAL COST0*H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT 8ATE310X
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTOftM COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATEalHX
NET PRESENT WORT*
ALTERNATIVE SL-2; HIGH PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
1 a 10 11 12831 .0
5.2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,2831 .0 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
1 0.909 0.826 0,751 0,683 0.621 0.564 0.513 0.467 0.424 0.3S6 0.35 0.319
831 .0 4,7 4.3 3.9 3.6 3.2 2.9 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.0 1 .6 1 .7
13
5.2
t4
5.2
15
5.2
16
5.2
17
5.2
18
5.2
19 20 21 21 23 24 25
5.2 5.2 5,2 5.2 5.2 *.? * 1
COvO00CM
5.2 5 .2 5 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .20.29 0.263 0.239 0.218 0. 198 0 . 1 8 0. 164 0. 149 0. 135 0. 123 0 . 1 12 0. 101 0.092
1 . 5 1 .4 K 2 t- 1 1 .0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.? 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5
O
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATES 10(1
N£T PRESENT WORTH
26 2? 28 29 30
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0,084 0.676 0.069 0.063 0.057
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND S ' S )
$30.0
(HPWS1.2)
HV^
IIIIIII
I
ALTERATIVE SL '3: PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS: 10 YEAS TREATMENT
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
0 1 8 1 1 12
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL AHMUM COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310*
1494.072,0 72.0 72,0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 5.2 5.2
1494.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72-0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72,0 5.2 5.21 0.909 0.826 0.751 0.633 0.621 0.564 0.513 0.467 0.424 0,386 0.35 0.3W
MET PttttHT WORTH 1494.0 65.4 59.5 54.1 49.2 44 .7 40.6 36.9 33.6 30,5 27.8 1.8 1.7
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATESIO*
HIT PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANMUAL, COSTANNUAL 0ISCO/M7
13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 21 23 24 25
5.2 5,2 5.2 5.2 5,2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.25.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2
0.29 0.263 0,239 0.218 0 . 198 0 , 1 8 0.164 0 . 1 4 9 0 . 1 35 0 . 123 0 , 1 1 2 0 . 10 1 0.092
1 .5 1.4 1.2 1 .1 1 .0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5
26 27 2fl 29 30
5.2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.084 0.076 0.06$ 0.0&3 0.057
TOTALNET PRESENT
UDRtH(THOUSAND t 'S)
SO00CM^_O
NET PRESENT WORTH 0.4 0.4 0.4 0,3 0.3 1953,4
(PW-SL3)
IIIIIIII
COST CCtt»>ONENT
ALTERNATIVE SL-3: LOW CAPITAL COSTS
I N -S ITU glODEGSADATION
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST CCW4ENTSSENSIT IVITY
FACTORTOTAL
COST
SITE PREPARATIONINITIAL MONITORING
SAMPLINGANALYSIS
INSTALL SPRINKLER SYSTEMI N -S ITU
4.40 ACRES
22 DAYS176 SAMPLES
22 LOTS7000 GY
BULK SOLIDS TO fig TREATgDLOAD
ON-S ITE HAULING
HEALTH & SAFETY
$400$315
(2,000$135
W I T H GROUND WATER:160 CY $100
160 CY S3
16 WEEKS $4,000
$6,380
$3,800$55,WO
$44,000$945,000
$16,000
$480
$64,000
8 SAMPLES COUECTEO/OAY8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZEDFOR PAHS AND ARSENIC1MGL. BOX AND METER190,000 SF TREATED TOA DEPTH OF 1 FT; NOBULK1 HO
FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFFSCONTAINING SOIL CUTTINGSFROM THE RI HAULED TO THEGRAVEL P ITS TO BE TREATED9Y GROUND WATERH&S OFFICER DURINGMONITORING & REMEDIATION;HHU, RgSPlRATOft
0.95 $6,061
0.950.95
0.950.95
$52,663
$41,800$897,750
0.95
1 .0
$15 ,200
$480
0.95 $60,800
Or-coCvjT*O
DIRECT CAPITAL COST $1,083,1',9
ENGINEERING t DESIGN ( 1 1% ) $119,143
CONTINGfiNCY <20Si) $216,624
a3-aa- = sss==sa==s=S:;s==s=====-=== ==s=a==^asa»=cS3^3SS=a3i±a======3=3aS3=s3aa33sas=3s;i3===ea!ss==sa=^sa=s33s*se:i3ssHa2=a=ss
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $1,418,886**** * * * * * * *
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST $1 ,419,000
aB===2=s2B3a3a=a=S3= = asa5i3Sasaoa=33^=S!:3BBa-3s3B=====aa=a33==asai:s3aas3aa=-3=3aa3==ss±=353:i=n=s==:i==S3ii=sa=sS==as=a======(LOU-SL3)
ALTERNATIVE SL-3 : LOW PRESENT WORTH ANAUSIS: 10 YEAR TREATHEMT
II CAPITAL COST
OAH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL ^DSTANNUAL DISCObM* RATE310%
NET PRESENT WORTH
COST PER VEAR PER 41000
4 5 6 7 3 10 11
14 19 .0 65.4 59.5 54 . 1 49.2 44.7 40.6 36.9 33.6 30,5 27. &
12
14 19 .0
H19.01
72.072.0
0.909
72.072.0
0.826
72.072.0
0.751
72.072.0
0.683
72.0 72.072.0 72.0
0.621 0.564
72.072.0
0.513
72.072.0
0.467
72.072.0
0.424
72.072.0
0.386
5.?5 .2
0.35
5.25 .2
0.319
1 .8 1 .7
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL
MET PRES£«T WORTH
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 21 24
5.25 .2
0.29
5.25.2
0.263
5.25 .2
0.239
5.25 .2
0.218
5.25.2
0.198
5.25 .2
0.18
5.25 .2
0.164
5.25.2
0.149
3.25 . 2
0.135
5.25 .2
O.i 23
5.2 5.25 .2 5 .2
0.112 0.101
5.25 .2
0.092
1 . 5 1 . 4
ooCVJv-O
1 .2 1 . 1 1 . 0 0 .9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0 .6 0 .5 0 .5
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUN^ RATE310%
NET PRE&ENT WORTH
26
0.4
27 28 29 30
5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057
0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND i'
1878.4
(LPVSL3)
ALTERNATIVE SL-3 : HIGH CAPITAL COSTS
COST COMPONENT
I N -S ITU BIODEGRADATiO«
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST COMMENTSSENSIT IV ITY
FACTORTOTALCOST
SITE PREPARATIGJMI N I T IAL MONITORING
SAMPLINGANALYSIS
INSTALL SPRINKLER SYSTEMI N -S ITU BIORECLAMATION
BULK SOLIDS TO 3E TREATEDLOAD
ON-S ITE HAULING
HEALTH & SAFETY
4.40 ACRES $1 ,450
22 DAYS $400176 SAMPLES $315
22 LOTS $2,0007000 CY $135
WITH GROUND WATER:160 CY $100
160 CY
16 WEEKS
$3
$4,000
$o,380
$8,800$55,440
$44,000$945,000
$16,000
$480
$64,000
8 SAMPLES COLLECTED/SAY8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZEDfOR PAHS AND ARSENICINCL. BOX AND METER190,000 SF TREATED TOA DEPTH OF 1 FT; NOBULKING
FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFFSCONTAINING SOIL CUTTINGSFROM THE RI HAULED TO THEGRAVEL P ITS TO BE TREATEDBY GROUND WATERH&S OFFICER DURINGMONITORING & REMEDIATION;HNU, RESPIRATOR
1 . 1 $7,018
1.1 $9,6801.1 $60,984
1 . 1 $48,4001 . 1 $1 ,039,500
1 . 1 $17,600
1.0 $420
1 . 1 $70,400
COCMf*o
DIRECT CAPITAL COST $1 ,254,062
ENGINEER ING & DES IGN ( 1 1%)
CONTINGENCY <205i)
$137,947
$250,812
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $1 ,642,821* * * * * * * * * * *
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST $1 ,643,000
(H I - SL3 )
1IIICAPITAL CCSTO&M COStSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCCONT RATE310X
NET PRESENT WORTH
II
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X
NET PRESENT WORTH
II
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COST
ALTERNATIVE SL-3 : HIGH PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS: 10 YEAR TREATMENT
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12
72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72,0 5.2 5,21643.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72,0 72,0 5.2 b .2
1 0.909 0.826 0.751 0.683 0.621 0.564 0.513 0.46? 0.424 0.386 0.35 0 .3 19
30,5 27.8 1 .8 1 .71643.6 65.4 59,5 54 . 1 49.2 44,7 40.6 36.9 33.6
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 21 23
5.25 .2
0.29
5 .25 .2
0.263
5 .25 .2
0.239
5.25.2
0-?1f i '
5.25 .2
ft tOft
5 .25 ,2
5 .25 .2
5 .25 .2
5 .25 .2
5 .25 ,2
5 . 25 .2
5 .2S .2
5 .25 .2
00CM^—
0. 164 0 . 149 0 . 135 O. i23 0 . 1 12 0 . 10 1 0.0921 .5
26
1 .4
27
1 .2
28
1 . 1
29
1 .0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6
30
5 -2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
ANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310% 0.084 0.076 0.069 0 063 0 057
NET PRESENT WORTH 0.< > 0.4 0.4 0,3 0.3
(HPWSL3)
0.5 0.5
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND J's )
2102.4
ALTERNATIVE SL-4 (A ) : PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X
NET PRgSEMT WORTH
202 1 .0
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
4 5 6 7 8 10
5.2 5 .2 5 .2 3 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
1 1 12
5 2 5 2 5 2 5 25 2 5 2 5 2 5 * 2
1 0.909 0.826 0.751 0.683 0.621 0.564 0 .5 13 O.W 0.424 0.386 0.35 0 .3 19
2021 .0 4 .7 4,3 3 .9 3 .6 3 .2 2 .9 2 .7 2 .4 2 .2 2 .0 1 .8 1 .7
CAPITAL COSTOfiH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE31034
NET PRESENT WORTH
14 15 16 17 19 20 21 21 23 24 25
5 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 S .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.29 0.263 0.239 0 .2 18 0. 198 0 . 18 0 . 164 0 . 149 0. 135 0 . 123 0 . 1 1 2 0 . 10 1 0.092
1 . 5 1 .4 1 -2 1 . 1 1 .0 0 ,9 0 .9 0 .8 0 .7 0.6 0 .6 0 .5 0 .5
coCMV-o
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT
NET PRESENT WORTH
26 27 28 29 30
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3
TOTALSET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND t ' s )
2070.0
(PW-SL4A)
IIIIIIIII
COST COMPONENT
SITE PREPARATIONIN IT IAL MONITORING
SAMPLINGANALYSIS
SL-4(A): LOW CAPITA' COSTS
EXCAVATION/SOU WASHING
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST COMMENTS
4.4 ACRES $1 ,450 $6,380
SENSIT IV ITYFACTOR
TOTALCOST
22 DAYS176 SAMPLES
SOILS FROM TH£ CARVER TERRACE SUBDIVIS ION:EXCAVATION 8400 CY
ON-S ITE KAULING 8400 CY
SULK SOLIDS FROM THE KENNEDY SAND AMD GRAVEL PROPERTY:LOAD 160 CYON-S ITE HAULING 160 CY
$400 58,800 8 SAMPLES COLLECTED/DAY$315 455,440 8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZED
$15 $126,000 1 FT DEPTH OVER 190,000SF; 205t BULKING
$3 $25,200
$100 416,000 FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFFS$3 $4£0
SOIL WASHING TREATMENT SYSTEM;TREATMENT SYSTEM H06/DEKOBTfilEATMEhT EQUIP. RENTAL
