Engineering Report DESIGN ANALYSIS REPORT SITE SPECIFIC QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN HEALTH AND SAFETY DESIGN ANALYSIS

CAP CONSTRUCTION AND RETENTION BASIN HAZARDOUS WASTE CLEANUP MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ERIE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CONTRACT NO. DACW45-89-C-0190

Prepared by: Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. S3515 Abbott Road P.O. Box 1938 Buffalo, New York 14127

For: U.S. Army Engineer District, Omaha Corps of Engineers Omaha, Nebraska

November 1991 Project No. 0285-33-2

52149

PIRNIE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS, SCIENTISTS & PLANNERS RR3QQOI8 PIRNIE

CAP CONSTRUCTION AND FLOOD RETENTION BASIN HAZARDOUS WASTE CLEANUP MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ERIE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

. FINAL DESIGN

TABLE OF REPORTS

Section Tab Description

1 . Final Design Analysis Report 2 . Final Site-Specific Quality Management Plan 3 Final Health and Safety Design Analysis

52750 AR3000I9 ffl zo o Ui

52157 AR300020 P1RNIE

FINAL DESIGN ANALYSIS REPORT

CAP CONSTRUCTION AND FLOOD RETENTION BASIN HAZARDOUS WASTE CLEANUP MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ERIE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS OMAHA DISTRICT CONTRACT NO. DACW 45-89-C-0190 MPI PROJECT 0285-33-2

NOVEMBER 1991

MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC

S-3515 Abbott Road P, O. Box 1938 Buffalo, New York 14219

0285-33-2107' . • : ...-..._.. 52152

R30002 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

PART 1 - GENERAL DESCRIPTION ...... ^ ..... 1 1.1 PURPOSE ...... i 1.2 AUTHORITY...... 2 1.3 APPLICABLE CRITERIA ...... 2 1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 3 1.4.1 Description ...... 3 1.4.2 Rationale for Project ...... 3

PART 2 - DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND PROVISIONS ...... 6

2.1 CAP AND FLOOD RETENTION BASIN DESIGN ...... 6 2.1.1 Cap Design Criteria ...... 6 2.1.2 Fill Limits Survey ...... 8 2.1.3 ; Delineation ...... 9 2.1.4 Surface Debris Survey ...... 9 2.1.5 . FRB Design and Improvements to Marshall's Run ...... 10 2.1.5.1 General ...... 10 " 2.1.5.2 Hydraulic and Hydrologic Analysis ...... 10. 2.L5.2.1 Estimation of Run-pff ...... 11 2.1.5.2.2 Marshall's Run Flow Analysis ...... 11 2.1.5.3 Design Concept and Criteria ...... 13 2.1.5.3.1 General ...... 13 2.1.5.3.2 Flood Retention Basin ...... 13 2.1.5.3,3 Marshall's Run ...... 19 2.1.6 FRB Geotechnical Design Analysis ...... 23 2.1.7 Settlement Evaluation ...... 24 2.1.8 Cap arid FRB Grading Plans ...... 25 2.1.8.1 General ...... 25 2.1.8.2 Drainage Improvements ...... 27 2.1.8.3- Ancillary Facilities ...... 29 . 2.1.8.3.1 Chain Link Security Fence & Gates ...... 29 2.1.8.3.2 Perimeter Maintenance Roads ...... 30 2.1.83.3 Permanent Staging Area ...... 30 2.1.9 Sedimentation ...... 30 2.1.10, - Landfill Gas ...... 30 2.1.11 Availability of Fill Materials ...... 31 2.L12 Topsoil ...... 31 2.1.13— -Evaluation of Potential for Migration and Mobility of Contaminants ...... 32 2.1.14 Monitoring ...... 33 2.1.15 Ground Water Extraction Trench Structures ...... 34 2.2 STRUCTURAL .,: -...... : ....:...... 34 2.2.1 General Description ...... '. .... 34 2.2.2 Materials of Construction ...... 34 2.2.3 Structural Design Criteria ...... 35

0285-33-2107 -i- 52153 ARJ00022 MAU30IM TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) P1RNIE

Page

2.3 SITE CONSTRUCTION ...... :...... ,.....,...... , 37 Z3.1 General ...... 37 2.3.2 Clearing, Grubbing and Brush Removal ...... 37 2.3.3 Off-Site Disposal of Bulky Debris ...... 38 23.4 On-Site Debris Disposal ...... 38. 2.3.5 Drum Removal and Disposal ...... ,_. .... 39 2.3.5.1 Drum Excavation and Handling ...... 39- 2.3.5.2 Interim* Waste and Drum Accumulation ...... 40 23.5.3 Drum Sampling and Analytical Program ...... 40 23,5.4 Disposal of Drummed and Contaminated Materials ... 41 23.6 Decontamination Pad ...... 42 2.3.7 Site Access Roads ...... ;,.,.,...... 42 23.8 ; Survey and Control ...... 43 23.9 . Contaminated Soils ...... 43 23,10 Contaminated Water ...... 44 23.11 Drainage ...... _ ., .. 44 23.12 Chemical Quality Management ...... 44 23.13 Control .....,..,.-,,,,.,....,...... :..... 44 23.14 Geotextiles '...... ,..,,,,,...... „.,... 45 23.15 Synthetic Liner ...... ™ ..... 45 2.4 HEALTH AND SAFETY ...... 46-

PART 3 - O & M PROVISIONS ...... 47.

REFERENCES ...... ^ ...... 48

LIST OF TABLES Table No. Description______Page

1 Existing Marshall's Run Channel Description ...... 12 2, FRB Side and Outlet Structure ...... 15 3, FRB Performance Criteria .;...... ,...... 16 4 Sensitivity Analysis of FRB Outlet Structure Screen Clogging Potential ...... 17

5. Break Analysis Determination of PMF Flows in Marshall's Run Downstream of FRB ...... ^ -~ 18 6. Design Flows in Marshall's Run Downstream of the FRB ...... M ., 21 7. Improved Marshall's Run Channel Description ...... 23 8. Improved North Ditch Channel and Culvert Description ...... 29

0285-33-2107 -ii- 52154 AR300023 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) PlKNIt

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Description

A PADER Notice of Cap Recommendations

B Wetlands Delineation Narrative

C 100% Design Review Comments/Response

D . . Not Used , -" - " ------E - Geotechnical Investigation ------

F " Hydrologic .Calculations (HEC-1 Computer Simulations) G •.. FRB Maps " "" "" ——-

H Hydraulic Calculations (HEC-2 Computer Simulations) I Marshall's Run Hydraulic Analysis Maps

J North Ditch Hydrologic Analysis Maps K Riprap and Endwall Calculations

L PADER Dam Review Criteria M Structural Design Calculations N Miscellaneous Design Calculations

O Miiscellaneous Catalog Information

0285-33-2107 : ------— -- - . —- -iii- '. . 52155 AR3000214 \\AICCXM PIRNIE PART 1 • GENERAL DESCRIPTION

1.1 PURPOSE

The Millcreek Superfund Site was formerly a freshwater . The site encompasses 78.4 acres, as determined by verified property boundary limits. According to historical information presented in previous investigation reports, all but four acres of the site have been filled with foundry sand and industrial waste. Extensive site investigations have revealed soil and contamination on site. Major classes of compounds detected include: polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), phthalates,"volatile organics, phenols and metals such as copper and lead, ------,--- , _..,-— ---_ . _-....-..-——-,-^.J,-—•• Derails concerning the type and extent of contamination can be found in the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Report (RI/FS), August 1985 (Ref. 1), the USEPA Record of Decision (ROD), May 1986 (Ref. 2), and the Remedial Clean-up Treatability Study, August 1989.{Ref. 3)7. for the Mfflcreek Superfund Site. ,The recommended remedial actions, which include ground water extraction/ treatment and capping yith Qooci retention, were selected to:

* prevent the air dispersion and off-site transport of contaminants; * prevent direct contact with contaminants by humans and wildlife; and * , reduce soil, sediment, surface water and ground water contaminant concentrations to levels acceptable to the USEPA and Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PADER).

This 90% Design Analysis Report presents design criteria for a portion of the remedial actions including the cap and flood retention basin (FRB). Capping the site will minimize the potential for direct contact with and ingestion of the contaminated waste fill/soil, minimize the potential for release of airborne contaminants and erosion-based of contaminants, and reduce the amount of precipitation which currently infiltrates directly into the waste fill. Construction of the cap will involve clearing and grubbing, grading the site to promote runoff, eliminate erosion due to steep slopes, placing a topsoil cap, and promoting the growth of vegetation. . -

0285-33=2107 " ' -1- 52156

fiR3Q0025 MALCOLM 1RNIJ The FRB will serve to minimize downstream flooding along Marshall's Run. Construction of the FRB will involve construction of a embankment to form a storm ••-'ater retention basin with a controlled discharge and downstream improvements of the larshaiTs Run drainage channel up to the 12th Street Bridge. Separate Final Design Analysis Reports (Refs. 6 and 7) were previously prepared for the Ground Water Extraction System and Ground Water Treatment Facility.

1.2 AUTHORITY

Malcolm Pirnie has been authorized to design a cap and a FRB for the Millcreek Superfund Site (Contract No. DACW45-89-C-0190 Scope of Services, Appendix "A"). The extent of the work was defined in the USEPA's Record of Decision, May 1986 (Ref, 2) and the Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study Report for Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania, August 1989 (Ref. 3).

13 APPLICABLE CRITERIA

The following is a list of general references for design criteria used during design:

* Architect Engineer Instruction Manual for Design of Military Projects, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, January 1991, AEIM 13;

* Guide Specifications for Military Construction, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District, October 1990;

• Record of Decision, Remedial/Alternative Selection, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania, USEPA, May 1986; • Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., August 1989; and * Title 25 Rules and Regulations, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, April 1988.

Preparation of this 90% Design Analysis Report and .design plans were augmented by incorporating, where appropriate or applicable, comments generated during the project kick- off meeting and 35% preliminary design review. Kick-off meeting minutes and responses to USAGE 35%, review comments are contained in Appendices pi and C, respectively.

0235-33-2107 - -2- 52157 J1R300026 NWJQOIM PIRNIE

1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.4.1 Description The project involves the design of a cap and flood retention basin for the Millcreek Superfund Site. Cap construction will involve regrading the site to consolidate wastes, eliminate and reduce ,.eliminating steep slopes, placement of a 12-inch thick soil cap, and establishing a vegetative cover. The FRB.will be situated at the southeast corner of the site to reduce the potential for downstream flooding along Marshall's Run.

1.4.2 Rationale for Project The remedial approach recommended in the ROD specified construction of a ground water extraction and treatment system to remediate contaminated ground water, selective excavation and consolidation of contaminated fill/soils and under a RCRA cap; and grading and vegetative soil covering of "low-level" or uncontaminated fill/soil to limit surface infiltration of water and to act as a physical barrier minimizing receptor exposure and contaminant migration. The ROD, and the RI/FS upon which the ROD was based, did not define contaminant levels or quantities of fill/soil/sediment to be placed under the RCRA cap. As such, the predesign studies involved evaluations of remedial capping alternatives to determine the effectiveness of selected cap alternatives relative to the overall remedial objectives. The alternatives which were considered were:

• a minimum six-inch topsoil cap with site regrading (referred to herein as the "topsoil cap"). • a topsoil/clay cap consisting of a minimum 6-inch topsoil layer placed over a minimum 18-inch thick clay barrier layer after site regrading (referred to' herein as' the "topsoil/clay cap"); and

• a RCRA guidance cap consisting of site regrading, a minimum 6-inch topsoil layer, 24-inch soil protective layer, geotextile laye.r, 12-inch sand drainage layer, 30-mil thick synthetic liner, a 6-inch sand protective layer and a 24-inch recompacted soil barrier layer (referred to herein as the RCRA cap).

The intent of the ROD would be achieved with all of the above capping alternatives, since potential environmental and human health impacts due to air dispersal of contaminat- ed soil, erosion and surface water transport of contaminated soil, and direct contact risk are

0285-33-2107 -3- = 52158

AR300027 PIRME

eliminated by the addition of a topsoil cap. The following computer models were used to evaluate the cap alternatives relative to the objectives of the ROD including:

* the Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) Model to simulate hydrogeologic performance (primarily infiltration rates) of the various alternatives;

* the Seasonal Soil Compartment Model (SESOIL) which is a mathematical model for a long-term environmental pollutant fate simulations designed to describe chemical migration through the vadose (unsaturated) zone; • the Prickett-Lonquist Simulation Model (PLASM) to simulate steady-state shallow ground water flow; and

* the RANDOM WALK mass transport model to simulate contaminant transport in the shallow ground water.

The models were used in concert to evaluate the performance of the various cap alternatives. Detailed discussions of the models, model inputs and model results are presented in the Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study Report (Ref. 3). The HELP Model was used to simulate the hydrologic performance of the Millcreek site in its existing state and for the three alternative caps. The HELP model predicted that addition of the topsoil cap would increase runoff slightly. Evapotranspiration increased due to the introduction of a good grass cover which serves to reduce the amount of water available for percolation through the waste fill to the ground water. The top soil/clay cap increased runoff due to the low permeability of the recompacted clay barrier layer. The clay barrier layer also increased the rate of evapotranspiration and served to further reduce the amount of percolation through the waste fill. The RCRA cap decreased the percolation rate to essentially zero due to the addition of the sand drainage layer and the synthetic liner barrier layer. SESOEb was also used to estimate the contribution of the vadose zone contaminants to the ground water in conjunction with various remedial capping alternatives,- The results indicated that the topsoil and topsoil/clay caps provide no significant reduction of pollutant - - ——-n-flVr _ i ^rnn'ci ii . .^_ _ _ _. -- ---mLji_-.B"—rr—^Tfurt T^—. •T • %. *~r*--—^-*-_ -*• ----- ,,-*^ t j— —• load to ground water. The RCRA cap was not evaluated since no infiltration from the cap toTh"e"Jground water through the fill would be expected. The RCRA cap would virtually eliminate pollutant load contributions from unsaturated waste fill eliminating percolation and leaching. 52159 0285-33-2107 AR300028 RNIE The hydrologic effect of the topsoil/clay cap was evaluated using the PLASM flow model. Five ground water collection segments or trenches were simulated in conjunction with the topsoil/clay cap in order to evaluate the effect of capping on the ground water collection system. A comparison of the flow lines for the 5 collection segments under existing conditions and a topsoil/clay cap indicated that the effect of placing a topsoil/clay cap over the site-coupled with a ground water collection system would not affect the general flow patterns that currently exist (Le., no cap) and would r^ujj^jji^a minor (i.e., 12%) reduction of the collected ground water flow rate over that estimated by the model for the same collection system without a cap. -...._ Overall, SESOIL model results for soil pollutant fate in the unsaturated zone indicated -that contaminant loadings to ground water under maximum ("worst-case") and average conditions over a .twenty-five year simulation period would not be significantly reduced with the placement of a low permeability cover such as the topsoil/clay or RCRA caps even though the infiltration rate would be reduced significantly. ApR<5RA^eap^Qver localized areas with high soil contaminant^ concentrations *would -virtually eliminate contaminant loading^to the ground waterv However, based on the solute transport model (RANDOM WALK) predictions, the reduction in contaminantV loadings from selectively excavated and capped areas does not significantly alter the need for ground water treatment, Furthermore, s^eetive^excavation-does not appear to; be feasible based upon wide-spread a^kerratic soil: contaminant distributioTi. The limiting step to determining the period of operation for a ground water collection and treatment system appears to depend upon the time required to recapture the existing contamination in the ground water both on-site and off-site. Consequently, the means of soil remediation (e.g., selective excavation versus capping), the type of cap and the establishment of soil remediation criteria is not important from the perspective of ground , provided that ground water is effectively captured and treated.

0285-33-2107 ' -5- . • 52160

AR30QQ29 .. PIRNIE PART 2 - DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND PROVISIONS

2.1 CAP AND FLOOD RETENTION BASIN DESIGN

2.1.1 Cap Design Criteria The Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study (Ref. 3) provided data necessary for the evaluation of remedial capping alternatives. A&^a, result of this predesign study, it was determined that a R€RA brother 10w"-pBM"eab"ility Farrier'fy|fe of cap'would not significantly affect ground water quality or the quantity of •g'Otin'd"" water'collected for treatment. K Consequently, a graded-vegetated topsoil cap was recommended to act as a physical barrier to mitigate direct exposure=of humans^and" wildlife to contaminated fill materials; and to minimize further migration of contaminated sediment from the site via surface water/flood erosion and wind-borne dust, PADER subsequently recommended that the cap be a minimum 12-inch thickness (see Appendix A). Design and implementation of the selected cap for the Millcreek Superfund Site addressed this request by PADER as as other applicable or relevant and appropriate regulations (ARARs). The grading plan logic previously delineated in the Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study and Value Engineering Report, as approved by the USEPA, PADER, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, was used in developing the subgrade grading plan. The grading plan incorporates PADER's Title 25 Rules and Regulations for land disposal sites which specify a minimum slope of 3% to prevent ponding and a maximum slope of 25% to limit erosion, and a perimeter access road for inspection and maintenance activities. These requirements are considered State ARARs. The grading plan was also developed with the objectives of minimizing both cut (to minimize waste disturbance and the probability of encountering drums) and fill (to minimize the amount of fill which must be trucked in, the associated material costs and environmental impacts associated with roadway truck traffic, mining, etc.). The cap design also addresses the Federal Flood Plain Management Regulation (EO11988) as an ARAR by incorporating a flood retention basin (FRB) that is designed primarily to mitigate downstream flooding of Marshall's Run. The flooding contribution associated with the project site is minimal with respect to the watershed upstream of the

52161 0285-33-2107 • -6- AR300030 MAKXXM PIRNIE site. Design of the FRB also incorporates State ARARs on Dam Safety and Waterway Management. Construction of the cap will involve cutting, grading, and minor filling in a flood plain. However, Marshall's Run and the north ditch which border the site will be improved by clearing, widening and placement of /iprap and other materials in the channels. Marshall's Run will be realigned to minimize encroachment on adjacent private properties. The stream/ditch embankments will also be cut back to reduce excessive slopes along the drainage channels which are prone to erosion. The clearing and widening of the drainage channels will improve the flood plain characteristics. The flood plain areas bordering Marshall's Run and the north ditch are currently inundated during flood storm events. Construction of the FRB will reduce the area! extent of the existing flood-prone areas, thereby negating" flood plain construction impacts. Thus, the FRB and channel improvements, in conjunction with the topsoil cap, will have an overall beneficial impact on flood plain management. The subgrade grading plan was also developed with "the objective of limiting filling of wetland areas. However, in order to minimize cap construction problems, covering of wetlands will inevitably occur. Some wetlands loss will be mitigated through excavation associated with the FRB as well as by grading back irregular cap limit boundaries. The wetlands loss (viz. currently estimated at approximately one acre) is significantly less than the wetlands loss previously proposed as part of the conceptual capping plans presented in the August 1989 Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study and less than that proposed in the ROD which recommended damming several of the wetland embayments for sedimentation purposes. Covering of the exposed fill material will mitigate the continued erosion of potentially contaminated soil and fill from the site into the wetlands. Additional data and criteria required to design the cap and FRB were collected and/or established based on additional surveys and investigations performed as part of the detailed- design. These tasks included completion of a landfill limits survey, wetlands delineation, surface debris survey, a geotechnical investigation, and a creek profile survey along Marshall's Run, Detailed discussions of the results of these surveys and investigations are presented in the following paragraphs.

52762 0285-33-2107 " ------_7_ - .._......

AR30Q03 PIRNIE 2.1.2 Fill Limits Survey Preliminary limits of fill for capping were previously identified in the ROD. A limits-of-fill survey was required to finalize cap limits on the construction plans. The limits-of-fill survey initially involved a survey crew placing stakes along cap limits identified in the ROD. Particular attention was given to establishing limits based on the existing boundaries of mature treed areas situated in the northeast section of the site. As determined in the ROD, this mature treed area will not be capped. The surveyed limits were to be verified and refined as required by excavating shallow test pits along the staked limits. -' - -- - Hand-excavated test pits along the staked limits in the northeast section revealed that the fill limits extend northward through the treed area, beyond ground water extracting trenches No. 1 and 5 to the drainage channel along the northeast property boundary (North Ditch) and easterly beyond trenches No, 2 and 4 to the western of Marshall's Run. This encompasses the entire area that was not initially planned to be capped. Inspection of boring logs from monitoring wells installed in this area and conversations with geologists present during previous site investigations confirmed the presence of fill within this entire area. Fill was also encountered during installation of the ground water extraction trenches. It was concluded that fill limits in this area extend to the drainage channel along the northeastern property boundary and to the western bank of Marshall's Run. The extent arid nature of fill in other areas beyond property limits is unknown. No known assessments have been conducted outside the property limits. Inspection of the treed area in the northeast section of the site revealed that a portion of the trees were removed for construction of the extraction trenches. Those areas disturbed as part of the extraction trench construction will be graded and capped to minimize infiltration impacts on the quality of water collected by the ground water extraction trenches. Capping these areas will also minimize the potential for direct contact with the fill exposed during construction. The limits of fill and prepared capping limits were established based on the results of test pits and field observations. In general, the fill limits either follow property boundary lines or edge of wetlands, as determined by the wetland survey (see Section 2.1.3). It appears that the remaining on-site wetland areas are unfilled portions of the original wetland area. Determination of wetland areas as well as bordering fill limits was facilitated

0285-33-2107 -8- 52163 AR300032 PIRNIE by abrupt change in grade caused by filling. The results of the fill limits survey were incorporated into the design plans.

2.13 Wetlands Delineation The site contains wetlands areas, some of which will be lost as a result of capping. In order to develop mitigation measures to the extent possible, a wetlands survey was conducted to delineate wetland limits in accordance with accepted methodologies. Wetlands boundary limits were determined by visual observations of wetland edges determined by a Malcolm Pirnie wetlands specialist. Wetland boundaries were flagged and numbered consecutively in the field and were subsequently located with respect to the horizontal grid system established for the site,using survey field instruments. The wetland limits and corresponding survey designations are indicated on the existing site plan drawing. The results of the wetlands delineation survey are contained in Appendix B, which includes a narrative of the delineation methodology, characterization results, photolog, and corresponding site plan.

2.1.4 Surface Debris Survey The site contains some large bulky metallic debris (viz. dump trucks, car bodies, refrigerators). The debris must be, removed from the site and properly disposed of in order to construct the cap. A surface debris survey was conducted to provide the Cap Contractor with information on the location and type of surface debris which must be removed during cap construction. The location and description of this debris is presented in tabular form on the existing site plan drawing to facilitate the bidding process. The debris list is being provided for bidding purposes and is qualified to reflect that .it is the Contractor's responsibility to verify the accuracy and completeness of the list. It is anticipated that the bulky debris will be loaded onto transport vehicles and decontaminated by high pressure steam-cleaning prior to leaving the site. Wipe sampling of debris will not be required before removal of debris off-site. Metallic objects can then be-salvaged for recyclable metals.

0285-33-2107 . .: .'.''."...... " '-- :•&•. -"-' ----- . '>--• - ---->- - 52164 AR300033 MALCOLM '1RNI!

2.1.5 FRB Design and Improvements to Marshall's Run 2.1.5.1 General Portions of the Town of Erie experience flooding problems along Marshall's Run. In order to minimize the potential for flooding along Marshall's Run adjacent to and downstream of the site, improvements will be made to the existing channel and adjoining wetlands. These improvements consist of construction of a flood retention basin (FRB), realigning the channel and raising the channel embankments. The contribution of overland storm water flow from the Site to the FRB is small compared to the impact of upstream watersheds. Of this contribution from the Site, approximately 40 percent will drain to Marshall's Run through the FRB, while most of the remainder will drain through existing wetlands through to the North Ditch, a to Marshall's Run. The North Ditch is located at the northern boundary of the Site, approximately 1,500 feet downstream of the FRB, and drains storm flow from adjacent residential properties (see Vicinity Map, App. G).

2.1.5.2 Hydraulic and Hydrologic Analysis The watershed contributing to Marshall's Run has a surface area of 1.55 square miles. The watershed is mostly urbanized and served with a network of storm drains and natural drainage channels. Design of the FRB required hydraulic and hydrologic analysis of the influent watershed and receiving stream, respectively, as well as selection and design of flood retention and flow control structures based on site characteristics. The following tasks were undertaken to support the hydraulic and hydrologic analysis:

TASK DESCRIPTION 1 Estimation of runoff corresponding to various return frequency storms. 2 - Estimation of the existing capacity of Marshall's Run. 3 Design of channel improvements and hydraulic control structures to contain the design flood flows within the FRB and Marshall's Run (Design Concept).

52165 0285-33,2107 _ -10- . . .1R300Q31* RNIE 2.1.5.2.1 Estimation of Runoff An estimation of the runoff corresponding to .various return frequency storms was performed. Hydrologic models of the watersheds tributary to Marshall's Run and the FRB were developed using the USAGE HEC-1 computer program (Version 4.0 - September 1990)7 The FRB receives flow from two areas: the predominantly urban watershed which discharges into Marshall's Run south .'of the railroad tracks, and the much smaller Site landfill cap watershed which discharges directly to the FRB. The urban watershed was subdivided into two main subbasins, and two additional smaller subbasins. Each of the main subbasins were further subdivided into smaller watershed areas. A total of 16 subwatersheds were factored into the hydrologic analysis (refer to Marshall's Run Drainage Boundaries Map, Appendix G). Modeling of tributary flows to Marshall's Run was also performed using the HEC-1 program. These flows consist of runoff from the Site and adjacent properties influent to the North Ditch, which in turn discharges to Marshall's Run downstream of the FRB. Runoff, from" the watersheds was developed using the kinematic wave method, while the interception/infiltration losses were estimated by the SCS curve number method. The SCS curve numbers were based "on the land use and soil types within the watersheds, as determined by the September 1974 hydrologic study. A 24-hour Type II rainfall distribution was considered for the 10- and 50-year frequency storms. A hard copy of the HEC-1 computer-generated runofLsummaries for. the 10-year and 50-year storms is included in Appendix F.

2.1.5.2.2 Marshall's Run Stream Flow Analysis An estimation of the capacity of Marshall's Run from the railroad tracks just south of the site to Road (Alt. Rt. 5) was completed using the USAGE HEC-2 Water Surface Profile computer program. Field survey data obtained included stationing, cross- sectional dimensions, and channel bottom elevations based on the existing datum for the site.' The locations, materials, invert elevations, and sizes of existing culverts within the channel were determined. Plan and profile drawings of Marshall's Run, showing HEC-2 cross-sections and bank and channel bottom elevations are included in Appendix I. Channel and overbank characteristics were evaluated to determine the Manning's "n" value used in calculating water surface elevations. Refer to the Table 1 for a description

0285,33-2107 ' ' ." .. : - -11- 52166 SR3.00035 MA1ODLM 1RNH of the channel conditions used in the .computer program. Cross-sections correspond to those shown on the Hydraulic Profile and plan view maps contained in Appendix I.

TABLE 1 EXISTING MARSHALL'S RUN CHANNEL DESCRIPTION Cross Channel Section Description "n" Channel adjacent to Site 35-72 Grass covered channel. 0.07 (existing condition) Moderate wooded obstruc- tions. Channel north of site to 5.5' 12-35 Grass covered channel, 0.025 by 3.5' box culvert clean. Little vegetation. 5.51 by 3.5' box culvert to 11-1 Mud Covered Channel 0.027 West Lake Rd. (Alt.5) (see description column) 34,35 12' by 6* concrete box cul- 0.017 vert (see description column) 25,26 5' dia. culvert 0.011 (see description column) 14, 15 6' by 4' oval corrugated 0.024 metal pipe (see description column) 8,9 3.5* by 5.5' concrete box 0.017 culvert

The existing channel capacity of Marshall's Run directly adjacent to the site, from the N.Y. Central Railroad grade to West 12th St., was determined to be limited to 15 cfs at cross-section 57. This station is where the runoff from a trucking company lot discharges into Marshall's Run. The second most limiting reach in this area was determined to be at cross section 43, where the discharge capacity was 60 cfs. Downstream of West 12th St., the capacity of Marshall's Run increases. Between West 12th Street and Lake Road (Alt. Rt. 5), the capacity of the channel was determined to be 150 cfs before overtopping occurred at the 6-ft. x 4-ft. oval corrugated metal pipe under Oregon Avenue (cross-sections 14 and 15). With improvements to the culverts and 1000 to 2000 feel of embankment, the carrying capacity of Marshall's Run in this area could conceivably be increased to 350 cfs or more (see Marshall's Run Hydraulic Profile, Appendix 1). It should be noted that while 350 cfs might theoretically be contained within

52167 0285-33-2107 -12- •il R 30003 6 MAI£DLM PIRNIE the channel immediately upstreanr'of Oregon St., the "charmer in that vicinity includes residential lawns which are routinely flooded.

2.1.5.3 Design Concept and Criteria 2.1.5.3.1 General Marshall's Run flows north-northwesterly adjacent to the Site. On the east bank of Marshall's Run, opposite the Site, are truck loading facilities, warehouses and residential homes. The proposed FRB will be located adjacent to the west bank near the southeast corner of the Site, within existing wetlands. The design operation concept for the FRB is to utilize these wetlands, and other wetlands south of the Site, to retain flood flows from Marshall's Run. The "excess" incoming flows from Marshall's Run wHI be diverted into the FRB along with overland flows from the capped southern portion of the Site. Diversion of channel flows will be accomplished by a control structure constructed across Marshall's Run south of the fill area. The control structure will contain a culvert designed to pass stqfitf _flpws up to the culvert's design capacity. When storm flow in Marshall's Run upstream of the control structure exceeds the capacity of the control structure culvert, the water levels in Marshall's Run will start rising and excess flow will spill into the FRB and contiguous wetland area over a side-discharge weir. Once the storage capacity of the FRB is reached, the stored water elevation will rise above the crest of the emergency discharge spillway. All flows in excess of the FRB design capacity will thereafter be discharged over the spillway and through the submerged culvert to the downstream channel, after having been retained in the FRB. This operating concept, which is desighed to attenuate peak flows while allowing "base" flows to pass freely, is a modification of the on-line basin concept, in which all flows are stored and attenuated prior to discharge: The "on-line" concept necessarily required a larger storage volume than the modified on-line design. . .

