View
7
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
TETRA TECH NUS, INC.600 Clark Avenue, Suite 3 • King of Prussia, PA 19406-1433Tel 610491 9688 • Fax 610491 9645 • wwwtetratechcom
PHIL-18399
October 11, 2004
Project Number 4192
Mr John Banks (3HS21)United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 31650 Arch StreetPhiladelphia, Pennsylvania 19103
SDMS DocID 2067669
Reference RAC 3 ProgramEPA Contract No 68-S8-3003
Subject Statement of Work for Chemical Oxidation Treatability StudyValmont TCE SiteRemedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)EPA Work Assignment No 044-RICO-031M
Dear Mr Banks
Enclosed please find the statement of work (SOW) for the treatability study at the subject site This studyinvolves evaluating m-situ chemical oxidation as a viable remedial alternative for contaminatedgroundwater attributable to the site This SOW is intended to be part of the subcontracting package, andshould not be considered to be a formal work plan for the treatability study
Please contact me if you have any questions or comments
Sincerely,
---- -------------- - Project Manager
ANT/vh
Enclosure
Bruce Rundell (EPA Region 3)------ - ----------- - ---- PA Region 3) (without enclosure)--------- - ---------- - - (Tetra Tech NUS) (without enclosure)
PHIL-18401
STATEMENT OF WORK
FOR
IN-SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATIONTREATABILITY STUDY
VALMONT TCE SITE
WEST HAZLETON, LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-S6-3003WORK ASSIGNMENT 044-RICO-031M
PREPARED BY:
TETRA TECH NUS, INC.600 CLARK AVENUE, SUITE 3
KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406
OCTOBER 2004
STATEMENT OF WORKIN-SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATION TREATABILITY STUDY
VALMONT TCE SITEWEST HAZLETON, LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Tetra Tech NUS (TtNUS) is conducting a treatability study at the Valmont TCE Site (the Site) in Hazle
Township and West Hazleton, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania using chemical oxidizing compounds to
treat contaminated groundwater at the site The study shall be designed and implemented to provide the
necessary data for TtNUS to evaluate and demonstrate m-situ chemical oxidation and/or m-situ
bioremediation as potential groundwater remedial action alternatives either as the primary alternative or in
combination. This subcontract does not address bioremediation at this time.
Results of the remedial investigation (Rl) at the Site indicate that there are risks related to the
groundwater plume that exceed EPA levels and that may require further evaluation. Contamination by
VOCs in groundwater (particularly for TCE) poses risks that will require evaluation for potential remedial
alternatives Remedial alternative evaluation will focus on a set of chemicals of concern (COCs) for each
medium that represents the site-related or potentially site-related chemicals that are the primary risk
drivers for a medium. COCs contribute significantly towards a cumulative cancer risk of 10"4 or have an
HQ exceeding 1
In support of this treatability study, the selected subcontractor will conduct laboratory screening, bench-
scale test, and/or pilot-scale field test to determine the suitability of chemical oxidation technologies to
remediate site groundwater contamination, primarily TCE The subcontractor will submit reports, in a
format agreed upon with TtNUS, at the conclusion of bench-scale test and pilot-scale field test, if
authorized by TtNUS to proceed. These reports shall present the process and results of the bench- and
pilot-scale tests. The pilot-scale field test report shall also present the system design and cost
information for a full-scale implementation. These results and design information will be included in the
feasibility study (FS) report by TtNUS. Prior to implementing the treatability study at the site, the
subcontractor will provide a detailed work plan regarding this work.
1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY
Based on the currently available information, the Site consists of one known source, the Chromatex Plant
No 2 (Chromatex), a former upholstery manufacturing plant at 423 Jaycee Drive, and contaminated
groundwater attributable to the Chromatex plant in the nearby residential neighborhood. Chromatex is
located at the edge of a large industrial park, and the residential neighborhood is located approximately
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401
100 feet northeast of this property boundary. There are 59 homes in the residential area, in addition to
five complexes housing about 50 apartments Residential wells in the area are contaminated with TCE,
but the affected homes have been connected to the Hazleton Water Authority (HWA) public water supply.
The site property consists of one plant building and several satellite areas and is about 6 acres in areal
extent. The mam plant is approximately 118,000 square feet in size. The plant was formerly divided into
two parts. The southwest side was primarily used for knitting upholstery fabric, yarn storage, and finished
goods storage, while the northeast side was used for finishing or stabilization of upholstery fabric and as
a shipping/receiving area.
A 10,000-gallon emergency overflow underground storage tank (UST) was formerly located at the
northwestern corner of the plant. This tank was used for collecting chemicals in the event of a spill or
leak. The tank and its contents were removed in the late 1980s. The former plant production well (PW-1)
was along the western side of the plant, about 20 feet northwest of the plant entrance. This well was
converted into a monitoring well (MW-22) during the Rl Since June 2003, the plant has been leased by
Karchner-Riccetti Partners to store liquid soap and detergent products The future use of the Site
includes a potential sale for continued light industrial use.
Chromatex used both water-based and solvent-based adhesives as part of the process to apply stain
repellents to fabrics and to manufacture latex-backed throw rugs. Yarns were received and knitted into
unfinished upholstery fabrics of various styles. The unfinished goods were then processed by applying a
styrene butadiene rubber or acrylic fabric compound on the back to stabilize the fabric and were dried in
one of two steam ovens A fluorocarbon stain repellent was applied in a third oven to some fabrics. The
fluorocarbon used TCE as a carrier and the carrier was recovered in a carbon absorption system to be
reused. These adhesives and the repellent were commonly known under the trademark names of
Scotchgard™ and DuPont Teflon™
Between 1978 and 1988, the TCE used in fabric coating was piped directly from the delivery trailer to one
of two 5,000-gallon storage tanks inside the Chromatex plant. From the tank, TCE was pumped through
an overhead pipe to a 55-gallon mixing drum containing Scotchgard™ chemicals. This mixture was
pumped to the application machine from where it was applied through spraying to fabrics Vapors from
the machine were then recovered by a solvent/vapor adsorption recovery system This system relied on
dual activated carbon units Steam was introduced, into the system to vaporize solvents captured by the
carbon units Any solvents and vapors remaining were then condensed and separated. The exhaust
from the recovery system was piped through the roof of the plant and emitted into the atmosphere The
treated water was piped to the local sewer system, while the reclaimed TCE was sent to the collector and
then back to one of the storage tanks
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 1-2
The reclaimed TCE could not be used as solvent-based adhesive since it lacked the necessary additives.
Some of the reclaimed TCE, therefore, was apparently returned to the supplier to be tested and restored
to its original specifications. The use of TCE for the stain repellent process was discontinued in June
1988, when Chromatex switched to a water-based latex adhesive process only.
Three operable units (OUs) have been designated at the Site. Groundwater contamination has been
known to exist at the site since 1987, when regulatory investigation began in response to citizen
complaints regarding the quality of their residential well water. The residential water-supply well
contamination was designated as OU-1 in November 1987
EPA determined that a removal action may be appropriate for soils contaminated with VOCs at a portion
of the Site. As such, surface and subsurface soils were the focus of an engineering evaluation/cost
analysis (EE/CA) report. These soils were designated as OU-2 for the Site. EPA completed a portion of
the removal action earlier this year. OU-3 addresses contaminated groundwater associated with the
Site, as well as the indoor air quality of residences near the Site. While groundwater is not used as a
source of drinking water in the vicinity of the Site, the possibility of VOCs migrating from contaminated
groundwater into residential indoor air is, and remains, a potential concern.
1.2 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS AND RESPONSE ACTIONS
Groundwater contamination at the Site was discovered in October 1987 when sampling of private drinking
water wells revealed the presence of high concentrations of TCE and lower concentrations of other
VOCs, including 1,1,1-tnchloroethane (1,1,1-TCA), 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1-DCE), and cis-1,2-
dichloroethe (cis-1,2-DCE). At the request of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP), EPA provided bottled water and carbon filters to residences affected by the TCE
contamination. Further sampling indicated the presence of TCE in 23 residential wells on Deer Run
Road, Bent Pine Road/Trail, and Twin Oaks Road, at concentrations up to 1,400 ug/l, and in the
Chromatex production well at a concentration of 2,200 ug/l. In December 1987, EPA subsequently
funded the installation of public water supply connections to all the houses in the neighborhood where
TCE contamination had been found.
Also in 1987, EPA collected soil gas samples around the Chromatex plant TCE was detected at
concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 12 5 parts per million (ppm), with the highest concentrations along the
rear of the plant EPA also analyzed the air of the emergency overflow underground storage tank (UST),
which revealed a concentration of TCE within the UST at 1,100 ppm This tank served as a collection
point for the floor drains within the plant, and was not associated or connected with the solvent recovery
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 -)_3
system The tank was drained of approximately 10,000 gallons of wastewater and nine 55-gallon drums
of bottom sludge.
Chromatex reported that the liquid wastewater contained 14,000 parts per billion (ppb) of TCE and lower
levels of other VOCs, that the tank was cleaned after removal of the liquid and sludge, and that the tank
was closed to prevent future use. However, the piping associated with the UST was clogged with latex
material. As a result, all lines to and from the UST were excavated for inspection. The inspection
revealed a break in the feed line to the UST, and that the broken portion of the pipe showed corrosion
and rust. A sample of the solidified latex from near the broken pipe contained TCE in the percent range,
while soil samples detected TCE at concentrations ranging from 50 to 1,800,000 micrograms per kilogram
(ug/kg), with the highest concentration reported for the shallow sample collected beneath the broken pipe.
In March 1988, EPA issued Chromatex an order to perform a groundwater contamination study.
Chromatex installed and sampled 12 monitoring wells at and near the Site TCE was detected at a
concentration of 17,000 micrograms per liter (ug/l) in monitoring well sample MW-11, located at the
northeast corner of the plant, and elevated contaminant levels were also detected in other on-site wells
Between 1989 and 1995, EPA completed several evaluations and inspections of the Chromatex plant.
Additional groundwater samples were collected by EPA in December 2000 TCE was detected in these
samples at levels ranging from 100 to 370 ug/l, while 1,1,1-TCA was found at concentrations ranging from
13 to 26 ug/l.