(TREATED AT A RATE OF 2.5 TONSPER HOUR 3 10 HOURS P£R DAY)
CHEMICALSUT IL IT I ESUV/OZQNEOPERATION & SUPERVISIONAIR MONITORINGBACKF ILL ING OF TREATED SOILS
RESTORATION:
1 LP SUM $14,000 $14,00012 MONTHS $58,000 *696,000 INCLUDES REACTORS,
1 LP bJH $18,0001 LP SUM $1 1 ,0001 LP SUM $6,7501 LP SUM $165,000
12 MONTHS $3,0008560 CY $3.00
TANKS, MIXERS,HOPPERS
$18,000$1 1 ,000$6,750
$165,000436,000$25,680 CARVER TERRACE SOILS
AND BULK SOLIDS;PLACED U ITH IN THEKS&G PROPERTY
0.95 $6,061
0.95 $8,3600.95 $52,668
0.95 41 19,700
0.95 $23,940
0.95 $15,2001.0 $480
1 .0 $1 < . ,OOQ0.95 4661,200
0.95 417, 1000,95 $10,4500,95 $6,4130.95 $156,7500.95 $34,2000.95 424,396
CLEAN BACKFILt.-(10") 7000 CY *5,00
SPREADING 7000 CY $2.00SCO <2") 2 1 100 SY $3.55
HEALTH & SAFETY 52 WEEKS $4,000
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING & DESIGN ( 1 1X)
CONTINGENCY (20%)
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
$35,000 ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
$14,000$74,905 ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACE
AREA4208,000 H&S DURING INIT IAL
MONITORING ANDEXCAVATION/TREATMENT
.__——________
0.95 $33,250
0.95 $13,3000.95 $71 , 160
0.95 $197,600
$1,466,227
$161 ,285
$293,245
$1,920,753* * * * * * * * * * *
r-oo
O
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST 4 1 ,92 1 ,000
(LOU-SL4A)
IALTERNATIVE SL -4CA ) : LOU NET PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2
CAPITAL COST08H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT ftATEfllOX
MET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATES1051
N£T PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTOJH COS TSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X
NET PRESENT WORTH
1921.0
192 1 .01
1921 .0
13
5 .25 .2
0.29
1 . 5
26
5 .25.2
0.084
0.4
5 . 25 .2
0.909
4 .7
U
5 . 25 . 2
n.263
1 . 4
27
5 .25-2
0.076
0.4
5.25 .2
0.826
4.3
15
5 . 25 .2
0.239
1 .2
28
5 . ?5.2
0.069
0.4
5 . 25 .2
0,751
3 .9
16
5 . 25 .2
0.218
1 . 1
29
S .25 .2
0.063
0.3
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0.683 G.621
3,6 3.2
17 18
5 .2 5 .25 ,2 5 .2
0 . 198 0 . 1 8
1 .0 0 .9
30
5 .25.2
0.057
0.3
S .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.564 0.513 0.467 0.424 0.386
2 .9 2 .7 2 .4 2 .2 2 .0
19 20 21 21 23
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0. 164 0. 149 0 . 135 0.123 0 . 1 12
0.9 0.8 0 .7 0.6 0 .6
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND J 'S >
1970.0
5 .2 5 .2S .2 5 .2
0.35 0.319
1 .8 1 .7
24 25
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0.101 0.092
0.5 0.5
00CM^—o
( IPUSL4A)
IIIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL"4(A) ; H IGH CAPITAL COSTS
EXCAVATION/SOIL WASHING
COST COMPONENT QUANTITY
SITE PREPARATION 4.4INITIAL MONITORING
SAMPLING 22ANALYSIS 176
SOILS FROM THE CARVEk ib 'RRACE SUBDIVIS IONEXCAVATION 8400
ON-SITE HAULING 8400
UNIT UNIT COST
ACRES $1 ,450
DAYS $400SAMPLES $315
.CY $15
CY $3
TOTAL COST
$6,380
$8,800$55,440
$126,000
$25,200
COMMENTS
8 SAMPLES COLLECTED/DAY8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZED
1 FT DEPTH OVER 190,000SF; 20% BULKING
SENSIT IVITY TOTALFACTOR COST
1 .1 $7,018
1 . 1 $9,6801.1 $60,984
1.1 $138,600
1.1 $27,720 I*—r—SULK SOLIDS FROM THE KENNEDY SAND AND GRAVEL PROPERTY:LOAD 160ON-S ITE HAULING 160
SOIL WASHING TREATMENT SYSTEM:TREATMENT SYSTEM MOB/DEMOB 1TREATMENT EQUIP, RENTAL 12
(TREATED AT A RATE OF 2.i TONSPER HOUR 3 10 HOURS PER DAY)
CHEMICALS 1UT I L I T I ES 1UV/OZOftE 1OPERATION & SUPERVISION 1AIR MONITORING 12BACKFILL ING OF TREATED SOILS 8560
SITE RESTORATION:CLEAH BACKFILL- ( 10" ) 7000
SPREADING 7000SCO <2") 2 1 100
HEALTH & SAfETY 52
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING & DESIGN (11%)
CONTINGENCY (20%)•sac^is-sc;— ?t^3^— sittSstfff^S!33is;ss3i;TSs— i"— sssaaecs
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
APPROXIMATE TOTALU I . Cl /. A \
CY $100CY $3
LP SUM $14,000MONTHS $58,000
LP SUM $18,000LP SUM $ 1 1 ,000LP SUM $6,750LP SUM $165,000MONTHS $3,000CY $3.00
CY $5.00
CY $2.00SY $3.55
WEEKS $4,000
isnssKSsssassssssesssss
CAPITAL COST3SB33=SS=SSEJsaS:S=eS==
$16,000i480
414,000$696,000
$18,000$1 1 ,000$6,750
$165,000$36,000$25,680
$35,000
$14,000$74,905
$208,000
i^ass&jstjsssssc
=*=*»« = «=:
FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFfS
INCLUDES REACTORS,TANKS, MIXERS,HOPPFP1;tlvr r £Kd
CARVER TERRACH SOILSAND BULK SOLIDS;PLACED HI THIN THEKS&G PROPERTY
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAC PAnutff
H&S DURING IN IT IALMONITORING ANDEXCAVATION/TREATMENT
2B=a=eciiiatca==a==aasaKaaHaai
=Sa=3SB4*IS35S;3 = :=SSBH!lassa3(
CO1.1 $17,600 _1.0 4430 ^_
o1 .0 $U,0001 . 1 $765,600
1.1 $19,8001 . 1 $ 12 , 1001 . 1 $7,4251 . 1 $ 18 1 ,5001 . 1 $39,6001.1 $28,248
1 . 1 $38,500
1.1 $15,4001.1 $82,396
1 . 1 $228,800
$1,695,451
$186,500
$339,090BsSsa3seaBBaa==2=aHaa
$2,221 ,040* * * * * * * * * * *£2 ,221 ,000
;s=DS3O*ltBaH333S=SSe=
ALTERNATIVE SL-4<A> : HIGH PRESENT WORTH ANAlYSl
IIIII
COST PER YEAR PER S1000
4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATEaiOt
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL AWHUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT ftATEfllCX
MET PRgSENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE31QX
NET PRESENT WORTH
2221 . C
222 1 .01
2221 .0
13
5 . 25 .2
0.29
1 . 5
26
5 .25 . 2
0.084
0.4
5 .25 .2
0.909
4.7
14
5.25 .2
0.263
1 .4
27
5 . 25.2
0.076
0.4
5.25 .2
0.826
4.3
15
5 .25 .2
0.239
1 .2
28
5 ,25 .2
0.069
0.4
5 .25 .2
0.751
3.9
16
5 .25 . 2
0 ,2 18
1 . 1
29
5 .25 .2
0.063
0.3
5 .25 .2
0.683
3.6
17
5.25 .2
0. 198
1 . 0
30
5 .25 ,2
0.057
0.3
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.621 0.564 0 .5 13 0.467 0.424 0.386
3.2 2 .9 2 .7 2 .4 2 .2 2 .0
18 19 20 21 21 23
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
O . i 8 0 . 164 0 . 149 0 . 1 35 0 . 123 0 . 1 1 2
0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND * '$ )
2270.0
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0.35 0 .3 19
1 .8 1 .7
24 25
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0 . 10 1 0.092
0 .5 0 .5
03r-COOJ•e—O
(HPUSL4A)
• V .0
IIII1
ALTERNATIVE SL -4 (B ) : PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER 410CO
2 3 4 5 6 ?
3959.0
, 'V "A
10 11 12
CAPITAL COST< * " COSTS 5 -2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .Z 52 52TOTAL ANNUAL COST 3959.0 5 . 2 5 . ? 5 . 2 5 . 2 5 . 2 5 . 2 5 . 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 * 2 5 * 2ANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310* 1 0.909 0.826 0.751 0.683 0.621 0.564 0.513 0.467 0 424 0 386 0 35 0 si9
NfcT WJESENT WORTH 3959.0 3.9 3.6 3.2 2.9 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.0 1 . 8 1 .7
CAPITAL COSr
O&M COSTSTOTAL ANKUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RAT6a)10X
MET WORTH
13 15 16 18 19 20 21 21 23 24 25
5.25.2
5.25 .2
5.25 .2
5.25 .2
5.25 .2
5.25 .2
5.25 .2
5.25.2
5.5 ,
.2.2
5.2 5.2 5.2 5.25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
GOCM<—
0.29 0.263 0.239 0,218 0 . 198 0 . 1 8 0. 164 0 . 149 0 . 1 35 0 . 123 0 . 1 12 0 . 10 1 0.092
1 . 5 1 .4 ; -2 1 - 1 1 .0 0 .9 0 .9 0 .8 0 .7 0.6 0 .6 0 .5 0.5
o
CAPITAL COSTOSH COS1STOTAL ANNUAi. COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X
NET PRESENT WORTH
26 27 28 29 30
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND $ ' s )
4008.0
(PW-SL48)
3 ALTERATIVE SL -4 <8 ) : LOW CAPITAL COSTS
EXCAVATION/ON-SITE INCINERATION/BACKFILL ASH• SENSITIVITY TOTAL
1i1
COST COMPONENT
SITE PREPARATIONIN IT IAL MONITORING
SAMPLINGANALYSIS
SOUS FROM THI CARVER TERRACEEXCAVATION
ON-srE HAULING
QUANTITY UNIT
4.4 ACRES
22 DAYS176 SAMPLES
SUBDIVISION:8400 CY
8400 CY
UNIT COST
$1,450
$400$315
$15
$3.00
TOTAL COST
$6,380
$8,800$55,440
$126,000
$25,200
COMMENTS
8 SAMPLES COLLECTED/DAY8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZEDFOR PAHS AND ARSENIC
1 FT DEPTH OVER 190,000SF; 20% BULKING; EXCAVATE1/2 OF A LOT AT A TIME
FACTOR COST
0.95 $6,061
0.95 $8,3600.95 $52,668
0.95 $1 19,700
0.95 $23,940
O00cc
SULK SOLIDS FROM TH£ KENNEDY SAHD AND GRAVEL PROPERTY: ^
|
I
I•flff
11••
1
LOADON-SITE HAULING
ON-S ITE INCINERATOR SYSTEM:MOB/DEMOBTEST BURNINCINERATIONElECTR & INSTRUHAIR MONITORINGASH TESTING (DELISTING)ASH SPREADING
SITE RESTORATION:CLEAN SACKFILL- < 10" >
SPREAD I WGSOO <2«)
HEALTH £ SAFETY
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
160 CY160 CY
1 LP SUM1 LP SUM
8560 CY1 LP SUM6 MONTHS1 LP SUM
4280 CY
7000 CY
7000 CY21 100 SY
28 WEEKS
4100$3.00
$100,000$80,000
$250495,000$3,000
4100,000$3.50
$5.00
$2.00$3.55
$4,000
$16,000$480
$100,000$80,000
$2 , 140,000495,000118,000
$100,000$14,980
$35,000
$14,000$74,905
$1 12 ,000
FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFFS
50 CY PER DAY
ASSUME 50% VOLUME LOSS;PLACED WITHIN KS&GPROPERTY
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
INCLUDES A H&S OFFICERDURING REMEDIATION
1 ENGINEER ING & DES IGN (1U)
Bm
CONTINGENCY (20X)
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
.».„».»»««»**,.».*
0.95 $ 15 ,2001.0 $480
1 .0 $100,0001 .0 $80,000
0.95 $2,033,0000.95 $90,2500.95 417 , 1001 .0 $100,000
0.95 $ 14 ,231
0.95 $33,250
0,95 $13,3000.95 $71 , 160
0.95 $106,400
42,885,100
$317,361
$577,020
$3,779,481************
•*-O
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST S3,779,000
( ( .OU-SL4B)
IIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL '4 (8 > : LOW PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER StOOO
II
CAPITAL COSTQ&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATESIOX
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT ftATEi)10%
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT ftarcainv
--J-----Z . . . . . .3 . . . . . .L.. 5 6 7 8 • to 113779.0 " " " " " " " " • • • " " - ' - " - - - • • - • - • • • • - • - . . . . - . . . - . . . . .