2.1.5.3.2 Flood Retention Basin Design of the flood retention basin was based on the HEC-1 influent developed both for overland drainage from the cap and influent flows from Marshall's Run. However, conditions in Marshall's Run interfere with the development of the natural . The existing culverts under the railroad tracks south (viz. upstream) of the Site

0285-33-2107 -13- 52168

AR300037 PIRNIE

are undersized and do not permit the peak flows to pass through. These undersized culverts act as hydraulic control structures, generating head losses of several feet and contributing to upstream flooding. Improvement of these structures to allow peak storm flows to pass is not included in the scope of the Millcreek project, but nonetheless constitutes a basic assumption pertaining to the design, operation and performance of the new FRB facility. The existing wetland elevations in the FRB impoundment area gradually vary from elevation 713 feet to 715 feet above average mean sea level (MSL), with elevations ranging from 709.5 to 712 feet (Refs. 2 and 3). The wetlands is frequently flooded, and no excavation is anticipated for the FRB. Additionally, the areas upstream of the FRB and railroad have topographic elevations of less than 720 feet. This limits the storage capacity of the FRB, since water surface elevations cannot be increased to the point where upstream flooding occurs. A map of the flood area impounded in the FRB during. the 10-year and 50-year storm events is provided in Appendix G. '.' Two hydraulic control structures are required to enable the FRB to operate as designed within the limitations presented by the high ground water and low available head. The first control structure is a side-discharge weir which forms the eastern boundary of the FRB. The purpose of the weir is to transfer peak flows to the FRB while maintaining minimum water levels in the wetlands. In order to lessen the potential for localized erosion that would effectively lower the water level in the wetlands, the side discharge weir has a concrete core wall. This concrete wall extends below the elevation of the invert of Marshall's Run channel to minimize the potential for water to'flow directly from the FRB into Marshall's Run. The second hydraulic structure is the low-level outlet which is to be. constructed across Marshall's Run. The low-level outlet is designed to regulate flow from the FRB by partially obstructing the flow in Marshall's Run during routine storm events, while preventing upstream flooding during extreme storm events by allowing the water to escape via an emergency overflow weir. During flood events in excess of the capacity of the low- level outlet, stored storm water may exceed the level of the side-discharge weir and back up into Marshall's Run. During these periods, which include the design storm (viz., 10-year), the low level outlet lies within the area impounded by the control structure and functions in concert with the FRB to attenuate peak flood flows.

52169 0285-33-2107 ' -14- - - -. - - ..... AR300038 MAUCQLM PIRNIE The outlet is designed as a wide base concrete-fill gravity retaining structure to minimize erosive damage and provide a margin of safety against foundation failure, A bar screen is provided on the upstream side to intercept large debris which might otherwise become lodged in the culvert or reduce the capacity of the downstream channel. Concrete aprons are provided on both the upstream and downstream sides to minimize damage from high approach and exit velocities to and from the culvert, and to minimize the potential for piping of subsurface water. The emergency overflow weir is sized and located at an elevation so "as to avoid flooding upstream areas during extreme rainfall events. Retaining walls are provided on either side of the outlet structure to couple the outlet structure with the earthen embankments of Marshall's Run. Design criteria fof the FRB outlet structure are listed in Table 2 below:

TABLE 2

FRB SIDE DISCHARGE WEIR AND OUTLET STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS Elevation of Side Discharge Weir 714.0 ft. Length of Side Discharge Weir 760 ft. Invert of Culvert 709.5 ft. Dimensions of Culvert 4.5 ft,(W) x 2.5 ft.(H) Crest of Emergency Spillway 717.50 ft Length of Emergency Spillway 4ft. Width of Emergency Spillway 30ft. Spacing of Screen Bars 6 in.

52170 0285-33-2107 .. - - - - -15-

R300D39 MAUG01M PIRNIE Performance criteria for the FRB are listed in Table 3 below:

TABLE 3

FRB PERFORMANCE CRITERIA Description IG-yr 50-yr 100-yr Storm Storm Storm Peak influent flows (from Marshall's Run and Site runoff) 887 cfs 1534 cfs 1736 cfs Peak outlet flow 157 cfs 327 cfs 390 cfs Flow-through culvert (max.) 157 cfs 173 cfs 176 cfs Flow-over emergency spillway (max.) 0 154 cfs 214. cfs Area impounded by FRB . .. 19.4 25.9 26.6 acres acres acres Water level in FRB (max.) 717.4 718.9 ft. 719.2 ft. Water level in downstream Marshall's Run 712.8 714.9 ft. 715.5 ft. Head loss generated by FRB (side discharge weir, culvert, emergency 4.6 ft. 4.0 ft. 3.7 overflow, and bar screen)

Based, on these design specifications and performance criteria, the FRB will begin to store storm water at flows .greater than 100 cfs, which is less than the existing downstream capacity of Marshall's Run below West 12th Street (see Discussion, Section 2.1.5.2.2). Upstream of West 12th Street, Marshall's Run channel will be improved to" increase its carrying capacity (see Discussion, Section 2.1.5.3.3). Thus, flooding conditions downstream will be improved by the FRB. - "" . The buildup of water in the FRB could have an impact on the stability of the cap and could result in some loss or slippage of soil especially after numerous and/or extended storm events. The granular nature of the slag (viz., well drained) and the proposed grade will serve to minimize potential stability problems. Since the cap consists entirely of topsoil, the loss of topsoil would be a long-term post-closure maintenance issue. Additional topsoil and reseeding may be required to maintain desired grades if soil loss occurs.

0285-33-2107 -16- 52171 AR300Q1+0 N4AICOLM PIRNIE The potential exists for the FRB low-level outlet bar screen to become clogged with debris washed down the channel. The dogged bar screen would have different hydraulic characteristics and could potentially effect the performance of the FRB. A sensitivity analysis was performed on the hydrologic routing computer model to determine the net effect of a partially clogged bar screen on FRB flood stage and downstream flows. The methodology used in the sensitivity analysis was as follows: a reduced culvert area, which yielded the same headless as that generated by a 50% clogged bar screen and the design culvert (viz., 4'-6"W x 2'-6"H), was calculated. This reduced culvert area was then input into the HEC-1 computer routing model to determine the new FRB performance criteria. These criteria are summarized in the table below:

TABLE 4

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF FRB OUTLET STRUCTURE BAR SCREEN CLOGGING POTEN- TIAL Description 10-Year 50-Year 100-Year Storm Storm Storm FRB Peak Stage: Clean Screen 717.38 718.90 " 719.24 50% Clogged Screen (1) 717.41 718.91 719.25 .

Culvert Peak Flow: Clean Screen 157 170 176 50% Clogged Screen(1) 154 170 176 (1) Culvert area adjusted from 11.25 s.f. to 11.08 s.f. to simulate clogged screen.

The sensitivity analysis suggests that a 50% clogged bar screen will have a negligible effect on the performance of the FRB outlet structure. In order to minimize the potential * for clogging, the bar screen has been designed to extend up to the spillway at a 30° incline from vertical, to facilitate manual cleaning. " . , The potential structural failure of the FRB outlet structure at various times during a storm event was investigated to determine peak flows to the downstream channel. The resultant peak flows were compared to peak flows under existing (no dam) conditions to determine the relative impacts on downstream property owners. The hydrologic computer

52179 0285-33-2107 . ' -17- . "*

R 3 0 QQU MAU3DUV4 PIRNIE Model HEC-1 was used for the dam break analysis, and the condition evaluated was the -robable maximum flow (PMF). The computer mode permits the user to declare the stage at which dam failure will cur. By observing the trends in the effluent hydrographs, stages were chosen to envelope a» dam break potentials. It was assumed that the dam would fail to an elevation of 714, a width of 60 feet, and side slope of 2 vertical on 1 horizontal. Fifteen minutes was specified for the dam to reach failure geometry. Peak flow is defined as the sum of flows through the low level culvert, over the spillway (ei 7175), over the dam berms (el. 720), and across the failed dam. For comparison, peak flow entering the reservoir for the PMF was determined to be 14,651 cfs. In the event no structure was constructed across Marshall's Run to impound floodwater, this is the flow that would progress downstream. Table 5 illustrates the stage, time and peak flow for each of seven dam failure scenarios. _. . . •

TABLES

DAM BREAK ANALYSIS: DETERMINATION OF PMF FLOWS IN MARSHALL'S RUN DOWNSTREAM OF THE FRB Stage at Break Time at Break Peak Flow (ft) (hrs) (cfs) 720.0 13.33 - 13,808 720.5 13.50 . . 13,809 I.. 720.8 15.33 12,992 721.0 15.50 14,940 721.5 15.58 14,342 722.0 15.63 14,072 722.3 15.67 14,072

Table 5 shows that the maximum flow in Marshall's Run as a result of FRB dam failure would be 14,940 cfs, less than two (2) percent greater than peak flows in the channel prior to construction of the FRB. Based on this analysis, it is concluded that the potential for increased adverse impact of a dam failure on downstream property owners would be negligible, compared with existing conditions.

0285-33-2107 -18- 52 1 73 P1RN1E 2.1333 Marshall's Run The capacity of Marshall's Run has been improved both upstream and downstream of FRB to accommodate the projected peak flows. Both the east and west banks of the channel have been elevated to provide additional capacity. The banks have a 3 horizontal to 1 vertical slope in conformance with PADER criteria for earthen structures. The original design intent,for improvements to Marshall's Run was to design to the capacity of the downstream channel. Following discussions with USAGE personnel, it was determined that Marshall's Run should be improved to convey flows in excess of the existing downstream capacity, in order to allow for potential future channel improvements by local authorities. " - ._...—._.—_ J :—~ .-_-—-— The east bank of Marshall's Run will be built up to prevent the discharge of backwater into'the trucking company lot on the southern half of the site boundary, and into residential properties on the northern half. Raising the east bank of Marshall's Run requires measures to convey overland flows which currently drain by gravity into the channel. Diversion swales on adjacent properties will direct flows through conduits in the bank into Marshall's Run. In order to prevent channel flow from discharging back through . — _—the conduits into the lower areas east of the Site, backflow prevention devices will be installed on gravity drain pipes lain through the banks. Two existing storm water lines at 15th Street and 17th Street currently drain directly into Marshall's Run at Stations 54 and 62, respectively. These storm water lines will also be retrofit with conduits through the east bank of Marshall's Run and flap gates to prevent return channel flows into the storm water collection system. However, it should be noted that field surveys have determined the existing inverts of the storm lines are up to 18 inches lower than the channel bottom in Marshall's Run. The interconnecting manholes to be installed under the Millcreek Cap and FRB project to join existing piping to conduits through the Marshall's Run berm will necessarily have outlet inverts higher than inlet inverts, guaranteeing partially surcharged pipes in the upstream storm water collection system even under dry weather conditions. This situation does not constitute a changed site condition, since storm water pipes are currently surcharged as a result of localized ponding at the pipe outlets in Marshall's Run. Improvements to the existing storm water collection system to alleviate the surcharge conditions should be undertaken by local authorities. 52174

0285-33^2107' " " " -19- AR300QI+3 MALCOLM PIRNIE Diverting storm flows from adjacent properties to a lift station was considered as an alternative solution. This option was ruled out due to additional capital, operation and maintenance costs. The trucking company adjacent to the southeastern boundary of the Site has expressed an interest in discharging flows from a mitigated wetlands into Marshall's Run. In order to minimize the relatively large water level fluctuations inherent in draining the wetlands to the FRB south of the outlet structure, a conduit has been designed in the east bank of Marshall's Run to convey wetlands flows north of the FRB. A backflow preventer (flap valve) will be installed on the pipe to prevent communication of channel flows with the mitigated wetlands. The elevation of the west bank of the channel upstream of the low level outlet structure (i.e. the side discharge weir) was selected to maintain minimum water elevation in the wetlands. The elevation of the east bank of the channel upstream of the outlet is designed to have a 13 foot freeboard at the 50-year storm flow, while the freeboard on the downstream channel banks is 0.5 feet for the same.storm event. The apparent reduced margin of safety against overtopping the downstream banks is justified by the flow control afforded by the outlet structure, and also results in minimized encroachment of the east bank onto adjacent private properties. The storm flows discharged into Marshall's Run downstream of the FRB outlet control structure are impacted by the influent flows to the FRB from Marshall's Run and from overland site drainage; by the attenuation of influent flows provided by the FRB; and by the flow contribution from the North Ditch Culvert (see discussion under Section 2.1.8.2) and the Water Treatment Plant. The design flows to Marshall's Run are summarized in Table 6 below. Cross-sections correspond to those shown on the plan and profile drawings contained in Appendix I.

52175 02S5-33-2107 . -20- ; AR3000H MA1ODLM PIRNIE

TABLE 6

DESIGN FLOWS IN MARSHALL'S RUN DOWNSTREAM OF THE FRB Channel Ultimate Cross-Section 10-year 50-year Capacity (no Freeboard) 64 to 50 157 cfs 327 cfs 350 cfs 50 to 35 ...... 173 cfs 33.8 cfs 350 cfs

The USAGE has determined that construction associated with the Cap and FRB project should be confined within the Site boundaries as much as practical. This has been largely accomplished by relocating the improved Marshall's Run channel approximately 40 feet west. However, maintaining the channel within Site boundaries adjacent to the Groundwater Treatment Plant required construction of a 200-foot long concrete box culvert. The box culvert will be closed to prevent accidental falls into the six foot deep structure. Rip rap has been provided along the banks and bottom of the improved channel. The rip rap has several 'functions: it will serve to define the channel boundaries; it will provide a measure~of erosion control during flood.events; it will reduce maintenance (i.e., grass cutting and repair of erosion); and it will enhance the visual appearance of the channel, which might otherwise become overgrown with vegetation. Lining the channel with rip rap is desirable where construction on natural and imported fill allows equipment to be used to economically place the material, and where communication with ground water is of secondary concern. However, additional protection against subsurface infiltration of the .channel flows is_ required where the channel parallels Trench Numbers 2 and 4 in order to prevent migration of uncpntaminated surface water into the ground water extraction system. In this area, whicn extends from the FRB control structure to the WTP bypass culvert, a continuous liner will be placed in the channel. The channel in the lined section will be underlain by a permeable drainage layer and constructed with subsurface drain lines to. relieve potential ground water pressure and prevent failure of the liner due to hydrostatic lift. Calculations for prevention of hydrostatic lift are included in Appendix N. - , An economic comparison was performed to determine the merits of two continuous liner concepts. A concrete-lined channel was compared with HDPE overlain by erosion

0285-33-2107 ' -21- 52176 AR3000l*5 MAUOOUVt P1RNIE protection. The analysis revealed that the HDPE liner was significantly less expensive at 5200,000 versus $500,000 for concrete. The type of erosion protection selected was shallow mesh gabions, since additional safety against puncturing the liner during construction may be. achieved by filling the gabions with relatively small stone media. Additionally, the gabions may be tied together and supported from the gabions placed at the bottom of the channel, and as such would be less likely to fail because of slippage off the HDPE liner. In addition to fulfilling the functions of riprap described above, the gabions also serve to anchor and protect the HDPE liner. The channel embankments beneath the riprap and liner components are designed as homogenous constructed of one material. The materials of construction for the channel embankments are as determined by the geotechnical investigation report (see Appendix E). These materials are readily available in the area and are less susceptible to piping damage (soil loss) than fine-grained cohesive soils. Two materials are specified; one for the lined portion of the channel, and another for the unlined portion. The material for the unlined portion has a higher percentage of fines, which make it less permeable. In order to prevent any contamination of channel flows by contact with contaminated material, all embankment fill materials will be provided from off-site borrow areas, which in turn will be investigated to determine whether past contamination from industrial activity may have occurred. The State of Pennsylvania requires that constructed slopes be no steeper than 3H on IV. The reference Design of Small indicates that. these slopes jieed be no flatter, Conservative calculations for slope stability, which are included in Appendix N, result in safety factors greater than 1.5 for both cohesive and non-cohesive embankment Gil material. The calculations and safety factors for slope stability also apply to riprap placed on geotextile along the unlined portion of the channel. In order to reduce the likelihood of seepage from the embankment face, as well as reduce the likelihood of piping beneath the embankment, a toe drain will be installed on the landward side of the embankment. The amount of seepage intercepted by the toe drain is expected to be minimal; considering the relatively short time to peak and subsidence for the design flood stage, and the low gradients (less than five feet of head for the design storm). The liner components for the lined portion of the channel consist of two layers of geotextile sandwiching a drainage layer of permeable material (the bottom layer to protect 52177 0235=33-2107 -22- - .... __ . MAIODLM PIRNIE the drainage material from intrusion of fines, and the top layer to protect the HDPE); an 80-miI HDPE liner (specified for durability and resistance to puncture during placement of the gabion mattresses); and a final geotextile protective, layer upon which the gabion mattresses are placed. Maximum tensile stress on the liner components have been calculated and are included in Appendix N. The minimum factor of safety of the liner components against tensile failure is 3.3. __....,.'_ The geotextile and HDPE will be keyed into the top of the embankment to stabilize the liner components. As discussed above, an adequate factor of safety exists for liner tensile strength when fully loaded with gabion mattresses. The liner anchor trench is not designed to fail before the liner as would be the practice in landfill construction where fill loading places additional stress on liner components. Based on previous design experience, the anchor trench detailed on the drawings offers a total resistive force against pullout substantially greater than the expected tensile loading on the liner components. A description of the channel hydraulic characteristics used in the HEC-2 water surface profile analysis for the improved Marshall's Run channel adjacent to the Millcreek Site is presented in Table 7. Cross sections correspond to those shown on the plan and profile drawings contained in Appendix I.

TABLE 7

IMPROVED MARSHALL'S RUN CHANNEL DESCRIPTION Channel Cross Section Description V Channel adjacent to Site 34-45, 67-72 riprap-covered channel 0.029

Channel adjacent to Site 46-67 stone-filled gabions 0.029

17th St. culvert 62-63 12'x 6* concrete box culvert 0.011

WTP culvert 45-46 12'x 6' concrete box culvert 0.011

2.1.6 FRB Geotechnical Design Analysis As discussed above, design of the FRB will include construction of a levee ' , . _ . ,. _j -- . ..L .... embankment to retain storm flows, realignment of Marshall's Run to situate the channel within the impoundment area, and construction of control structure to regulate storm flows.

0285-33-2107 ' ' -23-. ------52178

flR3000i4? PIRNIE A geotechnical investigation was conducted by Haley & Aldrich, Inc. of New York in the proximity of the FRB to obtain site specific information to adequately determine: * the suitability of the underlying soils for embankments, abutments and basin construction;

* requirements for embankment materials;

• any required improvements to the underlying soils; and

• construction considerations fot proposed structures.

Hie geotechnical investigation and design analysis was expanded subsequent to the 35% submittal to include additional information concerning the side discharge weir and water treatment plant bypass culvert. This information is required to establish design criteria for the FRB embankments and control structure. A geotechnical design analysis report prepared by H & A is included in Appendix E, and contains data from field investigations and laboratory test results. Major observations of the investigation were: * the embankment bearing grades are generally granular fill and are suitable for the type of construction anticipated;

• the character of the granular fill is likely to be variable, and special attention should be given to measures to resist the subsurface erosion and loss of soil due to water transport (i.e., piping); * all earthwork should be performed in the dry to prevent damage to the fine grained material;

• any low-permeability lining should be underlain by a drainage layer with relief of accumulated ground water; and

• embankment fill must be imported from off-site.

2.1.7 Settlement Evaluation A qualitative settlement evaluation was conducted to determine the probability and significance of settlement. Appreciable settlement is not anticipated for the following reasons: • the waste fill is primarily composed of foundry sand and slag which are granular in nature and readily compact under their own weight;

52179 0285-33-2107 • -24- AR3000U8.- NWCOLM PIRNIE • since the waste fill has been in place for a minimum of 10 years, most of the settlement associated with the waste fill, if any, should have already occurred; and

* during cap construction, all on-site fill will be compacted with a minimum of three (3) passes and all off-site fill will be compacted to 90% of the Standard Proctor density. Surcharge loads from compaction and construction equipment, arid fill placed to achieve desired grades will promote primary settlement, if any, of loosely compacted subfill. Should settlement occur during grading/filling operations, the Contractor will be required to place additional fill in settled area to achieve desired grades.

Since the cap consists entirely of topsoil, differential settlement is not a concern. Settlement after completion of capping (i.e., subgrade preparation, topsoil placement, and turf establishment) activities will be long-term post-closure maintenance issue. Additional topsoil and reseeding may be required to maintain desired grades if settlement occurs. Damage to concrete structures by settlement will be minimized by design and construction measures. Specifications require that the soil be dewatered prior to pouring cast-in-place concrete. Expansion joints are provided on the 200-foot long culvert adjacent to the Water Treatment Plant, and construction joints are provided at frequent intervals along the length of.the side discharge weir upstream of the Flood Retention Basin control structure. . ; :

2.1.8 Cap and FRB Grading Plans 2.1.8.1 General The cap and FRB grading plans and details were prepared in accordance with cap •design criteria presented in Paragraph 2.1.1. The cap design and features incorporate features presented in the pre-design study (Ref.3) with the following exceptions:

• expansion of the capping limits to include areas (cleared during extraction trench construction) located at the northeast section of the site; • southward relocation of the FRB; and • realignment of Marshall's Run.

Review of information collected during the limits of fill survey and construction of the ground water extraction trenches revealed that waste fill extends throughout the northeast

52180 0285-33-2107 . - ."_._--• —""""-" "- - - -25, ...... --..,. .... --..-•'• AR3000I»9 MAiCOIJVl PIRNS .section of the site up to the drainage ditch along the northern property line, and to Marshall's Run at the eastern property line. Shallow test pits excavated within the wooded area indicated that there is little, if any, soil cover over the waste fill- The preliminary grading plan (presented in the Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study Report) was developed using assumed capping limits and with the goal of minimizing disturbance of mature trees. However, construction of the extraction trenches resulted in clearing and disturbance of portions of the wooded area. Consequently, capping limits have been extended to encompass these cleared areas. The additional areas to be capped are a total of approximately 7 acres in size. . _ The FRB was offset southward from its previous location to maximize the separation distance from Trench No. 4 to reduce the potential influence of the FRB on the routine operation of the ground water extraction system. The pump test "data indicated that the zone of influence for Trench No. 4 extends approximately 250 feet. The USAGE generated comments regarding cap and FRB design were incorporated into the plans and specifications, where appropriate. The design review comments and Malcolm Pirnie responses to these comments are contained in Appendix C. .Where appropriate or applicable, comments concerning design issues have been incorporated into this Design Analysis Report. The 90% subgrade grading plan contours submitted for 90% design review remain essentially unchanged from the preliminary concept plan with the following exceptions: * the majority of the treed area identified in the ROD will not be capped;

* areas disturbed by extraction trench construction will be capped;

• the FRB has been relocated further south;

* Marshall's Run will be realigned and improved; .and * the grading plan reflects additional shaving of high and steeply-sloped areas, and flattening of associated grades to reduce the amount of clean fill required.

The subgrade grading plan also includes modifications to the FRB. An embankment levee with control structure is situated along Marshall's Run at the southeast corner of the Site. The levee embankment will have IV to 3H slopes. Marshall's Run will be realigned within the FRB and FRB embankments. 52181 0285-33-2107 -26- - fiR300050 MA1ODUVI PIRNIE Wetlands which will be lost due to capping consist of perimeter lenses in the "A" and "B" embayments located in the central portion of the Site. Approximately one acre of wetland will be covered by the final topsoil grade in these areas. The loss of wetlands is significantly less than the wetlands.loss .previously proposed as part of the conceptual capping plans presented in the August 1989 Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study (Ref. 3) and less than that proposed in the ROD (Ref. 1) which recommended damming several of the wetland embayments for sedimentation purposes. The subgrade plan also includes a proposed alignment for a perimeter maintenance road and fencing limits for site security. A perimeter security fence is required to restrict unauthorized access of motorized vehicles which could potentially cause severe damage to the cap. The subgrade grading plan was prepared in accordance with applicable design criteria. Grading the site to the proposed subgrade plan involves clearing approximately 60 acres of mature trees, small trees and brush. The total area to be capped is approximate- ly 57 acres. Cut arid fill volumes are approximately 72,000 and 150,000 cubic yards.(in- place), respectively. The preliminary volumes presented in the Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study (Ref. 3) indicated 60,000 and 140,000 cubic yards respectively. The increase in cut volumes can be. attributed to grading a larger capped area and from increased shaving from the steeply-sloped areas. The increase in clean fill is directly attributed to the inclusion of the 7 acres disturbed during ground water extraction system construction, as well as construction of embankments for the realigned and improved Marshall's Run channel. The balance of fill required to grade the site in accordance with the design plans will come from off-site borrow sources. As a measure to prevent the possible introduction of additional contaminants, the cap construction contractor will be required to import clean fill from USACE-approved borrow sources.

2.1.8.2 Drainage Improvements The cap will be constructed to minimize the concentration of runoff into point discharges, which would encourage localized erosion of the protective cap. Instead, sheet flow is encouraged'by the gradually contoured design. Where required, culverts will be provided under the perimeter maintenance road to facilitate localized drainage. Where surface drainage is directed into Marshall's Run or the

0285-33-2107 -27- - 52182

AR30005I MAUGCXM 1RNI1 North Ditch, flap gates will be installed to prevent backflow of water during extreme storm events. Two culverts will be installed on the eastern end of the North Ditch to permit runoff to drain under the Water Treatment Plant access road and into Marshall's Run. Design of the culverts is such that peak flows from the 10-year storm event will generate a backwater with sufficient head to permit flows to enter Marshall's Run, while limiting water surface elevations in the channel from flooding the Water Treatment Plant facilities (design channel headwater depths are elevation 711.8 for the 10-year flood, while the access road crown and treatment building floor are both at elevation 714.0). • At flood flows greater than the 10-year storm event, the water surface elevation in Marshall's Run during peak flows will temporarily exceed water surface elevations in the North Ditch. Backflow prevention (flap gates) will be provided where the North Ditch culvert empties into Marshall's Run. As the flood stage recedes in -the Flood Retention Basin and discharge through the FRB control structure decreases, Marshall's Run water surface elevations will lower and water impounded in the North Ditch and contributing areas will gradually be released. The North Ditch will be improved by widening the channel and extending the berms. Overland flows from the Site will drain directly into the North Ditch. The existing residential areas north of the North Ditch are generally at lower elevations than the Site," and will be drained into the North Ditch conduits through the berm. As with all conduits through channel berms, flap gates will prevent backflow of water from the channel into the residential areas. In this manner, Site surface drainage is contained and prevented from flowing onto adjacent properties. The table below summarizes the design specifications and performance criteria for the North Ditch channel and Water Treatment Plant access road culvert:

0285-33,2107 - -28- 52183 AR300052 .:... NAAIODLM PIRNIE

TABLE 8

IMPROVED NORTH DITCH CHANNEL AND CULVERT DESCRIPTION Drainage Area (acres) 48 Upstream invert El. 710.5 Width of Channel Bottom (feet) 10 Berm Slope 3:1 Top of Berm Elevation 713 Culvert: - Size (inches) 42 Number 2 Inlet Invert El 708.8 Outlet Invert El 708.4 Length (feet) 150 "n" value . . ^ ... 0.012 Inlet Condition - ..,.-.- Square edge with headwall Design Flows (cfs): 10-year storm 49 50-year storm 94 North Ditch Water Surface Elevations: 10-year storm: at culvert 711.8 upstream 712.3 50-year storm(1): at culvert 712.5 upstream 713.0.

(1) Assumes free flow into Marshall's Run. As discussed above, 50-year flows will be temporarily retained until flood stage in Marshall's Run recedes.

Hydrologic calculations used in evaluating the. runoff into the North Ditch are included in Appendix F.. North Ditch computer-assisted culvert design calculations are included in Appendix H. -:..":.: _--_.-_-

2.1.83 Ancillary Facilities 2.1.83.1 Chain Link Security Fence and Gates The overall Site will be fenced as part of this contract. .Temporary chain link security fence and gates will also be required around the staging areas for security purposes. Twenty-four hour site security will also be required during construction as specified in the Security Specification. The location of the security fencing is shown on the drawings.

0285^33-2107 ' ' . -29- 52184

-~.--.flR 3.000 53' MALCOLM 1RNI1 The fencing requirements are specified in the Chain Link Security Fence and Gates ~ Specification. The fence will be chain link, eight feet high with barbed wire and posts in concrete footings. Existing security fencing will be salvaged and reused for perimeter fencing provided that fence fabric and posts are in good condition and are properly decontaminated. Gates will be located as required for access by the Contractor.

2.1.83.2 Perimeter Maintenance Roads A perimeter maintenance road will be constructed to facilitate routine operations on the finished Site, including access to monitoring wells and hydraulic control structures. The road will be graded gravel, underlain by a nonwoven geotextile for structural integrity.

2.1.833 Permanent Staging Area A permanent staging area approximately 100 feet by 200 feet will be constructed off the Water Treatment Plant access road and in close proximity to the FRB. The staging area will be constructed of geotextile under graded gravel, and will serve as a center of operations for the cap and FRB construction project. All material hauling operations will involve access to the Site from this location, allowing trucks to unload on clean fill and exit without the need for decontamination. The staging area will remain on the Site after construction to support post-closure activities.