1.3 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE
The Site is located on the western side of West Hazleton, Pennsylvania. The former Chromatex plant is
located on a drainage divide and runoff appears to flow towards the northeast and the southwest. The
majority of surface drainage appears to lead toward the adjoining residential neighborhood, and then to
Black Creek, which is located about 1,250 feet of the property. A well-defined overland flow pathway is
not evident between a drainage ditch along the Chromatex plant and Black Creek itself. Some drainage
probably enters the stormwater management system in the vicinity of the Site In addition, a very small
portion of the surface drainage may flow overland for approximately 1 mile before discharging into
Cranberry Creek south of the Site From this point, Cranberry Creek flows west then northwest before
emptying into Black Creek. There is no clear overland flow pathway between Cranberry Creek and the
Site
The thickness of the soil cover near the Site ranges from less than 8.5 feet to 37 feet. Soils consist
predominantly of sandy-silt, with lesser amounts of sandy-clay and silty-clay. The Chromatex property is
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 1_4
underlain by cut and fill materials, which are classified not as a soil series, but as a land type blanketed by
undifferentiated soils. Residential and other undisturbed soils are most likely classified as the Pocono
Series, which consists of deep, well-drained, gently sloping to moderately steep gravelly sandy loams
which formed in thick, glacially influenced material derived from sandstone, conglomerate, and shale.
The local bedrock geology consists mainly of fine to course grained sandstones, conglomentic
sandstones, and conglomerate. Minor shale, slate, and coal layers are also present. The color of the
rocks vanes from brown, red-brown to light/dark gray and black. The rocks encountered are consistent
with those described for the Pennsylvaman age Pottsville Group
Fractures were encountered at varying depths in the Rl well borings The fractures were encountered
both at lithologic contacts (bedding plane fractures) and within lithologic units (cross-bedding fractures).
Fractures tended to be more common above and below the finer-grained rocks, such as siltstone, shale,
and sandstone beds. Most fractures were assumed to be bedding plane fractures of horizontal
orientation. The average depth to competent bedrock is about 14 feet below the ground surface. The
general area is underlain by the Pottsville and Mauch Chunk Formations and alluvium. Both formations
are water bearing The water primarily moves through interconnected openings in the rocks that have
occurred as a result of primary (interstitial) or secondary (fractured) porosity.
Some degree of hydraulic connection exists between Pottsville Formation hydrogeologic units underlying
the Site, and they are not distinctly characterized by lithostratigraphic properties The aquifer associated
with the Pottsville Formation acts as a water-table aquifer at the surface and becomes semi-confined at
depth
The Site lies within an apparent recharge area Water-level elevations in paired monitoring wells
generally showed a hydraulic head gradient in the downward direction Rainwater infiltrates soil and rock
beneath the Site and migrates in one of two preferential downgradient directions. Shallow groundwater
flows north-northwest from the north side of the Chromatex plant toward the residential neighborhood and
Black Creek and south-southwest from the south side. The depth to shallow groundwater beneath the
Site ranges from 8 to 20 feet.
Residents and commercial businesses near the Site obtain drinking water supplies from a municipal
authority The nearest municipal water-supply well is located within 2 to 3 miles from the Site The
nearest regularly used well is located along State Route 93. Some residences near the Site that are not
connected to public water may rely on private wells for drinking water. It is also possible that residents
connected to public water may use their wells for non-potable purposes (e g, lawn watering and car
washing).
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 1-5
1.4 NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION
VOCs attributable to Chromatex operations were detected in groundwater, surface soil, and subsurface
soil samples collected at the plant's property The VOCs of concern include TCE, cis- and trans-1,2-DCE,
and 1,1-Dichloroethane (1,1-DCA) While PCE and 1,1,1-TCA have been found in groundwater samples
at the Site, these two VOCs were not detected in soil samples from the Chromatex property.
The presence of TCE, 1,1-DCE, 1,2-DCA, and trans-1,2-DCE in soil gas samples collected at the
Chromatex plant, as well as in soil gas samples taken from nearby residences, indicates that VOC vapors
are affecting a portion of the residential neighborhood. Since historical information does not support the
alleged disposal of hazardous substances in the neighborhood itself, the VOC vapors are probably being
released from the shallow groundwater table in the vicinity of the Site. Alternatively, the VOC vapors
detected in residential soil gas samples may indicate that atmospheric releases of the same VOCs from
the Site, or another source of air contaminants altogether, could have occurred in the past.
The area of the contaminated groundwater plume emanating from the Chromatex property extends about
1,500 feet in a relatively narrow band to the northeast into the residential neighborhood along Bent Pine
Road/Trail, at least as far as Deer Run Road Based on the Rl results, the plume is dominated by
elevated TCE concentrations and lesser levels of 1,1,1-TCA and cis-1,2-DCE,
The width of the plume with TCE concentrations greater than 5 ug/l is about 600 feet. It also extends for
a distance of roughly 500 feet south of the Chromatex property and the apparent groundwater divide.
VOC levels steeply decline in this flow direction. The plume orientation parallels the direction of
groundwater flow and approximates the orientation of the axis of the structural low that underlies the Site
The areal extent of the plume with TCE levels greater than 5 ug/l is about 18 acres The depth of
groundwater VOC contamination may be at least 300 feet below the ground surface.
In addition to groundwater contamination attributable to the Chromatex property, four general areas of soil
contamination were identified at the property based on the Rl soil gas survey results and soil sampling
results The volume of VOC-contammated soils is estimated to be 12,000 tons; however, nearly 90
percent of the TCE and cis-1,2-DCE contaminant mass is within Zone "C"
Both surface and subsurface soils revealed elevated VOC concentrations, including TCE and cis-1,2-
DCE, at four general locations at the Chromatex property. The depth of soil contamination varies
between 3 and 12 feet below the ground surface, depending on the particular zone of concern
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401
Among the soil samples collected at the Chromatex property during the Rl, elevated TCE and cis-1,2-
DCE concentrations were detected more frequently and at higher levels in surface soil. The median TCE
concentration among surface soil samples taken at the plant was 97 ug/kg; the median TCE
concentration among subsurface soil samples was about 16 ug/kg For cis-1,2-DCE, the mean
concentrations for surface and subsurface soils were 154 and 6 ug/kg, respectively. The residential soil
samples did not contain TCE, cis-1,2-DCE, 1,1,1-TCA, or vinyl chloride.
Surface soil samples were collected at depths between 0-2 feet below the surface. TCE and cis-1,2-DCE
were the most frequently detected VOCs in the Chromatex property surface soil samples. The highest
TCE level (2,300L ug/kg) was detected in a surface soil sample along the outside eastern edge of the
plant TCE was contained in more than 80 percent of the Chromatex property surface soil samples. The
highest cis-1,2-DCE concentration (3.900L ug/kg) was contained in a surface soil sample collected
beneath the parking lot to the north of the plant Cis-1,2-DCE was detected in more than 50 percent of
the surface soil samples. With one exception, none of the primary VOCs were detected in residential
surface soil samples.
TCE, acetone, and cis-1,2-DCE were the most frequently detected VOCs among the Chromatex property
subsurface soil samples which were collected at depths between 2-12 feet below the surface. The
highest TCE level (290J ug/kg) was detected in a subsurface soil sample collected inside the plant near
the former front office. TCE was contained in more than 65 percent of the Chromatex property
subsurface soil samples Cis-1,2-DCE was detected in about 25 percent of the subsurface soil samples,
at concentrations up to 22J ug/kg.
Two rounds of groundwater sampling and analysis were conducted. Based on these results, the depth of
groundwater VOC contamination attributable to the Site may be at least 300 feet below ground surface
(bgs) This contamination is related to the interconnection of multiple hthological units beneath the Site,
based on the bedding planes and both vertical and angular fractures that were observed in the boring
logs.
Based on TCE levels in shallow groundwater (generally less than 60 feet bgs), the highest levels of
contamination are north of the groundwater divide and in the immediate vicinity of the Chromatex plant.
The highest TCE detection was 8,800 ug/l in the sample from well MW-11S, located at the northeast
corner of the plant. Sample MW-11S also contained the highest shallow groundwater VOC levels for
1,1,1-TCA (560 ug/l) and cis-1,2-DCE (150 ug/l). TCE levels found in samples from shallow monitoring
wells located south of the divide were an order of magnitude less than concentrations in samples
collected to the north of the divide. In addition, TCE levels appeared to steeply decline in the southern
groundwater flow direction The shallow TCE plume emanating from the plant extends at least as far as
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 1_7
Deer Run Road. The approximate configuration of the 1,1,1-TCA plume in shallow groundwater is
comparable to the TCE plume, although contaminant levels are much lower. Well samples with elevated
1,1,1-TCA detections generally contained elevated TCE and cis-1,2-DCE concentrations.
The highest VOC levels for deeper groundwater (generally greater than 60 feet bgs) are also north of the
divide and near the Chromatex plant The maximum TCE concentration detected was 1,400 ug/l in well
sample MW-11D This sample also had the maximum deeper groundwater levels for 1,1,1-TCE (120
ug/l), cis-1,2-DCE (110 ug/l), and trans-1,2-DCE (046J ug/l) TCE sample concentrations for deeper
wells located south of the divide were two orders of magnitude less than concentrations found in deeper
well samples collected north of the divide The TCE levels for deeper well samples steeply decreased in
the southerly flow direction
Among well clusters not located at the Chromatex property, deeper groundwater samples generally had
higher VOC concentrations than the paired shallow samples This implies that groundwater beneath the
Chromatex property has contaminated deeper water-bearing zones in the residential neighborhood to a
greater degree than the shallower water-bearing zones Similar to the shallow groundwater plume, the
deeper TCE plume extends from the plant to the northeast at least as far as Deer Run Road.