3^.0 1:1 1:1 I'l l'l \'i I-2 s-2 *•* *•* ^ 5.2t «.« o.826 ,.„, o.^ 0,-, ,5M 0 5
5;32
fl » ^ o » »3779'° " 4 '3 3 '9 »•* 3, 2., ,7 2, 2.2 2.0 ,_8
-. .- 1 3 . . . . . . '4 . '5 16 " '8 " ^ 2> « 23 24
l ' l l ' l l ' l ' • ' 5 '2 5 '2 5 '2 5 '2 5 '2 5.2 52 52«.» o,, o.23: ,j;.2
1£ D|;; 0.^ 0.^ 0 « o_» o - o »1 > 5 ' '4 ' • ' '- 1 '- ° ° ' » « • » «>•• 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5
26 27 28 29 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . TOTALNET PRESENT
5 -2 5 . 2 5 . 2 5 . 2 52 WRTH
5.2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 (THOUSAND S ' S )
12. . . . . . . .
5 .25 .2
0.319
1 . 7
25
5 .25 . 2
0.092
0.5
MET PRESENT WORTH 0-4 0.4 0 .4 0 .3
0000CMv-O
0.3 3828.0
I (LPWSL4B)
I ALTERNATIVE SL -4 (B > : H IGH CAPITAL COSTS
EXCAVATION/ON-SITE INCINERATION/BACKFILL ASH
IIII
COST COMPONENT
S ITE PREPARATIONIN IT IAL MONITORING
SAMPLINGANALYSIS
SOILS FROM THE CARVER TERRACEEXCAVATICft
ON-S ITE RULING
BULK SOLIDS FROM THb KENNEDYLOADON-S ITE HAULING
ON-S ITE IMCI» i e *ATOR SYSTEM:MOB/DEMOSTEST BURNINCINERATEELECTR & IKSTRUHAIR MONITORINGASH TESTIao (DEL IST ING )ASH SPREADING
S ITE RESTORATIONCLEAN BACKFRL-dO"; .
SPREADINGSOD (2")
HEALTH & SAFETY
* < * . , . * » - - * * - - • - . . * f c , » , , » • * * • „ .
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING & DESIGN < 1U)
CONTINGENCY <20%)
iManBsBaaaMaaawMsataasaaBsaBs.
TOTAL CAPITA). COST
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST
4.4 ACRES $1 ,450
22 DAYS $400176 SAMPLES $315
: SUBDIVIS ION:8400 CY $15
8400 CY 53.00
SAND AND GRAVEL PROPERTY:160 CY tioo160 CY $3.00
1 LP SUH $100,0001 LP SUH $SO,000
8560 CY $2501 LP SUM $95,0006 MONTHS $3,0001 LP SUH $100,000
4280 CY $3 .50
?000 CY $5.00
7000 CY $2.0021 100 SY $3.55
38 WEEKS $4,000
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . " • " • " " • • • * • • -- - - • . - . . . . „ . , . .
s&aa-iSBsatiBafesaaassLaaasBSzi-s.
TOTAL COST
$6,380
$8,800$55,440
$126,000
$25,200
$16 ,000$480
$100,000$80,000
$2, 140,000$95,000$18,000
$100,000$14,980
$35,000
$14 ,000$74,905
$ 1 12 ,000
• • • • * • • • • • • - •
ssssaesaasBas
COMMENTS
8 SAMPLES COLLECTED/DAY8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALY2EOFOR PAHs AND ARSENIC
1 FT DEPTH OVER 190,000SF; 20% BULKING; EXCAVATE1/2 OF A LOT AT A TIME
FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFFS
50 CY PEP, DAY
ASSUME 50% VOLUME LOSS;PLACED WITH IN KS&GPROPERTY
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEABFA1IVLH
INCLUDES A HSS OFF ICERDURING REMEDIATION- • ' • • - . . . . . . „ . . . , , , . . , . . , .
-""-... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
tBsaaBaasasai!=ji*acaa*Bsaa«[.a;
SENS IT IV ITY TOTALFACTOR COST
- . - . - . . . . , . , . _ _ .
' . 1 $7,018
1 .1 $9,6801.1 $60,984
1 . 1 $138,600
1 . 1 $27,720
1 . 1 $17,6001-0 $480
1-0 $100,000f .O $80,0001 . 1 52 ,354,0001 . 1 $10£ , 500' . 1 $'i9,800* -0 $100,000- . 1 $16,478
- . 1 $.':8,5oo1 . 1 S 15 ,4001 . 1 ^2,396
1 . 1 $123,200
$3,296,356. . . * . . . . . . . , . . . .„ . . ,$362,599
$659,271
aes&aeaaassasa&saesas
54,318,226* * * * * * * * * * * *
CMCOCOCM
o
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST$4 ,3 18 ,000
<H I - SL4B )
IIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL -4 (8 > : H.'SH PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
CAPITAL COSTOSM COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310%
«ET PftESEN' WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATEaiO%
<> 1 2
4318 .05-2 S .2
4318 .0 5 .2 5 .21 0 .909 0.826
4318 .0 4 .7 4 .3
13 14 15
5 -2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.29 0.263 0.239
3. . . . . . .
5 .25 .2
0.751
3.9
16
5 .25 .2
0.218
4. . . . . . . .
5 .25 .2
0.683
3.6
17
5 .25 .2
0. 198
5. . . . . . .
5.25 .2
0.621
3 .2
18
5.25 . 2
0. 18 i
6
5.25.2
0.564
2.9
19
5 .25 .2
0. 164
7
5 .25 .2
0.5 13
2 .7
20
5 .25 .2
0. 149
5.25 .2
0.467
2.4
21
5.25 .2
0. 135
9
5 .25 .2
0.424
2.2
21
5 .25 .2
0.123
10
5 .25 .2
0.386
2.0
23
5 .25 .2
0 . 1 1 2
11 12
5.2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0.35 0.319
1 .8 1 .7
24 25
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0. 10 1 0.092
POX0000
oM£T PRESENT UOftTH
III
1 . 5
26
1 .4
27 28
1 . 1
29
' •0 0 .9 0 .9 0 .8 0 .7 0-6 0.6 0.5 0.5
30CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL AHHUAL COST 5-2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
5-2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2ANNUAL DISCOUNT RADIOS 0,084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057
NET PRESENT WORTH 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3
TOTALMET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND t ' s )
4367.0
<HPWSL4S)
••••IIIIIIIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL-4<82): PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PgR $1000
10 11 12
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL £OSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATEat10%
NET PRESENT WOf<TH
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X
MET PRESENT WOftTH
CAPITAL COSTOfiH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNJAL 01SCOUNT RATE310*
NET PRESENT WORTH
5599.0
5599.01
5599.0
13
5 .25 .2
0.29
1 .5
26
5.25 ?J * C
0.034
0.4
5.25 .2
0.909
4.7
14
5 .25 .2
0,263
1 .4
27
5.25.2
0.076
0.4
5.25.2
0.326
4,3
15
5 . 25 .2
0.239
1 . 2
28
5.25.2
0.069
0.4
5.25.2
0.751
3.9
16
5.25 .2
0.218
1 . 1
29
5.25.2
0.063
0.3
5.25.2
0.683
3.6
17
5 .25 .2
0. 198
1 . 0
30
5.25.2
0.057
0.3
5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.25.2 5 .2 S .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,2
0.621 0.564 0.513 0.467 0.424 0.386
3.2 2.9 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.0
18 19 20 21 21 23
S .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0. 18 0. 164 0. 149 0 . 135 0 . 123 0 . 1 1 2
0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND t'S)
5648.0
5.2 5.25 ,2 5 .2
0.35 0.319
1 .8 1 .7
24 25
5 .2 5 .25.2 5 .2
0. 101 0-092
0.5 0.5
CCCOCvjo
(PW-SL482)
II ALTERNATIVE SL-4(62) : LOW CAPITAL COSTS
I
IIIIIIIII
COST COMPONENT
SITE PREPARATIONIN IT IAL MONITORING
SAMPLINGANALYSIS
EAtRVAl
QUANTITY
4.4
22176
ION/OH-!
UHIT
SITE INCINERA
UNIT COST
ACRES $1 ,450
DAYS $400SAMPLES $315
SOILS FROM THE CARVER TERRACE SUBDIVISION:EXCAVATION
OH-SITE HAULING
BULK SOLIDS FRC* THE KENNEDYLOADON-S ITE HAULING
ON-SITg INCINERATOR SYSTEM:H08/DEM06TEST BURNINCINERATION6LECTR & INSTRUHAIR MONITORINGASH TESTING < f >ELISTING)ASK DISPOSAL:
LOADING ASHTRANSPORTATION
8400
8400
SANO AND160160
11
3560161
428099000
CY
CY
GRAVELCYCY
IP SUMLP SUMCYLP SUMMONTHSLP SUM
CYLH
$15
$3.00
PROPERTY:$100
$3.00
$100,000$80,000
$250$95,000$3,000
$100,000
$3.50$4.00
r iOH/OFF-SITE DISPOSAL OF ASMSENSITIVITY TOTALTOTAL COST COUNTS fACm ™
$6,380
$8,800 8 SAMPLES COLLECTED/DAY*S5,440 8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZED
FOR PAHS AND ARSENIC
$126,000 I FT OVER 190,000 SF;20X SULKING; EXCAV 1/2 OFA LOT AT A T IHE- 1 UEEK
$25,200
$16,000 FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFFS4480
4100,000480,000
$2,140,000 50 CY PER DAY$95,000$18,000
$100,000
$14,980 ASSUME 50% VOLUME LOSS;$396,000 300 MILES ONE-WAY;
tl fv I'm -*.. _ _ . . _ . . __ .
0.95 $6,061
0-95 $S,36C0.95 $52.Mfi
0.95
0.95
0.951 .0
1 -0
$119,700
$23,940
$15,2004480
4100,000
LOCC00CKJT—o
1 .0 $80,0000.95 $2,033,0000.950.951 .0
0,950.95
490,250417 , 100
4100,000
$14,231$376,200
DISPOSAL
SITE RESTORATION:GLEAM 8ACKFILL- ( 10" )
SPREADINGSOO (2n >
HEALTH & SAFETY
4280 CY
7000 CY
7000 GY21100 SY
28 WEEKS
$200 $856,000
45.00 $35,000
$2.00$3.55
$14,000$74,905
44,000 $ 1 12 ,000
LOADSDISPOSED AT AN OFF -S ITE
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREAINCLUDES A H&S OFF ICERDURING REMEDIATION
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING & DESIGN (US)
CONTINGENCY (20X)aE==s==i:s=na=:=s==saB=sssa===
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
0.95 $813,200
0.95 $33,250
0.95 $13,3000-95 $71 , 1/o
0.95 $106,400
44,074,500
$448,195
$814,900sssaasaasana
$5,337,595
(LOWSL4B2)
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST$5,338,000
IIIIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE 3 1 -4 (82 ) : LOW PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
4 5CAPITAL COSTOSM COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RAIES10X
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTOXK COSTSfOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT ftATFftlfttt
———— • • " . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . .„ . . . _ . . . : . . a * to 11 ,25338.0 " * " " " " " * • • • • - • • • - • • • • - - • - - - . . . . . , . - . . „ . . . . . . . . .
» » • • » M !:! 11 11 5
!1 " 5-2 5-2 » *•* *.*1 •••" °-826 ••* ••« °- ••« «» .£ ,.i! 0.3. o!3S
2
03M»-•• «•' « » ... « a, 2, ,.4 ,2 2, ,8 1?