2.1.9 Sedimentation Ponds Design features incorporated into the construction plans to control erosion include limiting of steep slopes, routing runoff to surface water drainage channels and limiting design flow velocities in drainage channels. Due to the relative flatness of the site and gentle slopes, the design and use of constructed sedimentation basins for sediment control is not considered necessary. Erosion and sediment losses during construction can be effectively controlled by using temporary control measures (i.e. silt fences and/or hay bales).

2.1.10 Landfill Gas Generation of methane and or other gases is a concern at landfills containing degradable organic material. Historical information combined with field data suggests there is little degradable organic material present at the site. The existing abundant and vigorous

0235-33-2107 -30- 52185 flR30005U PIRNIE

plant growth on the site supports the conclusion that methane is snot present in appreciable quantities at the Millcreek Site. If in the unlikely event that construction activities (e.g., burial of wood debris) results in the generation of substantial quantities of methane gas which inhibit vegetative growth, gas vents could be installed in problem areas to facilitate gas venting and maintain vegetative ;grpwth. _...„_...._

2.1.11 Availability of Fill Materials Preparation of construction cost estimates involved contacting several local topsoil/ fill/gravel suppliers to obtain- material prices and availabilities. Each supplier was provided information on the types of material and quantities required based on preliminary estimates. Each supplier indicated sufficient availability of clean subgrade fill and gravel. Availability of the extensive quantity of topsoil may pose a problem depending on the quality of topsoil required. Sufficient quantities of soil capable of propagating and supporting vegetation are . available. High quality shredded and screened topsoil is available in limited quantities.

2.1.12 Topsoil _....._..._ The 12-inch topsoil layer will consist entirely of friable loamy soil capable of propagating and supporting vigorous plant growth. The primary design criterion for the topsoil is suitability for vegetative growth which will be controlled through the following topsoil specification:

Fertile, friable, natural loam soil, capable of sustaining vigorous plant growth, free of any admixture of subsoil, clods of hard earth, plants or roots, sticks or other extraneous material harmful to plant growth with the following analysis: a. Percent Passing Sieve Size by Weight 3-inch 100 . 1-inch 85 - 100 1/4-inch 65-90 No.200 20-80 :

b. Clay content of material passing #200 sieve not greater tan 30 percent, as determined by hydrometer tests.

0285-33-2107 - - -31- • 52186 AR300055 ERNII

c. pH 53 to pH 7.6. If approved by Contracting Officer, natural topsoil not having the specified pH value may be amended by Contractor at his own expense. d. Organic content ranging from 2.5 to 6 percent, as determined by ignition loss. e. Free of pests and pest larvae. f. Soluble salt content not greater than 500 ppm.

g. Liquid limit less than 50. - _ '.'-.'

Gradation of the topsoil is important because too high a fines content can hamper growth, and cause excessive erosion problems (finer soils are more easily eroded), and too high a sand/gravel content reduces the amount of soil moisture which can be maintained during dry periods.

2.1.13 Evaluation of Potential for Migration and Mobility of Contaminants Erosion could lead to contaminant migration once the topsoil layer is completely eroded and the subgrade/waste material is exposed. Erosion during construction and construction erosion control measures are discussed in the Erosion Control Plan (Ref. 8). Post construction erosion control is addressed in the Site Maintenance Plan (Ref. 9). Implementation of erosion control measures presented in the above plans will reduce the potential for erosion-based contaminant migration. The potential for migration and mobility of contaminants is also dependent on many factors (other than erosion), including:

contaminants of concern present, advective transport (driving mechanisms), adsorption, soil porosity, soE dispersivity, retardance factors, and site conditions, etc.. ~ . ! -

An extensive contaminant fate and transport analysis for the Millcreek site was conducted as part of the predesign study and is presented in the August 1989 Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study Report (Ref. 3). The analysis determined that the volatile

0285-33-2107 *32- - : - 52187 ftR300056 PIRNIE organics trichlorpethylene. (TCE) and 1,2-dIcfiloroethylene (1,2-DCE) were the primary contaminants of concern under existing conditions. Both compounds were determined to be relatively mobile at the site. Other contaminants of concern, such as semi-volatile compounds, PCBs and metals, were determined to be appreciably less mobile due to their low solubility and would not be expected to be significantly affected by capillary action. Upward mobility is a function of diffusion and, to a greater extent, capillarity. Capillarity is dependent on soil type, thickness, compaction, and quality of vegetative cover. Fine-grain soils and good vegetative cover enhance capillarity. Capillary transport of volatile organics vertically upward through the cap is only feasible around the periphery of the capped site where the topsoil cover 'is thinned and distance to the ground water is small. If capillary i. action does contribute to upward mobility of volatile contaminants around the site periphery, they would quickly volatilize once they migrate through the topsoil layer as evidenced by the results of the previous soil gas survey and on-site air monitoring. The release of volatile organics from the site fill was not determined to be significant from a public health or air quality perspective. Placement of a cap will, if anything, further reduce the upward mobility of these contaminants. Root zone penetration into waste material could potentially result in upward .migration of less mobile contaminants such as semi-volatiles and metals via biological uptake. The site is to be vegetated with grasses and maintained such that secondary growth does not become established. Root zone depth associated with grasses is typically several inches up to two feet. Therefore, uptake of contaminants as a result of vegetative growth s \ should be minimal. . .

2.1.14 Monitoring Wells As a result of the grading and cap construction activities, several monitoring wells located within the capping limits will be modified with extended surface riser pipes and protective casings to maintain accessible riser heights. The affected monitoring wells will be modified accordingly (extended or lowered) to maintain a minimum two-foot, six-inch (2'- 6") rise above final grades. Modification of risers_an_d. casings will require the use of materials and techniques which will not jeopardize the integrity of the modified well. Modification requirementsis addressed in the Technical Specifications and presented on the Construction Plans.

0285-33-2107 __-....-- - -33. R 300057 PIRIMIE Wells not scheduled for future monitoring or observation uses will be abandoned accordingly by cutting the riser tops and casings, and filling the monitoring well with a bentonite grout slurry. Realignment of Marshall's Run will require abandoning several trench performance monitoring wells scheduled to remain in service. Therefore, new monitoring wells will be required to replace these wells. The Technical Specifications and Construction Plans also detail requirements for the replacement of monitoring wells.

2.1.15 Ground Water Extraction Trench Structures Existing sumps, valve boxes, and monitoring wells associated with the ground water extraction system wfll be extended as part of cap and FRB construction activities to provide for riser extensions following regrading and topsoil placement in these areas. A schedule of elevations for the ground water trench structures and for those monitoring wells selected to serve as permanent sampling stations following construction are included in the Plans along with the required riser extension elevations.

2.2 STRUCTURAL

2.2.1 General Description The functional designs of the FRB outlet control structure, side discharge weir, and culverts are based on hydraulic and hydrologic considerations. Information contained in the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared by H&A of New York, Inc. indicates that the Site is suitable and capable of supporting the proposed hydraulic structures. The box culverts designed adjacent to the Water Treatment Plant and under the 17th Street Access Road will be designed for H-20 traffic'loads. The FRB Outlet Control Structure is a low-head gravity retaining dam. The side-discharge weir has no structural function other than resisting erosion from water discharging over its crest. All drainage culverts will be designed for 15,000-pound single-wheel loading conditions.

222 Materials of Construction The box culverts, FRB outlet control structure and side-discharge weir will be * constructed of reinforced cast-in-place concrete. Drainage culverts will be precast reinforced

52189 0285-33-2107 -34- , .

AR300058 MALCOLM PIRNIE concrete. The embankments of the improved Marshall's Run channel will be constructed of earthen fill. Channel protection will consist of riprap, stone-filled gabions, and a synthetic HDPE liner,

233 Structural Design Criteria

GROUND WATER CONDITIONS: , , ,

A.. Maximum 100-year flood elevation: .Not applicable

B. . Normal high ground water elevation: EL 711.00

LATERAL EARTBLPRESSURES . ..,.....' . ,„,. . (Based on using granular backfill [see Geotechnical Investigation, Appendix E]):

Unit Weight (pcf): Above Water Table 120 Below Water Table 60 Equivalent Fluid Density (pcf): Above Water Table 60 Below Water Table 30

A. Use 300: psT surcharge adjacent to structures. For short duration against walls use 60"0~psf with increase in allowable stresses by 33%.

FOUNDAlIQSLCRrrERIA: . _ ; . .".; /.,

.A. Min..slab on .ground: 6 inches . B. - -JSoildata: ; :...-,._..__ .;.... • . Allowable Bearing Pressures:: 3,000 psf max. Coefficient friction on granular fill = 0.40 Coefficient friction on virgin sail = 0.40

C- " Frost penetfatTdh depth below grade = 4 ft! Extend all frost walls 4 ft. min. below finished grade.

. ANALYSIS AND DESLGK FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE:

Sanitary Engineering Structures as defined in the scope of the ACI Committee 350 Report shall be in accordance with the alternate design method requirements of the Building Code ACI STD 318-83. Design for all other structures shall be in accordance with the Building Code ACI_STD 318-83 and latest supplements.

52190 0285-33-210" " -' _ AR-300059 MAIGOLM 1RNI1 Exceptions to the above will be noted as design progresses.

A. Concrete

1. Compfc " --' 1,350 psi 2. TENS fc •- - ' - 88 psi 3. Shear Diagonal Tension Beams: • without WEB Reinf. 60 psi 4. Shear-Punching Shear 110 psi 5. Bearing: on full area 750 psi on one-third area or Itss , 1,125 psi

B. Reinforcing Steel

Tension due to bending:

1. Non-water bearing structures: 24,000 psi

2. Water bearing structure in accordance with ACI Committee 350 recommendations for Environmental Engineering Concrete Structures. 3. Direct Tension: 20,000 psi ..---. ...

4. Embedment lengths & lap splices shall be based on: fc = 4,000 psi • fy -60,000 psi. C- -Minimum lap splice and embedment lengths shall be in conformance with ACI 318-83. The minimum length of laps for splices shall be as given in the table for Class "B" laps.

CONCRETE COVER: „ , ...... _ _, A. -Surface inside basins: 2" min.

B. Footing and slab on ground: 3" C ~ Formed surfaces exposed to weather or in contact with soil: 2" min.

D. .. Formed surfaces not exposed to weather or in contact with soil: 1-1/2" min.

DESIGN FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL:

AISC Specification for the Design, Fabrication and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings, dated November 1, 1978 fy = 36 KSI.

52191 0285-33-2107 -36- SR300060 MAITQUVI PIRNIE FACTOR OR SAFETY: Overturning: Service loads: FS01 =1.5 . . " . ' Min. frequency ("once in a lifetime") loads of short duration: FS^ =1.25

Sliding: "..__.-_ ... "___"_ ... ~. .". :v;.._. J: ]_-.". ".". " Service loads: FSOS = 1.5 Min. frequency ("once in a lifetime") loads of short duration: FS^ = 1.15

Computation:

FS01 = RM/OTM where RM (resisting moments) includes uplift and OTM (overturning, moments) may include the effect of active ("earth at rest") pressure but not passive pressure.

FSS1 =~iPV/-H •" '

wHere _V (vertical forces) includes uplift and H (horizontal forces) may include active pressure u is the coefficient of friction

BUILDING CODES: ;. "". - : . ; .

State: . ..^-Pennsylvania, ANSI, UBC .,,,."' . Year: Latest Edition

EARTHQUAKE: . ;

Zone: 3 per'MBMA

23 SITE CONSTRUCTION

2.3.1 General It is assumed that all other remedial construction contracts will be completed prior to initiation of cap construction. The Contractor will.be required to verity site conditions and factor in on-going construction activities as part of the bid process. .. i 23,2 Clearing. Grubbing and Brush Removal Clearing, grubbing_and brush removal will be performed on an as-needed basis in accordance with the Construction Plans and Clearing and "Grubbing Specification. Clearing

0285-33-2107 ---;-;- ...... _.-...... _. •• _37_._-. v _,._-_r=-i:- -52192 AR30006 I \tAlCOiJVt PIRNIE and grubbing limits will include all areas to be capped and any peripheral areas for drainage improvements, access and security as-needed by the contractor for the performance of the required work. In general, clearing limits will follow the capping limits and are indicated on the Construction Plans. , ' - • The Contractor will have the option of on-site or off-site disposal of large trees (viz. greater than 3 inches in diameter). Brush, stumps and tree logs less than 3 inches in diameter will be chipped and disposed of on-site and buried directly beneath the topsoil layer in a maximum 3-inch chipped wood lift. If the amount of chipped material is greater than 24,000 cubic yards (60 acres x 3 inches depth), the excess material will be buried in a manner similar to the large logs. Disposal of logs on-site will require cutting the logs to lengths not exceeding 4 feet in length and placing only one layer of logs in any_given area. The Contractor will also be required to maintain the buried trees or excess chipped material a minimum of one" fool below subgrade. Logs greater than 3 inches in diameter may be removed off-site. The Contractor will be required to properly decontaminate logs that have contacted waste fill prior to leaving the site. - ...

233 Off-Site Disposal of Bulky Debris Removal and salvage of bulky debris (junk cars, abandoned machinery, bulky metallic demolition debris) will be performed in accordance with the Debris Removal Specification. Bulky metallic debris removed for salvage or proper off-site disposal will be decontaminated before leaving the site. Wipe sampling of bulky debris will not be required.

23.4 On-Site Debris Disposal Surface debris, drums of slag and non-hazardous solid wastes that were excavated and placed on the eastern portion of the site by the USEPA in 1982, drummed drilling spoils and discarded field supplies at the site, and other such materials will be consolidated for placement under the soil cap in areas designated to. receive fill to achieve desired suberades. The debris disposal areas will be indicated on th^construction plans for reference by the Contractor. In general, buried debris will be covered with at least one foot of fill soil "followed by one foot of topsoil. Fill soil covering the debris will be compacted to not less than 90% Standard Proctor density. Debris will be crushed, placed, and compacted

0285-33-2107 •- OS- -. 52193 flR3Q0062 MALCOLM PIRNIE

by similar methods utilized to compact sanitary refuse (-5 passes with a dozer or trash compactor). The Contractor will be required to limit the thickness of the debris material to less than five (5) feet to minimize the long-term potential for settlement.

23.5 Drum Removal and Disposal During subgrade preparation, buried .drums _may be encountered. Prior to construction, the Contractofwill ipe required to submit a Drum Handling Plan for USACE review and approval. The Contractor's Drum Handling Plan will address excavation, handling, storage,. sampling and disposal of drums. The following subsections outline procedures and requirements the Contractor will be required to adhere to during construction. " *

23.5,1 Drum Excavation And Handling The Contractor will exhume drums and containers encountered during site grading and preparation. The Contractor will place exhumed drums in overpacks as necessary, log them, and immediately transport them to the on-site drum accumulation area for sampling and analysis prior to final disposition. Movement and handling of drums and containers will be specified to be kept to a minimum. If buried drums and containers are damaged in place or during removal and materials are released, the Contractor will collect these materials.to the maximum extent practical and place the released materials in clean drums. The Contractor will transfer the drummed materials to'the on-site. accumulation area for subsequent sampling prior to final disposal. In general, drum excavation will proceed from the downwind end of the area towards the upwind end. The operators are to work from the upwind side. Therefore, operators and workers will not be exposed to any vapors encountered during excavation and from excavated areas. The excavation area will be monitored for volatile organic vapors. At this time, a USACE representative may also log materials and collect samples for chemical analysis. The Contractor's1 foreman_wili direct the Contractors.personnel and equipment during the drum excavation.;; Other personnel, with the exception of the USACE representative will stand clear of the immediate area during the,drum excavation. All work will proceed in a slow controlled manner so as to minimize the potential dangers associated with excavation and extraction~of buried drums or other forms of waste materials. All drum 52194 0285^.2107 ''• ' ...;.. ; ;;:.. .;-":"—"-....." -39---•"-= •."..:.:v.:_," ,-,, :r~—" • flR300063_____ MAlfXXM PIRfsffi

excavation work shall be conducted in accordance with OSHA interim standard, 29 CFR 1910,120, (Hazardous Waste Site Operation and Emergency Response).

23.5.2 Interim Waste And Drum Accumulation The Contractor will construct an interim on-site waste "and drum accumulation area in a USACE approved location for temporary storage. This area will be bermed to prevent off-site migration of contaminants, covered with an asphalt liner, and secured by a chain link security fence and lockable gate. At a minimum, this area wiH have capacity to accumulate up to 100 overpacked drums stacked two high on wooden pallets. Non overpacked drums shall be stacked one high on pallets. Following removal and off-site disposal of all wastes from the interim waste and drum accumulation area, the Contractor shall close this area. This closure will include removal of berms and security fencing.

23.53 Drum Sampling and Analytical Program The Contractor will be required to sample liquid and solid materials contained in excavated drums in accordance with procedures set forth in the USEPA document EPA/600/2-86/013 "Drum Handling Procedures at Hazardous Waste Sites", The Contractor will be required to provide all sample containers and be responsible for sample compositing, packing, preservation and transport. The Contractor will be required to maintain field log documentation of all drum sampling and chain of custody. Split samples will be made available to the USACE on-site representative or representatives of regulatory agencies upon request. The objective of analyzing drum contents is to characterize the wastes as required to: • . - .

* Determine treatment and disposal requirements;

• Allow transportation of wastes in accordance with all regulatory require- ments; and • Allow waste bulking or recontainerization as necessary to provide the most timely and cost-effective program for waste disposal.

The Contractor will be required to provide data in a time frame that will expedient removal, off-site transportation and disposal of drums. The Contractor will

0285-33-2107 -_- . . -40- _ flR30006l» PIRNIE

be required to perform all sampling and analytical procedures in accordance with USEPA approved protocols. At a minimum, the Contractors sampling and analytical program shall address: -•—— . -•—-—-• _••==--•-./•: ..--.•.=._ -. --:.-_-—-L-jrrzn...:_. . -. - .

• waste compatibility testing procedures, protocols and analytical parameters,

• waste segregation criteria, ' _ ... •

• waste composite sample procedures and methodology,

• analytical parameters and procedures to determine treatment/disposal alternatives,

• ' schedule of all activities including assessment of treatment/disposal options, waste consolidation if appropriate, and off-site disposal, and

• methods and procedures for sampling and analysis of drums containing heterogeneous wastes (i.e. sample jars, refuse, miscellaneous wastes).

The results of all analytical testing performed by the Contractor shall be made available to the USACE immediately upon completion of final data reports and in no case greater than 30 days frpm the day;_of.sampling or less than 14 days prior to transportation of wastes off-site. . ; - "-.-". -.-"-v - -.-"_..___"---:":•-—-ii~

23.5.4 Disposal of Drummed and Contaminated Materials On-Site Disposal - In the event that the Contractor is required to regrade a portion of the landfill due.to settlement or erosion, there is a possibility that contaminated materials may be generated or .encountered. With the^exception of drums containing RCRA hazardous materials excavated from the site, wastes tha.t have been excavated subsequent to placement of the topsoil layer of the cap, are to be disposed of on-site and placed at least one (1) foot below the bottom of the topsoil layer. Empty drums will be crushed prior to disposal and shall be deposited in one lift not to exceed 5 feet. The location for on-site disposal of wastes which do not exhibit the RCRA Characteristics of Hazardous Waste (i.e., ignitabiiity, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity characteristk>TCLP) as described in 40 CFR 2.61.24, July 1, 1990, shall be proposed by the Contractor as part of the Contractor's Drum and Contaminated Materials Handling Plan. .

0285-33»2107. •/.._.. ' .-.-...- ^. ._ --- - 52196 aR3D0065 "'. . • MALDOUVt 1RNII Off-Site Disposal - AH drums containing materials characterized as hazardous materials are to be disposed of off-site in a permitted disposal facility. All contaminated "m'ateriartcThfi. disposed off-site shall be disposed of in accordance with RCRA approved methods. Drums and containers will be inspected prior to being moved. All employees who have a potential to be exposed to hazardous substances as a result of the transfer operation shall be notified "of the potential hazards associated with the contents of the drums or containers. .The name and location of the Contractor's selected disposal facility(s) and copies of all off-site disposal manifests" shall.be submitted to the Contracting Officer as part of the Drum and Contaminated Materials Handling Plan.

23.6 Decontamination Pad Significant" excavation of potentially contaminated waste fill and soils and contact with potentially contaminated ground and surface water will, take place during construction of the cap and FRB. Some contamination may be encountered in completion of the site work such as clearing and grubbing and construction of access roadways. Equipment utilized in a potentially contaminated area will be decontaminated according to the. procedures provided in the Contractor's Site Safety and Health Plan (SSHP). The Contractor will be required to provide facilities such that decontamination of potentially contaminated equipment will be completed on-site so that potentially contaminated materials remain on- site. . ' " The Contractor will submit details for the decon facility in conjunction with his SHERP. The approximate location of the required decontamination pad is shown on the' drawings,....".. ..._.,._ ...._...._;;. ;.;*__ ;,.;_.!_.__ ^ .;_..._"_

23.7 Site Access Roads Site access'will be accomplished via a temporary access road to be constructed parallel to and immediately south of the existing 17th Street ground water treatment plant access road located at the south end of the site. Construction of this temporary road will permit continued access to" the site while the existing 17th Street culvert is reconstructed within the improved Marshall's Run channel alignment. The Site access road will be designed "for continuous, heavy load truck traffic. Alternate access from Marshall's Drive

02S5-33-2107...... _..._ . _. . _. ...._- ;._. .^- =______. . 52197 ; SR300066 \\AIODUV1 PIRNIE may be possible pending a decision by the Town of Millcreek relative to the condition of an adjacent brick sewer. Special local weight restriction limits are not imposed on Millcreek Town roads. The Contractor wilTbe~restricted to Pennsylvania Department of Transportation gross vehicle weight limits. ... .-...... ,_

23.8 Survey and Control Vertical and horizontal control has been established for the site during previous • studies. Vertical control is based on United States. Coastal and Geodetic Survey (B&GS) datum and horizontal control is based on the Pennsylvania State Plane Coordinate,System. Elevations and coordinates are shown on the drawings. The site topography is based on aerial photography and sterepphotqgrammetric mapping completed by TVGA Associates in January of 1989. The January 1989 mapping was photogr am metrically revised by TVGA in December 1990 by adding the south bordering wetlands _and by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. in -February and July 1991 using field instruments to update site conditions (viz. extraction trenches, new tree limits, fenced staging areas,"drainage culverts, etc.). . The locations, property lines and markers on the site have been verified in the field by & property boundary survey conducted by Robert A. Lucas, RS in February 1990. Properly boundary limits determined by Lucas are shown on the existing Site Plan. Additional control points were installed at key locations around the site to augment existing benchmarks and control points. Property lines and bearings used on the extraction trench and treatment plant construction drawings were based on a previous control survey completed for the site by Greehhorne and O'Meara using State Plane Coordinate , Monuments, and additional field control work based on that survey. Distances and angles for property boundaries are as shown on the Township of Milicreek Tax Maps.

23.9 Contaminated Soils All soils excavated.during grading wiU be moved to areas requiring fill under the proposed cap. The location of cut and fill areas are shown on the subgrading grading plan. The Contractor's responsibilities for.regrading of fill and soils is addressed in the Specifica- tions. The Contractor""will"beTequired to provide erosion arid Sedimentation control for the project to meet the published requirements of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmen-

0285-33-2107 ...... _4__ 52798

flR300067 MAUCOLM 1RNII tal Resources and approved Erosion Control Plan (Ref. 8). Control measures will include methods to control migration of contaminated silt and dust such as a silt fences, straw bail traps, vegetative cover and construction phasing.

23.10 Contaminated Water Potentially contaminated water may be encountered and/or generated during cap and FRB construction and during equipment decontamination. When dewatering of ground water is required, pumped ground water is to be discharged back to the site in depressions created on an as needed basis to be located in USACE-approved locations~:on the site. Decorntamination water is to be* discharged in the sarrie manner. This is consistent with practices utilized during previous construction activities. The volume of water is small when compared to the overall ground water flow rate through the site,

23.11 Drainage The Contractor may have to temporarily divert flow from the Existing Marshall's Run channel using pumps and overland piping in order to complete construction activities. The specifications state that the drainage facilities are subject to review, and refer the Contractor to the Erosion Control Plan (Section 120Q). Specifically, the Contractor is required to prepare a Surface Water Bypass Pumping Plan indicating sequence of events and methodology (Paragraph 14, Section 02210 GRADING). This plan must be approved by the Contracting Officer.

23.12 Chemical Quality Management As part of the remedial construction at the Site, sampling and analysis of soil, water, air and possibly drums of waste exposed during construction may be required. The Specifications include requirements for sampling and chemical analysis. The preliminary cap construction Site Specific Quality Management Plan and Chemical Data Quality Management Specification describe requirements to be implemented by the Contractor during the performance of the work.

52199 0285-33-2107 • -44- 4R300068 MALGOyvl PIRNIE

23.13 Erosion Control Erosion could lead to"c'onta'mlh^hT'mi^atron" once .the topsoil layer is completely eroded and the s_ubgr_ade/waste material is exposed. Erosion during construction and construction erosion "control measures are discussed in the Erosion Control Plan (Ref. 8). Post-construction erosion control is addressed in the Site Maintenance Plan (Ref. 9). . Implementation of erosion control measures presented in the above plans will reduce the potential for erosion-based .contaminant migration.

23.14 GeotextUes ._...._'_ Geotextiles will be used at_th_e Site for construction of the maintenance road and staging area; and Jpr protection of the HDPE liner on portions of Marshall's Run. Woven geotextile are typically used for separation reinforcement and filtering such as in roadway construction. Nonwoven geotexiiles are typically used for separation 'and filtering such as in cap drainage layers, subdrains, etc. Material strength characteristics based on the intended use of the geotextile, typical geotextile application and the general strength characteristics of, available geotextiles on the market were considered in specifying geotextile materials. The design rationale for geotextiles is contained in Appendix N.

i _ , 23.15 Synthetic Channel Liner A synthetic channel liner will be installed to reduce the potential for infiltration of surface water from Marshall's Run into the extraction trenches. Consideration of materials was based on experience and material qualities. HDPE was. selected over, other synthetic materials for several reasons including durability, compatibility with known wastes and constructability.- HDPE, compared with PVC or VLDPE is more durable, less susceptible to ultraviolet degradation, more compatible with a greater variety of chemicals and contaminants and has comparable installation requirements. Selection of an.80-mii thickness is based on previous expense on similar projects. Contractors generally prefer to work with 80 or 100-mil liner due to reduced puncture potential and the cost of purchase/installation is only slightly higher than for reduced thickness. .- ...... -_._... .. __......

0285-33-2107 V - -; --v___-^-- .---——--=45. ;, AR3-Q00.69 MAlCOUrt PIRNIE 2,4 HEALTH AND SAFETY

The Contractor will be required to develop and implement an SSHP as part of the work. Requirements for the Contractor's health and safety program are described in the Specifications. The cap construction Health and Safety Design Analysis, dated March 1991, provides a basis for the development of the Specification as well as guidelines for the review of the Contractor's health and safety program.

52201 0285-33-210" . - . ._____ - - ... - -46- - ... - - . AR300070 MAUDOUVi PIRNIE

PART 3 - OT& M PROVISIONS

A separate project document entitled "Site Maintenance Plan" (Ref. 9) addresses site maintenance operations and procedures. The Site Maintenance Plan outlines measures intended to ensure that proper site maintenance care occurs at the disposal site after closure. It includes routine post-closure maintenance activities, inspection and maintenance frequencies and reporting requirements. - Provisions have been incorporated into the design of the cap and FRB to facilitate maintenance of the site. These provisions include a perimeter access road, minimizing steep slopes, drainage ditches configured for. maintainability, use of erosion protection as needed, and hardy vegetative cover. . ... ' ._..;....-- ... .'.....

0285-33-2107 '" ....-..-.--•--. . ^ ------52202 ' AR30007I MA1HXM 'IRNII REFERENCES

1. NUS Corporation, August 1985, Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Report, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania, August 1985, '-_', '"_

2. USEPA, May 1986, Record of Decision, Remedial Alternative Selection, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania.

3. Malcolm Pirniejnc., August 1989, Remedial Cleanup Treatability Study, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania.

4, USACE, January 1991, Architect Engineer Instruction Manual for Design of Military Projects, AEIM 13. .

5. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resource, April 1988, Title 25 Rules and Regulations. . :~ "

6. Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., July 1989, Final Design Analysis Report, Groundwater Extraction System, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania.

7. Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., August 1989, Final Design Analysis Report, Ground Water Treatment System, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania.

8. Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., July 1991, Erosion Control Plan, Milicreek Superfund Site, County, Pennsylvania.

9, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., July 1991, Site Maintenance Plan, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania.