Among the inorganic deeper groundwater results frequently detected metals were aluminum, barium,
calcium, chromium, cobalt, iron, magnesium, manganese, nickel, potassium, sodium, and zinc. Except
for barium, cobalt, and potassium these same inorganics were contained in background samples. The
maximum site-related inorganic levels were generally at least 10 times higher than the maximum
background concentrations Elevated VOC levels in deeper groundwater did not correspond to elevated
inorganic concentrations
The groundwater results indicate that VOC concentrations at the Chromatex property have decreased
since 1987 The VOC results for the Round 2 samples were generally lower than the Round 1
groundwater results The decrease in VOC concentrations for wells at the Chromatex property may be
related to the cessation of manufacturing operations at the plant that involved VOCs, or to limiting the
recharge of the contaminated water-bearing zones at the plant through the placement of asphalt in the
large parking lot north of the plant, or to natural attenuation processes, or to changing groundwater flow
conditions due to the absence of pumping influences from nearby wells (e g , the former production well
and residential drinking water wells)
In contrast, groundwater VOC concentrations within the residential neighborhood have not appreciably
decreased since 1987 This may be related to the presence of sources of VOC contamination at the Site
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 1-8
that continue to leach contaminants to the shallow and deeper aquife'rs at a generally steady rate, and the
slow groundwater travel times for those VOCs that are attributable to the Site
Details of site settings and nature and extent of contamination, collected during Rl, are presented in
Attachment A. The EE/CA report (TtNUS, Jan. 2003), the Rl report (TtNUS, July 2004), and any other
relevant information will be made available for review upon request
It is the intention of this solicitation to procure the services of one subcontractor under a fixed price
subcontract to perform a laboratory bench-scale study (using site groundwater), followed by an m-situ
chemical oxidation (ISCO) pilot-scale test at the Site All m-situ chemical oxidation technologies may be
proposed for consideration.
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 1-9
2.0 OVERVIEW AND OBJECTIVES OF TREATABILITY STUDY
It is anticipated that the treatability study will consist of one bench-scale study (including laboratory
screening) and up to two injection events for the field-scale pilot tests Overview and objectives of the
treatability study are described below.
2.1 BENCH-SCALE STUDY
A bench-scale study for chemical oxidation shall precede any on-site field tests or monitoring. TtNUS will
provide the subcontractor with representative site groundwater samples for a bench-scale study. During
the period of bench-scale study, TtNUS will conduct base-line sampling and analysis of all monitoring
wells that will be used or affected by the treatability study. Also, TtNUS will conduct a pump test on
monitoring wells MW-11S and MW-15S Results of the base-line monitoring and pump test will be
provided to the subcontractor for considerations to be incorporated in the design of pilot-scale tests.
The objectives for the bench-scale study are to evaluate the effectiveness of various oxidation
technologies and to determine the most suitable technology, the proper dosage of oxidant(s), and other
parameters (i.e, residual oxidants, degrading products, remaining contaminants, monitoring
requirements, etc.) for the pilot test The results shall demonstrate a minimum 90% destruction efficiency
for TCE at a design dosage and contact time that will be implemented in the pilot-scale tests
It is anticipated that the bench-scale study, including all laboratory analytical work, will be completed in 3
weeks A bench-scale study report shall be submitted within 2 weeks of completion of the bench-scale
test, and provide description of test procedures, results, conclusions, and any recommendations for the
subsequent pilot-scale tests.
2.2 PILOT-SCALE TESTS
It is anticipated that up to two injections of oxidant(s) will be performed by the subcontractor dunng the pilot-
scale tests to evaluate whether active remediation can effectively address the contaminated groundwater and
to develop information necessary to prepare a design for full-scale treatment Because of the heterogeneous
nature of the bedrock aquifer, the injections will be conducted at monitoring well MW-11S where the most
contaminated portion of the plume exists. Monitoring of the oxidant movement and contaminant destruction
will be conducted at monitoring wells MW-10A, MW-10B, MW-10C, MW-15S, MW-15D, MW-6S, MW-6D,
MW-14S, and MW-14D, in addition to MW-11S and MW-11D The subcontractor shall propose oxidants to
be injected, dosages, injection techniques and procedures (with or without pressure), monitoring, and related
activities in a work plan to be reviewed and approved by TtNUS prior to implementation. The subcontractor
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 2-1
shall be responsible for performing all activities related to oxidant injection and monitoring, except sampling
and analysis of groundwater samples, during the proposed on-site period The subcontractor shall provide
instruments and instructions for TtNUS personnel to carry on field monitoring activities after the subcontractor
demobilizes.
The first injection shall be designed to evaluate whether chemical oxidants can be injected and delivered
effectively into the water-beanng fractures, within the most contaminated portion of the plume The first
injection will provide information in determining whether m-situ chemical oxidation is viable at the site and
provide data to refine the second injection of the pilot-scale test, if necessary, /t is expected that the
monitoring conducted by the subcontractor during and within 2 weeks of the injection event will observe initial
movement of oxidants that reach at least monitoring wells MW-10A, MW-15S, and MW-14S. The design of
the first injection shall result in a minimum of 10% destruction of TCE in the samples collected from
monitoring wells MW-10A, MW-15S, and MW-14S TtNUS will continue monitonng (including the monitonng
wells indicated above and other wells at the discretion of TtNUS) after the subcontractor demobilizes. The
continuous monitoring is intended to discover the influence radius and degrees of the chemical oxidation.
Within 2 weeks of completion of all monitoring and analytical activities for the first injection, the
subcontractor shall submit a preliminary treatability study report addressing the first injection of the pilot-
scale test, including the injection procedures, monitoring results, laboratory data, discussions of findings,
conclusions, recommendations, and any modifications that would be needed to conduct the second
injection event There is no assurance that the second injection event will be conducted. If the second
injection is deemed unnecessary, the subcontractor shall finalize the preliminary treatability study report
with conceptual design and cost information for a full-scale chemical oxidation treatment system and
TtNUS' comments.
If monitoring results of the first injection indicate that chemical oxidation is promising, the subcontractor will
then be authorized by TtNUS to perform the second injection as proposed or with modifications. The second
injection is designed to address larger portions of the contaminant plume to evaluate the potential
effectiveness of chemical oxidation for VOCs in the heterogeneous fractures and bedrock matrix Also, the
second injection shall be scaled up to result in a minimum of 50% destruction of TCE in the samples collected
from shallow monitoring wells (including MW-6S, MW-10A, MW-11S, MW-15S, and MW-14S) and a
minimum of 20% TCE destruction in deeper wells in the monitoring plan (including MW-6D, MW-10B, MW-
10C, MW-11D, MW-14D, and MW-15D) The most important objectives for the second injection of oxidants
are to acquire design and cost information for a full-scale application of the technology in the future It is
anticipated that the subcontractor's field activities for the second injection event will be completed in 4
weeks Similar to the first injection event, TtNUS will continue monitoring of the monitonng well network
after the subcontractor demobilizes and until the chemical oxidation in the site groundwater has reached a
pre-application equilibrium status The subcontractor and TtNUS will maintain a periodic discussion of the
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 2-2
monitoring results, including laboratory data Within 3 weeks of completion of all monitoring and
analytical activities for the second injection, the subcontractor shall submit a treatability study report (draft
version) addressing the first and second injection events, including the procedures and observations
during the pilot-scale tests, all monitoring results and laboratory data, discussions of all findings,
conclusions, recommendations, and design and cost information for a full-scale implementation Also, the
bench-scale test data and all supplemental information shall be summarized in the treatability study
report. The treatability study report shall be submitted in draft within 3 weeks first and finalize it after
receiving TtNUS comments in approximately 2 weeks L
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 2-3
3.0 FURNISHED PROPERTY AND SERVICES
3.1 FURNISHED FACILITIES
The subcontractor is responsible to acquire, operate and maintain the necessary office and laboratory
space and other facilities required for the performance of this contract. Except for non-disturbing sharing
of the on-site trailer and sanitary facility that are controlled and maintained by TtNUS, TtNUS will not
provide additional office space, laboratory, or operational facilities to the subcontractor. All analytical
work needed for the monitoring of bench-scale study and pilot tests as described in Section 2 0 shall be
performed by the subcontractor using PADEP-certified laboratories.
3.2 FURNISHED EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL
TtNUS will provide equipment and personnel to collect the base-line groundwater samples for the bench-
scale study and will deliver the samples to the subcontractor's laboratory. The subcontractor must specify
the quantity of sample required for analysis in their proposal TtNUS will provide equipment and
personnel to collect base-line and follow-up groundwater samples for analyses prior to start-up and upon
completion of the pilot test. The laboratory analysis obtained from the groundwater samples will be used
to determine groundwater conditions prior to the pilot test and upon completion of the pilot test The
subcontractor shall be responsible for disposing of waste waters generated during the bench-scale study
and pilot-scale tests according to all applicable laws and regulations
Utilities specified below will be furnished at no cost to the subcontractor
• Potable water for chemical dilution will be made available at no cost to the subcontractor If required,
potable water will be supplied by a local supplier via 5,000-gallon tank trucks under direct contract
with TtNUS There will be no charge to the subcontractor for the use of the potable water. However,
the equipment needed and the associated costs for storing and mixing in order to perform this task
are the responsibility of the subcontractor (for example pumps, mixers, tanks, piping, generators and
personnel)
Electricity may be made available to the subcontractor However, the bidders must inform TtNUS of
requirements for high voltage (greater than 110 volts) or high consumption equipment and availability and
costs must be considered prior to issuance of subcontract agreement
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401
4.0 PROPOSED WORK PLAN FOR TREATABILITY STUDY
As part of the bid proposals, the bidders are expected to submit a proposed treatability study work plan
for the bench- and pilot-scale tests, including adequate details of chemical oxidation processes, test
procedures, chemical and equipment uses, staffing and scheduling, data management, data quality
assurance, health and safety, residual/waste management, and reporting. The proposed work plan must
contain sufficient details for a bid evaluation and must provide the followings at a minimum:
• Indicate the requirements for site groundwater for the bench- and pilot-scale tests. Describe work
procedures, laboratory analyses, oxidant(s) to be tested, standards and specifications of oxidant(s),
details of chemical reactions anticipated, and reporting of the results and recommendations.