- . . . . !S . . . - . .M . . . . . 1 5 '6 1/ '8 " ^ 21 2. 23 24 25
" " » " " sM M !i ;i 11 » » -0.29 0.263 C.239 0 .2 18 0. 198 0 18 fl i« A i/"f A
S '2 S '2 5 '2" • 198 0 . 18 0.164 0 , 149 0 . 1 35 0. 123 0 . 1 1 2 0 . 10 1 0.0921J ! ' * f '2 ^ 1 ' ° °'9 ^ «'• »•? 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5
26 27 28 29 30• • • • • • • • • - • . - . - . - . . . . . . . . . „ . . . . / ?OT*L
NET PRESENT5 . 2 5 ? < : 3 c - t P , WORTH' * * • * 5.2 5.2 5.25.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5 2 (THOUSAND $' s )n no/ « A-T* « ^ , _ . • • - - • • • • • . . . . . , .
vOCOCOCMs—o
NET PRESENT WORTH 0-4 0.4 0.3 0.3 5387.0
(LPUSL4B2)
IIIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL -4 (B2 > : H IGH CAPITAL COSTS
EXCAVATION/ON-SITE INCINERATION/OFF-SITE DISPOSAL OF ASH
I
I
1 COST COMPONENT QUANTITY UNIT
SITE PREPARATION 4.4 AcREsIN ITIAL MONITORINGSAMPLING -,-> n.vt;c.£ DAYSAMALYSIS 176 SAMPLES
SOUS FROM THE CARVER TERRACE SUBDIVISION:EXCAVATIOS 8400 CY
ON-S ITE KAULING 8400 CY
UNIT COST
$1 ,450
$400$315
$ 15
$3.00
TOTAL COST COMMENTS
46,380
$8,800$55,440
$126,000
$25,200
8 SAMPLES COLLECTED/DAY8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZEDFOR PAHs AND ARSENIC
1 PT OVER 190,000 SF;20% BULKING; EXCAV 1/2 OFA LOT AT A T IHE - 1 WEEK
SENSIT IV ITY TOTALFACTOR COST
1 - 1 $7,018
1-1 $9,6801.1 $60,984
1 . 1 $138,600
1-1 $27,720BULK SOLIDS FROM THE KENNEDY SAND AND GRAVEL PROPERTY-
LOAD it* rvloU CYON-S ITE HAULING 160 CY
OH-S ITE INCINERATOR SYSTEM:MOB/DEMOS ! ,p .._,1 i-r oUnTEST BURN , Lp INCINERATION 8560 cyELECTR & IWSTRUM t Lp SUHA IRMON IT o e i NG 6 MONTHSASH TESTING (DEL IST ING) 1 LP SUMASH DISPOSAL:
LOADING ASH 4280 CYTRANSPORTATION 9$000 LM
DISPOSAL 4280 CY
SITE RESTORATION:CLEAN BACKFILL -OO" ) 7000 CY
SPREADING 7000 CY500 ««) 21100 SY
HEALTH & SAFETY 28 WEEKS
- - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ , . . _DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING & DESIGN ( 1 1%)
CONTINGENCY (20%)^""SSBBSBBSEsassscBssBssssssssssKiiM-s
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL
$100$3,00
$100,000sso.ooo
$250$95,000$3,000
$100,000
$3.50$4.00
$200
$5.00
$2.00$3.55
$4,000
. . . . . . . . . . .
ssssestassaa
COST
$16,000$480
$100,000$80,000
$2, 140,000$95,000$18,000
$100,000
$14,980$396,000
$856,000
$35,000
$14,000$74,905
$ 1 12 ,000
• • • * * - • * • ' * . . *
c&usEa^a^ctfsa
FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFFS
50 CY PER DAY
ASSUME 50% VOLUME LOSS;300 MILES ONE-WAY;13 CY/20 TON TRUCK=330LOADSDISPOSED AT AN OFF -S ITE
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREAINCLUDES A H&S OFF ICERDURING REMEDIATION- • - • - - • . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . .
' . . . . . . . . . . . » . . , , . . t
saHB*ssa5is!3saaaa!asa=a=s=ss=
1 - 1 $17,6001.0 $480
1 .0 $100,0001 .0 $80,0001 . 1 $2,354,0001 . 1 $104,5001 - 1 $19,8001 -0 $100,000
1 - 1 $16,4781 . 1 $435,600
1 . 1 $941,600
1 . 1 $38,500
1 . 1 $ 15 ,4001.1 $82,396
1- 1 $123,200
$4,673,556
*S14,091
$934,7113att5BBaa=aa=a=ai,-sSaa
$6,122,358*** * * * * * * * *
*1 * 1* A* »
r-0000CMr-O
(H I -SL462)
^^H
IALTERNATIVE S L -4 ( B2 > : H IGH PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
I
1IIIIII
0 1
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
4 5 6 7 10 11 12
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL AMNUAL COST
6122.05 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 S .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .3 5 .2
6122.0 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,2ANNUAL OISCCtAT RATE310% 1 0.909 0.&26 0.751 Q.6S3 0.621 0.564 0.513 0,467 0.424 0.386 0.35 0 .3 19
NET PRESEMT UORTH 6122.0 4.7 4.3 3.9 3.6 3.2 2.y 2.7 2.4 2,2 2.0 1.8 1.7
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310%
NET PRESENT UORTH
CAPITAL COST0$M COSTSTOTAL AMNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE3105C
NET PRESENT WORTH
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 21 23 24 25
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.29 0.263 0.239 0.218 0, 198 0 . 18 0. 164 O .U9 0 . 135 0 . 123 0 . 1 12 0 . 10 1 0.092
1 .5 1 ,4 1 .2 1 . 1 1 .0 0 .9 0 .9 0 .8 0 ,7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5
26 27 28 29 30
5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.25.2 5.2 S.2 5.2 5.2
0.084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3
TOTALNET PRESENT
UORTH(THOUSAND $'s)
6171 .0
o
(HPUSL4B2)
IIIIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL -4 (C ) : PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PgR S1000
4 5 6CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL AJJNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATEfllOfc
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTCSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATEaiO%
rfET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTcm COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310%
NET PRESENT WORTH
- " - - - - • - - " - - - - - - . - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ ° y 10 11 1221806.0 ' " " " " " " " " " • " " " ' - • - " • - • - * - * • . . . . . . . . .„21806.0 5^2 s,z 5.1 I ' l I ' l I ' l \' l 5 '2 S '2 5 '2 5 '2 5.2
' 0,09 0.826 0,51 0.683 0.621 0,64 0.5, OJ67 .£ 0* £ pjj j21806.0 4.7 4.3 30 -5 x , ,3-6 3 .2 2.9 2.7 2.4 2 .2 2 .0 , _3 , ?
. . .J3 . . . . . . 1 4 . . . . . 1 5 '6 17 18 » 20 21 21 23 24 25
" » » « 11 ii " r,z 5-2 - » » »«.» 0.2,3 0.23, ..,„ 0,,6 ,i8 ,„ ,,w „_» Q » o » o » ^
KS '•* ''2 M 1'° "•' «•» «•« «•/ o., o., o.s o.
26 27 26 29 30- - . - - . . - . . . . . . . TOTAL
NET PRESENT5 - 2 5 . 2 5 . 2 5 . 2 52 U°R™5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5 P (THOUSAND $ ' s >
0.084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057 - - - - - - -
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0 3U '5 21855.0
(PW-SL4C)
00COC\Jv-O
I
^^n
IALTERNATIVE SL'4<C): LOW CAPITAL COSTS
I eXCAVATION\OFP-SITE INCINERATION
IIIII
COST COMPONENT
SITE PREPARATIONIN IT IAL MONITOR ING
SAMPLINGANALYSIS
QUANTITY
4.4
22176
UNIT
ACRES
DAYSSAMPLES
UNIT COST
$1,45»
(400$315
TOTAL COST
$6,380
$3,800$55,440
COMMENTS
3 SAMPLES COLLECTED/DAY8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZED
SENSITIVITYFACTOR
0.95
0.950.95
TOTALCOST
$6,061
$3,360$52,665
SOILS FROM THE CARVER TERRACE SUBDIVISION:EXCAVATE
TRANSPORTATION
INCINERATE
8400 CY
194100 LM
8400 CY
$15 $126,000
$4 $776,400
$1,700 $14,280,000
FOS PAHS AND ARSENIC
1 FT DEPTH OVER 190,000 SF;20% BULKING; 35 CY/WEEKEXCAVATED; PLACED IN 20-GALLON CONTAINERS300 MI ONE-WAY; 13CY/20TON TRUCK
BULK SOLIDS *RGM THE KENNEDY SAND AND GRAVEL PROPERTY;LOADING BULK SOLIDS 160 CY $100 $16,000TRANSPORTATION 1200 LH $4 $4,800INCINERATE 160 CY $1 ,700 4272,000
0.95 $ 1 19 ,700 o03
0,95 $737,580 (\j
0.95 $13,566,000 _
0.95 $15,2001.0 $4.800
0-95 $258,400
II
SITE RESTORATION:BACKFILL O0")
SPREADINGSCO <2">
HEALTH & SAFETY
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
TOflO CY $5.00 $35,000 ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
7000 CY $2.00 $14,00021100 SY $3.55 $74,905 ONLY POR CARVER TERRACE
AREA
244 WEEKS $4,000 $976,000 H&S OFFICER DURINGMONITORING & EXCAVATION;HNu AND RESPIRATORS
0.95 $33,250
0.95 $ 13 ,3000.95 $71 , 160
0.95 $927,200
$15 ,813 ,679
ENGINEERING & DESIGN (11%)
CONTINGENCY <20X)
$1 ,739,505
$3,162,736
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST
$30,715,919* * * * * * * * * * * * *
$20,716,000
ssasssajasssss&BassasSasasaasasrMssssssajBseBtieessa*(LOW-SL4C)
••M
IIIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL'4(C); LOW PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PgR YEAR PER $1000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOLUT RAT6a)10%
Hfcl PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL C3S7ANNUAL DISCOS RATE310%
NET PRgSm WORTH
CAPITAL COST0£M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X
MET PRESENT WORTH
20716.0
20716 .01
20716.0
13
5,25,2
0.29
1 . 5
26
5 .25 ?j • «.
0.084
0.4
5.25.2
0.90$
4 .7
14
5.25.2
0.263
1 .4
27
5 .25,2
0.076
0.4
5 .25 . 2
0.826
4.3
15
5.25.2
0.239
1 .2
28
5 .25.2
0.069
0.4
S.25.2
0.751
3 .9
16
5.25.2
0.218
1 ,1
29
5 . 25 .2
0,063
0.3
5,25 .2
0.683
3.6
17
5.25.2
0.198
1 .0
30
5 .25 .2
0.057
0.3
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0,621 0.564 0,513 0,467 0.424 0.386 0.35
3,2 2.9 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.0 1 .8
13 19 20 21 21 23 24
5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5,2 5,2 5.25.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2
0.18 0.164 0.149 0.135 0.123 0. 1 12 0.101
0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORM(TKOUSANO * 'S)
20765.0
5 ,25,2
0.319
1 . 7
25
5.25.2
0.092
0.5
GOCMr—O
(LPUSL4C)
IIIIIIIIII
COST COI**OHEMT
ALTERNATIVE SL -4 (C ) : H IGH CAPITAL COSTS
EXCAVATIONXOFF-SITE INCINERATION
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST COMMENTS
SITE PREPARATIONIN IT IAL MONr
SAMPUN4ANALYSIS
4.4 ACRES
22 DAYS176 SAMPLES
SOILS (-'ROM THE CARVER TERRACE SUBDIVISION:EXCAVATE 8400 CY
194100 Lh
8400 CY
$1,450
$400$315
$15
$6,380
$8,800 8 SAMPLES COLLECTED/DAYSS5,440 8 SAHPLES/LOT ANALYZED
FOR PAHS AND ARSENIC
SENSITIVITYFACTOR
1 . 1
1 . 11 . 1
INCINERATE
$126,000 1 FT DEPTH OVER 190,000 SF;20£ SULKING; 35 CY/UEEKEXCAVATED; PLACED IN 20-GALLON CONTAINERS
$4 $776,400 300 HI ONE-WAY; 13CY/20TON TRUCK
$1 ,700 $ 14 ,280,000
BULK SOLIDS FUCK THE KENNEDY SAND AND GRAVEL PROPERTY:LOADING BXK SOLIDS 160 CY $100 $16,000TRANSPORTATION 1200 LH $4 $4,800INCINERATE 160 CY $1,700 $272,000
SITE R6STORATl£i<:BACKFILL CIO" )
SPREADINGSOD (2")
7000 CY
7000 CY21100 SY
$5.00 $35,000 ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
$2.00 $14,000$3.55 $74,905 ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACE
AREA
TOTALCOST
$7,018
$9,680$60,984
1 . 1 $138,600
1.1 $854,040
1 . 1 $15,708,000
1 . 11 .01 . 1
$17,600$4,800
$Z99,200
1.1 $38,500
1 . 1 $ 15 ,4001.1 $82,396
CM
CO
Vo
"EALTH & SAFETY
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
244 WEEKS W.OOO $976,000 HAS OFFICER DURINGMONITORING £ EXCAVATION;HNU AND RESPIRATORS
1 . 1 $1,073,600
$18,309,818
ENGINEERING & DESIGN < <
CONTINGENCY (20X)
$2,014,080
$3,661,964
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST
$23,985,861* * * * * * * * * * * * *
$23,986,000
«BasssaH3S3saeBaas«ssss;s=sssssSBss=:::ssssBsa3a:S3S5»asso=3ss=Ka£s::=;3c(H I -SL4C)
fIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL -4 (C ) : H IGH PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL ?3S?ANNUAL 5ISCOUH- RATE31
0 1 2 3 4 523986.0
S -2 5 .2 5 ,2 5 .2 5 .223986.0 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 . 2
10% 1 0.909 0.826 0.751 0.683 0.621
6 7 s•""*"-"""-"
$ .2 5 .2 5 .25-2 5.2 5.2
0.564 0 .5 13 0.467
9 10 11• • - • - - . . . - » . . . , . , . „ . . . .