0285-33-210- - - -48- .... -"03 AR300072 MAIJQOLM PIRNIE

APPENDIX A

PADER NOTICE OF CAP RECOMMENDATIONS

028S-33-"1 -- -- • 52204 AR3QQQ73 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES NNSYLVAN1A 1012 Water Street Meadville, Pennsylvania 16335 Telephone: A. C. 814/724-8526 August 15, 1989

Subject: Hlllcreek Site Erie County, Pennsylvania Mr. Anthony Koller Remedial Project Manager Environmental Protection Agency Region III 841 Chestnut Building Philadelphia, PA 19107

Dear Mr. Koller: This letter is being written in reference to the remedial capping alternatives which have been developed for the Millcreek Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania. These are described in the Final Engineering .Report - Remedial Cleanup Treatibility Study prepared by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. (draft - June 1988),

The Department has determined that the six (6) - inch topsoil cap will be acceptable for the site. However, the clean fill layer beneath the topsoil should be at least six (6) inches. The above document describes this layer as ranging from zero (0) inches to nine ,(9) feet in depth. It is acceptable to the Department to accomplish this by deepening the "cut" areas as shown on the cut and fill isopach (drawing - 5-5 of the treatibility study) where needed in order to achieve the proper "clean fill" depth and also to maintain the final grade as shown on the final grading plan for the topsoil alternative (drawing 5-2 of the treatibility study). Should you have any questions, please .do not hesitate to call me at this office. Sincerely,

Anita M. Stainbrook Project Manager Hazardous Sites Cleanup Program Bureau of Waste Management

AMS/jb

cc: Captain Christopher Young —'Malcolm Pirnie Engineers, Inc. Don Becker

52205 4R3QQ071* PIRNIE

APPENDIX B

WETLANDS DELINEATION NARRATIVE

5285-33-2 AR300075 WETLAND DELINEATION NARRATIVE FOR THE MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE

MILLCREEK TOWNSHIP ERIE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

MARCH 1991

MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC. 11832 Rock Landing Drive Suite 400 Newport News, Virginia 23606

--——- --_-._- 52207

0285-33-2112. AR300076 """ TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION ...... '...... ,...'..'".'.'••.'...... -I

SITE DESCRIPTION ."."."'. ;"."".'." VV^ 7'.'W. .' ...... 1

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES . : . . / ....." V ."'J" "....'...... 1 Upland Plant Communities' •'...'..7 71 . .. . :.'...... 2. Wetland Plant Communities / . ... ". 7''"!' ; . . . . .' . . . . :;.£.

DELINEATION METHODOLOGY ..'...... :.,. . ''. . . . '', ..... 3 RESULTS -':.'-'-r:"7": rr:.;..".;. ,r. .-. .".'.I=VT^"T'"-; ; ...... \\

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment .,,,,.De.scription "A Upland Vegetation by Ecological System - Millcreek Site B Wetland Vegetation by Ecological System - Millcreek Site C. PhotoTog ^ "

0285-33.2U2 4 R 300077 INTRODUCTION This document has been prepared in conjunction with remedial activities being -performed at...the Millcreek S'uperfund Site, located in Millcreek Township, Eri.e.County, 'Pennsylvania"." Malcolm Pirnie ,has been retained by the U.S.. Army Corps of Engineers to delineate the extent of wetlands'on the.approximately 84.5-acre site. Results presented in this report are based upon field work completed.on December 11-13,.1990. -

SITE DESCRIPTION The site is an irregularly shaped.east-west oriented parcel located approximately Ik "mile" west of the City qf.'Ene",' 1% mile south of.Presque Isle"State"..P_ark, and _4jni_le .east of the Erie'.Airport. ...The site is bounded by West 12th . Street and ..residential land, to the north, an unnamed tributary to Lake Erie:.tp the east, the Norfolk and Western - Penn Central Railroad to the south and an athletic field"and forested land to the-west. The site has been used extensively • as an industrial' waste disposal facility over the past 40 years. "Between L,00p and 2,000 drums are reported to have been dumped on the site, which had previously contained an extensive "wetland area (U.S. EPA, "Site Investigation: Millcreek Township, Erie County, Pa. ,~'r 1.983).'"""

VEGEtATION COMMUNITIES The site..i.s comprised of a relatively diverse assemblage of upland and wetland plant communities. Former land uses such as clearing and filling' "have influenced the. success.]onal stages and plant species composition of the site. The disturbed northern, northeastern, central, and southwestern portions of the site are generally vegetated by upland old field and successianal plant communities. The low-lying land adjacent to these disturbed areas are predominantly forested wetlands. The extreme southern and southwestern portions of the site have not been recently disturbed and have grown up in successional and mature, forest, respectively.. " " ......

52209

0285-33-2112 flFUOO\J78 Upland Plant Communities SuccesslGnal forest and mature" forest are tfie.predominant upland' communities on site. The mature forest represents an older, less disturbed vegetation community than the successional .forest. Mature forest is dominated by climax species which eventually replace the pioneer"" species found in successional forest. Dominant trees of the mature forest in the extreme southwestern part of the site include oak, maple, birch, and tulip pop!ar. These. species are representati ve of the Northern' Hardwood and Beech-Maple Forest Associations, typically found on" the Lake Erie Plain. " . Successional forest 'contains few of the canopy tree species typical of mature forest. Fast growing pioneer "trees predominate. Common trees of the successional forest in the northern, northeastern and extreme southern portions of the site include cottonwood, gray birch, black cherry, white birch, and staghorn sumac. Dense thickets of shrubs and brambles occur where trees have not yet establi shed. Honeysuckle, blackberry, black raspberry, multiflora rose and red osier dogwood are common in these thickets. . • . _ The northern and northeastern portions of the site were disturbed during the early 1950's, much earlier than the central and western parts of the site. Successional forest dominated by cottonwood and honeysuckle has become established in this older fill area. Recently disturbed areas on the site, including haul roads, cleared areas, waste and rubble disposal areas, and fill areas, contain herbaceous vegetation typical of the old field plant community. Examples include yarrow, mullein, goldenrods, aster, and knapweed. Upland vegetation found on the site is identified in Attachment A at the end of the report.

Wetland Plant Communities In most portions of the site, wetland areas are identifiable solely through vegetative, hydrologic, and topographic indicators. The wetland/ non-wetland boundary is, in general, situated at the toe of slope of fill areas throughout the site. Soil samples'were taken utilizing a soil auger in the extreme southwestern corner of the site. The wet!and/non-wetland 52210 0285-33-2112 -2- AR300079 boundary was difficult to .-"determine ""in "this """ar.ea 'because of subtle topographical changes..and_exten._slye..integration..of facultative upland and •wetland vegetation.- - - - ". "" " - These types _ of palustrine wetlands "'occur on the Millcreek site: forested deciduous (PF01), paTustrine" emergent wetland (PEM), and open water (POW). Vegetation^ occurring with|n .each :pf_ the del ineated.wetlands is typical of ~thbser_specie.s "-associated with" palustrine systems found throughout the northeastern U.S. The palustrine forested wetlands are dominated, by facul'tati ve ...trees such as red maple, ash, and willow, and facultative shrubs such as red osier dogwood, ;highbush cranberry, and northern, "arrowwood. -The palustrine emergent wetland is dominated by herbaceous vegetation and'.such as rushes and sedges. The open water wetlands are characterized by standing water with obligate and facultative emergent and shrubby vegetation, .growing _in_/.the water. Three drainage ditches on. the site are.included in this category. ATI wetlands on site are-shown on Map A. Wetland vegetation found on the site, is identified in Attachment B at the end of the report.

DELINEATION METHODOLOGY The Unified Federal Method adopted in January 1989 was utilized to. identify wetland boundaries on the site. Given that the wetland and upland vegetation communities on the site were well-segregated and marked by. distinctive topographic boundaries, the routine on-site wetland determination'method'was followed using the plant community assessment procedure. The first step was to walk the project area identifying plant community types. Particular attention was paid to topographic changes and fill areas on the site. The second step was to determine whether natural environmental conditions exist on the site. Ther£ was no evidence of vegetative stress due. to fluctuations in precipitation, surface' water, or ground water levels on the site. - - . --.. ',-:.. • The next steps were to select several representative observation areas and characterize the plant communities within each wetland. Within each plant community, the dominant plant species .were visually estimated 52211 0285-33-2112 . .. ,. .... - _ . -3- —.... -^-_. - aR300Q80 ... for each vegetative strata, including tree, shrub and herb strata. Dominant species are defined as those species in-each stratum, that, when ranked in decreasing order of abundance .and cumulatively" totaled, immediately exceed 50 percent of the total dominance measure for that stratum, plus any additional species comprising 2ti percent or more of the total dominance measure for that "stratum. The indicator status for each dominant species was then obtained from the U.S. Fish" and Wildlife Service national list of wetland plants occurring in the Northeast U.S. Those areas where more than 50 percent of the dominants had an indicator status of obligate, facultative wetland and/or facultative were considered to have hydrophytic vegetation. Most wetland areas on the site contained dominant species with indicator status of obligate or facultative wetland and"wet!and boundaries delineated by abrupt changes in topography. In these areas hydric soi.ls were assumed to be present. . After characterizing the vegetation, field indicators of wetland hydrology were documented. Each plant community meeting the hydrophytic vegetation, , and wetland hydrolo.gy criteria were considered wetland.

RESULTS Area A consists of a forested wetland dominated by red maple, green ash, and black willow. The overall character of the deciduous swamp can be described as having a dense canopy, a moderately dense shrub layer, very little herbaceous ground cover and standing water varying from 6 to 12 inches in depth. The lack of ground cover may be due to the time of year when the survey was completed. The canopy trees are medium - aged with diameters ranging from 6 to 18 inches dfah. Common shrubs in the wetland included highbush cranberry, northern arrowwood, red osier dogwood, and spicebush. The herbaceous layer is dominated by common reed, cattails, and reed canary grass. Wetland A is shown in Photos 1-5. Area B is a small isolated wetland, dominated by red maple and green ash, as shown in Photo 6. The wetland was formerly connected to Areas A and F. The placement of fill at its east and west end has isolated the wetland.

52212 0285-33-2112 fiR3.0Qt)8 Area C has been separated _from Wetland A by the construction of a haul road as shown on Map .A. Based "on'aerial photography interpretation, the.haul road was built at some time..between'1975 and 1982 (U.S. EPA, "Site Investigation: Mi 11 creed Township, Erie County, Pa.," ). Wetland C is a deciduous swamp located atvthe south"end'of the site. The wetland is dominated by red maple, green "a'sh, and black willow trees. The swamp has a moderately dense "caiiopy, a dense s.hrub. layer, very little herbaceous ground cover, and .standing water, varying, from 1.to 2H feet in depth. The canopy trees are me.dium-aged. Common shrubs in the wetland include highbush cranberry, northern arrowwood, red osier dogwood, spicebush, silky dogwood, and ;spec_kl_ed_alder. Herbacep^ vegetation, is quite dense, in certain portions of Area C," and is dbmina'ted by cattails, common reed, and reed canary grass.. Other emergents .identified in Area C include water plantain, sedges,"spike rush, water horehound, bur reed, and duckweed. Wetland C is shown in Photos 7 - 10...... - - Wetland D is a deciduous swamp dominated by red maple and green ash. This wetland contains about 1-foot of standing water, few shrubs and almost no herbaceous understory (Photo 11). Area E is dominated by rushes, flat sedges, common reed, and reed canary grass. .The area is in a topographic depression which has been disturbed by the construction of natural gas well (Photo 12). It appears that fill has been placed in the area adjacent to the well, "Soils consist 'of yellowish-orange (10YR6/8, 10YR6/7) clays and clayey loams. However, there is evidence of'wetland hydrology. During the site visit, there was 2 to 5 inches of standing water in the wetland and the soils were saturated. Due .to the presence of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology, this area should be considered a jurisdictional wetland._• ...... _ . _...... __ . Wetland F is a crescent-shaped forested wetland bounded by the property line and a road on the west, and fill areas on the north, east, south, and southwest. The wetland is dominated by red maple, green ash, and black willow trees. The swamp has a moderately dense canopy, has very little shrubs or understory, and contains 6 to 12 inches.of standing water. Common shrubs in the wetland include highbush cranberry, red osier

52213 °285-33-2112 A-'-30*08R 2 dogwood, and spicebush. The herbaceous layer is dominated by cattails, common reed, and reed canary grass..(Photo 13). Wetlands G, H and I are drainage ditches containing obligate and facultative emergent and shrubby vegetation., Area G conveys runoff from Wetland D into Wetland F. Area H conveys runoff from Area A into Area I, which is located at the eastern edge of the site. Area I flows towards the north, eventually emptying into Lake Erie.

52214

0285-33-2112 . ATTACHMENT A UPLAND VEGETATION BY ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM MILLCREEK SITE

Scientific Name Common Name Designation Acer rubrum ,,_.__,_.. Red Maple . FAC Aster spp. . .. Asters,/ ...... —- Betula papvrifera ...... ,._ '_. ..W'hUe'_Bjrch .,,„_!_.._V_'., .. .F.ACU Betula populifolia " ; /Gray .Birch . . FAC. Centaurea maculosa . . ."'. Spotted Knapweed U Cornus stolonifera ... ,.,._._ _j Red-osier..Dogwood...... " FACW Lind.er.a...benzoin .:".' _ ..... ,.. Spicebush _ ___...._._ .._ . .. . FACW- Liriodendron tul ipife'ra" '' tul ip Poplar FACU Lonicera sp. _ _ _.,._____.__._._ ..J^ojieysuckles . .._ .....; _ -.-- Populus deltoides _"..""_." ."_.'_ .Eastern "Cbttpnwggd ..,. ^ FAC Prunus serotina Black Cherry . FACU Quercus Rubra ______Red Oak . _ ...... FACU Rhus typhina Staghorn Sumac . U Rosa multiflora - " .. . :Rose " ...= .,. FACU Solidago sp. ....__ _ Goldenrod : : ,. __..... -.-- : Verbascum thapsus _ . _ Common _mul 1 efn '_•_. ..'.._._ U

52215

0285-33-2112 AR30008U ATTACHMENT B WETLAND VEGETATION BY ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM • MILLCREEK SITE

Paulstrine Forested Wetland Brood-Leaved Deciduous (PF01) Scientific Name Common. Name . Designation Acer rubrura . Red Maple • , FAC Alisma plantago-aQuatica N. Water Plantain OBL Alnus rugosa __.. Speckled Alder FACW Aster SPP. Asters . --- Carex crinita . Fringed Sedge ,. . .. .__,DBL Carex SPP. Sedges - ' .... OBL, FACW Carex stricta Tussock Sedge. _ D.BL Cornus amdmum . Silky Dogwood...... f.ACW Cornus stolonifera' Red osier Dogwood ; FACW . Cvperus SP. . Flat sedge OBL, FACW, FAC. Eleocharis SP. . .. Spike-rush _ OBL, FACW Epilobeum SP. _ Willow-herb . ..03L.FAC Eduisentum sp. Horsetails Fraxinus pennsvlvanica Green Ash .FACW Lindera benzoin Spicebush FACW Lvcoous Virginia Water horehound OBL Qnoclea sensibil is Sensitive Fern . ; FACW Penthorum sedoides Ditch Stonecrop OBL Phalaris arundinacea Reed Canary Grass . _ FACW Phraqmites communis Common Reed FACW Podophvllum peltatum May Apple FACU Populus daltoides Cottonwood . FAC Rosa palustris Swamp Rose OBL Salix discolor Pussy Willow FACW Sal 1x nigra Black Willow FACW Sclrpus cvperinus Wool grass bulrush FACW Sparganium so. ._.. Burreed .,' ...__08L ^ sp. Duckweed OBL Thelvpteris thelvpteroides - Marsh Fern . ___. ._ ..... _ .;OBL TvDha'spp. Cattails • ' . OBL Ulmus americana ' American Elm FACW Viburnum cassinoides . N. Wild Raisin FACW Viburnum recognitum Northern Arrowwood FACW Viburnum trllobum Highbush Cranberry FACW

Palustrine Open Water Wetland (ROW) Carex SPP, .. Sedges . .. FACW,OBL Cornus stolonifera Red-osier Dogwood FACW Salix nigra Black Willow FACW Tvpha SP. . .. . Cattail . ". * OBL 52216 0285-33-2H2 4RJ00085 - •-- - ATTACHMENT C PHOTOLOG

52217 0285-33-2112 AR3QQQ86 PROJECT Mm Creek

DESCRIPTION Photo of Wetland A taken at Point" 1 (Map A) facing north.

COMMENTS

PHOTO ay R- I"* Sankev

PROJECT . Mill Creek

PATE Photo 2 Photo of Wetland A taken at Point 2 (Map A) facing north.

COMMENTS

PHOTO av R- T- Sankey

52218 MA1OXM .HR 3 QUO.8 7 ' PIRNIE ...... PROJECT _ Mill Creek \ —————————————

''$'' *• j "\ DESCRIPTION Photo 3 '\ Photo' orWetland A taken at. Point 3 _(Map AJ facing northwest.

COMMENTS

PHOTO BY - T

I. PROJECT Mill Creek

OATE 12/90

DESCRIPTION Photo of Wetland A_ taken at Point 4 (Map A) facing north.

COMMENTS

iJ PHOTO BY R- T. Sankey

I llVI^IIL Creek

12/90

DESCRIPTION PhQtQ 5 Photo of Wetland A taken at Point 5 • • (Map A) facing west

COMMENTS

PHOTO Ry -R- T. Sankey

PROJECT Mill Creek

DATE 12/9°

Photo of Wetland B taken at. Point 6 (Map A) facing north.

COMMENTS

^- „_ _ PHOTO BY R- T. Sankey '^^ ^ *

52220 MAUOOtJVi PIRNIE jR3.iiIlJ389 , _J' _fe^->, 'J£v; PROJECT Mill Creek DATE SPOT DESCRIPTION .. PhotO Photo of Wetland taken-at Polrt 7 (Map A) southeast.

COMMENTS

PHOTO BY R- T. Sankev

PROJECT_Ml11 Creek

„,„ 12/90 DESCRfPTl ow Photo 8 Photo of Wetland C taken at Point 8 (Map A) facing east.

COMMENTS

PHOTO SY R- T. Sankey

52221 R 300 090 ::.::' PIRNIE PROJECT Mm Creek

nirr 12/90

DESCRIPTION Photo .of Wetland C taken at Point 9 (Map A) facing north.

COMMENTS

PHOTO SY R- T. Sankev

PROJECT Mill Creek

DATE 12/90 DESCRIPTION Photo of Wetland C taken at Point 10 (Map A) facing southwest.

COMMENTS

PHOTO BY R. T. Sankey

52222 MALGOtM R an_n.o gi.. __ __ .. .. PIRNIriKPNiFn PROJECT tf111 Crgek

nm 12/90 DESCRIPTION PhotO 11| Photo of Wetland D taken at Point 11 (Map A) facing northeast.

COMMENTS

PHOTO BY R-T.Sankey

PROJECT Mill Creek

n.r, 12/90 nrsrpiP-nnw . Photo 12 Photo of Wetland E taken at Point 12 (Map A) facing southwest.

COMMENTS

PHOTO BY , R. T. Sankey

52223 UQ092 : PROJECT Mill Creek.

DATE —— —————————— DESCRIPTION PhOtO 13 iiC*-i ?}f \> • •Phot" " o" .ofi n Wetlan- .-.d F I F&( taken at. Point 13 ""-p-'-f ^^^^•^^fc^MiB^^^^B^^fc^rf^^fc^™^™^—P^^^^*^—™ (Map A) facing southeast.

COMMENTS

PHOTO 9Y R- T. Sankev

PROJECT

DATE O.ESCRJPTtON

COMMENTS

PHOTO BY

52224 MALCOLM A R 300093. PIRNIE PIRNIE

APPENDIX C

DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS/RESPONSE

02S5-33-2 AR300091+ 100% REVIEW COMMENTS

MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE CAP AND FLOOD RETENTION BASIN DESIGN ERIE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

The following responses address comments regarding the 100% project submittals for above- referenced site and project; These responses were prepared for review and inclusion in the Design Analysis Report. -

A. The following responses address comments prepared by Craig R. Olson, CEMRO- ED-DK: . ', . -..-... - - - - "... ------......

Design Analysis:

Comment Al: Pom. 2.3.10: Contaminated Water Include in this paragraph the disposition of decontamination water.

Response: Paragraph 2.3.10 has been modified to include disposition of decontamina- tion water.

Comment A2: Para. 23.11 Delete the options listed as they are irrelevant if the choice is completely up to the Contractor. If there are any specific requirements, the contractor must fulfill (i.e.} regulatory, local ordinances, provisions, etc.) during the temporary diversion"of Marshall's Run, they should be included in the specifications.

Response: The paragraph has been modified to refer to the required submittal "Surface Water Bypass Pumping Plan" (Section 02210, GRADING). Suggested bypass options have been deleted.

HSD Analysis:

Comment A3: Para. 8.1, page 8-1: Fourth Paragraph; eliminate the option to discharge to the treatment facility as this is not allowed in the specifications which clearly require the contractor to discharge decon water only to on-site ponds to be maintained by the contractor. Response: The paragraph has been modified to delete the option of discharging decon water to the ground water treatment facility.

0285-33-2/100% " " . A-I AR300095 Drawings:

Comment A4: ShL C-10 Correct the numbering of Trench Number 2. Verify that all trench numbers depicted on this sheet coincide with those listed in detail A on sheet C-22. Response: Numbering has been corrected and verified.

Comment AS: Sht C-10 Clearfy identify areas appropriate for the contractor to create "on-site ponds" for the disposal of decon water and dewatering water. Are there any special requirements for these ponds such_as liners, etc...?

Response: A suitable area has been designated on Sheet C-10. There are no special requirements for disposal of decon and dewatering water.

Comment A6: Sht C-ll Call out the decon area on this sheet. Indicate any specific requirements the contractor must consider when submitting decon facilities as required in Spec 01420.

Response: Decon area has been designated on Sheet C-ll.

Comment A7: Sht C-22 ' Detail A: The detail is very unclear as to what is existing and what is new. All items should be labeled "new" or "existing" as some are presently. Definitive line weights could also help. Please clarify the following: a, is the pump new? b. is the discharge piping new? c. is the valve and recycle line new? d. is the drainpipe new? e. etc. Contractors that aren't familiar with the job will be required to know this.

Response: The detail has been clarified to show new items.

Comment A8: General New waterline work should be shown on the drawings. Response: Water service has been added to Sheets C-10 arid C-ll.

0285-33-2/100% A-2 52227 AR300096 Specifications:

Comment A9: Section 01420, Para. 4 The water supply hydrant must be shown on the drawings.

Response: The water supply hydrant has been added to Sheet G-ll.

Comment AW: Section 02221-2, Pom. 2.4 Determine -whether rock is likely to be encountered. If based on geotechnical • investigations it is not, delete references to rock throughout this specification as it will reduce contractor suspicion during bidding and lower bid amounts.

Response: References to rock have been deleted throughout the referenced Section since borings did not encounter rock.

Comment All: Section 02113 Add this spec section to the index.

Response: Section 02113 has been added to the Index.

Comment A12: Section 02713, Pom. 5.1 Increase the cover for waterlines to 5-0" in accordance with the guidance given in NFPA 24. These lines will be intermittently used and will freeze if used during winter months.

Response: The specified cover for waterlines has been increased to 5'-0".

52228

0285-33-2/100% .. Y_.. V ._._„„.-. __.JI_-..-". A-3 flR300097 B. The following responses address comments prepared by Bob Gunkelman, CEMRO- ED-DJ:

Comment Bl: Reference 90% Cmt Dl . Specifications need to specifically require a plan for temporary__diversion of Marshall's Run. ,

Response: Paragraph 14 of Section 02210, GRADING, requires a • Category II submittal of a Surface Water Bypass Pumping Plan.

Comment 82: Reference 90% Cmt D7 Complete horizontal control for the maintenance road (Coordinates, curve __ information, stationing, etc:) is necessary for the Contractor to lay out the road. If this information is not provided on the plans, the Contractor will have to somehow generate this himself. It is not possible to build this road without 'some horiz. control for staking it out. Providing horizontal control will make the Contractor's job much easier.

Response: Sheet C-30 "Maintenance Access Road Layout" has been added to the Drawings. . :

Comment S3: Reference 90% Cmt D8 These contours still do not look right. Compare to Sheet C-13.

Response: The contours have been corrected.

Comment B4: Reference 90% Cmt DIG Show the new gate with a heavy line wt. Also, the note needs to be a heavy line wt. to indicate that the gate is new.

Response: The gate note has been added.

Comment B5: Reference 90% Cmt. Dll No existing road is indicated on Sheet C-ll.

Response: The 17th St. roadway has been added.

0285-33-2 B-4 flR30Q098 Comment B6: Reference 90% Cmt D12 a. Sheets C-24, 26- Where is steel manproofmg required? 'Will this interfere with flap gates? Indicate on Schedule all headwalls to receive manproofing.

b. Sheet C-27 -, Indicate inside dimensions of Catch Basins.

Response: a. See Legend, Sheet C-26 for clarifications.

b. Height dime_nsiqn varies with, location. Width and length are as indicated, rim and invert el's are given on Sheet C-26.

Comment B7; Reference 90% Cmt D18 I could not find where these items were addressed on the plans. Particularly the light poles (?) at the east end of the channel.

Response: Bid Item 15 and an applicable General Note have been added to the Contract .Documents.

Comment B8: Reference 90% Cmt D34C a. Delete the Specifications attachments,

b. . Use fence designation notes per the fence legends on Sheets C-28 & 29 on the layout plans. Need to use the designations to specify fabric width, top wire, etc.

c. Fix title of Sheet C-28.

Response: a. Attachments deleted.

b. Sheet C-28. and C-29 corrected to indicate correct fence type. c.' Tide of Sheets C-28 and C-29 are as per USACE standard details and legend.

52230

0285-33-2 B-5 , . flR3QQ099 G. The following responses address comments prepared by O. P. Patney, CEMRO-ED-DF:

Comment Cl: Sht C-17t Section 5 For temperature reinforcement for 10" wall per ACI 318 change #5 @ 12" o #4 @ 12".

Response: Reinforcement details have been changed as requested.

Comment C2: Sht C-18, Section 2 Same Comment for 12" wall

Response: We feel #4 @ 12" will not control temperature and shrinkage" cracking to the degree necessary for a structure exposed to running water. Refer to ACI Committee Report 350.

Comment C3: Sht. CMS, Exterior wall reinforcement in Section 2 for Box Culvert: Clarify what is correct. One leg of bar shows #7 @ 12" and the other leg #6 @ 12". Response: Correct as shown. Dowels into culvert slab are #7 @ 12". Top reinforcing in slab is #6 @ 12". "' -

Comment C4: Sht C-24, Pipe Culvert (Plan) For 6" thick wall 2-layers of #4 bars are too much. Please revise to cltange to 1'layer #4 bars. Response: Plan currently shows one layer of #4 bars.' Bar "J" shown on plan is actually located in base slab. Refer to section on Pipe 4.

52231 0285-33-2 C-6 AR3QOIOO D. -The following responses address comments prepared by R. B. Sedlak, CEMRO-ED-CC:

Comment Dl: 90% Comment H3: Quantity Takeoff Sheets were not included in the 100% cost estimate. These sheets need to be submitted immediately.

Response: . Material takeoffs are provided for the reinforced concrete quantities (listed on p. 10, item 8), and for soil cut and fill (listed on p. 3, item 3). Takeoffs are located at the end of the final cost estimate volume.

Comment D2: 90% Comment H7 Most of the Price Quotes were related. Most prices remained the same. Quote #20 was updated, but no price was included. Were the quotes actually updated?

Response: Quo.te #10 will be confirmed and the price included. Price quotes which are indicated as updated were in fact confirmed subsequent to the 90 percent submittal, as requested.

Comment D3: 90% Comment H9, Development of Home Office Expense & Profit This was not done and is still required.

Response: As discussed by phone, an acceptable allowance of 5% for Home Office Expense is made on the Cost Estimate Analysis Sheet for each Bid Item.

Comment D4: Page 2 of 26 Item No. 1 - Recap shows a cost of $137,250. No backup for this number nor is it included in the totals. Response: The correct number is $166,000. "Backup for this number is given on page 26 of 26.

Comment D5: Page 5 of26 Is survey crew needed for this length of time?

Response: Survey crew hours have been reduced to 2,078/man for the project.

Comment D6: Page 5 of 26 Site Security - Specs indicate 2 yr - 24 hr/day = 17,520 hrs. Estimate uses 13,300 m-hr & 17,337. hr for pickup truck. Which is correct? Response: For backup of 13,300 miles/hour see bottom of page 5 of 26. The hours for pickup truck will be changed to 17,520. 52232 0285-33=2. . ; - : - -. 5-^^-^_———,D-7 flR300IOI Comment D7: Page 17 of 26 PPE material costs do not agree with costs ofp,5 of 26. Suits 4fday or I/per day? All items that show cost for PPE need to be reviewed. Response: Page 17 PPE costs are for decon laborer, as indicated. Page 5 does sot contain PPE costs. Page 7 PPE costs are for COE employees and visit ./rs, as indicated.

Comment D8: Page 25 of 26 Cost for truck appears very high. No cost shown for truck driver. Review and revise as required.

Response: No dedicated truck driver is anticipated for the water truck. Backup for the truck cost is included in the Final Cost Estimate,

Comment D9: 90% Comment H17a & HITb, p. 2,3, &7 of 17 Item No. 7 comments were not complied with. These quantities do not agree with Design Documents. A-E needs to explain why these changes were not done. Review and revise as required.

Response: Quantities shown on the Final Cost Estimate are in agreement with the Final Design Documents.

Comment D10: Page 11 of 17 Item No. 7 - Estimate indicates'street lights are Govemment'fumished. Specs do not show this requirement. It appears specs should be revised showing GFE.

Response: Street lights are GFE. Refer to Spec Section 16402, Para. 12.

Comment DJ1: 90% Comment No. H18a Item No. 8 - Quantity take-off sheets are still required. None were submitted.

Response: See Response to Comment Dl.

Comment D12: Page 3 of 4 Item No. 9 - Material cost of $2,500/Ac. Verify that this is not a cost to Prme Price with labor, equipment and material already included, Response: Material cost of $2,500/AC does include labor, .equipment and material. Cost estimate has been revised.

^ , 52233 0285-33-2 ' D-S AR300I02 Comment D13: Page 3 of 8 ' , Item No. 13 - Highlight on Quote Sheet from lab items used. Response: Quote sheets have been highlighted as requested.

Comment D14: Drawings show modification to collection sumps. No cost shown in estimate for this work. Is this required?

Response: Costs for sump modifications'have been included in the Final Cost Estimate.

Comment D15: .For Bid Estimate labor cost will be current Davis-Bacon rates.

Response: • Labor rates are from Department of Labor localized for Erie, PA; as !' directed by USACE Project Manager 3/11/91.