• Identify any additional groundwater data (or other data) needs beyond that provided in this SOW
which the bidders deems necessary prior to conducting the treatability study. TtNUS will provide site
access to collect groundwater samples or other field data. Collection of such data is at the
subcontractor's expense, and shall be reflected in its bid The bidder's Work Plan must specify
whether TtNUS' assistance in on site monitoring and sampling are required.
• Include a separate price for mobilization and demobilization. The subcontractor is responsible for
providing and delivering all necessary equipment, materials, and personnel to the Site to support the
treatability study. After completing the treatability study, the subcontractor is responsible for
demobilizing all of the equipment, materials, and personnel and returning the site to its original state.
The subcontractor will coordinate mobilization and demobilization activities with TtNUS project
manager and/or on-site representative If a second injection is authorized by TtNUS during the first
injection event, a second mobilization and demobilization will not be required and shall be excluded
from charges to TtNUS.
• Document all assumptions, such as the mass of contaminant to be targeted by the pilot test and the
associated aquifer volume to be treated (target area). The Work Plan shall include a detailed
explanation of the injection process. The bid form includes up to two oxidant injection events No
well drilling is expected to be performed by the subcontractor. If new wells or piezometers are
required and agreed upon by TtNUS, well drilling and installation services will be provided by a
licensed well driller, contracted by TtNUS
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 4_1
• Provide the identification, concentration and volume of all chemical species used in the procedure
and how they will be measured and/or verified in the field. The work plan will provide a rationale for
each chemical species used.
• Identify the testing parameters that will be measured and possibly varied (such as injection rate,
number of injections, etc) and provide the rationale for varying these parameters.
• Specify the schedule and method of injection and interval of injection as well as the timing of the
various injections
• Propose monitoring parameters, performance criteria, and analytical methods to document conditions
during the pilot test. In addition, oxidation/reduction potential (ORP) and other field parameters must
be monitored by the subcontractor following injections over a proposed period of on site monitoring.
Some monitoring parameters will be oxidant specific The monitoring plan will be implemented only
after approval of the plan by TtNUS TtNUS will collect baseline and post-test samples for laboratory
analysis (including on site monitoring of ORP and other field parameters)
A
• Present all results obtained from the first oxidant injection, evaluation of the delivery method and
treatment effectiveness, discussions and conclusions, recommendations for terminating or
applications of additional oxidants, and any modifications for the second injection. The subcontractor
is responsible for including the base-line and post-injection groundwater analytical data collected by
TtNUS to evaluate the treatment effectiveness Information developed during the pilot-scale test by
the subcontractor and the analytical results need to be evaluated by the subcontractor shall be
incorporated into a preliminary report within three weeks of receiving the sample results from TtNUS
or the laboratory. Test results should be summarized in tabular or graphical form, if possible.
• The second oxidant injection shall follow written work procedures (as modified) and include type of
oxidant(s) to be used, details of chemical reactions anticipated, and reporting of the results and
recommendations The bidders must also include all assumptions, such as the mass of contaminant
to be targeted by the pilot test, the associated aquifer volume to be treated (target area), existing
wells that will be monitored for performance, testing parameters, schedule, method of injection, and
duration of injections. The need for a second injection will be decided during or after the first oxidant
injection, based on results and other considerations. For cost estimating purposes, the second
injection will include its own mobilization and demobilization charge. The mobilization/demobilization
charges may be deducted if no gap between the fist and second injection events
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 4-2
Within 5 days of execution of a subcontract agreement, the selected subcontractor shall submit a final
treatability study work plan to TtNUS, with greater details of the above elements in the proposed work
plan. No work shall begin until the final work plan has been approved by TtNUS The subcontractor shall
furnish all labor, supervision, materials, equipment, and field or laboratory analytical services as
described Note that sample collection and laboratory analytical services for base-line and during or after
injection will be the responsibility of TtNUS. The subcontractor is responsible for the laboratory analytical
services required for the bench-scale test and during the pilot-scale test, to support its monitoring efforts
as deemed appropriate by TtNUS.
Pertinent soils, geology, hydrogeology, and groundwater information for use in this solicitation are
summarized in Attachment A. Details and other relevant information will be made available for review
upon request.
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 4.3
5.0 BID EVALUATION
TtNUS will evaluate the bids based on the work requirements presented in this solicitation, including the
following categories-
• Merit and adequacy of the technical approach proposed for the pilot scale study
• Potential effectiveness of the proposed injection/treatment system.
• Bidder qualifications - field experience at comparable sites, suitability of equipment and laboratory,
staff qualifications, etc
• Ability to meet the schedule.
• Client references
• Price
Each of the categories will be evaluated by TtNUS in a scale of 1 to 10. The score for the first 4
categories will be weighted among all bidders using the following guidelines-
Value Description
0 This element is not addressed in technical proposal, or is totally deficient.
2 This element is address but contains significant deficiencies.
5 This element is address but minor clarification is required A final score will be applied
following fact finding discussion with the bidder.
8 The element is good It has some superior features.
10 The element is superior in most features
The final scores are expected to be announced within 1 week from the date of bid closure or clarifications
received
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401
6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE
Monitoring and analytical services, if required, for the treatability study will be provided by the
subcontractor or by its proposed laboratory TtNUS will review the quality assurance project plan (QAPP)
submitted by the subcontractor and/or its laboratory within 5 days of the issuance of subcontract
agreement. All samples shall be analyzed according to standard EPA methods. The QAPP must also
cover the collection of field parameter samples as well as laboratory samples.
UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RACSMI92/18401 6-1
7.0 DATA MANAGEMENT
The subcontractor and the proposed laboratory will keep detailed logs and records of all testing activities
Testing procedures shall be well documented, using bound notebooks, photographs, etc Back-up copies
of all QC and monitoring data will be made. As an appendix to the bench-scale study report and
preliminary and final treatability study reports, the subcontractor will include copies of all drawings, logs,
records, data and other documents generated during this project This appendix will include, as
appropriate, the following items
• Sample chain of custody forms
• Sample progress record or internal laboratory tracking documents
• Sample preparation logs
• Reagent preparation logs
• Experimental logs for bench-scale study and pilot testing
• Sample submission for analysis
• Raw laboratory data
• Laboratory QC summary sheets (duplicates, spikes, blanks, etc)
• Overall QC summary of laboratory analyses
• Computation sheets
• Data reduction summary
UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 7-1
8.0 REPORTING
The subcontractor shall submit written reports to TtNUS at the conclusion of the bench-scale study and
the pilot-scale tests, according to the schedule indicated in previous sections. A report for the bench-
scale study must be received by TtNUS within two weeks of completion of the bench study The
preliminary report for the first injection of the treatabihty study shall be submitted to TtNUS within two
weeks of completion of all monitoring and analytical work by the subcontractor. The subcontractor should
expect TtNUS providing comments and supplemental information (e.g., laboratory data) for the
subcontractor to incorporate into these reports The subcontractor must then finalize the reports within
one week of receiving TtNUS comments or additional materials
Within 3 weeks of completion of all monitoring and analytical activities for the second injection, the
subcontractor shall submit to TtNUS a draft treatability study report addressing the bench-scale study and
the first and second injection events. TtNUS will provide its comments in two weeks. The subcontractor
shall submit the final report within 2 weeks of receiving TtNUS comments and complete with all drawings,
logs, records, data, and other documents The treatability study report will include complete
documentation of the work leading up to and conducted during the entire treatability study The
treatability study report will also present the subcontractor's conclusions and recommendations regarding
the bench-scale study, pilot-scale tests, their future applications at the site, if applicable, and design and
cost information for a full-scale application The design for full-scale chemical oxidation treatment shall
have adequate details that allow a preliminary cost estimate (+/- 20 percent accuracy) for the
construction, operation and maintenance of the treatment system
The subcontractor shall submit an electronic copy and two hard copies of the reports indicated above to
TtNUS
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 8-1
9.0 HEALTH AND SAFETY
No later than 5 days after award of the subcontract and prior to conducting any on-site work, the
subcontractor shall submit to TtNUS a project-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) for performance of
the treatability study. The HASP will be reviewed by TtNUS and be the governing document for all
subcontractor's work activities conducted on or off site, including any lower tier vendors or contractors
that the subcontractor may employ for this treatability study. It will be the responsibility of the
subcontractor to ensure that all workers are trained in handling hazardous substances and the use of
strong oxidizers and injection equipment, and enforcing the requirements and policies put forth in the
HASP. TtNUS will provide field oversight and monitoring the subcontractor's performance during the
pilot-scale tests
Subcontractor's personnel are required to have completed the standard 40-hour health and safety training
per 29 CFR 1910.120, as well as the annual 8-hour refresher courses Additionally, the subcontractor
must conduct a one-time site-specific health and safety orientation prior to commencement of on-site
activities All subcontractors' personnel working on site, including lower tier contractor personnel, must
attend the site-specific health and safety orientation All subcontractor personnel are required to obtain
medical approval to work at hazardous waste sites, as well as document their inclusion in a medical
monitoring program Copies of training certification and medical monitoring documentation for all on site
personnel, including lower tier contractor or vendor, shall be provided to TtNUS prior to any site related
activities
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 g.-|
10.0 MANAGEMENT OF RESIDUALS AND WASTE
The subcontractor will submit to TtNUS a residual/waste management plan (R/WMP) three (3) days after
award of the contract The subcontractor will be responsible for disposal of all residual and/or waste
generated by the bench- and pilot-scale activities, unless other arrangements are made with TtNUS. All
unused or spent reagents provided by the subcontractor shall be removed from the Site at the conclusion
of the treatability study. The subcontractor is responsible for the proper reuse, recycling, or disposal of
these reagents in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations Any
surface soils that are stained or contaminated during the treatability study must be removed and replaced
with unstained and uncontammated soils.