5-2 5 .2 5 .25.2 S .2 5 .2
0.424 0.386 0,35
12. . . . . . .
5 . 25 . 2
0 .3 19NET UNTH 23986.0 4.7 4.3 3.9 3.6 3.2 2 .9 2 .7 2>4 1 .8 1 .7
I
CAPITAL COST0£« COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUH^ RAT£310%
HET PRESENT WORTH
13 14
5 .2 5 . 25 .2 5 .2
0.29 0.263
15
5 .25 . 2
0.239
16
5 . 25 . 2
0 .2 18
17 18 19
5-2 5 .2 5 .25-2 5 .2 5 .2
0,98 0 . 18 0,64 0
20 21 21
5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2
' • 149 0,35 0,23 (j
23 24
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
1 , 12 0 . 10 1
25
5 .25 .2
0.092
&COCM•(—O
0.8 0.7 ° -6 0.6 0.5 0,5
26
III
CAPITAL COST° *HCOSTS
TOTAL AHNUAL COST
27 ?8 29
5 2*5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25.2 5 .2 53 s 2 , .
AHNUAL DISCOUNT RATES10X 0.084 0.076 0.069 0 0 6 3 0 0 5 7
NET PRES£MT WORTH 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3
(HPWS14C)
TOTALMET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND $ ' s )
24035.0
IIIII1
CAPITAL COST0«M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUM- RATE310%
NET PfiEStNT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL CCSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310%
NET PRE^KT WORTH
CAPITAL CO'jTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COST
3854.0
ALTERNATIVE SL -4 (D ) : PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER *1000
» » " » »s2. o.,, o.M3 ..«, 0 .S1J 0 .
10
ANNUAL DISCOUNT CU£3lO% C.034 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057
NET UORTH 0-4 0.4 0.3 0.3
1 .424 0.3S6
2 .2 2 .0
12
5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.25.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2
0.29 0.263 0.239 0.218 0.198 0.18 0.164 0.149
1 .5 1 .4 1 .2 1 . 1 1 .0 0 .9 0 .9 0 .8
26 27 28 29 30
5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 S .2
5.2 5.2 5.2 S.25.2 5.2 5.2 5.2
0.135 0.123 0.112 0,101
0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND $'s)
£3
5.25.2
0.092
0 .5
cr-00CM•r—O
3903.0
(PW-SL4D)
iiIi
iiili
ALTERNATIVE SL-4(0): LOW CAPITAL COSTS
EXCAVATIOH/OPF-SITE LANDFILLttWITlVITY TOTAL
COST CCW^ONENT QUANTITY
SITE PREPAfiArrONI N I T IAL HONIT38JNG
SAMPLINGANALYSIS
SOILS FROM TMS CARVER TERRACEEXCAVA'ION
TRANSPORT
DISPOSE
BULK SOLIDS F60H THE KENNEDYLOAD SULK SOLIDSTRANSPORTDISPOSAL
SITE RESTORATIONCLEAN SACKFUL (10")
SPREADINGSOO <2">
HEALTH & SAFETY
OfRECT CAPITAL COST
4,4
22176
UNIT
ACRES
DAYSSAMPLES
UNIT COST
$1,450
UOO$315
TOtAL COST
$6,380
$8,800$55,440
COMMENTS
8 SAMPLES COLLICTED/OAY8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZEDFOR PAHS AND ARSENIC
FACTOR COST
0,95 $6,061
0,95 $8,3600.95 $52,668
SUBDIVIS ION:8400
194100
8400
SAND AND160
1200160
7000
700021 100
28
CY
LH
CY
$15
14.00
$200
$126,000
1776,400
$1,680,000
1 FT OVER 190,000 Sf;20% BULKING; EXCAV 1/2 OFA LOT AT A T I HE - 1 WEEK300 HUES ONE-WAY,
13 CYS PEfi 20 TON TRUCK3 647 TRUCK LOADS
0.95 $119,700
0,95 $737,580
0.95 $1 ,596,000
LT\O00CM
S
GRAVEL PROPERTY:CYLHCY
CY
CYSY
WEEKS
$100$4.00$200
$5.00
$2.00$3.55
4000
$16,000$4,800
$32, COO
$35,000
$14,000$74,905
$1 12 ,000
FOUR 40-CY EOLL-OFFS
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
H&!> OFFICER DURINGMONITORING fc EXCAVATION;K'Nu, RESPIRATORS
0.95 $15,2001 .0 $4,800
0.95 $30,400
0.95 $33,250
0.95 $13,3000.95 $71 , 160
0.95 $106,400
$2,794,879
ENGINEERING & DESIGN (1U)
CONTINGENCY (20%)
$307,437
$558,976
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST
$3,661,291* * * * * * * * * * * *
$3,661,000
( LOU-SL4D)
IIIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL- i (O) : LOW PRESENT WOftTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 1 1 12
CAPITAL COST 3661.0OSH COSTS 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2TOTAL ANNUAL COST 3661.0 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2ANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X 1 0.909 0.626 0.751 0.683 0,621 0.564 0.513 0.467 0.424 0.386 0.35 0,319
NET f»8€££UT 3661.0 4.7 4.3 3.9 3.6 3.2 2.9 2.7
13 U 15 16 17 IS 19 20
2.4
21
2.2 2.0
21 23
i .a
24
1 . 7
25
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL 01SCCUI7 RAT £310%
5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5,2 5.2 5.2 5,2 5.2 5,29.2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0,29 0.263 0.239 0.218 0.193 0.16 0.164 0.149 0. 135 0.123 O.H2 fi.tdl 0.092
NET WORTH 1 .5 1 .4 1 .2 1 . 1 1 .0 0.9 0.9 0,8 0.7
26 27 29 30
0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5
TOTAL
CAPITAL COSTOJH COSTS 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2TOTAL ANNUAL COST 5.2 5,2 5.2 5.2 5.2ANNUAL DISCO*' RATgaiOX 0.034 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057
NET WORTH 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3
WORTH(THOUSAND t 'S j
3710.0
CDCM«•=O
^^^IIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL-4 <0 ) : HIGH CAPITAL COSTS
EXCAVATION/OFF-SITE LANOflU
COST COMPONENT QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST
S ITE PREPARATION 4.4 ACRES 4 1 ,450INITIAL HON1TOS1NG
SAMPLING 22 DAYS 4400ANALYSI S 1 76 SAMPLES 4315
SOILS FROM TK£ CARVER TCCAACE SU80IVISI0N:EXCAVATION 6400 CY 115
TRAJiSPOPT 194100 LH 44.00
DISPOSAL 8400 CY 4200
BULK SOLIDS FROM THE KEttXEDY SAND AND GRAVEL PROPERTY:LOAD BULK SOLIDS 160 CY 4100TRANSPORT 1200 LH 44.00DISPOSAL 160 CY 4200
SITE RESTORATION:CLEAN BACKFILL O0»> 7000 CY 45.00
SPREADING 7000 CY 42.00SOD (2") 21 100 SY 43.55
HEALTH & SAFETY 2& WEEKS 4000
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING & DESIGN ( 1 1X )
CONTINGENCY (20%)
SSSSS«eeBS«sas««a«^a«s s Ha«a«Ba,«a!,a«a«
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
SENSITIVITYTOTAL COST COMMENTS FACTOR
46,380 1.1
48,800 6 SAMPLES COUECTEO/DAY 1.1455,440 « SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZED 1.1
FOR PAHS AND ARSENIC
4126,000 1 FT OVER 190,000 SF; 1.120X BULKING; EXCAV 1/2 OFA LOT AT A TIHE- 1 WEEK
4?76,400 300 HUES OHg-WAY, 1.113 CYS PER 20 TON TRUCK» 647 TRUCK LOADS
41,680,000 1.1
416,000 FOUR 40-CY ROLL-QFFS 1.144,800 1.0
432,000 1.1
$35,000 ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACE 1.1APiA
414,000 1 . 1474,905 ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACE 1.1
AREA
4112 ,000 HIS OFFICER DURING 1 . 1MONITORING & EXCAVATION;HNu, RESPIRATORS
: ao a ame aaaasaa s sa *a»«aa33oa a a asssa ac a sa a ssssss a aa a fie a
TOTALCOST
47,018
49,680460,984
4138,600 ^0s'
4854,040 00<M
41,848,000 -.CJ
417,60044,800
435,200
438,500
415,400482,396
4123,200
43,235,418
4355,896
4647,084
:aass33=S3aaa
44,238,397* * * * * * * * * * * *
APPROXIMATE IOTAL CAPITAL COST 44,238,000
(HI-SL4D)^
IIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE SL'4(D>: HIGH PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER $10001 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE31CX
NET PRESENT WOftTH
CAPITAL COSTQ&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOJN^ RATEfllOX
NET PBESfNT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTOiH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT ftATE31G5S
NET PRESENT WORTH
4238.0
4236.01
4238.0
13
5.25.2
0.29
1 .5
26
5.25 2<f • b
0.084
0.4
5.25 .2
0.909
4.7
14
5 .25.2
0.26.,
1 ,4
27
5.25 .2
0.076
0.4
5 ,25 .2
0.826
4.3
15
5 .25.2
0.239
1 ,2
28
5.25 .2
0.069
0.4
5.25 .2
0.751
3.9
16
5 .25.2
0.2 18
1 . 1
29
5.25.2
0.063
0.3
5.2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0.683 0.621
3.6 3.2
17 18
5 .2 5 .2S.2 5.2
0.198 0 . 18
1 .0 0.9
30
5.25.2
0.057
0.3
5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2
0.564 0.513 0,467 0.424 0.386
2.9 2.7 2,4 2,2 2.0
19 20 21 21 23
S .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 .2 5 ,25.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2
0.164 0 , 149 0. 135 0. 123 0 . 1 12
0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0,6
TOTALU£T PDfQFUTrib i rtvcobNi
WORTH(THOUSAND t 's)
4287.0
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0.35 0.319
1 .8 1 .7
24 25
5 .2 5 .25 .2 5 .2
0. 101 0 ,092
0.5 0.5
ccoCO<M*—o
CHPHSL4D)
IIIIIIIIIIIII
CAPITAL COSTOfiH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310S
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RAT£310%
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTOSH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310%
NET PRESENT WORTH
(PU-SL4E)
ALTERNATIVE SL-4(E > : PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER tlOGQ
2 3 * 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12
o 7.t 1:1 % l-i 2 j;i - -1 O.W O.B26 0.75, 0.683 8.«, O.S64 O.SH D.«7
615 .0 6., 6.3 5.7 5.2 «., * . , , . ,
16 20
J-5
2,
7,6 7.6.424 0.386
3.2 2.9
21 23
7 67.6 7-67.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7 . 6 7 . 6 7 . 6 7 6 7 60.20 0.263 0.23, 0.2 ,8 0 . 198 0.. . 0.164 «.,» 0 . 135 0 . 123 O. l i *7 (,
«.'«
1 . 1 1 .0 0.9 0.8
7.60.092
0.7