Comment D16: For Bid Estimate rates will be based on COE Equipment Manual dated August 1991. ' . i Response: As previously directed by USACE, source for equipment rates is the COE Equipment Manual dated 1988.

Comment D17: Reproduction quality is very poor. Many sheets are hard to read. More care needs to be taken for the bid estimate.

Response: Care will be taken to improve reproduction quality.

Comment D18: Bid Estimate will be based on advertised plans, specs and bid schedule, not the 100% design documents.

Response: Final cost estimate will be based on Final Construction Documents.

52234 0285-33.2. ------., ...--•_- —— •"•: - D-9 flR30QI03 E. Jlie following responses address comments prepared by Debra Morrisey, CEMRO-ED-EF.

Construction Cost Estimate:

Comment El: General: Per 1910.120 use the terminology Site Safety and Health Plan (SSHP) rather than Health and Safety Plan (HASP) or Safety, Health, and Emergency Response Plan (SHERP). Please correct this terminology throughout these Design documents. Response: Terminology has been corrected to indicate Site Safety and Health Plan (SSHP).

Comment E2: Item 2, Sheet 13 Per phone conversations with Gary Lang (CENAP-COf-NA) and Virginia Wall, the Harvard Graphics are not needed in this work effort. Delete this cost.

Response: Costs for Harvard Graphics have been deleted.

Comment E3: General It shall be stated in the specifications that at the end of this 24-month construction period all of the copier and computer equipment will be turned over to the government, Response: The Specifications have been modified to reflect this requirement.

Comment E4: Item 7, Sheet 6. Delete the "Level D + ".

Response: Corrected as requested.

Comment E5: Item 13, Sheet 2 It shall be stated in the specifications that at the end of this 24-month construction period all of the monitoring instruments and chemical testing equipment will be turned over to the government.

Response: The Specifications have been modified to reflect this requirement.

0285-33-2 E-10 52235 AR300IOI* Design Analysis Report: i Comment E6:. Section 2.4, page 44 See Comment #1, Construction Cost Estimate.

Response: SHERP has been changed to SSHP.

52236 0285-33-2 - '..-,-.-.-.,.: , .. ...,-, ... ^ E-ll AR'3 F. The following responses address comments prepared by Jeff McClenathan, CEMRO-EDHD:

Comment Fl: Riprap meets sizing standards for 9" layer thickness but construction experience indicates difficulty in uniformly placing a riprap layer less than 12" thick and bedding less than 6" thick.

Response: .Drawings and Specifications have been changed to reflect 12" riprap, 12" gabions and 6".gravel bedding.

Comment F2: The standard Corps riprap graduation for a 12" riprap layer Is:' , ;. D100 10-26 Ibs D50 5-11 Ibs D15 2-5 Ibs - - This riprap size will be adequate to replace the 9" gabions placed downstream of the FRB in Marshall's Run.

Response: The gradation above for 12" riprap layer has been incorporated in Specification Section 02223. It is recommended that the gabions remain where indicated, for ease of installation and reduced risk of damaging the HDPE liner (see discussion in Design Analysis Report).

Comment F3: Tfie flow velocities present in Marshall's Run upstream of the FRB do not appear to warrant riprap erosion protection.

Response: The design rationale for placing riprap upstream of the FRB is as follows:

• it will minimize localized erosion as impounded stormwater crests back over the side discharge weir into the channel;

• it will also define channel boundaries, which will facilitate routine channel cleaning and minimize the potential for over-excavation into potentially contaminated subgrades and embankments;

• it will enhance the visual appearance of the channel, which might otherwise become overgrown with vegetation; and * it will minimize maintenance of the channel (i.e., cutting the grass, repair of gully erosion).

Recommend maintaining riprap as designed......

52237 0285-33-2 -—I F-12 fiR3QOI06 Comment F4: Recommend that riprap placement be terminated at the 10-year water surface elevation. Localized velocities .above this height will not warrant riprap placement. Response: The difference between the 10-year water surface and top of embankments is only 3 feet vertical, on average. For the comparatively small incremental cost involved in extending the riprap to the top of the embankment relative to total project costs, and for the reasons listed in the response to • Comment F3 above, we recommend maintaining riprap as designed.

52238 0285-33-2 - - , --:------AR300I07 G. The following responses address comments prepared by Bill Doan CEMRO-ED-HE. Comment Gl: Request PADER dam safety comments be forwarded once they have been received,

Response: PADER dam safety comments are included with this comment set. V. ch respect to the ARAR comment: The FRB will pass a 100-year flood, as analyzed by HEC-1 hydrologic and hydraulic computer routing model. Table 3 of the Design Analysis Report has been expanded to provide FRB performance criteria for the 100-year storm.

1. The 0,5 discrepancy in the outlet invert has negligible effect" on HEC?-! routing results. 2. A slightly coarser filter material has been specified to conform to the referenced 1986 USACOE criteria: dsof = No, 10 = 2 mm. ave. slot width = 1/16 inches = 1.6 mm. width > 1.2

3. The sieve analysis performed by the geotechnical subconsultant indicated that the site soils are sandy. A good nonwoven fabric would be suitable for such conditions. The Contractor is, however, required to submit samples and specifications for the geotextile and test reports of the embankment fill; and furthermore, to install the geotextile in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations. 4. Paragraph 14 of Section 02210, GRADING, requires that the embank- ment fill specified for the unlined portions of the channel be placed to 10 feet from any structure and compacted to 95 percent maximum density.

52239 02S5-33-2 ' G-14 flR30QI08 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES FIELD OPERATIONS - WASTE MANAGEMENT 1012 Water Street -Meadvllle, Pennsylvania 16335 -.-.--- , ^——-Telephone: A. C. 814/332-6848 November 7, 1991 Subject: Millcreek Superfund Site Erie County _ Mr. Anthony Koller (3HW21) Remedial Project Manager U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III 341 Chestnut Building Philadelphia, PA 19107 Dear Mr. Koller: The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PA DER) has completed its review of the portions of the Millcreek Superfund Site Construction and Flood Retention Basin (FRB) Design Report that would be regulated by the Pennsylvania Dam Safety & Encroachments Act. The following comment is a State Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement (ARAR): The Department's Chapter 105 Rules & Regulations would require a minimum design storm of 100-year return period for a dam with this classification. The dam may be able to safely pass the 100-year storm, but the Information submitted does not demonstrate this. No calculations are shown for the 100-year flood. Since the dam is being built as a flood retention basin, the probable downstream hazard potential classification 1s 2. The following comments are not State ARARs but should be considered in the FRB design: There Is a discrepancy 1n the Invert of this 2.5/ft. by 4.5/ft. r-v low-level outlet. It is given as 709.5 in Table 2 on Page 15 of I the 100% Submittal Design Analysis Report and 1s shown as 709.5 on _> the "FRB CONTROL STRUCTURE PLAN" on Sheet C-16, but 709.0 1s used 1n the routing (See HEC-1 input, line 171). It 1s acknowledged that the effect of this discrepancy on the routing would be negligible* The degradation of filter material versus the specified perforation of the pipe 1s questionable according to U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) guidelines. The following criteria are not met: m ^ ° D85f/Max. pipe opening > 2 (USBR, 1987) D50f/Slot width > 1.2 (USACOE, 1986) 52240

An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 4 H 3 0 U I 09 Recycled Paper $ -2-

The design of the geotextile selected for the toe drain should based on the embankment fill material properties regardless of source. A fine grained soil should be specified for structural backfill along the FRB control structure. If you have any questions, please contact me at this office. Sincerely,

Nancy L._Snyder Project Manager Hazardous Sites Cleanup Program Northwest Region NLS/sn cc: Mr. Japp Mr. MI Mr. Leaver Mr. German

52241

•1R3QOI 10 'H. The following responses address comments prepared by Barry, CEMRO-ED-GF.

Comment HI: Specification 02210 & 02245 The relationship of topsoil specified in Section 02210 Grading Paragraphs 2.4 - "Acceptable Topsoil"; Par. 5 - "Conservation of Topsoil"; and "Placing Topsoil" and the Specification 02245 "Topsoil Cap" is still confusing. If topsoil does not exist on the site, why have a paragraph titled "Conservation of Topsoil". If acceptable topsoil is not used in Section 02210, why have paragraphs to conserve and place topsoil in this Section? I do not understand theA-E's explanation of the annotated comments from the 90% review. The Contractor bidding this job will probably be as confused as I without the benefit of A-E explanation made in Design Review comments. Response: Paragraph 5 - "Conservation of Topsoil" in Section 02210 has been deleted.

Comment H2; Specification 02210, paragraphs 12 & 15 Is it the intent to have the levee and retention basin earthen berm embank- ments specified in paragraph 15 - "Finished Excavation Fills and Embank- ments" and par. 12- "Fill". These are weak specs for flood control features. Special considerations should be made for compaction, zoning, scarification of lifts, kneading together of lifts, and under-seepage considerations, etc.

Response: Revised specifications for levees have been included in the Final Docu- ments.

Comment H3: Specification 02210, para. 12 Paragraph 12 indicates that suitable fill should be used for embankments, which means cohesive or cohesionless soil. The cross-section of levee and embankments reflects a IV on 3H sideslope. This sideslope cannot be equally suited to both cohesive and cohesionless soils. For example, the toe drain shown may not be needed for cohesionless soil.

Response: . ' Slope stability was considered in the report from the Geotechnical Subconsultant (see Appendix E of the Design Analysis Report). The revised specifications for levees (paragraph 14, Section 02210, GRADING) includes information on fill gradations and quality, subgrade preparation, fill placement, and compaction. The State of Pennsylvania requires that slopes be no steeper than 1 on 3, Design of Small Dams indicates that these slopes need be no flatter. Conservative calculations result in safety factors greater than 1.5, for both cohesive and granular (cohesionless) cases. These calculations are included in Appendix N of the Design Analysis Report.

The gradation specifications for embankment fill in paragraph 14, Section: GRADING result in a sandy or gravelly cohesive or cohesionless soil for

0285,33-2-:--- - , ••-• •-."•• ; ----- —H-1S 52242 AR300IM the lined part of the channel; and soil group GM, GC, SM or'S'C (w^'";h are generally defined as cohesive) for the unlined part of the channe. ;f required by the Corps, all embankment fill can be specified as a'cohesive soil. However, a requirement for cohesive materials ML, CL, MH or I will preclude use of the soil gradations recomrneiided by the geotechi il consultant; and specifying sandy or gravelly embankment fill to con .n fines of high plasticity may increase the cost of the material. Additionally, the soils specified will be less susceptible £o piping damage" than fine- grained cohesive soils. For these reasons, it is recommended that the specified embankment gradation criteria be used.

The I' by 5' toe drain was designed on the basis of experience, judgment, and the nature of the embankment. Its purposes include reducing the likelihood of seepage from the embankment face, and reducing the likelihood of piping (soil loss) beneath the embankment. Its capacity depends on the gradient.

Comment H4: Specification 022W, para. 3, 4 & 12 Paragraphs 3t 4 and 12 indicate that excavated material from the site can be used for fill and embankments, without any consideration made for contami- nated soil. No testing of soil for contamination is considered either. Recommend some thought be given of this and revise specifications as required to address contaminated soil Response: Paragraphs 4 and 12 have been modified to delete reference to use of on- site material in the embankments. Paragraph 14 has been added, which specifically requires off-site material be used in the embankments.

Comment H5: Specification 02275, para. 5.2, "Seams" If the shaded part of this paragraph is deleted and the underlined pan is. added, the sewing option will not be specified. .Rectify!!

Response: The paragraph has been modified to permit sewing.

Drawings:

Comment H6: Shts. C-3 through C-14 inclusive There are still symbols on these drawings that are not shown in the legend. The symbols — and... -... -... - are not shown in the legend, for example. T, -& may be others. Provide a legend for all symbols. . are tt shown in the legend for example. There may be others. Provide a legend >r all symbols. Response: Missing symbols have been added. See also sheet G-2.

52243 0285-33-2 H-I6 AR300II2 Comment H7: Sht C-21 ...... The pipe boot detail does not identify all features. Do sol

Response: Detail has been clarified.

Comment H8: Sht C-21 Identify all features of the toe detail. Response: All features have been identified.

CommentH9: Sht C-21 T ; Where are the outlets from the toe drain located? How many are there? What do they look like? .

Response: See sheet C-ll. Toe drain daylights into drainage swale immediately upstream of headwall structure 132. .

Design Analysis:

Comment U10: Comments 2, 3, and 4 above should be reflected in the Design Analysis. An explanation of design criteria should be reflected in the design analysis for all work efforts discussed in the referenced specification sections.

Response: A discussion of embankment construction, material, stability and compo- nents has been included in the Design Analysis Report, Sections 2.1.5.3 and 2.1.6: . '.. - - .:. "-..__—

Comment Hll: The Details on Drawing C-21, Typical Riprap Section and Typical HDPE/ Gabion Mattress show components not addressed in the Design Analysis. The '^rationale for using individual components as well as the total composite cross- section should be addressed in the Design Analysis.

Response: See response to Comment H10. A discussion of rationale for HDPE/gabion mattress and riprap was included, in the 100% Design Analysis Report Section 2.1.5.3, and has been expanded in the Final Design Analysis' Report to include drainage layer and geotextile.

52244 0285^33-2 -= ------V- - - H-17 flR300M3 Comment H12: Sht C-21 The Toe Drain Detail references "Granular Subdrain Material". Is this the same as "Granular Subdrain Material". Is this the same as "Granular Subdrain Filter Material" specified in Section 02410? Is the "toe drain" the same as the "subdrain system" specified in Section 02410? Be consistent in terminology!

Response: Details and Specification 02410 have been coordinated for terminology.

Comment HIS: Design Analysis Both the typical Riprap-Lined Channel section and the Typical HDPE/Gabion Mattress-lined Channel section have 1 on 3 sideslopes. Provide calculations and explanations in the design for slope stability, hydraulic-stability, use of the gravel drain system behind the FML, friction angles between the separate component interfaces, and any tension factors considered in the materials. A IV on 3H slope with these various interfaces Is highly questionable. The 16 oz/sy nonwoven geotextile and the 80 mil HDPE as well as 80 mil HDPE and 3" granular subdrain, bedding layer are also suspect for stability. Geotextile and riprap stability and interfaces should also be discussed for the FRB levee embankment.

Response: Tensile strength of the HDPE and geotextile; riprap stability; slope stability; and friction angles are all considered in the calculations referenced in th_e_ response to Comment H3. Ail have suitable factors of safety as designed.

Comment H14: Design Analysis . Provide calculations and explanation of the anchor trench at the Typical HDPE/Gabion Mattress-Lined Channel Detail

Response: The anchor trench is intended to stabilize the liner components, not protect the liner components from tensile failure due to loading stresses (see response to Comment H15). Section 2.1.5,3.3 has been expanded to include this discussion.

Comment HIS: Drawing Sht C-21 The anchor trench should be detailed more clearly. The width, depth and type of fill should be specified or shown on the Detail. Response: The anchor trench is detailed on Sheet C-21. The intent of the anchor trench is to stabilize the liner. In contrast, anchor trenches for landfills are designed to yield prior to liner failure, which might be induced by filling. Malcolm Pirnie engineers recommended the anchor trench detailed on Sheet C-21 based on design experience, which indicate more than adequate resistance to slippage of the Ijner during construction is provided.

0285^33-2 ~~ H-18 52245 AR300IU' Substantial factors of safety against failure of the liner is also present (see Appendix N, Design Analysis).

Comment H16: Design Analysis The levee and earthen flood retention embankments should be discussed in the Design Analysis, How were the cross-sections designed? What does the toe drain do? Provide rationale for cohesive and/or cohesionless materials in the embankment.

Response: See response to Comment H3. Section 2.1.5.3.3 has been expanded to include a discussion of design rationale for the embankment materials and • cross-section.

Comment H17: Design Analysis How were levee and flood retention embankment elevations selected? Provide hydraulic rationale. Is there freeboard?

Response: Refer to Section 2.1.53,2 and 2.1.5.3.3 for discussion of FRB and Marshall's Run hydraulic design. In summary, elevations were selected to contain design flood flows while minimizing encroachment of the channels onto either contaminated site soils, or adjacent properties.

52246 0285-33-2 ' ------:— —- — -^— ' —-H-I9 flR-3001 15 I. The following responses address comments prepared by McPherr i CEMRO-ED-GB:

Specifications:

Comment II: Sec, 02223, Rip and Bedding Add quality and sources of material.

Response: Riprap and bedding will be supplied from off-site sources. Material specifications for Section 02223 are formatted in a similar manner as other material specifications (i.e., Sections 02245 and 02410). Additionally, paragraph 2.2 requires that Category II Compliance Certificates be submitted.

Comment 12: Sec. 02210, Grading Cross-sections and zoning of materials.

Response: Reference new paragraph 14, "Special Considerations for Embankments."

Comment 13: Sec. 02210, Grading Add Category Two submittal for laboratory and density test results of contractor-selected borrow sites.

Response: Submittal has been added.

Comment 14: Sec. 02201, Excavation, Filling and Backfilling Number of days before backfill can be placed is referenced to Section 033QO. Not clear. Should call out number of days or give exact paragraph in Section 03300.

Response: Section 02201, paragraph 8 has been modified to prohibit backfill until concrete has reached full strength.

Comment 15: Sec. 02201 Can Contractor use heavy equipment, after structure is covered a certain distance?

Response: No. Heavy compaction equipment wiU exceed the design surcharge regardless of backfill depth.

52247 0285-33-2 1-20 SR300I 16 Comment 16: Sec, 02201 Grid node control elevations - they aren 't all shown on Drawings.

Response: Grid node elevations are given in the Specifications, Appendix B.

Drawings: • ...... Comment U: Sht C-9 ._.,__._ _...,___-'. Slope hatches are shown on Plan, but slopes are not called out.

Response: Channel slopes are detailed on subsequent sheets.

Comment 18: Sht C-9 • Top of Plan on right side grading should transition to. meet existing ground Response: See detail on Sheet C-10.

Comment 19: Sht C-10 Top of Plan on right Side. Add Note: For continuation of grading see Sheet C-3, . ' "J- ' . : ~ ~~.'" - "~" '

Response: Sheet C-3 is for subgrade. Sheet C-lQJs^ final grade. Grading is continued on Sheets C-14 and C-ll, as per the key map.

Corwr..znt 110: Sht C-10 .-:;._--:: ... All grid nodes should be identified on Drawings.

Response: See Comment 16 response. Coordinate alpha values are given for every node.

Comment 111: Sfit C-10 Need some typical sections.

Response: See-sheets C-21, through C-29 for details of Marshall's Run, storm water structures, box culverts, etc.

52248

0285-33-2. . - . . -..,--...... • .. _._I-21 AR300II7 Comment 112: Sht C-10 Show typical levee section showing zoning of materials. Response: Zoning of materials is addressed in Specification 02210. Embankment material is from off-site areas. Gradation for embankments is specified" in Section 02210. "

Comment 113: Sht C-ll Need location for structures.

Response: Manholes have been stationed. The 50-scale grid was intended to facilitate location of structures and fill grades without confusing coordinates • indicated for each.

Comment 114: Sht C-ll Need some curves on center line of cliannel.

Response: There are no curves for the channel. Coordinates are provided at each change in direction.

Comment 115: Sht C-ll - - - symbol not in Legend - may be wetlands or fence. Response: Symbol for subdrain has been corrected.

Comment 116: Sht C-ll Need excavation plans and sections for structures. Response: Refer to structural elevations, Sheets C-16, C-17, C-18.

Comment 117: Sht C-ll No control for gravel covered perimeter road.

Response: A new drawing Sheet C-30, Maintenance Access Road Layout has been added.

Comment US: Sht C-20 No stationing called out for manholes, structures, and control for excavations; also toe drain.

Response: Refer to response to Comment C-ll. 52249 0285-33-2 1-22 AR300II8 Comment /IP: Specifications Guide specification for levees is enclosed for use for levees and FRB 'embank- ment.

Response: Pertinent sections have been incorporated into Specification Section 02210, Grading. ...".,

52250 0285-33-2 :- .; _:-W' ^ V T-- -1-23 ". •;•'——_-;-——•-- flR300l19 J. The following responses address comments prepared by Jerry Trease, CEMRO-ED-" EG Chemistry:

Comments Jl through J70: Design Analysis Report; Site Specific Quality Management Plan; Specifications 1350, 2460, 1600, 1800, 02212 and 02671. Response: The comments were phrased as directives. No exceptions were taken, and all comments have been incorporated into the referenced documents. With respect to Comment 57b, "PCB is not a TCLP parameter", PCB has been removed from the list of hazardous parameters to be tested for at the Millcreek Site.

52251

0285-33-2 J-24 AR300I20 MALCOLM 'IRNII

APPENDIX D

NOT USED

_ _ 52252 0285-35-2- " "..: ..^-:,,:\-^-] ,. .:::,-..;" ._...... ,_ ..-_;i. . . . . 3R300I2I MALCOtM 1RNI1

APPENDIX E

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

52253

0285-33-2 --=- - =.. . - ftR3QOI22 GEOTECHNICAL ""ENGINEERING INVEST I CATION PROPOSED FLOOD RETENTION BASIN MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA ... .- .. . ._.->.

By

H&A -of New York Rochester; New York

For- ..-•-. Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. Buffalo, "New York

52254

File No. 70179-40 September." 19.91 R300123 H & A OF NEW YORK

Geotechnical Engineers & Environmental Consultants 26 S/eptember 1991 File No. 70179-40

Malcolm Pirnie; Tnc. """• " " " " " S.'3515 Abbott Road...... " " '" , - ;. : ...:.::...... P,-O, Box 1938 Buffalo, New" York . 14219... . ""-..-. ..-."" " Attention: Mr. Kent McManus . Subject:--. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation ,Proposed Flood Retention "Basin Millcreek Superfund Site Erie,' Pennsylvania Gentlemen: This- report summarizes -the .results of . subsurface investigations , presents ge'otechnical-,.design recommendations, and provides comments on construction considerations for the.. .proposed flood retention basin at the Millcr.eek. Superfund" Site' in Erie, Pennsylvania. This work was undertaken in accordance with o_ur_ revised, proposal dated - 26. April 199O, as^authorized by the agreement dated 23 January 1991. Preliminary comments on a previous -design scrieme were presented in our memorandum dated 19 March 19.91. Additional services were, provided- in accordance with our letter proposal dated 12 June 1991. '.:. "V^jr1:^::.1'::"::!^"^::'^::^;";:.-*!!:^!".:":":'":. ...'"'.' ' ..'. The ..general location, of .' the. "proposed retention basin is shown on the Project .Locus,-' Figure ;i. .. It ,.lies , in the southeast corner of the . Superfund " "" We. ..understand that :the "£ld.od"rete:ntion basin will, be formed by constructing berms. .along its north and. east sides. These berms have proposed crest elevations of 720, crest widths of 10 feet, and inboard and outboard slopes of one 'vertical on three horizontal. As part. of the berm construction, a westward realignment of Marshall's Run is-also. proposed, such that it will .flow north within the -basin, immediately .west of .the east dike. The portion ' o-f the . channel .within the basin will. -have a bottom width of approximately 10 feet, "and bottom, elevations between approximately 710 and 711. - _ ... " :__ . • ..

Affiliate 52255 Haley fie A!drich, inc. Gastonbury. L'unntx-ncut Iscarboruuijh, Maine ARJO_ ~ A. .A...,O. , 2A k, • BtfdtorJ, \'t'w iiii: Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 26 September 1991 Page 2

Within the basin, a side-discharge weir will be.constructed along the west bank of. realigned Marshall.1 s Run. It is presently anticipated that the-weir will consist of a reinforced "concrete core wall, with an earthen berm on each side. = The corer.wall has a proposed crest elevation of 714, and a crest width of one foot- It is also proposed that the wall be supported by a 2-foot--wide strip footing, bearing at elevation 708. Berm slopes of one vertical on three horizontal are planned. Flow exiting the basin will pass through a: reinforced concrete. ... control structure. This structure will include a conduit with an invert elevation of 709.5 (for low and normal flows), and an overflow weir .with a crest elevation of 717 ('for high flows) . Two reinforced concrete.box culverts will be constructed north of (downstream from) the control structure. Each will have an inside width and height of approximately 12 and 6 feet respectively. The southern culvert will have a length of approximately 30"feet and an invert elevation of approximately 70.9, and will .convey Marshall's Run beneath the water treatment plant access .road. The- northern' culvert will have a length of approximately 200. feet and an invert elevation of approximately 70S, and "will", convey Marshall's Run the water treatment plant itself. A low-permeability lining of a portion of Marshall's Run is also. being considered. This lining may consist of either reinforced .- concrete or a geomembrane, and may extend from the control. structure north to the water treatment plant bypass culvert...... The objectives of our work on this project have been to:,- . - :"-- characterize subsurface conditions,-and to" develop geotechnical design recommendations and construction considerations for the . proposed basin and its related structures; To fulfill these - , - - objectives, we performed, the following work: " .- - -- o Accumulated and evaluated readily available information on" subsurface conditions at and near" the site. Included in this effort was a review of the logs of previous explorations " performed by others, provided to us by Malcolm Pirnie-. o Prepared, coordinated, and monitored a two-phased program of subsurface explorations. The field work was conducted in accordance with a health and safety plan prepared by Malcolm" Pirnie.

52256

AR300I25 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 26 'September. 1991 . Page 3 /. '.-' ...::.....^..:- o Performed a limited program of laboratory testing, to aid in soil classification and the estimation of geotechnical engineering properties. / "•"""-. -•-.---._••• •_— o .Reviewed and summarized the information ..accumulated, performed analyses related ....to the geotechnical engineering aspects of design and construction, and developed recommendations. o Prepared, this engineering report summarizing our work.

FIELD AND . .LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS . •"-,..._"..„.". . .. . Subsurface.. .Explorations.,. .. '. ",.,. ../„,...."-,,",.. ^,,, .'•- ... Subsurface explorations performed at "the"'s"ite for. this study consisted of nine test borings.' Test Borings SB101 through SB104 were performed by Pittsburgh Testing 'Laboratories -between 18 and 21. February 1991, before, the basin's location. and configuration were fxnalized.." -A" CME""55". truck-mounted drill, rig was used for this initial phase of explorations'.' Test Borings -SB105 through SB109 were performed by Empire Soils Investigations between 17 and 19 June=l991, after ra'dditional planning by Malcolm Pirnie. A CME 5-5 track-mounted rig was used "t or this ..second phase. The test borings " were advanced to. depths ranging from 27;. 0 to 49.5 feet" below the ground surf ace ,,_. using "hollow-stem augers. The drilling was . conducted" "-in accordance "with generally accepted practices, under "the , observation of H&A of New York personnel. The ...explorations •xj^e/j^e"r'f6rmiaa"":at\^&e":approximate locations shown on the Subsurface- Exploration Plan ] "Figure" 2, Locations and ground surface elevations of ' the . completed, explorations were . surveyed by Malcolm Pirnie. v All -elevations in this 'report are expressed in feet, and are-"'refer:enc;e"d "to National Geodetic Vertical. Datum (NGVD) . ' " . " . '..----- ... Soil samples were' obtained 'with standard.:_Spiit -Spoon Samplers (2.0 inch O.D., 1.375 inch. f.D.)" in "accordance" with ASTM"D1586. • Field measurement of in situ soil conditions consisted of the Standard Penetration Test.(SPT). The Standard Penetration Resistance. (N) is defined as the "number "of blows necessary to drive the Standard -Split. 'Spoon Sampler. -,one foot into. 'undisturbed -soil using a - 140-pound weight falling freely for; 3.Q .inches, . • .In some instances., when no or very poor soil recovery in the Standard Split. Spoon Sampler was" experienced, a three-inch O.D. split spoon was employed to increase sampTe" recovery. Because.no 52257

OQQI'26 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 26 September 1391 . — - --- Page 4 ...___.... soft cohesive soils were encountered, no undisturbed Shelby tube samples were taken. Soil samples obtained from 'the test borings were visually examined and classified by H&A of New York personnel---Descriptions of .the soil samples from each test boring are presented on the.'Test Eoring Reports, which were prepared by H&A of New York and are .contained in Appendix A. Standard Penetration Resistance (N) values can be determined from data presented on the Test Boring Reports. One groundwater observation well (MW104) was installed in the . completed borehole of Test Boring SB104. The well consisted of a.- 10-foot length of 1.5-inch diameter. PVC well screen, packed in quartz filter sand, attached to a PVC riser pipe extending to the ground surface. A bentonite seal was placed above the sand filter to retard the infiltration of surface water. -The details of the installation are presented in Appendix B. A _summary of.groundwater levels in this and other wells e read during the field p_rogram, is presented in Table 1. • • - Laboratory Testing ... " ' A limited program of laboratory testing was performed -to aid in soil classification and estimating geotechnical engineering properties. The tests included: ' " ~~ . o Five natural water content determinations (ASTM D2"216) . o Five sieve analyses (ASTM D422JT. o Two hydrometer analyses (ASTM D422). o . Five Atterberg Limits tests (ASTM D4313).

Laboratory test results-are contained in'Appendix C. ... ------

SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS r. . „ . .... ,-,_-,-.- Surface Conditions ...... " ... ~.. The study area is in the southeast corner of an 7S.4-acre former wetland. In general, the ground surface is heavily vegetated _with grass, brush, and mature trees. -This area lies within the of Marshall's Run, a stream which, borders the east-side of the site.

52258

AR300I27 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.'" _ ___ "__ ___'______26~"September" 1^91"."" "7 ,-"-":"" ". '.'[..: "r:.:;7. ;;;._.;_","..._:;".. "..";. Page 5 - , .,, .L..,/v^ -V.-^™-^-.^--\"--"------"-..-^--^"•:""— ""• ------.