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 -| Q-1
11.0 SCHEDULE
The subcontractor will make every effort to maintain the schedule proposed by the subcontractor and
approved by TtNUS and incorporated into the subcontract prior to the start of work, unless a more
appropriate schedule is agreed to by all parties No work shall be performed prior to approval of the work
plan. All laboratory and field activities associated with this treatability study should be completed within
the approved project duration. As a part of the proposal, the bidders shall prepare a project schedule
chart and submit with the bids. The schedule chart shall identify all major events, intermediate
milestones, and report/document submittals
A preliminary project schedule, based on this SOW, is presented in Table 1. The bidders shall submit
their proposed project schedules based on their tasks to meet the project objectives. A final version of
project schedule shall be prepared and executed with the subcontract agreement
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401
12.0 MANAGEMENT AND STAFFING
The subcontractor will identify its key managerial and technical personnel who will be involved in the
treatability study and provide their qualifications and experience to TtNUS prior to commencement of any
work
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 12-1
13.0 OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
The subcontractor will be responsible for complying with all applicable federal, state and local regulations
governing the performance of pilot-scale treatability studies on hazardous waste sites and for obtaining,
maintaining and paying for any licenses required to perform this work. In addition, all laws and
regulations governing the transportation of hazardous materials to and from the site will be adhered to at
all times
The bench- and pilot-scale test reports shall be submitted to TtNUS under the respective tasks of the
bench-scale study and pilot-scale tests Any modifications to the proposed work plan and/or cost must be
approved by TtNUS prior to execution. The subcontractor will be paid upon completion of the entire
treatability study Incremental invoicing and payments may be considered with prior arrangements with
TtNUS
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401
14.0 PROPOSALS
Responsive bidders shall prepare their proposals consisting of Technical Volume and Commercial
Volume as described below.
PART 1 - TECHNICAL VOLUME
Each bidder is requested to submit a Technical Volume in a separately bound volume. In order that your
Technical Volume may be evaluated strictly on the merit of the material submitted, no contractual price
information is to be included in the Technical Volume The Technical Volume will contain the following
documents:
(1) The bidder shall submit a proposed treatability study work plan as described in Section 4 0 of this
SOW. In addition to the technical contents, this plan should include the work methodology,
classification of major personnel (site supervisors/foreman and up) who will perform the work and
their qualifications, lower-tier subcontractors, their specialties, responsibilities, rolls, and
qualifications, a list of major equipment and material or their suppliers that are to be used in the
contract, work sequence and schedule, and, demonstration of the bidder's ability to meet the
schedule committed and budget authorized.
(2) Descriptions of relevant projects, with at least three (3) client references for projects similar to the
bidder is proposing. Submittal of confidential reference, i e , those who may not be contacted, is
unacceptable.
Tetra Tech NUS reserves the right, in awarding the subcontract, to give such weight as deemed
proper to the bidder's experience records. The bidder shall submit, with the proposal, certification
of the experience requirements listed below The bidder's proposal shall address the experience
records set forth as follows:
The bidder and his/her lower-tier subcontractor(s) shall have been engaged in work of similar
character to that contemplated hereunder for a period of not less than five years immediately•,
prior to the proposal opening date The bidder and his/her lower-tier subcontractor(s) shall
list the names of at least three typical projects with a detailed description of the work
performed.
The bidder and his/her lower-tier subcontractor(s) shall provide evidence that the
manufacturer(s) for equipment to be used have regularly engaged in manufacture of the
proposed equipment and show satisfactory operation for each installation
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 14_1
(3) The bidder shall certify that he/she owns or has commitments for the use of all necessary
equipment, materials, and manpower necessary to complete the work within the time specified
(4) If the bidder proposes to complete the statement of work requested by the solicitation using the
services of any lower-tier subcontractors, this shall be clearly stated in the offer. The costs of using
any lower-tier subcontractors shall be reflected in the price provided. A Lower-Tier Surety Form
completed by any proposed lower-tier subcontractor, if applicable.
If the bidder is awarded a subcontract, he or she shall impose upon any lower-tier subcontractors
the same requirements that Tetra Tech NUS has imposed upon the bidder. The qualifications,
experience, and equipment and services to be provided by any proposed lower-tier subcontractors
shall be documented with the response to this solicitation. The qualifications of the lower-tier will
also be evaluated to determine the qualifications of the bidder.
PART 2 - COMMERCIAL VOLUME
(1) General. Requirements - this Part consists of the actual monetary offer to enter into a subcontract
to perform the specified and proposed work. It also includes required representations,
certifications, and other statements of the bidder, any other administrative information, and a
summary of exceptions and deviations taken.
(2) Format and Content - this Part shall include the following documents (in the order listed):
(a) Bidder representations, certifications, and other statements of the bidder fully executed;
(b) Additional information to be furnished by the bidder, such as bonds and insurance certificates
(if applicable);
(c) Organizational conflict of interest data (if applicable),
(d) Cost proposal;
(e) Exceptions and Deviations taken to the model subcontract; and
(f) Summary of Exceptions and Deviations taken in other Volumes.
(3) Description -
(a) Bidder representations, certifications and other statements of the bidder
UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 14_2
Bidder representations, certifications, and other statement are to be executed fully and a copy
included in each copy of this Part
(b) Additional information to be furnished:
(i) Remittance address If the bidder's remittance address is different from the address
shown elsewhere in the proposal, such address shall be furnished, including Zip Code.
(11) Insurance certificate. As described in subcontract General Conditions 7 and the Sample
Subcontract, Section E.
(iii) The completed Quality Assurance Statement of Understanding
(c) Organizational Conflict of Interest.
Any data to be furnished shall be presented in this section.
(d) Cost Proposal.
(i) General. The Cost Proposal consists of the bidder's estimated cost to perform the work
as set forth in the Statement of Work Since each Cost Proposal will be evaluated to
determine such matters as the reasonableness of cost, and the probable cost to Tetra
Tech NUS, and an understanding of the magnitude of effort, it should be accurate,
complete and well documented. Please note that contractual cost information is not to be
included in the Technical Proposal, Part 1.
(ii) As a minimum, the cost proposal shall contain the completed and signed Price Proposal
Form (Attachment B) Payment for items included in the subcontract shall be as defined
herein and in accordance with the Price Proposal Form. Detailed description of items
and measurement and payment for items on the Price Proposal Form also are given in
Attachment B.
(e) Exceptions and Deviations to the Model Subcontract.
(i) The bidder shall identify and explain any exceptions or deviations taken or conditional
assumptions made with respect to the model contract, bidder representations,
certifications, and other matters included in Part 2 including the reporting requirements
UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3M192/18401 14.3
AR100030A
TABLE 1
PRELIMINARY PROJECT SCHEDULE
IN-SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATION TREATABILITY STUDYVALMONT TCE SITE
WEST HAZLETON, LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
ACTIVITY
Request for Proposal [RFP] issued
Bid closing
Execute subcontract
Submit detailed treatability study work plan, HASP, R/WMP,
QAPP, and other administrative documents
Review and finalize work plan and other documents
Issue Notice to Proceed
Perform bench-scale study
Submit bench-scale study report
Mobilize (pilot-scale test)
Perform 1st injection for pilot-scale test
Post-injection monitoring (sampling and analysis)
Prepare and submit preliminary treatability study report
Review and finalize preliminary treatability study report,nd
TAGET DATE
WeekO
WeekS
Week 4
WeekS
Week 5-6
Week6
Week 6-8
Week 9
Week 10
Week 10-11
Week 12-13
Week 13-14
Week 15-16
COMMENT
expected on 10/13/04
expected on 10/27/04
expected on 11/03/04
Subcontractor
TtNUS/subcontractor
TtNUS
Subcontractor •
Subcontractor
Subcontractor
Subcontractor
TtNUS
Subcontractor
TtNUS/subcontractor
(Note If 2 injection is not needed, the report shall be finalized with conceptual design by week 18 )
Authorization to proceed with Phase 2
Perform 2nd injection for pilot-scale test
Post-injection monitoring (sampling and analysis)
Demobilize
Prepare and submit draft treatability study report
Review draft treatability study report
Finalize and submit treatability study report
Week 16
Week 17-20
Week 21-24
Week 25
Week 25-27
Week 28-29
Week 30-31
TtNUS
Subcontractor
TtNUS
Subcontractor
Subcontractor
TtNUS
Subcontractor
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401
ATTACHMENT A
SOILS, GEOLOGY, HYDROGEOLOGY AND GROUNDWATER INFORMATIONVALMONT TCE SITE
TABLE 2-1SUMMARY OF Rl MONITORING WELL INFORMATION
VALMONT TCE SITEW. HA2LETON, PENNSYLVANIA
WELLFIRST
SCREENEDINTERVAL
SECONDSCREENEDINTERVAL
CLASS COMMENTS
MONITORING WELLSI MW-1A
MW-1BMW-1CMW-2
MW-31 MW-4
MW-5MW-6S / 61
I MW-7S / 71
MW-8S / 8D
I MW-9S
MW-10AMW-10BMW-10C
I MW-10DMW-11SMW-11D
MW-12S/12I
I MW-13SI MW-13I/13D
MW-14S
I MW-141 / 14D I
MW-15S/15D
MW-16SMW-16I/16D
MW-17S/17I
MW-18
MW-19S
MW-191
MW-19D
MW-20SMW-20DMW-21S
MW-21I/21D
36 io 46 feet55 to 80 5 feet90 to 100 feet44 to 54 feet
35 to 45 feet15 5 to 55 feet15 to 45 feet24 to 34 feet
34 to 44 feet
35 to 60 feet
24 to 34 feet
36 to 46 feet65 to 75 feet
104 to 114 feet13 to 15 feet44 to 54 feet
96 to 106 feet45 to 58 feet
20 to 35 feet78 to 88 feet
35 to 50 feet98 to 108 feet
48 to 58 feet
30 to 45 feet66 to 86 feet
36 to 44 feet
12 to 72 feet50 to 60 feet
66 to 76 feet220 to 250 feet
40 to 55 feet78 to 98 feet35 to 50 feet56 to 66 feet
88 to 98 feet
58 to 68 feet
97 to 112 feet
88 to 98 feet
122 to 132 feet
155 to 165 feet
90 to 105 feet
104 to 114 feet
56 to 66 feet
84 to 94 feet
ShallowIntermediate
DeepShallow
Shallow
Shallow,Intermediate
Shallow;Intermediate
Shallow;Deep
Shallow
ShallowIntermediate
DeepShallowShallowDeep
Shallow;Intermediate
ShallowIntermediate;
DeepShallow
Intermediate,Deep
Shallow,Deep
ShallowIntermediate;
DeepShallow,
IntermediateIntermediate
Shallow
IntermediateDeep
ShallowDeep
ShallowIntermediate,
Deep
Pre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitonng Well;
Background WellPre-RI Monitonng WellNo Longer AvailableNo Longer Available
Reconstructed ResidentialWell
Reconstructed ResidentialWell
Reconstructed ResidentialWell
Reconstructed ResidentialWell;
Now AbandonedPre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitoring WellPre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitonng Well
Background Wells
Background WellBackground Wells
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/17576 2-4
TABLE 2-1 (continued)SUMMARY OF Rl MONITORING WELL INFORMATION
VALMONT TCE SITEW. HAZLETON, PENNSYLVANIA
IWELL
FIRSTSCREENEDINTERVAL
SECONDSCREENEDINTERVAL
CLASS COMMENTS
MONITORING WELLSMW-22D
MW-23S / 23!