COCM*t~o
26 27 28 29
7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.67.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6
0.084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057
0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND * ' s >
686,6
aiiiiii
ALTERNATIVE SL -4 (E ) : LOU CAPITAL COSTS
EXCAVATION/PASSIVE SOIL WASHING
I
I
COST COW>ONENT QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST
SITE PREPARATION 1 LP SUM $2,000IN IT IAL MONITORING:
SAMPLING 22 DAYS $400ANALYSIS 176 SAMPLES $315
SOILS FROM THE CARVER TERRACE SUBDIVIS ION:EXCAVATE 8400 CY $15
ON-S ITE HAULING 8400 CY $3
SULK SOLIDS FROM THE KENNEDY SAND AND GRAVEL PROPERTY:LOAD BULK SOLIDS 160 CY $100ON-SITE HAULING 160 CY $3.00
S ITE RESTORATION:CLEAN BACKF ILL (10") 7000 CY $5-00
SPREADING 7000 CY $2-00SOD (2") 21 100 SY $3.55
HEALTH & SAFETY 28 WEEKS $4,000
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING & DESIGN ( 1 1% )
CONTINGENCY (20X)
SBssssssasassjsassassssssssBsssssBBSgsSHsssssa-BMBBSssssssssssa
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
TOTAL COST COMMENTS
$2,000
$8,800 8 SAMPLES COLLECTED/DAY$55,440 8 SAMPLES/LOT ANALYZED
FOR PAHs AND ARSENIC
$126,000 1 FT OVER 190,000 SF;20% BULKING; EXCAVATE 1/2A LOT AT A T IME- 1 WEEK
$25,200 HAULED TO THE GRAVELP ITS ; TO BE TREATED WITHGROUND WATER
$16,000 FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFFS$480 HAULED TO THE GRAVEL PITS
TO BE TREATED U1THGROUND WATER
$35,000 ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACEAREA
$14,000$74,905 ONLY FOR CARVER TERRACE
AREA
$112,000 H&S OFFICER DURINGMONITORING & EXCAVATION;HNU, RESPIRATOR
sa=eaHBSB=-=B=aasass3B:!SS:i*BSSSssnssts.s=5B
SENS IT IV ITY TOTALFACTOR COST
0.95 $1,900
0.95 $8,3600.95 $52,668
0.95 $1 19,700OF
0.95 $23,940
0.95 $15 ,2001.0 $480
0.95 $33,250
0.95 $13,3000.95 $71 , 160
0.95 $106,400
$446,358
$49,099
$89,272
i3aaaaa=j3ii=33H!=Bsae=3s
$584,729* * * * * * * * * * *
O
oCM«r—O
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST $585,000
(LOW-SL4E)
ALTERNATIVE SL -4 < £ > : LOW PRESENT WORTH AMALYS1S
COST PER YEAR PE6 41000
CAPITAL COST0£H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATESlOX
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RAT£310%
NET PRESENT WORTH
0
585.0
585 .01
585.0
,3
7.67.6
0.29
2.2
26
7.67.6
0.084
0.6
1
7.67.6
0.909
6.9
u
7.67.6
0.263
2 .0
27
7.67.6
0.076
0.6
2
7.67.6
0.826
6.3
15
7.67.6
0.239
1 .8
28
7.67.6
0.069
0 .5
3
7.67.6
0.751
5.7
16
7.67.6
0.218
1 .7
29
7.67.6
0.063
0.5
4
7.67.6
0.683
5.2
17
7.67.6
0. 198
1 .5
30
7.67.6
0.057
0.4
5 6 7 8 9 1 0
7.6 7.6 7,6 7.6 7.6 7.67.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6
0.621 0.5M 0 .5 13 0.467 0.424 0.386
4.7 4.3 3.9 3.5 3.2 2.9
18 19 20 21 21 23
7.6 7.6 7,6 7.6 7.6 7.67.6 7.6 7,6 7.6 7.6 7.6
0. 18 0 . 164 0. 149 0. 135 0. 123 0 . 1 1 2
1 .4 1 .2 1 . 1 1 .0 0,9 0.9
TOTALNET PRESENT
WORTH{THOUSAND * ' S )
656.6
11 12
7.6 7.67.6 7.6
0,35 0.319
2.7 2.4
24 25
7.6 7.67.6 7.6
0. 10 1 0.092
0.8 0.7
eg?—o
(LPWSL4E)
IIIII
COST COMPONENT
ALTERNATIVE SL-4(E) ; If IGH CAPITAL COST3
EXCAVATION/PASSIVE SOIL WASHING
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST COKKgNTSSENSITIVITY TOTAL
FACTOC COS?
SITE PREPARATION 1 LP SUH (2,000IN IT IAL MONITORING;
SAMPLING 22 DAYS $400ANALYSIS 176 SAMPLES $315
SOILS FROM THE CARVER TERRACE SUBDIVISION:EXCAVATE 8400 CY $15
OH-SITE HAULING MOO CY $3
SULK SOLIDS FROM THE KENNED? SAND AMD GRAVEL PROPERTY:LOAD BULK SOLIDS 160 CY $100GN-S1TE HAULING 160 CY $3.00
SITE R6STORAUOH:CLEAN BACKFILL (10"> 7000 CY $5.00
SPREADING 7000 CY $2.00SOD (2") 21100 SY $3.55
HEALTH & SAFETY 28 WEEKS $4,000
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENGINEERING & DESIGN ( 1 1X)
CONTINGENCY (20%)
TOTAL CAPITAL COS*
$2,000$6,800 3 SAMPLES COLLECTED/DAY
$s$,440 8 SAMPLCS/LOT ANALYZEDFOR PAK* AND ARSENIC
$126,000 1 Ft OVER 190,000 SF;20* SULKING; EXCAVATE 1/2 OFA LOT AT A TIHI-1 WEEK
125,200 HAULED TO THE GRAVELPITS; TO 8E TREATED WITHdftCUMD WATER
$16,000 FOUR 40-CY ROLL-OFFS$480 HAULED TO THE GRAVEL PITS
TO SE TREATED WITHGROUND WATER
135,000 ONLY FOR CARViR TERRACEAREA
$14,000$74,905 ONLY fOU CARVER TERRACE
AREA
$1 12 ,000 HiS OFFICER DURINGMONITORING & EXCAVATION;HNU, RISPIRATGR
1.1 $2,200
1.1 19,6401.1 160,944
1.1 $133,600
1.1 $27,720
1 . 1 $17,6001,0 $430
T.I $33,500
1.1 $15,4001.1 $32,396
1.1 $123,200
$516,760
$56,344
$103,352
$676,955* * * * * * * * * * *
CVJoaCM
O
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST $677,000
(H I -SUE)
ALTERNATIVE S l-4(E) : HIGH PRESENT UOfitH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAft P£ft 41000
CAPITAL COSTOiH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCO** HATES10X
NET PKESCKT WOftTK
CAPITAL COSTOftM COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL OlSCCUft* ftAU310X
NET Pfi£S€«T tfttTH
CAPITAL COST0£H COSTStfiTIL AlltltlAL COSTIU ' » «ft*lU«^ ***** •
ANNUAL DISCOUNT RATESlCX
MET PR£S£HT WORTH
0
677.0
677.01
677.0
13
7.67.6
0.29
2.2
26
7.67.6
O.C*4
0.6
1
7.67.6
0.909
6.9
14
7.67.6
0.263
2.0
27
7.67 ,6.0
0.076
0.6
2
7.67.6
0.526
6.3
15
7.67.6
0.239
i.a
23
7.67.6
0.069
0.5
3
7.67.6
0.751
5.7
16
7.67.6
0.21f t
1 . 7
29
7.67.6
0.063
0.5
4
7.67.6
0.633
5.2
17
7.67.6
0. 198
1 . 5
30
7.67 AI ,O
0.057
0.4
5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1
7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.67.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6
0.621 0.564 0.513 0.467 0.426 0.3d6 0.35
4.7 4.3 3.9 3.5 3.2 2.9 2.7
18 19 20 21 21 23 24
7.6 7.6 7,6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.67.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6
0. 18 0.164 0. 149 0 . 135 0.123 0 . 1 1 2 0 . 10 1
1.4 1 .2 1 . 1 1 .0 0.9 0.9 0.8
TOTALNET PBES£MT
WORTH(THOUSAHO i '3)
748.6
12
7.67.6
0.319
2.4
25
7.67.6
0.092
0.7
coCMr-o
<HPVS14£)
SOURCE INFORMATION FOR MAJOR CCST ITEMS
SITE
SAMPLING
ANALYS IS
HEALTH & SAFE* '
PERIODIC INSPECTION
*ENCE HAIHTENAtiCE
LOAD SULK SOL::SEXCAVATIONOH - S I T E HAUL ItC
TQPSOIL
SPREADING
SCO
MOWING
WATER
SPRINKLES SYS'EM
I N - S I TU 8JORECLAMATIQH
MECHANICAL SCI. WASHINGTREATMENT UNIT
0N-S 1TE INCINERATIONMGS/DEH06TEST BURNI MCI HERAT! ONAIS KONlTQft lVGASK TEST I KG
OFF -S ITE TRANSPORTATION
OFF-S ITE DISPOSAL
OFF-S ITE INCINERATION
(SL-SCURC)
t1,i5G/ACR£; MEANS, 021 108.0500,
WOO/DAY; ASSUMES 440/HOUR LABOR * EXPENSES
1315/SAMPLE, MUS 196S PRICE GUIDE
t4GOO/WEEK; ASSUMES LABOR COST OF tSO.OO/HGtlR;WOO RCUK& TRIP; (ZOO/WEEK FOfi RESPIRATOR;i 1SO/W£EK FOR A HNU, AND APPROX tdSO/WEEK EXPEUSIS
i1,200/:HSP€CTIOH; ASSUMES $SO/HR LABOR *$800 ROUND TR IP TRAVEL EXPENSE
MEANS, 015 304.0010,
t lOO/CY; MEAHS, 020 7 17 . 1 1 20 ,
t lS/CY; HSANS, 022 254.0050,1988 * HEALTMASAFETY
J3/CY; MEANS, 022 266.1150, 1988 * HEALTHASAfETY
47.50/CY; VENDOR GUGTg
$2/CY; VENDOR SUITE
; VENDOR QUOTE
; t30/HONlH/LOT-VEWDOB QUOTE; USED 6 MONTHS
t/20/LOT; $120/HONTH/LOT-VEHDm QUOTE; USED 6 MONTHS
190/LGT; t15/HONTH/LOT -VENDOR QUOTE; USED 6 MONTHS
S2.000AOT; VENDOR OUOTE; INCLUDES BOX AND METES
H35/CY; KEYSTONE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES (ICER) ESTIMATE
ALL ASSOCIATED COSTS ARE KER ESTIMATES
$100,000; COST FROM gRT PREVIOUS REPORTS480,000; COST FROM ERT PftgVlOUS REPORTS4250/CY; COST FROM EPA PftgVIOUS REPORTt3,Onn/HONTH; COST FROM EftT PREVIOUS REPORTSt lOO.OOO; COST FROM ERT PREVIOUS REPORTS
i'./LOADED MILE; COST FROM ERT PREVIOUS REPORTS
$200/CY; MEANS 020 717.6021 , 19S8
$1,700/CY; VENDOR QUOTE
^^^IIIIIIIIIIIII
OoCM*r-O
APPENDIX 6-B
COSTING TABLES ASSOCIATED WITH THE GROUND WATERRESPONSE MEDIA UNIT ALTERNATIVES
I2069T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
IIIII
APPENDIX 6-B
GROUND WATER ALTERNATIVE COSTING TABLE
This appendix presents the costing table used for thedetai led evaluation of the ground water alternatives (Sect ion6 . 0 ? . Included are the tables for the baseline present worthevaluat ion; the capital and present work tables for the lowcost evaluation; and the capital and present worth costs forthe high cost evaluat ion. Also included in this appendix is al ist ing of the major baseline unit costs and theircorrespond ing sources .
OOCM^r—O
2069T 4 0 4 0 - 0 0 1 - 6 0 0
IIIII
ALTERNATIVE G W - 1 : PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
I
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
CAPITAL COSTC&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RAT£310%
NET PRESENT WOftTK
CAPITAL COSTOSM COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310%
45,0
45 .01
45.0
13
9.09.0
0.29
9.09 .0
0.909
8.2
U
9.09.0
0.263
9.09.0
0.826
7.4
15
9.09.0
0.239
9.09.0
0.751
6.8
16
9.09.0
0.21 f t
9 .09.0
0.683
6.1
17
9.09.0
CklOfl
9.09.0
0.621
S .6
18
9.09.0
n 10
9.09,0
0.564
5.1
19
9.09.0
n \LI
9.09 .0
0.513
4.6
20
9.09.0
A tlf.