Access, .was difficult' during the explorations, in February 19.9.1, and many areas .of the sote^-were .flooded by as much as 4 feet of water. Much less'flooding.and generally dryer conditions, however, were . observed in June 1991. Subsurface. So.il Conditions.. __=,_".._ ..,:J7....__...;, ... „.. The.nine test-borings were, terminated at depths ranging from 27.0. to 49.5 feet. A summary of soil strata,encountered by the borings is presented below in order of occurrence from the ground surface downward. Not all."..strata described were encountered at all boring locations. '. - ..':/:—-..- ;..:"..-.:.-- ....._ ...: ' ' "-'"-' ..... ---- Topsoil,' fill ('including foundry' sand)', vand/ or former, topsoil. (representing, the. .previous ground surface) were . encountered in all nine test borings, to depths as great as approximately 9 feet. These -materials consist primarily of varying quantities of sand, gravel, and silt', wi-th"" varying lesser .quantities of clay, brick, slag,', concrete,- glass, :.wood, roots, and other. .organic matter. Standard Penetration Test N values range, from 2 to 35, and average approximately. .9 .blows, per foot, .These values suggest that .the. relative density of the topsoil. and fill varies from very loose to dense, and is generally loose overall. , ".'.:.' ' " Soil deposits des"c^ibed_.as glaciolacustrine were encountered in all nine test .borings. At ' the boring locations, the thickness of these deposits .ranges from approximately .13. to. .25. f.eet, with an average of approximately 17 feet.' ., The soils consist" primarily of sand and silt', with varying lesser -quantities of gravel 'and clay. .Standard Penetration Test N values range from zero -(weight of hammer or - ' rods)" to 33, and'" 'average'" 'approximately 16 .blows per, foot. . These data suggest that the relative density of the deposits varies from very loose to dense, and is .generally medium dense overall. (For a saturated .granular .soil, an N value of .zero should not. be interpreted, as an indication of 'zero -strength. Rather, it usually results from a- semi-buoyant "condition created 'at the point .of sampling by the method of borehole^ advancement. ) Glacial till was- encountered in all nine -test borings. Approximate depths to the top of this deposit range from 16 to 31 feet, with an average of 22 . feetTV.. The till consists primarily of "silt and sand, with varying lesser, .quantities of gravel and clay. Standard Penetration Test N values range from 16 to greater than 100, and average approximately 74 blows per foot. These values suggest that the relative density of the till varies^ from medium dense to very dense, and is generally very dense' overall,

52259

4R30QI28 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 26 September 1991 Page 6

Eight of the nine test borings were,.terminated within the glacial till. After penetrating through approximately 20 feet of the .till, however, Test Boring SB101 was terminated at a" depth of ..49.5 feet, " in what appeared to be severely weathered shale. Groundwater ...... -- - . ... . •- Groundwater observations are presented on the Test Boring Reports in Appendix A, A summary of groundwater levels in observation wells, read during the February 1991 phase of the field program, is presented in Table l. The observed depths to groundwater ranged from approximately 2"'"to 8 feet, and averaged approximately 5 .feet below the ground surface. It should be noted that groundwater levels will.vary with location, time, seasonal and precipitational changes, and changes In the, levels of nearby surface waters (such as Marshall's Run).

IMPLICATIONS OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ,./... -,- . The subsurface explorations and laboratory test results -indicate that the natural soils at this'site are generally granular (non-cohesive) in nature, and will therefore derive their streng primarily from internal friction. For slopes", embankments, and wide foundations on such soils, the factors of safety against deep bearing capacity failures are commonly very high, even £or . " relatively small angles of internal friction. "For these reasons,- the performance of triaxial shear strength testing was deemed unnecessary for the construction proposed. - The explorations also suggest that much of the proposed .earthwork will be performed in or on randomly placed fill materials. Because the character and quality of these materials is likely to be . - variable, special attention should be given to the preparation of subgrades, including measures to resist the development of piping (the subsurface erosion and loss of .soil). More detailed discussions are provided"in subsequent sections of this report. ,-..-.

DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ... - . ._.., -., ., .. Cut Slopes and Stream Channel . __ ...... Cut slopes in existing fill materials will be necessary to form the realignment of Marshall's Run. These slopes should be no steeper than one vertical on three horizontal, as currently planned.

52260 AR300I29 Malcolm Pirnie,. Inc. ' ' ' ' ": ' '.' ""' " "" - 26 September v!9 91. =-,.,-...... ,..=.-,-..,.," .,-•-•. .- - - . • Page 7 . : '.":: ••---_-••-— ^-- ;;..-—; :..;...:;."."...', '. ... .

It will be necessary to protect. the cut slopes and channel, bottom from the.. erosive .action of flowing water. Also, as previously noted, a portion o£ the realigned channel may be provided with a low-permeability lining. ... : Based on discussions ^with Malcolm Pirnie 's project personnel, we understand that .erosion protection in unlined portions of the channel will consist of either riprap stone or some .type of unitized (such as 'gabion mattresses). The size and thickness of the protective material should be r determined on the basis of hydraulic considerations, but the thickness should in no case.. be. less than 1 foot. A suitable non-woven geotextile, should " be- placed between. .the. protective, material and the underlying soil. If- riprap is used t and depending on. its siz.e, one or more : additional layers. of ""smaller." stone 'may' be necessary between the' riprap and the geotextile...... ^ ... ., r., -~ . .. . Tt_is uhders'tootr'that, in any lined. "port ions of the channel, the low-permeability lining, will, consist : of, .either reinforced concrete. or a geomembrane.. -If -concrete, no additional "erosion protection is anticipated. ' Ifva -.^e:omembrane, erosion protection will consist of riprap or .a revetment as described- above- Additional protection, above and beneath the geomembrane itself, should be provided in accordance with the -manufacturer ' s .recommendations. To help prevent: the development of excessive hydrostatic uplift pressures and failure" -(heave) of the channel bottom, any low-permeability lining should be underlain by a granular or synthetic, groundwater. .drainage layer,- which in turn should be separated from 'the underlying soils, by a jap_n-wqyen geotextile. Relief ports (weepnoles) "with one-way flap valves should be provided along both .sides of the channel .at .horizontal spacings of 50 f.eet.-or. less. VThe elevations of the ports will depend on the. thickness of. erosion protection material, but should be established such that the .ports will begin .to. function. ..before the factor" of safety against hydrostatic uplift becomes less than 1.5. ." An empty. channel should be assumed. * Embankments . . ^..r^[/^.^_^sr___i_^..-. Inboard and outboard embankment slopes should be no steeper than one vertical-.on three" Horizontal, . as currently planned. Depending on the presence or absence of an adjacent low-permeability channel lining, embankment fill should consist of inorganic material conforming to the following gradational limits:

52267 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 26 September 1991 Page 8

Percent Finer .by Weight :.. , .. Sieve Size . ' .Lined ._. _. ...Unlined ..._ . ;. ._ 3 in. 100 -- —loo No. 4 30-70 "3d - 70 No. 200 . 0 - 50 - 12-50 - Requirements for the placement and compaction .of embankment fill materials are presented in a subsequent section of this report. Because the inboard slopes of. the basin will be unlined, continuous: toe drains should be installed on the subgrade beneath the outboard slopes. These drains should consist of 4-inch diameter.perforated PVC pipe, surrounded by 1/2 to 1-inch crushed stone, in an envelope of non-woven, geotextile. ' The crushed stone layer should be l.vfoot in thickness and 5 feet in width. No toe drains appear to be : necessary along the channel downstream of the basin, where lower water levels will lessen the likelihood of piping. The portions of embankments exposed to flowing" water should.be protected from erosion, as previously described for cut slopes CU1andU the stream channel. Portions not exposed to flowing water shou be vegetated by hearty native grasses. At least one foot of _- • freeboard should be maintained between the embankment crest and design high water elevations. -: - - -. Side-Discharg-e Weir . . .,- ,. . The side-discharge weir may be designed and constructed^as currently planned, including the reinforced concrete core-wall and strip footing'. The berms on each side should consist of either type of embankment fill, as described above.- .Erosion protection should be provided on both feerms, as previously described for-.cut slopes and the stream channel. . . . :. Control Structure ...... ~ The reinforced concrete control structure should bear on firm natural soil or compacted embankment fill (as previously described), placed after the removal of any unsuitable materials. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered by Test,-Boring SB108, an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot appears appropriate for this location, which exceeds that required for the control structure. It alsb_appears that the bottom-of-structure elevation will be near or below the existing bottoiEi-of-fill elevation, and that little overexcavation of unsuitable materials will -therefore be required. 52262 .1R300I3I Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 26 September 19.91 Page 9 - ... - .... „

The normal frost-protection ' depth for foundations in Erie, Pennsylvania .is: approximately 3 .5 "feetr^aM" soils beneath .the . . control structure will be -saturated. .Any portions of the structure seated within approximately 3.5 feet _0f_an exposed surface, therefore", should be designed to, accommodate periodic frost heaving...... I:.....:...... / . . Four-foot -concrete-" cutoff walls /are^ciarfently planned beneath the'1 heal arid toe ;of. the control structure. ""TO provide further resistance to piping, the upstream and downstream erosion protection and/or -lining materials. (including geosynthetics) should tightly abut the,. control, structure. ------.---.• All fill., around "the "cohtroT ""structure" should consist of compacted embankment fill. A-. summary of 'approximate lateral, earth pressure, parameters, -as requested by Malcolm Pirnie, is as follows:

Active ...... At-Rest . . . Passive Lateral coefficient """ ": ' 0"."3'3 ""'""r"T:":'"^~r ^"0". 50 - 3.00 Drained Equivalent ' --.^-— • ---40 .'..Il'go 360 Fluid Density (pcf) ' ' " ' ".'. " '"" : •-"-—"; Submerged Equivalent... " - ~ -. .:. ;/--;. -.--::-"-."-f:\ . ' • " Fluid Density (pcf) ...... - '. .. o soil , . . .._.._-=:.._, ...; -:::.2Q . •:.""... •.-.".30" iso o- Soil and Water . ....80 " ...":.:.; . 90 . 240 It is .cautioned that_ structural displacements are. necessary to develop both the active and. passive cases, and that the at-rest case is therefore recommended. Conservatism should -be applied if - submergence- levels will vary"/; A lateral" coefficient of 0.5 should also be applied to any vertical surcharge loads. Box. Culverts , .. . . ;._;_. .;.;... .^.^:.:':.;;_._.^:_,;r^,:ru^-- .-.^^,;>;"~,"-. :•"- . ... :",- • : . The two box culverts should be designed in general accordance with the recommendations presented., above for-_the .control structure. Based. on the .subsurface . conditions encountered by Test Borings - SB103 and SB109, little, over'excavation for removal of unsuitable materials is expected. .._...<_ ...

52263

.•4R300I32 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 26 September .1991 Page 10 . ._- -

Seismicitv and Liquefaction Potential A seismic risk map of the United States was -prepared by Algermissen in 1969, and is presented by the Bureau of Reclamation in their Design of Small Dams (1977) . This map divides, the country into zones of four levels of severity (0 through 3). Erie, -Pennsylvania lies on the borderline of a Zone 2 and a Zone 3, indicating that "moderate" to "major" earthquake damage is- possible. Given the. . seismic history of Erie and the .nature of this: project, however, it appears that the risk of earthquake damage is minor, if modern construction techniques are followed. . - "-" - — - The potential for liquefaction.during a seismic event is greatest - for relatively uniform fine sands at low relative 'densities'! -'Given the gradational and density characteristics of-the soils at this . site, as well as the seismic history of Erie., the potential for" liquefaction is considered to be low......

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ... , .. . -,- . . , . -• Comments in this section are directed toward excavation, fill_. ... placement, foundation construction, and other.geotechnical engineering aspects of the proposed construction. It is that prospective contractors must evaluate potential construct!o problems on the basis of their own knowledge and experience, taking into account their own proposed construction methods and procedures. " • : - ; " Based on the subsurface explorations, it is estimated that, most of . the required excavation can be performed with conventional excavating equipment. It should be noted, however, that obstructions, including cobbles and boulders, may be encountered within both the fill and natural soils. Demolition debris may be present in. the fill. All earthwork, foundation concrete placement, and channel construction should be performed in-the-dry. Because excavations- will be advanced near and below observed groundwater levels, - it -is- anticipated that some type of pumped subsurface dewatering system will be necessary. It is cautioned that the soils at this site contain significant quantities of fine-grained material, and that they will be sensitive to disturbance. Bearing grades, therefore, should be kept free of water, should be subjected to a minimum amount of construction traffic, should be left exposed no longer than necessary, and should not be permitted to freeze. . :

52264

4R300I33 Malcolm Pirnie,-Inc. 2.6 .September 19.91' " Page. '11.. - ;: ;~ ,:._^:::z;

Construction..areas should be "stripped of all surf.ace..'topsoil. •Prior to placing any fill" or. foundation concrete," the exposed bearing grade should, be. thoroughly examined, tamped, and (where- possible) proof.rolleGL.;.witH" a heavy-roller.-- Any loose, soft, wet, 'frozen, organic, or.'Otherwise.unsuitable materials should be removed and' replace"d''"with compacted embankment fill. The existing fill materials may generally "be left..in place "beneath 'embankments,, the. realigned" stream "channel, "and the side-discharge. weir. Any fill material's, .beneath, .the concrete control structure or box culverts, - however/should be removed and replaced with compacted, embankment -f ill_.__... '_"_....____,_"_ The gradatio"nal7r"e"quirefaehts- recommended' for 'embankment fill are. presented in a previous, section". "_ylt appears that much of the excavated on-site fill .and'riatural "soil may be suitable .for re-use as embankment fill, if. desired. Embankment fill should be spread . in uniform horizontal., layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. in'general, : embankment fill .should be compacted to at. least 90. per bent." .6^" tlie;" maximum" dry density, determined -by ASTM D . 155,7..(latest edition) . For .any fill beneath or within 10 feet of the control .structure or .either box .culvert, however, the percent compaction should-be increased to-95; CLOSING . . __;.'.d::^-;_;__,.-' -...._;__4----^T.-"--!----^.',- • '-.-- --- Professional services for this.investigation were performed, •findings obtained, and the recommendations prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical...engineering practices, exclusively for; the. proposed retention basin and its related structures. No other, warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Subsurface conditions" described in this report have been inferred from a relatively'small, number of widely spaced explorations. Conditions "between. and__beyond these explorations are likely to vary... If conditions revealed" during c.onstructioh appear to. differ materially from those. ..described, H&A of "New York should be given the opportunity to observe tho.se conditions and evaluate their possible impact on our recommendations. It is also recominehded "that H&A assist in preparing the geotechnical-related-portions of the .project ..drawings . and . specifications, and provicie"..oD-si.te,monitoring and consultation during earthwork, and '.foundation construction.

52265

4R300I3U Malcolm Pirnie, inc...... - . - 26 September 199i . , : Page 12 .•.,_.'

It has been a pleasure assisting you with .this, investigation. If you have questions or comments, or if you redpaire additional information, please do not hesitate to contact, us, - --- Sincerely yours, H&A OF NEW YORK

Ray M. Teeter,. P.E. SenlAfl Engine*"

;y\E. Walker, P.E. Vice President RMT/SEW/cad: nut35 Attachments: -Table 1 . - Summary of Groundwater Levels Figure 1 - Project Locus. "..-.-". . .. Figure 2 - Subsurface Exploration Plan Appendix A - Test Boring Reports '• Appendix B - Observation Well Report Appendix C - Laboratory Test Results -"-'-

52266 ,4R300 I 35 TABLE 1

--, -SUMMARY OF- GROUNDWATER LEVELS

--- -— - - ---Ground ;~ .. Grpundwater.. .. Well . "".~:::i:.T ^surface- -..„ Depth Groundwater --Number _ . . ..^_'. ... , ...^levatioji'.". .,....:." ., = --.Y feet) Elevation

MW-1 -^..- ... --^--^17._0; __" " "____" ' ~~ 6.9" " 710.1

MW-2 • " - 715/4 •""-"• ~^;'-~ : 5.2 710.2

MW-3 ; :-; — ----713.4 ^ ' 2.6 710.8

MW-4 713.9. - , — _ 3.9 710.0 MW-33A : " r ::.:-" "^nts: '2 .." ""~""4.o" 711. .2

MW-33B" """" ~_ _ "_715_;3" ; ' " "T"~". " ".V"T4 ."l 711.2

MW-34. -----. "717.. 6 . ""•- . " . 6.1 . ' 711.5

MW-104 - - 717.1 - - - --7.2 709.9 NOTE: . "". •-.-.: - . - - 1. Groundwater,; levels- were, read on 21 February 1991. 2. We 11 "fiumBer -.MW- IjO 4 ' " was" ~i ns't a lied under the observation of H&A of . New York personnel. other wells, were installed .previously by others. ,- .- . .. ' "." " ' "."• " r '.:.-•-.-. " • 3. Ground surface, elevations were ..provided by Malcolm Pirnie.

rmt4l

52267

L__ H£ A OF..NEW YORK :'! R 3 Q f] I ? p. ROCHESTER. NEW YORK ' . . U T ^ LONGITUDE: 80" 08'58" LATITUDE: 42° 05' 31' O H&A of New York *t Comulnng Grattdwikal Enpncen, CeofepM* *nd HydtogcoiogiiK O h- MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SfTE T- O 52268 ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA ^ T '———-——-s PROJECT LOCUS z QUADRANGLE CQCATIQN UJ USGS QUADRANGLE: SV^NVILLE. PA. SCALE 1 IN. = 2000 FT. FEBRUARY 1991 AR300I37 FIGURE 1 FILE HO. 70179-40 --%cfi?H'-•"• Jffi • 8l?-t'/^i^.-v.^li i^ti

Nisva^ x itft. - as NOLLN3i3aocnd d ______"'• x 13NNVHO Q3NOnV3.a •*P^TTL>^^ --*T , ^7"~***tl *• /_ -^f:-~^\ ' "j'l'i -- •*. tl^^?fd|%W** itSSfc^/r" - ^WT^^K^/^'';^'! "'^- ^^ -- •-"*J';:'"^ :-^^ r''ml§o^^^^^^L^^^-"^-r-, -''7 " ^.v -" ffak^-*™&iAf*f*nbBn "•• " . "'.." ;.• ;— . , "•--•-

aHfuonais noaiNOo

.p'^E^'S5C"1i-- .^^- -:v^.: ;-., '-D-- .' : ',. ij ' ':/; •pi4;h|^,!,'':VS- I •'''''• :c'- .^^^i^^.^' '• - - • •">"^>.""- • '-•'•;- - • .".> '• iHBAnno/:-X . •j " S:-f/'-^-^ •V/ -i I,,!•• -U • -..-^'' • ^ ^ -/^ > r•, -_...,,——-,- •'• - -:^ - ..^_^'._- ovoa -tr-^irf v^; -^i^' - SS33OV 'tnv-^Tryi • -•:> ^^r ""'-i';^r-*t^'-,*'^ii -yi:!b---lr-• i'ir'-:1' #3- •-^

^Sj^ss^^i^^ai^r^^rW^^r^^ '^-=l~.i APPENDIX A Test - Boring "Reports

52270

R300I39 H&A OF NEW YORK; " ROCHE"s"TER7iretrro""R"x— — Consulting Geotechnical Engineers," " TEST BORING R'EPORT SORING NO. SB'101 Geologists and Hydrogeologists

PROJECT: MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ': " ' " ' - - •------FILE NO. 70179-40 CLIENT: MALCOLM PIRNIE ". " :" SHEET NO. 1 Of 2.. CONTRACTOR: PITTSBURGH TESTING LABORATORIES ...— ...... " . "." . LOCATION: See Plan

DRIVE CORE. .. DRILLING EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES ITEM"" " CASING SAMPLER . BARREL. ELEVATION: 715.6 RIG TYPE: CME 55, Truck Mounted DATUM: NGVO TYPE Augers S BIT TYPE: "2-7/8 tri-cone roller bit START: 18 February 1991 INSIDE DIAMETER (IN) ' 3.- 1/4 1-3/8 DRILL MUD: potable water FINISH: 19 February 1991 HAMMER WEIGHT ' (LB) 140 ... OTHER: . None DRILLER: J. Jenkins HAMMER FALL (IN) 30 H&A REP: T. deary

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE." STRATA BLOWS BLOUS. . . JUMSER & DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS CFT) PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY (FT) (FT)

5 S1 0,0 Loose black to brown silty fine SAND, Little fine gravel, - - - 6 - ' trace clay with brick and root fibers, damp. (SM) 5 15"/24~" 2.0 -FILL- 3 2 S2 2.0 Same, except very loose, brown, wet. — 2 2- 12"/Z4" 4.0 -FILL- 4 4.0 14 S3 4.0 Very loose gray fine SAND, little silt, trace medium sand with ——.5 . _ 2 . pea.t. layer from 4.3 ft. to 4.5 ft., wet. (SM) 2 10"/24" 6.0 -FILL AND FORMER TOPSOIL- 3 6.0 4 34 6.0 Loose gray silty fine SAND, trace medium sand, trace fine - 3 gravel, with root libers, wet. (SM) 4 17" /24" 8.0 4 10 S5 . ... 8.0 Medium dense gray coarse to. fine sandy GRAVEL, some silt, wet. 12 (GM) 14 18-V24" 10.0 — 10 — 14 9 S6 10.0 Same. 10 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 9 S"/24" .. 12.0 9 9 S7 12.0 Medium dense gray to red coarse to fine sandy GRAVEL, trace 9 silt, wet. CGP") 7 15"/24" 14.0 7 8 S8 14.0 Medium dense gray silty medium to fine SAND, trace fine gravel, — 15 — 15 trace. coarse sand, trace clay, wet, (SM) 12 15 "/24" 16.0 13 14 S9 16.0 . Medium dense gray medium to fine SAND, trace silt. (SP) - 11 9 24"/24" 18.0 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 9 5 . S10 . 13.0 -- Loose. gray silty fine SAND, trace coarse sand, trace clay, wet. 3 (SM) 4 15»/24" 20.0 4 6, S11 20.0 - r— Same, except medium dense with Layer of gray coarse sand from 9 t^. 20, 7 ft. to 21.5 ft., wet. 9 16"/24" 22.0 es 12 irCN> 7 S12 22.0 Same, except medium, dense, with gray fine gravel Layer from - 13 " 22.0 f.t. to 22.7 ft. wet. 13 15"/24" 24.0 26 -GLACIOLAOJSTRINE- 5 S13 24,0 Dense gray, gravelly coarse to -fine SAND, wet. (SP) _25 " — 15

UATER LEVEL DATA SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION SUMMARY

DEPTH (FT) TO: OVERBURDE* (L1N FT): 48.2 ft. DATE TIME , 0 Open End Rod TIME (HR) BOTTOM BOTTOM WATER T Thin Ualt Tube ROCK COREC (LIN FT): --- OF CASING OF HOLE' U Undisturbed Sample S Split Spoon SAMPLES: 22S 2/18 ... 0.0 4.0 '2.0 2/19 . —— 48.0 49.5 2.0 A H 6 (J (J | kO BORING NO SB-101 HSA OF NEW YORK, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK BORING NO. SB-101 1 Consulting Geotechnical Engineers, TEST BORING REPORT FILE NO. 70179-40 1 Geologists and Hydrogeologists SHEET NO. 2 OF 2^

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA SLOWS SLOWS NUMBER & DEPTH CHANGE VESUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS . ^^ (FT) P£S FT PER 6 !H RECOVERY (FT) (FT) ^^— • •— • -• 2======. ....-: 16 13 "/24" 26.0 30 25 S14 26.0 Same, with fine sand Layer from 27.6 ft. to 28.0 ft. ' 1 15 -GLACIO-AOJST8INE ' 1 17 17V24" 23.0 27.6 30 Dense gray SILT, L Title fine sand, moist. (ML) 1 21 SIS 28.0 30 30 17»/24» 30.0 '-GLACIAL TILL- 1 36 50 S16 30.0 Very dense gray coarse to fine sandy SILT, moist. (ML) 1 24 24 17V24" 32.0 30 Advanced augers -to 33.0 ft. . . .-- - 30 sir 33.0 Same, except with rock fragments, damp. 1 27 67 16"/24" 35.0 -35 _ 67 Advanced augers to 36.0 ft. 50 SIS 36.0 Same. - 57 -GLACIAL TILL- _. . ' -_ . -J^" 67 17"/24" 38.0 50 Advanced augers to 39.0 ft. 36 S19 39.0 Same. -40 — 46 41 17»/24" 41.0 100 Advanced augers to 42_.0.ft, ^^^ 52 S20 42.0 Very dense gray clayey SILT, trace fine sand with rock - 62 fragments, wet. (ML) 70 12V24" 44.0 90

-45 _ Advanced augers to 45.0 ft. ' 20 S21 45,0 Very dense gray SILT, little fine sand, trace clay, wet.. (HL) 30 30 15 "/24" 47.0 75 48.0 n Advanced augers to 48.0 .ft. - —— 100/.2 -^ S22 . 13.0-48.2 -GLACIAL TILL- — i Very dense gray severely weathered SHALE, dry. -SO — Advanced 2:7/8 inch roller bit into rock at 49.5 ft. -UEATHERED SHALE- Bottom of Exploration at 49.5 ft. • - Notes: 1. Borehole grouted to ground surface.

-55 —

52272 ^P

-60 — A R30f)UI HS.A OF NEW YORK, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK" Consulting Geotechnical Engineers, TEST BORING REPORT . BORING NO. S3-102 GeoLogists .and Hydrogeologists

PROJECTT~- MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE " -!"" "" ." FILE NO. 70179-40 CLIENT:' MALCOLM PIRNi'E -.-.-. _. .- --._--- SHEET NO. 1 OF 2 CONTRACTOR: PITTSBURGH TESTING LABORATORIES " ... LOCATION: See Plan

, DRIVE COR£ DRILLING EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES ITEM CASING SAMPLER BARREL ELEVATION: 717.7 RIG TYPE: CME 55, Truck Mounted DATUM: NGVD TYPE Augers S BIT TYPg: — • START: 19 February 1991 INSIDE DIAMETER. (IN) 3-1/4 1-3/8 ... DRILL MUD: ------FINISH: 20 February 1W1 HAMMER WEIGHT (LB) 140 OTHER: DRILLER: J. Jenkins HAMMER FALL "_(IN) 30 H&A REP: T. Cleary

DEPTH . CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA BLOWS BLOWS JUMSER & DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS (FT) PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY. . (fT> ' (FT) 12 S1 0.0 Medium dense brown coarse to fine sandy GRAVEL, with brick _ .-,.-_ 8 fragments, damp. (GP) 9 4"/24" 2.0 3 -FILL- 5 S2 2.0 - 5 Medium dense gray silty fine SAND, littte fine gravel, Little1 6 9"W 4.0 coarse. sand, trace medium sand, damp. (SM) 4 . -FIIL- 4 S3 4.0 Same, except very Loose with wood fragments, ___ c _ _, 2 1 5"/24"... 6.0 -FILL- 1 6,0 . 2 S4 6.0 Loose brown to gray medium to fine SAND, little coarse sand, - -_ . _ 2 little clay, trace fine gravel with organic material, wet. (SM) 2 8»/24" 8.0 -FORMER TOPS.OIL- 2 8.0 5 S5 ... 8.0 Medium dense brown to gray coarse SAND, little fine gravel, 8 Little medium to fine sand, trace silt, wet. (SP) 13 13"/24" 10.0 — 10 — 17 18 S6 10.0 - No recovery. (Advanced augers to 12.0 ft.) a 11 0"/24" 12:0 23 18 S7* 12.0 Medium dense brown medium to fine sandy GRAVEL, little silt, 13 wet. (GM) 10 0"/24" 14.0 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 8 14 S3 14.0 (* Sample recovered using 3 inch spoon. Blow counts from 140. __15 — 10 Lb. harrmer with 2 inch spoon.) 7 8"/24" 16.0 11 6 S9 16.0 Medium dense gray fine sandy SILT, trace clay, wet. (ML) _ . - _ 5' -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 6 l3"/24» 18.0 12 7 S10 18.0 6 Same- 52273 6 15"/24'' 20.0 — 20 — 9 3 S11 20.0 Same. 5 9 14"/24"" 22.0 15 22.0 - Medium gray coarse to medium SAND, little silt, trace fine 25 S12 22.0 gravel, wet. (SM) - . . - 46 60 14"/24." 24.0 Same. . -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 80 50 S13 24.0 Very dense gray SILT, little fine gravel, little fine sand, — 25 — 83 dry. (ML) ' -GLACIAL 'TILL-

UATER LEVEL DATA . .. SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION SUMMARY

DEPTH (FT) TO: OVER8URDE I (LIN FT): 40.5 ft. DATE TIME ELAPSED 0 Open End Rod TIME CHR) BOTTOM BOTTOM WATER •T Thin WaLL Tube ROCK COREI) (UN FT): --- OF CASING OF HOLE U Undisturbed Sample _ S Sol it Sooon SAMPLES: I8S^ 2/19 ...... 6.0 8.0 6.0 AR3UOU2 BOH** SB- 102. RJA OF NEW YORK, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK BORING NO. -SB-102 . Consulting" GeotechnTcal Engineers, TEST BORING REPORT FILE NO. 70179-40 Geologists and Hydrogeologists SHEET NO. 2 OF 2

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA SLOWS SLOWS NUMBER £ DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS ^fl^ (FT) PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY (FT) - (FT) ^H 60 17"/24" 26.0 Very dense gray SILT, trace medium sand, dry. (ML) 90 -GLACIAL TILL- 32 314 26.0 Samc, except trace clay, dry. _ — 40 35 18"/24» 28.0 60 35 S15 28.0 Same, dry. — — 45 60 17"/24" 30 '.0 119 45 S16 30.0 Same, dry. _ _ 33 47 20"/24" 32.0 -GLACIAL TILL- 65 f

22 S17 33.0 Advanced augers to 33_._0'ft. — _ 46 Same, with rock fragments. 47 22"/24» 35.0 27 Advanced augers to 36.0 ft. 45 SIS 36.0 Same, with rock fragments. — _ 45 47 22"/24" 33.0 25 Advanced augers to 39. Q ft. 30 S19 39.0 Same . -40 — 50 12"/1S" 40.5 -GLACIAL TILL- • 67 ———————————————————————— . —— _!______; — - Bottom of Exploration at 40..5 ft. .. ^^^B

— - Notes: "^^ - 1. Sorehole grouted to ground surface. .. •

—45 —

-50 —

-55.—

- 52274 ^^

-60 — - fltnnniu? H&A OF NEW YORK:,. ROCHESTER",. .NEW YORK" Consulting Geote'chnica'l Engineers, TEST BORING REPORT BORING NO. S3- 103' Geologists and HydrogeoLogists , . .