MW-24S/24I
MW-25S / 25!
MW-26S/26I
MW-27
RW-1DL-01
DL-02
294 to 304 feet62 to 72 feet
34 to 44 feet
36 to 46 feet
24 to 34 feet
Unknownto 131 feetUnknownUnknown
to 250 feetUnknown
to 290 feet
88 to 98 feet
64 to 74 feet
92 to 102 feet
102 to 112 feet
DeepShallow,
IntermediateShallow,
lntermed;ateShallow,
IntermediateShallow,
IntermediateDeep
ShallowDeep
Deep
Former Production Well PW-1
Former GW-98 Well
OTHER WELLSGW-6
GW-9
GW-11GW-20GW-21GW-22GW-23GW-24GW-26GW-28GW-30GW-55GW-70
K-1OW-9
OW-12OW-14OW-15OW-20
Unknownto 92 feet
Unknown to110 feet
36 to 175 feetUnknown
40 to 190 feet20 to 85 feet
150 to 180 feet40 to 190 feet45 to 135 feet
Unknown70 to 350 feet82 to 92 feet
UnknownUnknownUnknownUnknownUnknown
Jnknown to 28 feetJnknown to 55 feet
Intermediate
Intermediate
IntermediateDeep
Intermediate
ShallowShallowShallowShallowShallow
1
UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/17576 2-5
TABLE 4-8
OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ORGANICS AND INORGANICS IN SHALLOW GROUNDWATER (SUMMER 2003)
VALMONT TCE SITE, HAZLETON, PA
Substance - - ,-"-> ~.~ ' • ' - ' - ' '
1,2-Dichloroethene (trans)1 ,4-DioxaneAcetoneBenzeneCarbon Disulfide
Carbon TetrachlondeChloroform
CHoromethaiYecis-1 ,3-Dichloropropene)ichlorodifluoromethaneMethyl Tertbutyl Ether (MTBE)TetrachloroetheneTnchloroethene
•-"•,, .- ; ; -. Background Data '"' -.*". >'T ','>'.?:'"'"<*-»'Ffeq..
of :
election
0/3
0/0
0/0
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/2
0/0
0/2
0/3
0/3
1/1
0/2
, .. ,R«n§e>fPosltlw» .*""',-:<f , -Detection "5 -","" "•>Min.-\ "-V , tent;*"! ,
019 J
lean ofMl Data
019
Sampling Round andLocation ot Maximum"
VM-MW21S-01-6/27/200
"t. '.jSM-C- ;̂>, -ISlte-RelatedData '" ,•<,?. •.'*•-- ~. «v,v -.f." --> ' -
*«Cf of :'?-
detection
6/25
5/5
2/7
3/25
3/25
3/25
4/13
3/24
1/2
3/21
2/256/24
16/17
2/14
' '^ Ranjj* ofPosltlve .,'_,-',%,•t- '-r ̂ DMoctlbiicT ""/f^"Mn.'~-- •""•j'vh'''Max.V#f^ •
0 08 J • 1 8
2 2 - 6 3 J37 J - 42 J
0048 J - 01 J0028 J - 019 J
01 J - 018 J
0 037 J - 1 7
007 J - 077 J
064 J
069 J - 36 J
019 J - 02 J
0 062 J - 7 1
012 J - 37000073 J - 0076 J
teanof
All Data
207
465
626
195
195
196
354
0317
044505331 97
231
576
321
''"', - 'V>,; • "' 'f~A'\ -Sampling Round andLocation of Maximum ' >
VM-MW11S-01 -6/24/2003
VM-MW11S-01 -6/24/2003
M-OW 15-01 -7/1 1/2003VM-MW 1 0A-01 -6/24/2003VM-MW09S-01 -7/1 0/2003VM-MW 1 1 S-01 -6/24/2003VM-M W 1 0 A-01 -6/24/2003VM-MW 1 5S-01 -6/24/2003VM-MW 06S-01 -7/2/2003VM-M W 1 5S-01 -6/24/2003VM-MW09S-01 -7/1 0/2003VM-RW01 -01 -6/30/2003VM-MW 11 S-01 -6/24/2003VM-MW 1 4S-01 -6/25/2003
lepresentatlve; ,' - *' ^ ^" ̂Johcflntration
126
6.13
439
125
125
125
238
0417
064
1 29125
134
42100221
Notes
Units are ug/LNumber of sample results excludes rejected data or blank-qualified data Duplicates are consolidated Into one result.Mean of all data includes positive detections and non-detected results Detection limits are divided by twoThe determination of representative concentrations is based on comparison of maximum to the 95 % UCL, which Is presented In a separate table
Frequency ol detection refers to number of times compound was detected among all samples versus total number of samples
Number of samples may vary based on the number of usable results
L/DOCUMENTS/R AC/R AC3/4192/175764-41
TABLE 4-8
OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ORGANICS AND INORGANICS IN SHALLOW GROUNDWATER (SUMMER 2003)
VALMONT TCE SITE, HAZLETON, PA
Substance* y-V",'~~'"' ",,' "">
Perfluorooctanyl Sulfonate (PFOS)Aluminum
Arsenic
Bartum
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Cyanide
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
anganese
Nickel
Potassium
Silver
Sodium
Vanadium
Zmc
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
4-Methylphenol
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(g h ijperyletre
3enzo(k)fluoranlhene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Fluoranthene
lndeno{1 ,2,3-cd)pyiene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
1 1 2-Trtchloroe1har»e
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroelhene
Free;.'
of ,
•election
0/0
0/2
0/3
1/3
0/3
0/2
2/2
2/2
1/2
1/2
0/3
1/1
0/2
3/3
3/3
3/3
0/0
1/1
1/1
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/2
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
2/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
- ' - • • fcange of Positive?.. V 'Detection "- " -*Win. . - / • L Mix.
25 J
924 J - 2200 J
1 2 J - 21 J
14 1 J
34 J
244
591 J - 1840 J
20 - 569
32 J - 44 J
1 1 J
3320 J
0068 J - 019 J
JteanofMl Data
75
1560
1 65
196
795
244
1030
41 2
38
1 1
3320
0169
- * ' ' % • ' , • ' „'"Sampling Round andLocation at Maximum* I
/M-MW 1 7S-01 -6/30/2003
I/M-MW17S-01 -6/30/2003
I/M-MW03-01 -6/30/2003
I/M-MW03-01 -6/3072003
\/M-MW21 S-01 -6/27/2003
VM-MW21S-01-6/27/2003
VM-MW 1 7S-01 -6/30/2003
VM-MW03-01 -6/30/2003
VM-MW17S-01-6/30/2003
VM-MW21 S-01 -6/27/2003
VM-MW17S-01-6/30/2003
i/M-MW 1 7S-01 -6/30/200;
< ,, - , ' - - " Site-Related Data ' • '*,•,'. «< '-. •Freq.
of. •election
4/6
2/6
19/25
1/25
21/25
5/24
2/16
23/23
23/25
17/21
9/22
1/25
16/16
3/22
25/25
25/25
20/25
10/10
2/20
16/16
5/25
10/25
1/25
1/25
1/25
1/25
1/25
1/25
1/25
2/25
1/25
1/25
1/25
1/25
19/25
3/25
7/25
7/25
". flange of ̂ Positive,- (;- >•!, ', ̂ 'Detection -Vff IWn '";- ,"• • " Max.,'- • /
013 J - 078
023 J - 077
152 J - 5480
134 J
142 , - 278
034 , - 091 J
1 2 , - 1 5 J
1110 , - 23800
088 . - 906
1 5 J - 40 6 J
41 J - 701
41 J
622 J - 36900
88 J - 181
428 J - 11400
124 J - 775
31 J - 874
788 J - 5880
067 J - 078 J
5390 - 5320038 J - 66 J
296 J - 2010049 J
27
1 2 J
1 8 J
23 J
1 7 J
1 7 J
23 J
37 J - 63
22 J
6 2
17 J
34 J
15
47
0044 J - 290
0 1 1 J • 0 42 J
011 J • 81
025 J - 10
Aeon of
0277
03
806
774
807
211
236
7440
133
14 1
142
496
4750
601
2510
196
171
2300
457
24400
21 1
457
1 96
336
233
235
237
235
2352 36
259
237
2 53
235
2 42
288
247
196
1 98
248
291
10 1
^ ' /"' ' - *" *
Sampling Round and '
M-MWIOA-OI-e^^OOS
M-MW 10A-01 -6/24/2003
'M-MW25S-01-7/10/2003/M-OW 1 5-01 -7/1 1 /2003
/M-MW 1 0A-01 -6/24/2003
/M-M W 26S-01 -7/7/2003/M-MW 095-01 -7/1 0/2003
/M-M W 1 2S-0 1 -6/26/2003
M-MW26S-01 -7/7/2003
(/M-MW26S-01 -7/7/2003
VM-RW01-01-6/30/2003
VM-OW15-01-7/11/2003
VM-MW09S-01 -7/1 0/2003
VM-MW09S-01 -7/1 0/2003
VM-MW26S-01-7/7/2003
VM-MW26S-01 -7/7/2003
VM-MW26S-01 -7/7/2003VM-OW20-01 -7/1 0/2003
VM-MW24I-01 -7/1 0/2003
VM-OW15-01-7/11/2003
VM-MW09S-01 -7/1 0/2003
VM-MW 26S-01 -7/7/2003
VM-MW 1 5S-01 -6/24/2003
VM-MW09S-01-7/1 0/2003
VM-OW 15-01 -7/1 1/2003
VM-OW 1 5-01 -7/1 1 12003
VM-OW 1 5-01-7/1 1/2003
VM-OW1 5-01 -7/1 1 /2003
VM-OW 15-01 -7/1 1/2003
VM-MW 1 3S-01 -6/25/2003
VM-MW19S-01-7/t/2003
VM-OW 1 5-01 -7/1 1 /2003
VM-OW 1 S-01 -7/1 1/2003
VM-OW 1 5-01 -7/1 1/2003
VM-OW 1 5-01 -7/1 1 /2003
VM-MW 09S-01 -7/1 0/2003
" VM-OW15-01-7/1V2003
VM-MW 1 1S-01-6/24/2003
VM-MW 1 0A-01 -6/24/2003
VM-M W 1 0 A-01 -6/24/2003
VM-MW 11 S-01 -6/24/2003
VM-MW 1 0A-01 -6/24/2003
Representative^ i* ; ' .