9.09.0
0.467
4 .2
21
9.09.0
9.09.0
0.424
3.8
21
9.09.0
9.0 9.09.0 9.0
0.3B6 0.35
3.5 3.2
23 24
9.0 9.09.0 9.0
l £
9.09.0
0.319
2,9
25
9.09.0
r-OONCM<r-O
NET PRESENT WORTH 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.0 i .a 1 .6 1 .3 1 .2 1 . 1 1 .0
.092
0.8
III
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COST
29 30
9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.09.0 9.0 9,0 9.0 9.0
ANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310X 0.084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0,057
NET PRESENT WORTH
(PW
0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0,5
TOTALHIT PRESENT
WORTH(THCUSAHO J ' s )
129.8
I
•^HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE CW-2A: PRCSEHT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER TEA* PER $1000
1 10 I t 12
CAPITAL COS'OAH COSTSTCTAL AHNUA. :CST
ISCXl- RATE81CX
1248.031 1 .0 3M.O 3H.O 31 1 .0 JM.O 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 J ' 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0
1248 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 31 1 .0 31 1 .0 31 1 .0 Jt l .O 31 1 .01 0.909 0.826 0.751 0.663 0.621 0.564 0 .5 13 0.467 0.424 0.386 3.35 0.319
WET PtE««T WORTH 1243.0 282.7 256.9 233.6 2 12 .4 193.1 175.4 159.5 145.2 131 ,9 120.0 108.9 99.2
CAPITAL COSTOAK COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL CCSTAWUAL OISCOU«r 8ATE310X
MET P«ESEWT WORTH
CAP ITAL COST018 COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL :OST
OtSCOXA* CATES10X
MET PRESENT WOfiTH
(PV-GU2A)
13 14 1$ 16 17 18 19 20 21 21 23 24
311 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 .0 3H .O 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 31KO 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 03 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 JM.O 3 1 1 .00.29 0.263 0.239 0.21ft 0.198 0. 18 0.164 0.149 0.13$ 0.123 0. 1 12 3. 101 0.092
90.2 S 1 .8 74 .3 67.8 61 .6 56.0 5 1 . 0 46.3 42.0 38.3 34.8 3 1 . 4 28.6
27 29 30
3 1 1 . 1 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 03 1 1 .0 3U .O 3H .O 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 00,084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057
26. t 23.6 2 1 . S 19.6 17.7
TOTAtHET Mi Sty T
WttTK
4179 ,5
COo<>OJr-O
•••IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
ALTERATIVE G W - 2 C A J : »OW CAPITAL COSTS
ACTIVATED CAX80NSENSITIVITY
COST CO»K*ENT QUAD
S ITE MC'tUTIOHWELL «PUACtMI»TSUSUt'AC£ 3CAIN SYSTEM :
CtAIWS : »$TALLPUMPSsi«p IDS' ALLPIPINC
ft£C*AtG£ 'CEttCHtllG ( IN-SITUSNALLC% "«£NCK IHSTALIKJECTIC* PUMPSPIP INGELECT A :«STfiUMt s jECTic * TANKCHEMICAL *IED SYSTEM
HAVCLING 0* EXCAVATED SOILSEXCAVATEOS-SITE «A*JL|NG
GSCUSOWATE* r» £ATH£NT KANTSOIL ' ILLJ* j£ \f£ v t ii /•3W^TG* • ™Vi
"o*^*^?™1
OIL/VATE& S£PCA»B AOSOSe UNIT(HIT UWfi F ILLPiPt»e/Pwe»sELECTft 2 mSTfiUMAHCIl EOUI9HTOTHEft Pftoc TANKS
HEALTH t SA'E*Y
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
MTY
19
210020201
SOIL1500
21111
FCCN20002000
UNIT
LP SUMWILLS
L?PUMPSSUMPSLP SUM
HUSHING)ifPUMPSLP SUMLP SUMLP SUMLP SUM
U»tT COST TOTAL COST CCMMfHTS FACT08
15,00015,000
KSO13,00013,00013,000
:12S
13,500135,000120,000110,00015,000
15,000145,000
1105,000160,000160,00013,000
BASED UPON A 10,000137,500 GAL/DAY INJECTION AATE
17,000135,000120,000110,00015,000
0.950.95
0.950.950.950.95
0.950.950.950.95
f .O1 .0
TOTALCOST
14,750142, 75$
199,750157,000$57,00017,600
135,62516.650
$33,250119,000110,00015,000
TRENCH EXCAVATION:CYCY
• PfttLlMINAftY4000
1
t11
50001111
2«
CYLP SUM
LP SURLP SUMLP SUMi§SLP SUMLP SUMLP SUHLP SUM
*CKS
11513.00
EAftTHUGOC:116
15,000
135,000116,000140,000
11 .00147,000165,000161,000US, 000
u,ooo
130,00016,000 KAuiEO OH SITE TO THE
GRAVEL PITS; TREATED VIA&2CUNO MATES
164,00015,000
135,000116,000140,00015,000
147,000135,000161,000U5.000
196,000 H&S OfflCEft DURING EXCAV;HNu AND RESPIRATORS
0.950.95
0.950.95
1 .01 .01.0a. 95
0.950.950.950.9S
0,95
126,50015,700
160,800$4,750
135,000$16,600140,000
$4,750$44,650$80,750$76,950142,750
$91,200
$910,175
ENGINEERING t DESIGN du>CONTINGENCY (20X)
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST
$ 100 , 1 1 9
1 182,035
$1,192,329
$ 1 , 192 ,000
C
CM
O
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
ALTERATIVE GW 2A: LOW PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER $1000
1 t> 5 10 1 1 12
CAPITAL COSTOAH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL ccstANNUAL 01SCOLA* RATES10*
1 1 92 .03H.O 31 1 .0 3tKO 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 31 t .O 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0
1192.0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 31 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .01 0.909 0.826 0 .751 0.683 0.621 0.564 0 .5 13 0.46? 0.424 0.366 0.35 0 .3 19
NET PR€S£NT WORTH 1 192 .0 2S2.7 256.9 233.6 2 12 .4 193. 1 175 .4 159 .5 145.2 13 1 .9 120 .0 108.9 99.2
CAPITAL COSTOtH COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL OlSCOUh* RATE31QX
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAPITAL COST04H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL 01SCCUD* RATE310X
H6T PRESENT WORTH
(LPWGW2A)
13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 21 25
3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 03 1 1 .0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0
0,29 0,263 0.239 0 .2 18 0 . 1 98 0 . 18 0.164 O.H9 0. 135 0 . 123 0 . 1 1 2 0 . 10 1 0.092
90.2 81-f i 74.3 67.8 61 .6 56.0 5 1 .0 46.3 42.0 38.3 34.8 31 .4 28.6
26 27 29 30
3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 31 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .03 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 00.084 C.076 0.069 0.063 0 .057
26. 1 23.6 2 1 . 5 19.6 17 .7
TOTALNET PRESENT
UORTK(THOUSAND t ' s )
4123 .5
OT-^CVJr-O
m
ALTERNATIVE GW-2(A> : H IGH CAPITAL COSTS
ACTIVATED CARSON
COST COMPONENT QUANTITY
S ITg PREPARAT IONWgLl REPLACEMENTSUBSURFACE SRA1N SYSTEM:
DRA INS INSTALLPUMPSSUMP INS'ALLP I P I N G
RECHARGE TRENCHING < IN-S ITUSHALLOW TRENCH IJJS^ALI NJECT ION PUHPSP IP INGELECT 4 INSTRUMI NJECT ION TANKCHEMICAL FEED SYSTEM
19
2 10020201
sou150C
21111
SENSITIVITY TOTALUN IT UNIT COST TOTAL COST COMMENTS FACTOR COST
LP SUMUELLS
LFPUMPSSUMPSLP SUM
FLUSHING):LFPUMPSLP SUMLP SUMLP SUMLP SUM
$5,000$5,000
$50$3,000$3,000$8,000
K25$3,500
$35,000$20,000$ 10 ,000$5,000
$5,000$45,000
$105,000$60,000$60,000
$8,000
BASED UPON A 10,000$37,500 GAL/DAY INJECTION SATE
$7,000$35,000$20,000$10 ,000$5,000
1 . 1 $5,5001.1 $49,500
1 . 1 f '5,5001 . 1 $66,0001 . 1 $66,0001.1 $8,800
1 . 1 $41,2501 . 1 $7,7001 . 1 $33,5001.1 $22,0001 . 0 S i O . O O O1 .0 $5,000
^_T~O^CM•r-O
HANDLING OF gXCAVATED SOILS FROM TRENCH cXCAVATJON:EXCAVATE 2000 CY $15ON-S lT g HAULING 2000 CY $5.00
GROUNDWATER TREATMENT PLANT • PREL IM INARY EARTHWORK::SOIL F I L LSURVEYING
TREATMENT SYSTEM ;OfflCE/LASOIL/WATER S£PCARB AOSORP UN ITIV IT CARS FILLPIPING/PUMPSELFCTR & INSTRUMANCIL EQUIPHTOTHER PROC TANKS
HEALTH & SAFETY
DIRECT CAPITAL COST
ENG INEER ING & DES IGN ( 1 1% )
CONT INGENCY C20X)
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
24 UEEKS $4,000
$30,000$6,000 HAULED ON S ITE TO THE
GRAVEL P ITS ; TREATED VIAGROUND WATER
40001
111
50001111
CYLP SUM
LP SUMLP SUMLP SUML8SLP SUMLP SUMLP SUMIP SUM
$16$5,000
$35,000$16,000$40,000
$1$47,000$S5,000S81.000$45,000
$64,000$5,000
$35,000$16,000$40,00045,000
$47,000$85,000$81,000$45,000
$96,000 H&S OFFICER DURING EXCAV;HMu AND RESPIRATORS
1 . 1 $33,0001 . 1 $6,600
1 . 1 $?0,4001 . 1 $5,500
1 .01 . 01 . 01 . 11 . 11 . 11 . 11 . 1
$35,000$16,000543,000$5,500
$5 1 , 700$93,500$89, 100$49,500
1 . 1 $1 :5 .600
$ 1 ,037 , 150
$ 1 U , 0 8 7
$207,430
$1,358,667
APPROXIMATE TOTAL CAPITAL COST ,3W,300
( H I - G W 2 A )
^VB^V
IIIII
II
II
CAPITAL COSTQ&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE3lO%
NET PRESgNT WORTH
CAP ITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT RATE310%
NET PRESENT WORTH
CAP ITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL D ISCOUNT RATE310%
NET PRESENT WORTH
13
ALTERNATIVE G W - 2 A : H IGH PRESENT WCHTH ANALYSIS
COT P£ft YEA* PER $1000
1 2 3 4 5 6 / 8 10 11 12
3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 01359.0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 31 1 .0 31 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 31 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0 3 1 1 .0
1 0.909 0.826 0.751 0.683 0.621 0.564 0 .5 13 0.467 0.424 0.386 0.35 0.319
1359.0 282.7 256.9 233.6 2 12 .4 193. 1 175 .4 159 .5 145 .2 1 3 1 . 9 120 .0 108 .9 99.2
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 21 23 24 25
90.2 8 1 .8 74.3 67.8 6 1 .6 S6.0 51 .0 46.3 42.0 38.3 34.3 31 .4 28.6
26
3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 00.064
27 28
3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 00.076 0.069 0.063
30
3 1 1 , 03 1 1 . 00.057
26.1 23.6 21 .5 19.6 17.7
TOTALMET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND * 'S )