PROJECT: MILLCREEK" SUPERFUND SITE -.. .__ .. Y|" """ "" " -" FILE NO. 70179-40 CLIENT: MALCOLM PIRNIE ...... _ _ SHEET NO. 1 OF 2 CONTRACTOR: PITTSBURGH TESTING LABORATORIES' - --,..- LOCATION: See Plan

DRIVE CORE DRILLING EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURE'S' 3TEM ' . . CASING SAMPLER r BARREL ———————————————————————————— ELEVATION: 715.1 RIG TYPE: CME 55, Truck Mounted DATUM: NGVD TYPE ,--=.- Augers S BIT TYPE: --- START: 20 February 1991 INSIDE. DIAMETER (IN) 3-1/4 1-3/8 ... . DRILL MUO: --- FINISH: 21 February 1991 HAMMER WEIGHT

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE . SAMPLE STRATA BLOWS BLOWS JUMBER...& DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS (FT) PER FT PER 6: IN RECOVERY (FT) (FT) 7 SI 0.0 Medium dense brown to black coarse to fine SAND, with slag, - - - - - 12.' dry. ' '/24" 20.0 — 20 — 14 52275 7 s :. S11 20.0 Same. -_ - 7: . • 17»/24" 22.0 40 15 : S12 22.0 Dense gray silty fine SAND, trace clay, moist. (SM) ----- 15- -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 15 18"/24» 24.0 : 18 24.0 21 S13 24.0 - Oense gray silty coarse to fine SAND, little fine gravel, — 25 — 18 . moist. (SM) -GLACIAL TILL- WATER LEVEL DATA , SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION SUMMARY DEPTH (FT) TO: OVERBURDEN (LIN FT): 30.0 ft. DATE TIME 0 Open End Rod TIM6

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA 8LCWS BLOWS NUMBER S DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS " _^___k (FT) PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY (FT) (FT) " ss=s,,.— -i- 21 12"/24» 26.0 Dense gray silty coarse" to fine SAND*, Ifttle fine gravel, 20 moist. (SM) 16 S14 26.0 Same, except dense. 24 2S 16"/24» 28.0 36 15 S15 28.0 Same. " - - 20 24 18"/24" 30.0 -GLACIAL TILL- . 35 Bottom of Exploration at .3.0.0 ft. Notes: - • 1. Borehole grouted to ground surface. , . - -

-35 —

_ 9 -40 — •

_45 — -

-50 —

_

52276 ^^

. flMOf D IU5 H&A OF NEW YORK, ROCHESTER"; NEU Yoik.: " '._.: Consulting Geotechnica I Engineers, TEST B.ORING' REPORT BORING NO. SB-104 Geologists and Hydrogeologists .

^•--y -•••••'•-"•-•-•-—- - 1 PROJECT: MILLCRE1K STTP'E'RFUHD SITE FILE NO. 70179-40 CLIENT: MALCOLM PTRNIE - = SHEET NO. 1 OF 2 CONTRACTOR: .PiTTSBURGtf'TESTlNG LABORATORIES" .::::;.: - :./Y.: -^z.:": - LOCATION: See Plan DRIVE CORE DRILLING EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES ITEM CASING SAMPLER BARREL ELEVATION: 717.1 RIG TYPE: CME 55, Truck Mounted DATUM: NGVD TYPE . . - Augers S BIT TYPE: ---."- - - - START: 20 February 1991 INSIDE DIAMETER (IN) 3-1/4 1-3/8 .... DRILL MUD: --- FINISH: 20 February 1991 HAMMER WEIGHT (LB) 140 OTHER: --- - DRILLER: J. Jenkins , HAMMER FALL (IN) 30 H&A REP: T. CLeary

DEPTH ' CASING SAMPLER . SAMPLE . SAMPLE STRATA BLOWS . BLOWS JUMBER & DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS (FT) - PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY (FT) CFT)

2 SI 0.0 Loose black fine SAND, little. silt, trade coarse to medium _. 2 sand, damp. (SM) 5 19"/24'" 2.0 -FOUNDRY SANO F1LL- - 4 4 S2 - .- 2.0 Same. - - - .4 3 - 18"/24" 4.0 3 2 S3 4.0 . Same, except moist. - —— 5 _ 1 1 . 22"/24" 6,0 1 1 S4 6.0 Same, except wet:. -FOUNDRY SAND FILL- 2 7.0 4 20"/24" 8.0 Loose black to gray fine sandy SILT, trace medium sand, wet. 4 (ML) . 2 S5 .. 8.0 Same . . -FILL- 2 9.0 3 15"/24" 10.0 Loose gray silty coarse to fine SANO, little fine gravel, wet. 3 (SM) 3 S6 ... 10.0 -- - Same, except trace fine gravel. 4 5 10 "/24" 12.0 -GLACEOLACUSTRINE- 5 8 S7 12.0. Medium dense gray coarse to fine SAND, little sUt, trace clay, - - '- 7 wet. . CSM1 11 13"/24" 14.0 9 8 S3 14.0 Medium dense gray coarse to fine SAND, little coarse gravet, — 15 — 8 wet. (SP") 9 10"/24"" 16.0 -GLACIOLACUSTR1NE- 13 7 S9 16.0. ' Medium dense, gray silty fine SAND, trace medium sand, wee. (SM) - - 5 9 1W24" 18.0 9 9 S10 18.0 Loose gray fine silty SAND, wet. (SM) 5- 5 13"/24" 20.0 6 3 S11 20.0 Loose gray fine sandy SILT, wet. (ML) 3 3 16"/24" 22.0" -GLACIOLACUSTR1NE.- 10 22-0 15 S12 _ .. 22.0 Very dense gray coarse to fine SAND, trace gravel, trace silt, — 20 . wet. .(SP) ' 40 14"/24" 24.0 60 52277 34 S13 24.0 -GLACIAL TILL- — 25 .— 30 WATER LEVEL DATA SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION SUMMARY

DEPTH (FT) TO: OVERBURDE^ (LIN FT): 28.0 ft. DATE TIME 0 Open End Ro.d TIME (HR) BOTTOM BOTTOM WATER T Thin Wall Tube ROCK COREC CLIN FT): --- OF CASING OF HOLE U Undisturbed Sample S Sol It Spoon " SAMPLES: 14S 2/20 ... 6.0 8.0' 6.0 A R J 0 0 1 46 fl°RI«G NO. SB-104 HSA OF N£U YORK, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK SORING NO. SS-104 i Consulting Geotechnical, Engineers, TEST BORING REPORT FILE NO. 70179-40 Geologists and Hydrogeologfscs SHEET NO. 2 OF 2 ~ "

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA SLOWS SLOWS NUMBER S, DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS .' -jf^ (FT) PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY (FT) CFT) := -— - i _ 50 15"/24» 26.0 Very dense gray medium to coarse SAND, little fine sand, trace 60 fine gravel, wet. (SP) 17 SI 4 26.0 Very dense gray fine sandy SILT, trace coarse sand, moist. (ML) - 30 50 15"/24'' 28.0 1 -GLACIAL TILL- 90 Bottom of Exploration at 23.0 ft.

-30 — Notes: - 1. Borehole grouted to ground surface.

—— -*. 2. Offset we'll installed. See overburden Groundwater Monitoring Well Report for MW-104.

-35 —

-40 — •

-45 —

-50 —

-55 —

- _ 52278 ^^

-60 — - AR30niU7 H&A OF NEW YORK, ROCHESTER, "NEW "YORK Consulting GeotechnTcal Engfneers, TEST BORING REPORT BORING NO. SB-105 Geologists arid Hydrogeologists

PROJECT: - MILLCREEK. "SUPERFUND" SITE •••••--'-- -v=—— - -• • FILE NO. 70179-40 " CLIENT: """ MALCOLM. P_IRN!E "., ...... : - ... - ---.:.. SHEET NO. 1 OF 2" CONTRACTOR: EMPIRE'SOILS INVESTIGATIONS" LOCATION: See Plan DRIVE CORE . DRILLING EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES . ITEM CASING SAMPLER CfiDOCl " ELEVATION: 715.7 RIG TYPE: CME' .55 Track-Mount DATUM: NGVD ' TYPE . - _ Auger S BIT TYPE: ' -"-- ' - START: 17 June 1991 INSIDE. DIAMETER.. (IN) 4-1/4 1-3/8 DRILL MUD: ------FINISH: 13 June 1991 HAMMER WEIGHT (LB> 140 ... OTHER: . — " -- : DRILLER: A. Koske HAMMER FALL . (IN) 30 H&A REP: T. Cleary

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE . SAMPLE STRATA BLOWS BLOWS JUMBER & DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS . cFrr- PER FT PER 6. IN ? ECO VERY (FT) (FT) 2 SI 0.0 Loose black fine SAND, little silt, trace coarse to medium -- 3 sand, damp. (SM) 4 12"/24" 2.0 -FOUNDRY SANO FILL- 5 2.0, 4 S2...... '2.0 Loose'gray to gray brown fine SAND, little, silt, little clay, _. - _ 3 damp. (SM) ' 3 3"/24» 4.0 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 4 3 S3 - 4.0 Same, damp-, - . " __, 5 _ 4 6 - 14"/24" 6.0 8 12 S4 6.0 Dense. gray coarse, to fine SAND, Little silt, trace clay, wet. - v =_ 12

— 25- --=-

WATER LEVEL. DATA " . "." """ SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION SUMMARY

DEPTH "('FT) TO: . OVERBUROE 1 (LIN FT): 32.0 DATE TIME ' ELAPSED - 0 - Open End Rod TIME (HR) BOTTOM BOTTOM WATER . T Thin Wall Tube ROCK CORE3 (LIN FT): -- OF CASING OF HOLE U Undisturbed Sample S Split Spoon SAMPLES: 13S 6-17-91 ... - ...... - 6.0 8.0 6.0 5RJOQIU8 ' m™m SB- 105 «£A OF HEW YORK, ROCHESTER, NEV YORK BORING NO. SB-105 I Consulting Geotechnfcal Engineers, TEST BORING REPORT FILE NO. '70179-40 " I Geologists and Hydrogeologists SHEET NO. 2 OF 2 I

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA BLOWS BLOWS NUMBER & DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS _^^t CFT) PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY (FT) (FT)

27 S12 25.0 Same, with horizontal fragments of shale, at 25,8 ft., dry. 10G/.2 25.9 Advanced augers to 30.0 ft.

20 S13 30,0' Same, except trace coarse sand, dry. " ~" 36 44 22"/24» 32.0 -GLACIAL TILL- 75 Sottom of Exploration at 32.0 ft. Not.e: - -

1. Borehole grouted to-ground surface.. -45 — -

*

-45 —

-SO — ,

-55 —

__, 52280 ^^

-60 — - - AR300U9 ... .. -- • H&A OF NEST YORK, ROCHESTER',' HSTVBKR ' Consulting Geotechnical Eng"ineers, TEST BORING REPORT BORING NO. SB-106 Geologists and Hydrogeologists

PROJECT: MILLCREE1C SUPERFUND SITE . .._.,., FILE NO. 70179-40 CLIENT: ' MALCOLM PIRNIE SHEET NO. 1 OF 2 ' CONTRACTOR: EMPIRE SOILS INVESTIGATIONS ' ... . -" LOCATION: See Plan

DRIVE CORE DRILLING EQUIPMENT S, PROCEDURES ITEM CASTNG SAMPLER BARREL ELEVATION: 712.0 RIG TYPE: CME 55 Track-Mount DATUM: NGVD TYPE ' ' Auger S BIT TYPE: " "— — " START: 18 June 1991 INSIDE DIAMETER'CIN) 4-1/4 1-3/8 DRILL MUD: ---- FINISH: 18 June 1991 HAMMER WEIGHT (L8) 140 ... OTHER: ------DRILLER: A. Koske HAMMER FALL. . (IN) 30 H&A REP: " T. Cleary

DEPTH . CASING SAMPLER . SAMPLE . SAMPLE STRATA SLOWS BLOWS JUMBER & ' DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS (FT) PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY .. (FT) (FT) "

2 S1 0.0 Very loose brown to gray "fine sandy SILT, some clay with roots, - - 1 grass and decomposed organic debris, moist. (ML) 3 18"/24" 2.0 4 6 S2 2.0 Same, moist. -TOPSOIL- 8 3.0 9 16"/24" 4.0 Medium dense gray silty coarse to fine SANO, little fine 14 gravel, trace c.L.ay, wet. (SM) -5 S3 4.0 Same, except little fine gravel, wet. ___ c __ 9 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE-" "• ' 10 8"/24" 6.0 11 16 S4 . 6.0. Same, except IfttLe fine gravel, wet. — - —— 10 16 22"/24",... 8.0 Dense gray siUy.f-ine SAND, little, gravel, mois.t. .(SM) 22 8 S5 8.0 Medium dense gray coarse to fine SAND, little gravel. Little 6 silt, wet. (SM) 7 15"/24" 10.0 — 10 — 6 6 ,S6 . 10.0 . Same, wet. ' 7 6 15"/24" 12.0 9 Medium dense gray silty fine SAND, wet. (SM) 6 S7 12.0 Same, moist. - - — - 8 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 11 23 n/24" . 14.0 14 6 S3 , 14.0 Same, except trace fine sand, moist. _„- 6 5 20"/24"..- 16.0. 10 4 S9 16.0 . Medium dense gray fine SAND, little silt, trace coarse to - - - — 12 medium sand, trace fine gravel, moist. (SM) 13 22"/24" 18. 0 . 21 7 " S10 18.0 Same, moist. 10 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 14 24"/24'( 20.0 19.5 __2Q _. 28 Very dense gray SILT,- trace medium sand, trace clay, damp. (ML) 10 S11 20.0 ... Same, with fragments of shale, damp, • 28 -GLACIAL TILL- 35 18"/24" 22.0 43 AoVanced augers to 25.0 ft.

52281

— 25 —

WATER LEVEL DATA , " "„ SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION SUMMARY DEPTH (FT) TO: OVERBURDE i (LIN FT): 27.0 DATE TIME ctrtr

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA SLOWS BLOWS NUMBER S DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS .. ^j^^ (FT) PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY (FT) (FT) =^2= 25 S12 25.0 Same, with fragments of shale, damp, - 35 50 24 "/24" 27.0 -GLACIAL TILL- 31 ———————————————————————————————————————— : ——————— ™_ Bottom of Exploration at 27.0 ft. - -

- Note: " 1. Borehole grouted to ground surface. _

-H -

-45 —

-.0 —

-55 —

52282 4fc I«_ .flR nnn I5I H&A OF NEW" YORK, ROCHESTER-,-. N Eft-' -YC&k"'' . . Consulting Geotechnical Engineers^"" " " ' " '• TEST BORING REPORT BORING NO. SB-107 Geologists and Hydrogeo legists .. „ . . . -

PROJECT: MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ...... _ _ FILE NO. 70179-40. CLIENT: MALCOLM PIRNIE SHEET NO.- 1 OF 2 CONTRACTOR: EMPIRE SOILS INVESTIGATIONS LOCATION: See Plan

DRIVE CORE DRILLING EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES ITEM , CASING SAMPLER BARREL ELEVATION: 711.8 RIG TYPE: CME 55 Track-Mount DATUM: NGVD TYPE """ ------Auger S BIT TYPE: —— - START: 18 June 1991 INSIDE DIAMETER. .(IN) 4-1/4 1-3/8 ... DRILL MUD: —— »-.- — FINISH: 18 June 1991 HAMMER WEIGHT (LB) 140 OTHER: ------DRILLER: A. Koske HAMMER FALL - (IN) 30 H&A REP: T. Cleary

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA BLOWS BLOWS JUMBER & DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS' (FT) - PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY

2 S1 0.0 Loose gray to black clayey SILT, little .coarse' to fine sand, _ . __ 3 • trac'e fine gravel, moist. (ML). 4 12"/24" 2.0 -FOUNDRY -SAND FILL AND TOPSOIL- 4 2.0 3 S2 2.0 Loose gray sil.ty coarse to fine SAND, trace fine gravel, moist. - --•=— 4 (ML) . -GLACEOLACUSTRINE- "" 4 15"/24'' 4.0 5 2 S3 4.0 Medium dense .gray coarse to fine SAND, trace silt, wet. (SP) __ 5 . .-_ 5 6 18"/24" 6.0 7 8 S4 6.0 Same, except trace fine gravel, wet. ----- 8 10 2Q"/24". 8.0 11 5 35 8.0 Same, except dense, trace fine gravel, wet. 15 18 ' 20"/241i 10.0 — ID — 16 6 S6 10.0 Same, except trace fine gravel, wet. -GLACIOLACUSTRENE- 7 8 16" /24" 12.0 Medium dense gray fine sandy SILT, trace coarse to medium sand, 18 trace clay, moist. (ML) 6 57 12.0 Medium dense gray SILT, trace fine sand, moist. - -- • 8 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 10 20"/24" 14.0 13 3 S8 14.0 . Same, with thin 1-3 mm layers of black silt, wet. _ }5 _ 2 3 16"/24" • 16.0 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 4 16,0 10 . S9 16.0 Very dense gray coarse to fine SAND, trace gravel, trace silt, - -. - - 28 . moist. (SP) ... 25 .. . 18"/24" 18.0 -GLACIAL TILL- 3"0 12 S10 18.0 ... Very dense, gray coarse to fine sandy SILT, trace gravel with 32 fragments of shale, damp. (ML) 38 24»/24" 20.0

<..U. 44 21 Sll 20.0 Very dense gray SILT, little coarse to fine sand with fragments 64 - - of shale, damp. (ML) 67 24-V24" - 22.0 100 Advanced augers to 25.0 ft.

52283

— 25 .—

WATER LEVEL DATA SAMPLE mENTIFICATION SUMMARY

' DEPTH (FT) TO: OVESBURDE y (LIN FT): 27.0 - DATE TIME 0 Open End Rod TIME (HR) BOTTOM BOTTOM WATER T Thin Wall Tube ROHC CORE3 (LIN FT): — - -- OF CASING OF HOLE U Undisturbed Sample S Split Spoon" ' SAMPLES: 12S 6/18/91 ... ----- 4.0 6.0 4.0 qtnnnisz e°*™»° SB-107 H&A OF HEW YORK, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK BORIMG NO. - -SB-107 Consulting Geotechnical Engineers, TEST SORING REPORT" FILE NO. 70179-40 Geologists and Hydrogeologists SHEET NO. 2 OF 2

DEPTH CASIHG SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA BLOWS BLOWS NUMBER £ DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS ^^^ PER FT PER 6 IH RECOVERY (FT) (FT) — ,._..— _-— g-_— :==2=ss= 21 S12. 25.0 Very dense gray coarse to fine sandy SILT, trace fine gravel," - 52 damp. (ML) . 67 24"/24" 27.0 -GLACIAL TILL- 97 Bottoro of Exploration at 27.0 ft.

_ _ Note: 1. Borehole grouted. to ground surface.. _

-35 —

-45 _

•

-55 —

- 52284 ^P

-60 — AR3UO 153 ' . HSA OF NEW YORK, ROCHESTER; NEW YORK'"" ~ V Consulting Geotechnical EngTneers," " "" TEST BORING "REPORT " :' BORING NO. SB-108 Geologists and Hydrogeologists

PROJECT: MILLCREEK .SUP".E,RFU~ND SITE - - FILE NO. 70179-40 CLIENT: MALCOLM PIRNIE ....,._ ...... _..,_._ H,_ ,,.._...... -.^- SHEET NO. 1 OF 2 CONTRACTOR: EMPIRE SOILS" INVESTIGATION'S . " . LOCATION: See Plan.

DRIVE CORE DRILLING EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES ITEM CASING SAMPLER. BARREL ELEVATION: 712.1 RIG TYPE: CME" 55 Track-Mount DATUM: NGVD TYPE Auger S BIT TYPE:* ---- - :-" START: 19 June 1991 ENStDE DIAMETER (IN) 4-1/4 1-3/8- DRILL MUD: ------'- FIN'ESH: 19 June 1991 HAMMER UEIGHT US.) 140 ... . .OTHER: DRILLER: A. Koske HAMMER FALL (IN) 30 H&A REP: T. deary

DEPTH """" CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE _ SAMPLE STRATA BLOWS BLOWS JUMSER & DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY (FTJ CFT)"

1 SI 0.0 Very Loose black fine SAND, little silt, trace coarse .to medium - 2 1.0 — | sand, dry.

52285

__.2g _

WATER LEVEL DATA .. . SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION SUMMARY

DEPTH (FT) TO:. ' OVERBURDE ^ (LIN FT): 32,0 DATE TIME 0 Open End Rod TIME (HR) BOTTOM BOTTOM WATER T Thin wall Tube ROCK COREI) (UN FT): — OF CASING OF HOLE- U Undisturbed Sample S Sol it Sooon • • SAMPLES: 13S 6/19/91 ... 4.0 6.0 5.0 A R 3 0 0 1 5 U BORING "° S8-108 HSA OF HEW YORK, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK BORING MO. SB- 108 .. 1 Consulting Geotechn!cal Engineers, TEST BORING REPORT FILE NO. 70179-40 1 Geologists and Hydrogeotogists SHEET NO. 2 OF 2 ' '-" " 1

OEPTH CASIHG SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA SLOWS BLOWS NUMBER & DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS ___l___k (FT) PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY (FT) CFT) 13 S12 25.0 Very dense gray fine sandy SILT, little medium to coarse sand, 1 - 25 moist. (ML) 30 20"/24» 27.0 -GLACIAL TILL- 36

-50 — 15 S13 30.0 Very dense gray SILT, trace coarse to medium sand. (MLJ 31 42 22"/24» 32.0 -GLACIAL TILL- " - - - 47 Bottom of Exploration at 32.0 ft. Note:1 1. Borehole grouted to ground surface..- - - — 3g _

—40 — •

-50 —

-55 _

- 52286 ^^

-60 — fifK 001 55 ..: i HSA OF NEW YORK,' ROCHESTER, NEW "YORK Consulting Geotechnical Engineers, TEST SORING REPORT BORING NO, SB-109 Geologists and Hydro-geologists

PROJECT: MILLCREEK" SUPERRMJ SITE" ' " "" V " C " . ' - : FILE NO. 70179-40 " CLIENT: MALCOLM PIRNIE - - - ' ." SHEET NO. 1 OF 2 CONTRACTOR:, EMPIRE SOILS INVESTIGATION'S "" " ' """ - LOCATION: See Plan

DRIVE .. CORE DRILLING EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES IT. ITEM CASING SAMPLER BARREL • ———————————————————————————— ELEVATION: 713.1 RIG TYPE: ! CME 55 Track:Mount DATUM: NGVD TYPE * " Auger S SIT TYPE: -- — .-•:.. . START: 19 June 1991 INSIDE DIAMETER. (IN) 4-1/4 1-3/8 ... DRILL MUD: — FINISH: 19 June 1991' HAMMER WEIGHT (LS) 140 OTHER: — - - • DRILLER: A. Koske HAMMER FALL (IN) 30 HSA REP: T. Cleary or"

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE " STRATA BLOWS BLOWS JUM8ER 8. DEPTH CHANGE " VISUAL CLASSIFICATION AND REMARKS (FT) PER FT PER 6 IN RECOVERY (FT) CFT)

2 SI 0.0 Loose brown to tan coarse sandy SILT, trace clay, dry. (ML) - 4 1.0 —] -FILL- 6 16"/24" 2.0 9 Mediura dense black to gray SILT with brick, glass, and slag, 6 . S2 2..0 " dry. (ML) -- --- 4 • Same, dry. 6 12"/24" 4.0 -FOUNDRY SANO FILL- 4 4.0 4 S3 4.0 . Loose brown to gray SILT, little clay, trace sand with roots, __ , c . __ 3 damp. (ML). 3 20 "724" 6.0 -FORMER TOPSOIL-. 5 - 6.0 " 6 S4 6.0 ' Same, except l"ittle coarse sand, no roots, damp. - 5 -GLAC10LACUSTRINE- 6 16"/24" 8.0 4 WOH S5... ,.. 8.Q. No Recovery, wet. WOH WOH 0"/24" 10.0 — 10 — WOH WOR S6 10.0 Very loose gray silty coarse to fine SANO, trace fine gravel, UOR wet. (SM) WOR 2"/24" 12,0 WOR WOR S7 12.0 Same, wet. - •——— .WOR WOR 2"/24" 14.0 WOR WOR S3 14.0 Same, wet. ... —.15 — 1 Loose fine sandy SILT, trace medium sand, trace clay, wet. (ML) 5 10"/24" 16.0 4 5 S9 16. Q . . Medium dense silty coarse to. fine SAND, trace fine gravel, _ - _ 9 trace clay, wet,..(SM) 9 24 "/24" 18.0 Dense gray fine sandy SILT", trace medium sand, wet. (ML) 11 S10 18.0 Same, wet. 6 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- 10 13/24" 20.0 Medium dense gray coarse to fine sandy GRAVEL, some silt, — 20 — 19 moist. CGMX- 7 S11 20.0 •""• Same, with fragments of shale, moist. - - 12 16 14"/24" 22 .-0 13 Advanced augers to 25.0 ft.

52287

— 25 —

WATER LEVEL DATA SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION SUMMARY

DEPTH "(FT) TO: OVERBURDEN (LIN FT): 42.0 DATE TIME ELAPSED - 0 Open End Rod TIME (HR> BOTTOM BOTTOM WATER T Thin Wall Tube ROCK CORED (LIN FT): --- • OF CASING OF HOLE " U Undisturbed Sample S Split Spoon ' SAMPLES: • 15S 6/19/91 --- ... a.o. 10.0 8.0 WOH Weight of Hammer WOR Weight of Rods BORING NO. SB- 109 H1A OF NEU YORK, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK BORING NO. SB-109 Consulting Geotechnical Engineers, TEST BORING REPORT FILE NO. 70179-40 Geologists and Hydrogeologists SHEET NO. 2 OF 2

DEPTH CASING SAMPLER SAMPLE SAMPLE STRATA SLOTS BLOWS NUMBER & DEPTH CHANGE VISUAL CLASSIFICATION ANO REMARKS . ^^ (FT) PER FT PER 6 [N RECOVERY (FT) CFT) 2 S12 25.0 Loose fine SANO, little silt, moist to wet. (SM) - 3 -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- ' .- - - 5 24''/24" 27.0 15 Advanced augers to 30.0 ft. *

-SO — 5 S13 30.0 Same, wet. -GLACIOLACUSTRINE- - "--- 9 31.0 15 24"/24» 32.0 Dense gray SILT, trace coarse to medium sand with fragments o 15 Shale, moist. (ML) -GLACIAL TILL- ;:: - Advanced augers to 34.0 ft.

8 S14 34.0 Same, except medium dense, moist to wet. —55 - 6 10 24"/24» 36.0 Advanced augers to 40.0 ft. 12

-40 — 18 SI 5 40.0 Same, moist. 26 20 24»/24" 42,0 -GLACIAL TILL- - ^J 31 Bottom of Exploration at 42.0 ft.

Note: - - _45 _ 1. Borehole grouted to ground surface.

-SO —

—55 —

52288 ™

-60 — fl R30I3157 .„ ;. ' APPENDIX B' Observation Well Report

52289

3R30QI58 H£A OF NEW YORK CONSUITIMG GEOTECHNECAL ENGINEERS OVERBURDEN GROUNDUAT'ER' MONITORING WELt REPORT GEOLOGISTS AND HYDROGEOLOGISTS,

PROJECT: HILLCRSEK SUPERFUND .SITE . . FILE NO.: 70179-40 LOCATION: ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA WELL NO....: . MW-1Q4 CLIENT: MALCOLM PIRNIE LOCATION": See Plan CONTRACTOR: PITTSBURGH TESTING LABORATORIES DRILLER: J, JENKINS RIG TYPE: CME-55, TRUCK MOUNTED SHEET: . . =1 _QF 1 INSTALLATION DATE: " 21 FEBRUARY .1991 H&A REP: T, CLEARY

Survey •Depth/Stlckup above/below ground Datum fJSVQ surface of. protective casing. _____None

Stickup above/ground Ground surface of riser pipe. . _____2._5__jt. Elevation: 717.1 -CEMENT/8SNTONETE •Thickness of Surface Seal . - . ^^.. 1-5 ft. GROUT- Cement/Bentcnice 1.2 ft. Type of Surface Seal _ . - Grout______[indicated all seals1 showing dep.th, thickness and type]

R I n •Type of Protective Casing - _____None 2 o E t -BENTONITE Inside Diameter of Protective Casing None PELLETS- S t •FOUNDRY •Depth of Bottom of Protective Casing 0 o SAND I FILL- •Inside Diameter of Riser Pipe L s c •Type of Backfill Around'Riser ' -Sentonite Pel lets C * 2.7 ft. 0 I •Diameter of Borehole " 5-1/2 ig. N t D I Type of coupling (threaded, welded, etc.) .-^ Threaded T I 7.0 •Depth .of Bottom of Riser 4. 0 N ' -FILL- •Type of Uellscreen . Slotted PVC S 9.0 ft. -QUARTZ •Screen Slot Slie __.._....- .0,01 in. SAND- -Diameter of Wellscreen ____2.0 in. -LACUSTRINE SAND- Type of Backffll Around Wellscreen '. Quartz Sand

-Depth of" Bottom of Uellscreen ____14.8 ft- 15.0 ft. -Depth of Bottom of Borehole _. lj.0 ft.