0731
0721
2380
8 14
125
282
253
13100
208
258274
503
38100
601
3710
413
247
3560589
31600
282
807
125
504
241
24
24
24
2 4
239
287
24
279
2 4
249
374
263
137
125
131137
55 9
S/R AC/H AC3/4192/17576
TABLE 4-9
OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ORGANICS AND INORGANICS IN INTERMEDIATE/DEEP GROUNDWATER (SUMMER 2003)
VALMONT TCE SITE, HAZLETON, PA
I I 00815 IVM-MW18-01-7/8/2003Perfluorooctanyl Sulfonale (PFOS)
UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3M192/17576 4-42
TABLE 4-9
OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ORGANICS AND INORGANICS IN INTERMEDIATE/DEEP GROUNDWATER (SUMMER 2003)VALMONT TCE SITE, HAZLETON, PA
Notes
Units are ug/LNumber of sample results excludes rejected data or blank-qualified data Duplicates are consolidated into one resultMean of all data includes positive detections and non-detected results Detection limits are divided by twoThe determination of representative concentrations is based on comparison of maximum to the 95 % UCL, which is presented in a separate table.Frequency of detection refers to number of times compound was detected among all samples versus total number of samplesNumber of samples may vary based on the number of usable results
UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3M192/175784-43
W*Sl \\
BEINGINVESTIGATEDBY PADEPX
LEGEND
25 RESIDENCE
OU-1
OU-2
OU-3
----- DRAINAGE PATHWAY
SITE MAPFILE 4192CP13
MKB PHLVALMONT TCE SITE
HAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGHLUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 1-2
1-4
I
\\• 1
- -X
\\MW-DL02
\
TDGW-? -I (1,300 -„
FEETNORTH)
•MW-DL01
. 1
U/x-m " N
\\ xt \ \«ifl
•\ f •i\> 4n\\l\\ \ \ '
MW-19(3)
GW-98 98 vV\D /\
- ^ ^^^ A,
K-,1D i / :
MW-20(2) « i I// ,/ n <V A/1 •
^ ,DGW-24 7/4>GW-23 ^/
GW-21 ^'-§(2) *//
OW-9
MW-12(2)
OW-12 V-20 • /MVV_13(3)
// •
MW-11(2)
MW-26(2)
i—ALLEGEDPOLYCLEANDISPOSALSITE; PADEP
—PROJECT
MW-2
MW-3MW-21(3)
MW-17(2)
LEGEND
• EXISTING MONITORING WELL(S)
fi MONITORING WELL(S) INSTALLED ORw RECONSTRUCTED DURING Rl
25 RESIDENCE
D RESIDENTIAL WELL
500 1000
SCALE IN FEET
TCTRA TCCHNUS.NC.
MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SCALE
AS NOTEDFILE 4192CP30
MKB PHLREV DATE
05/03/04FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 2-1
2-3
MONITORING WELL
25 RESIDENCE
— GROUNDWATER DIVIDE(INTERMEDIATE WELLS)
7E7HA TECHNUSv WG
GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION LOCATIONS
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SCALE
AS NOTED
FILE 2192GX04MKB PHL
REV DATE
04/29/04FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 3-5
3-15
I
v^ =. O xo-
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i io o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
(13A31 V3S NV3W 3AOSV 133d) NOI1VA313
CO
I I i I i i i r rr~rTT~ri i i i i I iP P P p O p p O p O O p p p O O p O p O p
(13A31 V3S NV3W 3A08V I33J) NOI1VA313 OM
@f=Q.
CL
to
i-AlA-EGED \PQiLfCLEAN 'DISPOSAL
'
MONITORING WELL
RESIDENCE
_ _ GROUNDWATER DIVIDEx (SHALLOW WELLS)
GROUNDWATER ELEV.—1525— CONTOURS (DASHED
WHERE INFERRED)
(1521 50) ELEVATION MEASUREMENT6/23/03
TCTRA TECHNUS, NC.
GROUNDWATER FLOW MAP(SHALLOW WELLS) (JUL 03)
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SCALEAS NOTED
4J92GP06MKB PHL
REV DATE
04/20/04FIGURE 3-6
FIGURE 3-8
3-23
CD |
i'<-c\(^o\r^c
-XX' Xx s
X//~x\/, '"\XN
/ /' \ s•'&,' /^
/1/[.
\ \ \\ \
/^' .-' 'V NXC >;J\- / < ' ~ -^ ^ /'* * •- 'A -•£, V -. \^'/-"> /~ \; y/'x\ i x \
.? / C- K MW-241-.
,_.5/\ 'x-(^1l45l
"^K X'«
-^^}
/ ;-/ />/ / / r,
SCALE IN FEET
LEGEND$ MONITORING WELL
25 RESIDENCE
_ _ GROUNDWATER DIVIDE(SHALLOW WELLS)
GROUNDWATER ELEV.—1525— CONTOURS (DASHED
WHERE INFERRED)
(1521.50) ELEVATION MEASUREMENT6/23/03
TETRA TCCH NUS, WC.
GROUNDWATER FLOW MAP(DEEPER WELLS) (JUL 03)
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SCALE
AS NOTED
FILE 4192GP07MKB
REV DATE
04/19/04
FIGURE 2-6FIGURE 3-9
3-24
Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192KT03 dwg 05/U/04 MKB
ALLEGED POLYCLEANDISPOSAL SITE; -
A'DEP PROJECT, '-
MONITORING WELL
RESIDENCE
RESIDENTIAL WELL
NO DETECTS
CONCENTRATION / \^ -^^ / SCALE ,N FEET
|W
HUL
C.L.L. INUMDC.
TCE1,1,1-TCA:iS1.2-DCE
PCE
Ivoc
CONCENTRATIONS
OTE:NITS ARE IN MICROGRAMS PERITER Otg/L).
®TFTRA TECH NU8, NC.
PRIMARY VOC CONCENTRATIONSSHALLOW WELLS (SUMMER 2003)
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SCALE
AS NOTEDFILE: 4192KT03
MKB PHLREV DATE
05/U/04FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 4-13
4-38
Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192KT04.dwg 05/12/04 MKB
LEGEND
0
25
DND
J
MONITORING WELL
ALLEGED POLYCLEANDISPOSAL SITE;
PADEP PROJECT
RESIDENCE
RESIDENTIAL WELL
NO DETECTS
ESTIMATEDCONCENTRATION
IWELL NUMBER!TCE
1.1.1-TCA;IS1.2-DCB
PCE
VOCCONCENTRATIONS
NOTE:UNITS ARELITER
IN MICROGRAMS PERTETRA TCCH NU8, NCX
PRIMARY VOC CONCENTRATIONSINTERMEDIATE & DEEP WELLS
(SUMMER 2003)VALMONT TCE SITE
HAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HA2LETON BOROUGHLUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SCALE
AS NOTED
FILE 4192KT04MKB PHL
REV DATE
05/12/04
FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 4-14
K VALUE MAY BE BIASED HIGH
VALUE MAY BE BIASED LOW
V^= TCE CONCENTRATION (ug/L)SCALE IN FEET
SCALE
AS NOTEDTCE CONCENTRATIONS INSHALLOW GROUNDWATER
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
FILE 4192CP32MKB PHL
REV DATE
05/07/04
FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 4-15
4-46
0 04J / c-'MW-26,1 / ,
r-AllEGEd /(?OLYCLEANDISPOSAL /
SCALE IN FEET
LEGENDMONITORING WELL
RESIDENCE
D RESIDENTIAL WELL
ND NO DETECTS
ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION
TCE CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
TETRA TCCHNUS, WC.
TCE CONCENTRATIONSIN DEEPER GROUNDWATER
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
4-47
SCALE:AS NOTED
FILE 4192CP14MKB PHL
REV DATE
i 05/12/04FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 4-16
Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192GX06 dwg 05/14/04 MKB
CHROMATEXPARKING LOT
GROUND SURFACCHROMATEXPARKING LOT
•3.
WATER TABLE(APPROXIMATE)
#1500-1
£1490 —UJ2 1480 —
>01470—Im
1460—1
WELL CLUSTERIDENTIFIER
80
GROUND SURFACE
WATER TABLE
SCREENED INTERVAL
TCE CONCENTRATION 100
D160
HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET
0 40 80
VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET
TETOA TWH NU8, WCX
CROSS SECTION A-A'TCE CONCENTRATIONS
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SCALE
AS NOTED
FILE: 4192GX06MKB PHL
REV DATE
05/14/04
FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 4-17
4-49
Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192GX07 dwg 05/U/04"MKB
pALL STEEL PARKING LOTALL STEEL BUILDING
GROUND SURFACE -s
CHROMATEXPLANT J2PARKING
TABLE (APPROXIMATE)
JAYCEEDRIVE [201 ' DRIVE
LEGENDWELL CLUSTER
IDENTIFIER
GROUND SURFACE
WATER TABLE
SCREENED INTERVAL
TCE CONCENTRATION (ug/L) •100-
300 600
HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET0 60 120
±VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET
TETRA TECH NUB* NCX
CROSS SECTION B-B'TCE CONCENTRATIONS
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
ND
SCALEAS NOTED
FILE- 4192GX07MKB PHL
REV DATE05/14/04
FIGURE NUMBERFIGURE 4-18
4-50
Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192GX08 dwg 05/14/04 MKB
225
WATERTABLE
(APPROXIMATE
'00. A.720
500
HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET0 37.5 75
VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET
WELL CLUSTERIDENTIFIER
GROUND SURFACE
WATER TABLE
SCREENED INTERVAL
2 _
LJ
TCE CONCENTRATION(ug/L)
ItTCTRA TECH NU8, NC.