4290.5
OJ
3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 00.29
3 1 1 , 03 1 1 . 00.263
3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 00.239
3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 00.218
3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 0 3 1 1 . 00.198 0. 18 0.164
3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 00. 149
3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 00.135
3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 00 . 123
3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 00. 1 12
3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 00. 101
3 1 1 . 03 1 1 . 00.092
CVIsr-O
(HPWGW2A)
IIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE GW-28: PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
COST PER YEAR PER t lQQO
1 10 11 12
1 3 1 1 . 0324.0 324 .0 324.0 324 .0 324.0 324 .0 324.0 324 .0 324 .0 324.0 324 0 324 0
1 3 1 1 .0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324 .0 324 .0 324^01 0.909 0.826 0 .75 1 0.683 0.621 0.564 0 .5 13 0.467 0.424 0.386 0.35 0 .3 19
MET PRESET WORTH 131 1 .0 294.5 267.6 243.3 221.3 201 .2 182.7 166.2 15 1 .3 137.4 1 2 5 . 1 1 1 3 .4 103.4
CAP ITAL COSTO&H COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL GISCOLi * * " RATE310%
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 21 23 24 25
III
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL COSTANNUAL DISCOUNT *ATES10%
NET PRESENT WORTH
324.0 324 .0 324.0 324 .0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0324.0 324 .0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324 -0 324.0 324.0
0.29 0.263 0.239 0 .2 18 0 . 196 0 . 18 0. 164 0, 149 0. 135 0 . 123 0 . 1 1 2 0 . 10 1 0.092
94.0 85 .2 77.4 70.6 64.2 58.3 53 . 1 48.3 43.7 39.9 36.3 32 .7 29.6
26 27 28 30
CAPITAL COSTO&M COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL CCSTANNUAL D ISCOUN- SATES10%
NET PRESET WORTH
324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0324.0 324 .0 324.0 324.0 324.00.084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0 .057
27.2 24 .6 22.4 20 .4 18 .5
TOTALMET PRESENT
WORTH(THOUSAND $ ' S )
4365.0
ONCVJ^~o
(PW-GW2B)
1IIIi0
1252.0
AlTCBMATlVf GW 21: LOW PRESENT UOtTN AftAlTftlf
COST HI TiAK H* II000
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 12
CAPITAL COSTOJ5« COSTS 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0TOTAL ANNUAL COST 1252.0 324.0 324.0 326.0 324.0 324.0 32*.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324,0AWIHJAL OUCOWT UTUtOX f 0.909 0.526 0.751 0.483 0.621 0.*M 0.513 0.467 0.424 0.386 O.M 0.3t»
NET PRES£«t WOftTH 1252.0 294.$ 267.6 243.3 221.3 201,2 itt.7 1*4.2 151 .3 137.4 125.1 1 IJ.4 103.4
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 21 23 24 25
CAPITAL COSTOftK COSTS 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324. C 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0TOTAL ANNUAL COST 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0AhMUAL DISCOUNT RATea'OX 0.29 0.263 0.239 0.218 0. 198 O. l f t 0 . 164 0 . 149 0. 135 0. 123 0 . 1 1 2 0 . 101 0.092
NET PftE$£*T WORTH 94.0 85.2 77.4 70.6 64.2 58.3 53. 1 4S.3 43.7 39.9 36.3 32 .7 29.8IIII1I
26 27 28 29 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CAPITAL COSTG&U EOSTS 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0TOTAL AHMUAL COST 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 524.0
DISCOUNT RAT6S10S 0.084 0.076 0.069 0.063 0.057
MET PRESET WORTH 27.2 24.6 22.4 20.4 13.S
lOTAi
<TROU$AHO t's)
4306.0
I
8B i tt w u II 888888888
W4V
S S M —
u >
it ^
B B •*
» 0
* -«
B 3^
« ^"
* IP
»
: 5 B B JJ
B
OV
tf> s - II * 1 » M B B B • » * 1 B B B J 1 « B n B » I ( 1 ( 1 ! H » M ' • i i i i
t* * S M* |i
-j B o
m-•B
E 5
»•!*_•
—f~
M —
KB
e m
£» B
A
m»•
B m
»•o
• as
——
B f
t X
r* * ^
**>•
ar-
B -*
*•M
M§B
Q
O
2 *
mN
<v>
to
" 5
sB B
".m a
—5
*»•
^*M « B B a B B B I 8 B tt S 1 1 s i B * B n 2 • B * i * 2 S w : 1 3 4 5 a I •
* w* *
* — *
* "
2 **
**: C
c C •*
** 5* *
o
£: * : s
s
5 5 f J** v 8M -# r -4 Cft 5
s -
s *
s sS
gfff
lf |II
wS
cB**
nv tf>
£ ft
JB
^ ^* ^
•*• ^ in
V ***
^- TT
* -« *
s, -^
*• *••
—* A
ft -4
Aft
jfi 0
4
** V
ft
W f~
itt
T~
ft ft
€)
••H
rtj
f?
r O
) M
I te* ••
£) F~
MB
«1
•*"**
TV
^*
**»
33
it *•
&**>
•» *
» j*
M,
«•
-*
cm--*
-t )C
«»
t* m
S»
-HI
m f
H-I
t -*-»*.»
m
» •-
r»
* a
f>
x y
« V
a *
- "
s 8
Sj?
mV
BB
Bt
c S
S ?
"^*
<*•^
. »•- •*-*
4BB
•S
" aci
aTl
1Hj*
fi 2
a S c
«*«•P
"" "*
1 '««^**?
*9«
3
9| y
«8
£
£
S-*>
«»*
A>«
M<*
|»
-«
]*•
rO
*»
O- *-* — *-
" •*
M
-»
wQ
*^*W
B0
>U«
W»
£ M
l —
§S
£SS
S8
S 8
-«
B-.T
O O
O* C
" 9
O
C
O 8
> »•
o W
i
(*>S
$
>OO
a£t'
*-£h
« **
r IT
5
8 !§§§§!§
II
IIS
"* S.
fi
^* ?
^ >-
c **
X5*
-* i»
^t^
*^ **•
^ D
M A
Ban
f
S B
MM
-. ^
fa
* 5
§ < "
* S I »-
•> •>«>•»•>
__
**
o<»
S4
I 4
4^
*A •
» •
^fc
^^ ^
d*^3
»d»a
>«>B
3
1 S
93
*ff i? *?
iff i^
** '^
f* ii^
*•5
E *"
*ST **
" FK
**
Kg
^4 "
^ ^^
*4 ^
? €
* ^3
* *^
ft* *"8
i P*
ir tf
5f ir
K fr
C
v*o
o o
o o
•> o
e c> &
o o
oo
«_m^-
S *
<•<»££:;
li S III ^
5 M
l* * »
•*k
^ jT
\ f f) (|t
£-g . » .*
MB> fjp, n
Mi
Ib
^ B A
* # q
1*
rf
m ^^
t \ *
••^
• fc
if *
8>
*Jt
•
. .
«8Bf
t Bta. b_
* "J
^J
w
«r* **
• • fw
^
v^k
H
JBBJ
BfM
^
•»
^S --- SJ ^
m * «
"t? I
J?
5 ™ aA
«k^•i If?
^*^
x "*
!< K fl
•*•"
-8«" -^
•**
B^B
> C
9 •?"
^P> tQ
€
» ^P
*^
^^
r* ** *•
s:s§
Scg
cc
s ss
§§§§
§8
§§§g II
fc I r
o A
w*
w*
§§§§§§ iii§ §§
_§ ^ & n » -» o § >-
C— *Ja s s
MK
OO
O
00
00
O
O8
»<»3
33
3 S
SS
dt
Cpdt
s225i
?S
$55 I
£r
.§ §
§ 2 § 5
§ §
§ g $
$
§ m ~ •^F—
f S »** 8
61 > • i,
-. S
m-
5«
*•o
-**
AD
A
s ^
fo
= i /r r» a
s-
5S i §2 -• r-
012
915
*. c
2?^ S ¥
i £
SS
— w
a> *t
i M
I m
! S
5i -
« S
| HI
•»• ^
• R
°
• It
*»«• v
*•N
—:
fi6 1
^*1
— *D
--o>
ft3 i M 1 ! i i ' .
O m n •4 „ ••* r I
•
= ?
JD ••
™ • • -• « *•
§ §§§
§§§1
«•ff
^ j?
IP i* **
5 s 5
S S 5:
- f
M» »•
_ **» . §i
f u « M g 0 s r- •» «> •< M K f*l < -« i
S3
p- L mX
w r*
C :5 - V .
"* t M
m »•
-«o * a
M -* Mt M - -, -
C *~ *~
SS
P & &«•
— 6
»* o
3§§§
S S
Ssss
S g*5
55 ;
H ^f
s^S
^*— m
& — « B —
» i» «
go
C 5 «»*«*
• * in
ci-*
>-M
i»**
f*i
* «
,1 1
WU
" V
» H - ' •*
fc •.
* *
* f f
*•»
s r j
r; x
8 »L
C^
^* 9
)K
J^
f^
•**
- s
" " I
". «
Mt
C §•"8
--
- S S
8
-» -
»2-§
»fi2
- «»
B
3t
K fi
f^S- |
g52 U
|
W* M
M
C M
M
t«t*
S X!
" R
S S
*^ S
F*
W«*
»M
£&£<
%
P ••
U» -^ -^
fk o
O A
ut
tMu
^ wt
u c> O
O
O O
w o
m c
~* B i > S o
«n f%
§ I f — - i § u o ^ 14» r- C O nt C X! o
e
— —
•* — o
o
O C
1 ~^
8 S
8 S
9O
OW
u*
§88
8 8
a •*• « » M O — -« -»
8 <
1291
6
1^^^™IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
ALTERNATIVE GW 28: HIGH PKCSEUT MOUTH ANALYSIS
COST PE8 YEAR PEft 41000
1 9 11 12
CAPITAL COSTOW COSTSTOTAL ANNUAL CC5TAHMUAL OISCOUW MTEfi'Ot
U26.o324.0 524.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324 .0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0
1428 .0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324,0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.01 0.909 0.626 0.7S1 0.683 0.621 0.564 0.513 0.467 0.424 0.336 0.35 0.3t9
MET PCESE*- UOCTH U2S.O 294.S 267.6 243.3 221.3 201.2 '82.7 166.2 151 .3 137.4 125.1 1 13.4 103.4
15 16 17 21 21 23 24
CAPITAL COST3fiM COSTS 324.0 124.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0TOTAL ANNUAL CCS* 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324 .0 324.0 324 .0 324.0AtttUAl DISCOUNT 4ATEA10X 0.29 0.263 0.239 0.216 3.196 0.16 0.164 0.149 0.135 0.123 0. 1 12 0.101 0.092
MET PRESET* **TH 94.0 65.2 77.4 70.6 64.2 56.3 53.1 46.3 43.7 39.9 36-3 32.7 29.8
26 27 26 29 30 TOTAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sgt PfiiSENT
CAPITAL COST WORTHO&M COSTS 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 124.0 UHCUSANQ S'S)TOTAL AWWAL CCS* 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 324.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ANNUAL DISCOUNT UTEfllOX 0.064 0,076 0.069 0.063 0.057
MET wOftTH 27,2 24.6 22-4 20.4 !8.5 4462.0
O
IIIIIIIIIIIIII
HEALTH £ SAFETY
WELL MONITORING
£XCAVAT10«
OH -SI T6 HAULINGSOIL F ILLSURVEYINGSUBSURFACE DRAIN SYSTEM
DRAINSPUMPSSUMPPIP ING
RECHARGE TRENCHINGTRENCH I NSTALLAT IONINJECTION PUMPSP IP INGELECT £ INSTRUMINJECTION TANKCHEMICAL FE£0 SYSTEM
OIL/WATER SEPARATOR
SOURCE INFORMATION fOft HAJOfc COST ITEMS
$4000/U£EK; ASSUMES LABOR COST Of tbO.GO/HOUR;$800 ROUHO TRIP; *2CC/dgEK FOR RESPIRATOR;5ISO/WEEK FOR A HNU; AND APPROX $S5G/WggK EXPENSES
*1QOO/WELL; LABOR AMD 1966 NUS ANALYTICAL COSTS
J15/CY; MEANS, 022 254.0050, 1988 * HEALTH&SAFgTY
43/CY; MEANS, 022 266. 1 150, 1988 + HEALTH&SAF€TY
iWCY; KEYSTOHE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES («R) ESTIMATE
KER ESTIMATE
*SO/LF; COST PROM ERT PREVIOUS REPORTS$5,GOO/PUMP; COST fROH ERT PREVIOUS REPORTS$3,000/SUMP; COST FROM ERT PREVIOUS REPORTSt8,GOO; COST FROM ERT PREVIOUS REPORTS
KER ESTIMATEKER ESTIMATEKER ESTIMATEKER ESTIMATE«R ESTIMATEK6R ESTIMATE
K6R ESTIMATEK£R ESTIMATE
AIL ASSOCIATED COSTS ARE K£R ESTIMATES
fLUIOIZEO CARBOH BED REACTOR ALL ASSOCIATED COSTS ARg KER ESTIMATES
(GW-SOJRC)
COt—&CMT—O