CROSS SECTION C-C'TCE CONCENTRATIONS
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
4-51
SCALEAS NOTED
FILE 4192GX08MKB PHL
REV DATE
05/U/04FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 4-19
Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192GX09.dwg 05/14/04 MKB
WATER
TABLE(APPROXIMATE)
GROUNDSURFACE
51480-4
LU 1480^
§1470—1
Q 1450—I
VERTICAL SCALE IN FEETHORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET
LEGENDWELL CLUSTER IDENTIFIER
GROUND SURFACE
WATER TABLE ^
SCREENED INTERVAL
TCE CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
V
D•100'
TETRA TECH NU& N&
VALMONT TCE SITECROSS SECTION D-D'
TCE CONCENTRATIONSHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SCALEAS NOTED
FILE- 4192GX09MKB PHL
REV DATE05/14/04
FIGURE NUMBERFIGURE 4-20
4-52
4192 Valmont\RI RFPORT FINAL\4192KTt7 dwg 07/07/04 MKO
MW-J9S® ND ^U«fe:-^IL-
MW-20S
woonrn WCA
ND * \ \/0 58K •'/ «
? ̂ mv-6lDi ,x v\\V.-1 / ^ ^\> N
v / ^24S,fr*..•/*•> /
WOW-15ND
M W - 2 6 S ' ,® 0 . 6 8 '
•> xv v% /\ "N -><, /,' X <^ Mv>
^<^
^
/
OW-20 JND '*!
<.4^ :MW\15S_._/ _-_
/ ' n
MW-11S290
i /\ ' I i \' '/4?/A ; NDC/VJ-v/ / \-iM\w_ 9Rc;x
x\_-- -/-/^/-7-W--/f-:V
O »7;
,POLYCLEAN ''DISPlOSAL /"SITE;" --T7PADEP''
S-L .. .V--/ n r«i-'E-r \
/,' \LP'ROJECT \
:< \ «\
US1 4.
ND
/// /
<J ®MW-3 gjMW-21S
wnonED AREA
LEGEND® MONITORING WELL
25 RESIDENCE
D RESIDENTIAL WELL
ND NO DETECTS
J ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION
K VALUE MAY BE BIASED HIGH
L VALUE MAY BE BIASED LOW
1,1,1-TCA CONCENTRATION
300 600
SCALE IN FEET
TbTETRA TECH NU3, NC.
1,1,1-TCA CONCENTRATIONSIN SHALLOW GROUNDWATER
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
SCALE
AS NOTED
FILE 4192KT17MKB PHL
REV DATE
05/14/04
FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 4-21
4-54
SCALE IN FEET
LEGENDMONITORING WELL
RESIDENCE
RESIDENTIAL WELL
NO DETECTS
ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION
VALUE MAY BE BIASED HIGH
VALUE MAY BE BIASED LOW
1,1,1-TCA CONCENTRATION(ug/L)
7ETRA TECH NUS, NC.
1,1,1-TCA CONCENTRATIONS INDEEPER GROUNDWATER
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SCALE
AS NOTED
FILE 4192KT19MKB PHL
REV DATE05/14/04
FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 4-22
4-55
4192 Volmont\RI REPORT riNAL\4192KT18 dwg 07/OB/04 MKB
' MW-19SNO
BOLYCLEANDISPOSAL
/SITEll
, -A , - , -^A? , ) // ,' r
' , - ' '\ \
300 600
SCALE IN FEET
TETRA TCCH NU8, WC.
CIS-1,2-DCE CONCENTRATIONS INSHALLOW GROUNDWATER
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SCALE
AS NOTEDFILE 4192KT18
MKB PHLREV DATE
05/14/04
FIGURE NUMBER
FIGURE 4-23
4-56
NDMW-19JMW-19D
049JMW-16I
2.3MW-12D
0.08J ,MW-1B
NDMW-26I /
0.91 /M W 1 8
' MW-228.7J-
LEGENDMONITORING WELL
RESIDENCE
RESIDENTIAL WELL
NO DETECTS
ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION
VALUE MAY BE BIASED HIGH
VALUE MAY BE BIASED LOW
-vQO, CIS-1.2-DCE CONCENTRATION
SCALEAS NOTED
TECHNUS, Nd
CIS-1.2-DCE CONCENTRATIONS INDEEPER GROUNDWATER
VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH
LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
FILE. 4192KT20MKB PHL
REV DATE
05/14/04
FIGURE NUMBERFIGURE 4-24
4-57
ATTACHMENT B
PRICE PROPOSAL FORM
PRICE PROPOSAL FORM
IN-SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATION TREATABILITY STUDYVALMONT TCE SITE
WEST HAZLETON, LUZERNE COUNTY1, PENNSYLVANIA
OCTOBER 2004
DESCRIETlO
Mobilization and Demobilization LumpSum
Bench-Scale Study (including laboratoryscreening and bench-scale study report)
LumpSum
Pilot-Scale Test- 1 Injection Event(including the preliminary treatability studyreport)
LumpSum
3a Additional Effort for Report Preparation(finalize the preliminary treatability studyreport in the event that 2nd injection is notneeded)
LumpSum
->ndPilot-Scale Test -2 Injection Event'including final treatability study report)
LumpSum
TOTAL - with 1st Injection Event Only
TOTAL - with 1st and 2nd Injection Events
Exceptions or Assumptions by Bidder:
(use continuing pages if needed)
Name of Company:.
Name of Responsible Person/Title:
Signature, Date
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 B-1
WORK ITEM DESCRIPTION AND MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENTIN-SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATION TREATABILITY STUDY
VALMONT TCE SITEWEST HAZLETON, LU2ERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
OCTOBER 2004
The following describes the various work items and establishes the method of measurement and paymentfor the work items to be performed by the subcontractor.
Work Item 1 Mobilization and Demobilization - This item includes mobilizing and demobilizing allpersonnel, equipment, material, and supplies required to implement all bench- and pilot-scale tests for an in-situ chemical oxidation treatabihty study by the subcontractor. Thisitem includes locating all required equipment, manpower, and materials on- or off-siteprior to the start of the work and removal at completion This item also includes thesubcontractor's cost to finalize and submit the treatabihty study work plan and otherdocuments required in the SOW prior to the issuance of Notice to Proceed. This is alump sum item and includes all activities described in the SOW regarding mobilizationand demobilization. Payment will be made at the completion of the subcontract or %after Notice to Proceed and % at the satisfactory completion of demobilization, as agreedupon between the subcontractor and TtNUS
Work Item 2 Bench-scale Study - This item includes all labor, equipment, material, and suppliesnecessary to perform a bench-scale study (including laboratory screening) for an in-situchemical oxidation treatabihty study by the subcontractor. A bench-scale study reportshall be submitted within 2 weeks of completion of the bench-scale test, as required bythe SOW. This is a lump sum item and includes all activities described in the SOWregarding the bench-scale study. Payment will be made to the subcontractor atsatisfactory completion of the bench-scale study, including the bench-scale study report,as required by SOW
Work Item 3 Pilot-Scale Test - 1st Iniection Event - This item includes all labor, equipment, material,and supplies necessary to perform the 1st injection event by the subcontractor for a pilot-scale test of an in-situ chemical oxidation treatabihty study. A preliminary treatabilitystudy report shall be submitted within 2 weeks of completion of all monitoring andanalytical activities for the first injection, as required by the SOW. This is a lump sumitem and includes all activities described in the SOW regarding the 1st injection event fora pilot-scale test. Payment will be made to the subcontractor at satisfactory completionof the 1st injection event for a pilot-scale test, including the preliminary treatabihty studyreport, as required by SOW. Alternatively, monthly invoicing and payment method, asagreed upon between the subcontractor and TtNUS, may be utilized if sufficientdocumentation is provided by the contractor to substantiate its progress
Work Item 4 Additional Effort for Report Preparation - This item includes all labor, equipment,material, and supplies necessary to finalize the preliminary treatabihty study report(prepared under Work Item 3) in the event that 2nd injection is not needed This reportshall contain conceptual design and cost information for a full-scale chemical oxidationtreatment system and TtNUS' comments, with similar details as the final treatabihty studyreport submitted under Work Item 5. This is a lump sum item and includes all activitiesdescribed in the SOW regarding the preparation of the final treatabihty study reportPayment will be made to the subcontractor at satisfactory completion of the finaltreatabihty study report
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 B-2
VWork Item 5 Pilot-Scale Test - 2nd Imection Event - This item includes all labor, equipment, material,
and supplies necessary to perform the 2nd injection event by the subcontractor for a pilot-scale test of an m-situ chemical oxidation treatability study. A draft treatability studyreport shall be submitted within 3 weeks of completion of all monitoring and analyticalactivities for the 2nd injection, as required by the SOW Also, a final treatability studyreport shall be submitted within 2 weeks of receiving TtNUS comments on the draftreport. This is a lump sum item and includes all activities described in the SOWregarding the 2nd injection event for a pilot-scale test. Payment will be made to thesubcontractor at satisfactory completion of the 2nd injection event for a pilot-scale test,including the draft and final preliminary treatability study reports, as required by SOW.Alternatively, monthly invoicing and payment method, as agreed upon between thesubcontractor and TtNUS, may be utilized if sufficient documentation is provided by thecontractor to substantiate its progress.
L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 B-3
Recommended