52290

Remarks:

AR300I59 Well No. MW-104 . • APPENDIX C .:" = Laboratory Test Results'

52297

flR3QQ!60 H&A FORM No, 505'JUNE 198B . US. STANDARD STEVE SIZE T 55 FI '= ft s a No.4 No.10..No.20 Nd.40NO.60No.lOO No.iOO , . - 100 100 ! . j 1 i ^:"!l — .III i \: 1 il i 90 90 ! I i Ii T f i MI f 1 j I i -J II . 80 i -1 • V1 III 80 II 1 : ;i i 1 III • ~"t 1 1 1 : jt i i ii .11 1 '' 70 — -- , i 70 —— - . 1 i t- h -ti. CT — -- 1 i t.| • 260 L ;:\ Ii 60 : T l!^_ 1 Ii en - |I . i\i j | II trSO 1 ' } 50 z ; . . .ill ; 'i 111 I jj_ I LL. i i i! \ £40 1 !'! \ II 40 LU O 1! i l! I 1 i «1 1 II 1 Illl en - ' i i i i ii _ J. if"! \ i • .1! ' ^30 i 30 i II t I n 1 l ! Hi i\ . \ --! 1 \ l i i I i Ii ^ " i 20 l! 1 1 l! * 1 . i 20 Hi l I 1 i 1! 10 If ^ H 10 . Ii JIL j 1 **«: I 1 0 ! I ill _ Ii i 1 II i f until ii 1 0 100 10 . 1.0 . 0.1 0.01 0,001O.OD 01 GRAIN SIZE (MILLIMETERS) GRAVEL SAND CO9BLES SILT OR CLAY COARSE | FINE COARSE ( MEDIUM FINE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM SAMPLE DEPTH SAMPLE PROPOSED SYMBOL EXPL... .. SAMPLE DESCRIPTION NO. NO. (feet) SOURCE USE

O SB101 Sl-5 28. 0-30'. C Gray SILT, little fine . . aand .

EXPL. . SAMPLE NATURAL ATTER8ERG LIMITS (%) L 01 ' " SYMBOL Cu cc WATER NO. NO.. CONTENT(%) W L W p Ip (% by wgt.)' O SB101 -| S15 10.4 Non-Plastic

/CQA Haley Sc Aldrich, Inc. Cbntultutg Gcoccchnicil Engineeri, Geologists and HydrogwlogMM .MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA " GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

flR300!6l FILE NO. 70179-40 DATE- Feb.1991 H&A FORM No. 505 JUNE 1988 __ * g US-STANDARD SIEVE SIZE " '"'- 1 100 * H S = S S S No.4 No.10 Nc2Q No.40No,60No.lOO No.200 - • J-aJf' i If . _ .1 J . III 1 | ['"" ii mi | 90 ! ll —— II HI l! 1.^_L! . i -B Jl. 1 II • i IKLL II ll 1 >... Ill 80 I. |i 4i 1 . uii L.. IL ; L ; i ii || HI in i III f 70 \ HI 1 i 1 t- ;; i j A . 1 in L. J I 1 II t" 1 II I l ' H • u) 60 1 i \ " l . J! I [ to CO r \ 1 ;il HI i - ---- —— ——— 50 yj !- I j i J 1 n 1 . ..l i it- 1 0 ![ i 1 1 1 Hi j 1 \ | —— •• | |ln- ! i sor HI | : I Q.30 !l "i \ni n I . ill -c i H 1 1 I' 1 1 \« \ \\ .. ill 1 i .11 • III i i ii1 j Ii 1 Qi I II 1 ! 20 n r ' 1 1 „ ———————— 20 I ll ll . 1 JM Hi j jpoi^ 1 f 1 ; P n II I 4 fi 10 l I ii i n I ^*( 'II; r i 1 1 j 0 1 Ii < J 1 if) 1 II 0 100 10 1.0" 0,1 0.01 .0.00 . . - - -0.0001" GRAIN SIZE (MILLIMETERS). GRAVEL SAND -..,. ' :^M^k COBBLES SILT OR CLAY. - ^^h COARSE" FINE COARSE j MEDflJM FINE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ' ^^

SAMPLE DEPTH SAMPLE: PROPOSED SYMBOL EXPL. SAMPLE DESCRIPTION NO. NO. (feet) SOURCE USE Gray coarse SAND, little firs SS102 J. 0-10.0 O .35 gravel, little medium to. fir 3

EXPL. SAMPLE" NATURAL ATfERSERG LIMITS (%J L 01 SYMSOL Cu cu c WATER NO. NO. CONTENTS) W (_ W p Ip (% by wgt.) O SB102 S5 ...13.1 Non-Plastic 1 ^

£f^~^^ Halcy &: Aldrich, Inc. ' *TT3K» » Consulting CeotechiuuJ Engineers, Ceobpiu ind Hydrogeolopit* MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ' ^^ ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA ^B GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ^^

/J R ^OD 1 pi? FILE NO. ' 70179-40 DATE: Feb . 1991 HSAFORM No, 505-JUNE 1938 t ± US, STANDARD SIEVE SiZE s t t * f I35 ...... '. . ____ _ - -- .- 100 = S No. 4 No. 10. No.20 N6.*ONo,60No.1CQ No.200 100 I il W }II U p 1 l ! II P i 5\ \ \ III 1 90 90 r II j n \i . i i III! I II ! r\ jT UK II . 80 V1 |i l\ 1 ii Ii • t III SO I ! 1 j 1 "\ .i ii i i 1 i 70 1 1 1 \ 1 1 70 1 TT i! S60 l m. i I! II 1 1 1 60 i || 5 I! Fkl 1 1 t to i i i j$; ll 1 ccSO 50 -zLU. i i '<3_ i II U- i i 1 1 | VfI 40 LU I O 1! l % CE LU I i! , \\ \ r* i 0-30 i 1 il 1 i 1 30 III J __ i r ii! ¥ 11 i 1 1 i i ! 1 i 20 Mil ^t 20 1 ' i . ii _L_ HI V Hi1 i 1 i in 1 il | 10 i i ^i 10 i Ii i ii 'ssli II it ____ I'l ^w- *-$ 0 1! i! Ill ll Ii •1 1 III i 0 100 . -10 . ..1.0 0.1 " O.Q" 1 0,001 0.001 0 GRAIN SIZE (MILLIMETERS) " GRAVEL SAND ' COBBLE; SILT OR CLAY CQAHSE FINE COARSE | MEDIUM | FINE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM SAMPLE DEPTH SAMPLE - PROPOSED SYMBOL EXPL- , SAMPLE DESCRIPTION NO. - " NO. (feat) SOURCE . . USE Gray silty coarse. to fine O i3B103 . S14 12.0-14,0 - --"------SAND, little fine gravel. 1

EXPL. SAMPLE NATURAL ATTER8ERG LIMITS (%) L 0 I SYMBOL CM C c . WATER NO. NO. CONTENTt?£) W L W p Ip {% by wgt.) O SB103 S14 - 20.2 . Non-Plastic ...

AQA H a 1 c y Sc A 1 d r i c h, Inc. Consulting GeocechnicaJ Enginecn, Geologist! and Hydrogrolojpiti MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

• AR3DOI63 FILE NO. 70179-40 ' DATE: Feb. 1991 H&A FORM No. 505 JUNE 1988 » £ U.S. .STANDARD SIEVE SIZE j __ j S 2 100 3 No.4 No.10 No.20 No.JtONo760No.10TT- 0- fNO.20Q CiK- - ,.M« i (V Y HIT -•o-j. I'l !i | ; I 1 HI jjfe. 90 l $T^Xi Ilii II 1 |1 1! III r j I i L II 1 [^V j i !|V III ! i i ji 1 1 ' III 80 ii i III i II .0 Ji I!'ill1 t ' ro i II II ————— 70 n 1 i 1: \ l! i 1 \ i 1! 19 i in Il 1II 1 uj so i 1 5 l|: |: i 1 MI J.1 f(i CD 1 1 trSO I) t l i III 1 UJ i' ,!l i 11 L_. '"' u. III! 1 1 1! II. Ii ii T[ A 1' II. i 2 40 i ————— 40 UJ |l IIT ——— \ 1 ; l 10 I I Mil. 1 1 I!"n i III I i j 1 1 1 [ i 0 1 I! i 1 1 ill 1 1 ii l II II n 100 10 1.0 O.t OEM L.Q-001 b.ooor' GRAIN SIZE (MILLIMETERS) GRAVEL SAND COSBLEJ SILT OR CLAY , ' '.' jfl^ COARSE |FINE COARSE | MEDIUM FNE UNIFIED SOL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ' ^^

SAMPLE DEPTH SAMPLE PROPOSED SYMBOL EXPL. SAMPLE DESCRIPTION NO. NO- (teet) SOURCE USE Black fine SAND, little O SB104 S2 2.0-4.0 silt, trace cioarse tcf " "~^"" " medium sand. . . _. , . ,-,^_ — <—».-, '

EXPL. SAMPLE NATURAL ATTER8ERG LIMITS (%) L 01 SYMBOL Cu C c WATER NO, NO. CONTENTS) W L ' W..p . I p (% by wgt.) O £B104 S2 19.6 I Non-Plastic

£if~^^ Haley & Aldrich, Inc. j f '^&^nf % Consulting CeotechnidJ Engineer*, Geologuo and Hydrogcobguu 1 MILLCREEK SUPERPUND"~SITE ^^\ ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA - ^H GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ^^

flR 3001614 FILE NO. 70179-40 - DATE- Feb. 1991 FORM No. 505 JUNE 19S8 US... STANDARD SIEVE SIZE " ' " * * Z i 1 5 = . _•« B S W S Sa 3. No.« N0.10 100 Nb.20 'No.40NaGONo.100 No^OO 100 GL_iJl f i 90 WJ U 90 I —— „\ j 1 il il j r^ | SO il SO. T\ MI ~n i II / 70 \ 70 Q, ii ^ i !.• i l l d !i 1 i \i 1 i H l 1 uj 60 ^ 60 5 f n i m i j ___ a: 50 i^ 50 UJ I i i ^L±_ ! 1i iiii 1 l i LJ_ i PCX. I • i i •. £40 4 1 J 40 UJ n II i "4 Ocr — f-t-- i-i> 1 UJ 1! 1 ! I ii i NI 1 ii i a- 30 30 T IP II _ _ JUI I i |I |l Qj i 20 1 20 i M i 1 1 1 ——— " i n 10 10 1 ( ll _l I a 1 ii U i ii ii i il ! 0 I HIM 11 \ n 0 100 0.001 0.001 0 GRAIN SIZE (MILLIMETERS) GRAVEL SAND COBBLES SILT OR CLAY COARSE FNE COARSE t MECUUM | FINE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM SAMPLE DEPTH SAMPLE PROPOSED SYMBOL EXPL. - - SAMPLE DESCRIPTION NO. " NO. (feet) SOURCE USE Gray silty coarse. to fine O SBl~04 S6 10. 0-12. -0 . SAND, little fine gravel. .

EXPL. SAMPLE NATURAL ATTERBERG LIMITS f%) L 0 I SYMBOC c u WATER NO. '. NO, C CONTENTS} W L W p I P (% by wgt.) O SB104. . .36 15.5. Non-Plastic;

•

£f^~^^ H a I e y & A I d r i c h, I n c. f \L30M ^ Connildag Geoiechnical Engineer*. Geologist! «nd HydrogEobpm

MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

BR300I65 FILE NO. 70179-40 " DATE: Feb. 1991 MA1COLM PIRNIE

APPENDIX F

HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS (HEC-1 COMPUTER SIMULATIONS) (on computer disk unless otherwise noted)

File Name l^pe Description 103FINAL.HC1 HEC-1 Data . Data and output files for the 10 and 50- 10FTNAL.Out HEC-1 Output yeaFevehts. these HEC-1 files include 50FTNALJHC1 HEC-1 Data all contributing areas upstream of the 50FINAL.Out HEC-1 Output FRB, contributing areas from capped landfill, routed flows through the FRB, Water Treatment Plant and North Ditch contributing flows. Within the output file, two subareas are especially important: (1) Subarea Rout - This is the routed outflow from the FRB. (2) Subarea NDTOT - Tlus is the combined hydrograph of the FRB . . . . routed flows and the total North Ditch flows. It is here at which Marshall's Run peak flows are governed. 2ND42.PC -'- HYS Input Input and output files for the North Ditch 2ND42.0UX , HYS Output® Culvert files. FRB.PCT _ HYS Input Input and output files for the FRB Con- FRB.OTT HYS Output*1' trol Structure. In the outpurfile, a per- f-==.— formance curve table indicates the tailwa- ^- '—-" ter elevation, inlet control head, and outlet control head vs. flow. (1) HYS output fUes are not stored in memory. Therefore, a hard copy of the file is included separate from disks.

0285^3-2 ...... '...... ;_. 52297 flR300!66 ULVERTNALYSISERSION

URRENT DATETJRRENT TIMEIIiE NAMEILE DATE 0.9.-3Q-X9 ._ :. 08:36:54" ' ' FRET •"""" ""9/30/91

ERFORMANCEURVEISCHARGEANGE FLOWSNALYZED

MINUMUM DISCHARGE (CFS) Q DESIGN DISCHARGE (CFS) 150 MAXIMUM DISCHARGE (CFS) 200

.A.- SITE DATA Ui E - CULVERT SKAPE, MATERIAL/ INLET L INLET ,: OUTLET CULVER* BARRELS SPAN RISE MANN. V ELEV. ELEV. LENGTH INLET SHAPE N TYPE # (FT) (FT) (FT) I MATERIAL '(FT) (FT) II 709.00 .708.99 11.00 2\ * 1 - RGB --4.50_ 2,50 .012 CONVENTIONAL, 3 4 5 6

52298

.flR3GOI67 ORRENT DATEURRENT TIMEILE NAMEILE DATE . 09-30-19 08:36:54 FRB 9/30/91

CULVERT NUMBER:

ULVERTNVERTATA INLET STATION (FT) 0.00 INLET ELEVATION (FT) 709,00 OUTLET STATION (FT) 11.00 OUTLET ELEVATION (FT) 708.99 NUMBER OF BARRELS l.'OO SLOPE (V-FT/H-FT) 0.0009 CULVERT LENGTH ALONG SLOPE (FT) 11.00

BARREL SHAPE: 4.50 FT X 2.50 FT BOX- BARREL MATERIAL: CONCRETE WITH A MANNING'S N OF 0.012 INLET TYPE: CONVENTIONAL INLET EDGE AND WALL: SQUARE EDGE (30-75 DEG.' FLARE) INLET DEPRESSION: NONE

TAI ".WATER RATING CURVE

FLOW(CFS) W.S.E.(FT) 0 708.99 20 709.50 40 709.95 60 710.40 80 710.90 100 711.40 120 711,85 140 712.35 150 712.60 180 713.10 200 713,30

SELECTED OVERTOPPING CREST

ROADWAY SURFACE: .. .. .

EMBANKMENT TOP WIDTH (FT): 720.00

CONSTANT ROADWAY ELEVATION PROFILE 52299 CREST LENGTH (FT) 100_OQ

. DATEURRENT TIMEILE NAMEILE DATE 09-30-19 . 08:36:54 FRB 9/30/91

SUMMARY OF CULVERT^FtOWS (CFS) ' ' " FILE: "FRB DATE: 9/30/91 " CFTfprp) N TOTATnTlTL. ..._.__ ^.-,.. — __ . .^ ... ;- ...3-4- - , 6 OVERTOP^

710.43 20 - 20 - , .0 ~ ~ ^ " " " 0 0 ' 0 02 711:27 , 40 .40 0 "0 0 0, 0 ' 0 - 711-97 60 60 00 0 0 0 ' 0 2 712,63 80 80 0 /0 ' 0 ' 0 0 0 ? 713.69 100 100 00 "0 ' 0 0 02 715.00 120 120 0 0 _0 0 0 n - 716.57 140 "140 -'" ,0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 o 717.44 ISO 150 0 0 0 0 0 02 720.40 ISO ISO 0 . _0 0 . 0 0 OP 722.64 200 - 200 0 0 0 0 0 02

52300 4R30069 .... _n;T URRENT DATEURRENT TIMEILfc NAMEILE DATE - 09-30-19 08:36:54 FRB 9/30/91

CULVERT # 1 PERFORMANCE CURVE FOR 1 .BARREL (S) - | Q HWE TWE XCH OCH CCE FCE '•12E vc I fcJfa) (ft) (ft) Cft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (fpsl 0 709.00 708.99 0.00 -0.01 -O.Q1 709.00 70S .98 cl 20 71043. 709.50 1.31 1.43 1.43 0,00 0.00 5I 40 711.27 709.95 2.09 2.27 2.27 0.00 0.00 6 1 60 711.97 710.40 2.80 2.97 2.97 0.00 0.00 80 712. 63 710.90 3.63 .3.59 3-59 0.00 0.00 e7 I 100 713. 69 711.40 4.69 4.21 4.21 0.00 0.00 .3 120 715. 00 711.85 6.00 5,43 5*43 0.00 0.00 10 140 716. 57 712.35 7.57 6.86 6.86 0.00 -0 .00 12 150 717. 44 712.60 8.44 7.63 7,63 0.00 0.00 t.13r ISO 720. 40 713.10 11.40 9.91 9.91 0.00 0.00 16 200 722* 64 - 713.30 13.64 11.47 11.47 0.00 0.00 li *-i*- >

SUMMARY OF ITERATIVE 'SOLUTION ERRORS FILE: FRB DATE: 9/30/91

HEAD HEAD TOTAL FLOW % FLOW ELEV(FT) ERROR (FT) FIXDW(CFS) ERROR(CFS) ' ERR 709.00 0.00 0 0 °l 710.43 0.00 20 0 0. 711.27 0.00 40 0. 0.00 711.97 0.00 60 0 0.00 712.63 0.00 80 0 0.00 713.69 0.00 100 0 0.00 715,00 0*00 .. ...120 0 0.00 716.57 "— " b.oo 140 0 0.oo - 717.44 0.00 150 0 0.00 720.40 0.00 180 0 0.00 722.64 0*00 200 0 0.00

5230t AR300I70 a~o at- ULVERTNALYSISERSION

URRENT DATEURREtfT TIMEILE NAMEILE DATE " """ '"". 10-02-19- 11:27:27 • 2ND42 9/23/91

ERFORMANCEURVEISCHARGEANGE -• 'FLOWSNALYZED

MINUMUM DISCHARGE. (CFS) 0 DESIGN DISCHARGE (CFS) 50 MAXIMUM DISCHARGE (CFS) 150

C A - SITE DATA- B - CULVERT SHAPE, MATERIAL , INLET i U' L INLET OUTLET CULVERT BARRELS SPAN RISE MANN. INLET V v 'ELEV. ELEV. LENGTH SHAPE N TYPE. # (FT) (FT) (FT) MATERIAL (FT) (FT)

1 708.80 708.40 ISO. 00 1 ^-.RCP 3.50 3.50 .012 CONVENTIONAL 2 708,80 708.40 15,0.00 1 - RCP 3.50 3.50 .012 CONVENTIONAL 3 4 5 , 6

52302 AR300I7I ' . URRENT DATEtTRRENT TIMEILE NAMEILE DATE 10-02-19 11:27:27 2ND42 9/23/91

:ULVERT NUMBER;

HLVERTNVERTATA

INLET STATION (FT) 0.00 INLET ELEVATION (FT) 708.80 OUTLET STATION (FT) 150.00 OUTLET ELEVATION (FT) ' 708.40 NUMBER OF BARRELS , 1.00 SLOPE (V-FT/H-FT) 0.0027 CULVERT LENGTH ALONG SLOPE (FT) 150,00

BARREL SHAPE; CIRCULAR 3.50 FT IN DIAMETER BARREL MATERIAL: WITH A MANNING'S W OF 0.012 INLET TYPE: CONVENTIONAL INLET EDGE AND WALL: SQUARE EDGE WITH HEADWALL INLET DEPRESSION: NONE

52303 AR300I72 . . . _ URRENT DATEURRENT TIMEILE NAMEILE.DATE - 10-02-19 11:27:27 * 2ND42 9/23/91

CULVERT NUMBER:

ULVERTNVERTATA INLET STATION (FT) Q.OO INLET ELEVATION (FT) 708.80 OUTLET STATION (FT) 150.00 OUTLET ELEVATION (FT) • 708.40 NUMBER OF BARRELS 1.00 SLOPE (V-FT/H-FT). , 0.0027 CULVERT LENGTH ALONG SLOPE ,(FT) 150.00

BARREL SHAPE: CIRCULAR 3.50 FT IN DIAMETER BARREL MATERIAL: - - ' ...... WITH A MANNING'S N OF 0.012- INLET TYPE: CONVENTIONAL INLET .EDGE AND WALL: SQUARE EDGE WITH HEADWALL INLET DEPRESSION: NONE

CONSTANT WATER SURFACE ELEVATION 711.50

SELECTED OVERTOPPING ..CREST

ROADWAY SURFACE: . PAVED

EMBANKMENT TOP. WIDTH (FT): ' '50.00 CONSTANT ROADWAY ELEVATION PROFILE

CREST LENGTH (FT) . 150.00 OVERTOPPING CREST ELEVATION (FT) • 714.00

52304

AR300_L73 " 'Tf±'_':r_cif'n .0^0 of URRENT DATEURRENT TIMEILE NAMEILE DATE" " - ' '-- 10-02-19 11:27:27 2ND.42 9/23/91

SUMMARY OF CULVERT FLOWS (CFS) FILE: 2ND42 DATE:" -972379.1' ELEV (FT) TOTAL " 1 2. 3 4 5 6 • OVE&TOF ITS 70S. 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 711.53 IS 7 8 0 0 0 — 0 0 _73 711.60 30 15 15 0 0 . 0 C 0 2 711.72 45 22 23 0 0 __. I.-.JO --- 0 6 -2- 711.77 SQ 25 25 "0 " 0 0 C 0 "2 712.10 75 37 38 0 0 Q _... 0 . , 0 2 712.35 90 45 . 45 0 0 , 0 c 0 .- *i 712.63 105 52 53" 0 0 0 0 0 2 712.83 120 60 60 0 . 0 0 0 - 0 . .-2_ • 713.20 135 68 68 0 . 0 .. - 0 -;0 0 f 713.60 150 75 75 6" 0 0 0 0 -%

52305

ARSOQ'W ' "_. URRENT DA.TEURRENT TIMEILE NAMEILE DATE 10-02-19 - 11:27:27 2ND42 . 9/23/91 CULVERT # i PERFORMANCE' CURVE ...... FOR 1 BARREL(S) Is .0 ji; -: »•» -:°° s:s ao .: :. ?•» • -- SO TI^ m T-Ti "Wn ^ «-T J-.o-» J.HJ 0.00 0.00 5.84 ^68 --^:-2op--^|71"3' 3ft 711 SgA ;t:?•;•;:• i -4'044;iS .....J:,43 S 4*0...SrS3 °-°S ° ^ u-^

52306 ftR300J75 URRENT DATEURRENT TIMEILE NAMEILS DATE 10-02-19 -11:27:27 2ND42 9/23/91 CULVERT # 2 PERFORMANCE CURVE ___. . - FOR 1 BARREL (S) Q HWE TWE ICH OCR CCE FCE TCE vo I (cfs) Cft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Cft) (ft ) (fps) I 0 711.50 711.50 0.00 2.70 2.70 70S. 80 0.00 0.( •I 8 711. 53 711.50 1.02 2.73 2.73 0.00 0.00 0. £ • 15 711.60 711.50 1.60 2.80 2.80 0.00 0.00 l.{ 1 23 711, 72 711.50 2.08 2.92 2.92 0.00 0.00 2«"£ 1 25 -711.77 711.50 2.22 2.97 2.97 O.OO 0.00 2,"' \ 38 712.10 711.50 2.84 3.30 3.30 0.00 0.00 4.1 1 45 712.35 711.50 3.19 3.55 3.55 0.00 0.00 5.CI 53 712. 63 711.50 3.54 3. S3 3.83 0.00 0.00 5.S 1 60 712.83 711 ,,50 3.91 4 . 03 4.03 0.00 0.00 5.6 1 68 713* 20 711.50 4.31 4.40 4.40 0.00 0.00 7.1 t.5r 1 75 713.60 711.50 4.76 4.80 4,80 0.00 0.00 8.3 J

SUMMARY OF ITERATIVE SOLUTION ERRORS FILE: 2ND42 DATE: 9/23/91 HEAD HEAD TOTAL FLOW % FLOW ELEV(FT) ERROR (FT) FLOW (CFS) ERROR ( CFS ) ERROJ^^ 708.SO 0,00 0 0 0.o^^^^^^vH 711.53 0.00 15 -0 -0.00^^ 711.60 0.00 30 -o -0.01 711. 72 0.00 45 -o -0.01 711.77 0.00 SO -0 -D.01 712.10 0.00 75 -0 -C.01 712. 35 0,00 90 -0 -0.01 - -"- 712, 63 0.00 1-05 —o -0.00 712.83 0.00 120 -0 -0.00 713. 20 0.00 135 0 0.00 713.60 0,00 150 -0 -0.00

52307

MR300176 070 DT' _.= -=-.r--- - • -«*•*•" PIRNIE

APPENDIX G

FRB MAPS

0285-33-2 ...... __:____ , 52308 300177 WETLANDS (APPROX. LOCATION)

NOTE: PORTION OF U.S.G.S.-S-WANV1LLE, PA. 7.5 MINUTE SERIES, 1957, PHOTOREVISEO 1969 8 1975. CONTOUR INTERVAL IS IO'. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS VICINITY MAP .„„----. .MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE .1R3.QO 178. _ .. SCALE': V'= 2000' DESIGN ANALSIS REPORT 'IRNI MARSHALL'S RUN DRAINAGE BOUNDARY MAP U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS———————JULY 199 CD. MAIOQIM PIRNIE

APPENDIX H

HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS (HEC-2 COMPUTER SIMULATIONS) ' ' (on computer disk)

File Name Tppe ' Description lOryr Storm Flows in Marshall's Run: 10YRDNDP,OUT HEC-2 Output Sections 1 to 23, supercritical 10YRDNDB.OUT HEC-2 Output Sections 23 to 47, subcritical 10YRUNDB.OUT HEC-2 Output Sections 50 to 67, subcritical 50-yr Storm Flows in Marshall's Run: 50YRDNDB.OUT HEC-2 Output Sections 13 to 47, subcritical 50YRUNLXOUT HEC-2 Output Sections 50 to 67, subcritical 10YRDNDPJHC2 HEC-2 Data Data files for above output files. 10YRDNDB.HC2 HEC-2 Data 10YRUNDB.HC2 HEC.2 Data 50YRDNDB.HC2 HEC-2 Data 5QYRUND.OUTJICHEC-2 Data

ULTUND.HC27 '. HEC-2 Data " Data me for Marshall's Run maxiinum capacity flows upstream of the North Ditch, ULTDND.HC2 HEC-2~t>ata Datafile for Marshall's Run maximum capacity flows downstream of the North Ditch ULTUND,OUT -HEC-2 Output Output files for maximum capacity flows ULTDND.OUT HEC-2 Output in Marshall's Run.

.NDESIGN6.HC2 - HEC-2 Data" ~ Da^ and ou^ut files for the 10,50, and NDESIGN6.OUT HEC-2 Output 100-year flows in the North Ditch. These HEC-2 files indicate water surface eleva- tions in the North Ditch at different flow events.

0285-33-2 ,, .--"' - = .J.^: ::i.:..-:,-::;..^ ;-:;;:;::.;_-::::::.:...:-....-: 52312

flR300!8 MAIOOLVI PIRNIE

APPENDIX I

MARSHALL'S RUN HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS MAPS

02S5-33-2 --— 52373 flR300!82

_ PIRNIE

APPENDIX J

NORTH DITCH HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS MAPS

0285-33-: o < fc o o: 5 f 3 PIRNIE

__.. APPENDIX K

RIPRAP AND ENDWALL CALCULATIONS

0285-33-2, . _ __....._:_•.. " .-,-"- - . . ": . _ .-,:•- " ... . .'.. - 52318 flR300l86° MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC. PIRNIE

CHKD. BY j DATE ....$.., r / JOB NO. SUBJECT

52319

.!. i - ! ! flK JUU-I07 i i , i . MALCOLM PIRNIE. INC. PIRNIE SY.

SUBJECT

. C f rr ,\ t <5>.-: y ' f ' ~t -" . *]$ ^I'A 0n\

Sou'0 foiv/e1- AM

P^ ..M>^^ " 52320 "e "..... ^^ r^oc^^ > - - -&> = ~s^> MALCOLM PIHNIE, INC. PlRNlt "Y.— ffll_ DATE ._/L_. SHEETMO. J CHKD.BYZ?j3..DATE.,..fc?^?/3/ JOB NO...... SUBJECT

). g-"lr

52321 TM 5-120-3 dissipators or erosion protection works, or for rea- 4-3. Apron sons such as right-of-way restrictions and, occa- sionally, esthetics. a- P*vcd aprons are probably the oldest and simplest form of culvert protection. Protection is b. Failure of the system will take place if there is provided to the local area covered by the apron ami inadequate endwall protection. Normally the end a portion of the kinetic energy of flow is reduced or sections may be damaged first, thus causing flow converted to potential energy because of the hv- obstruction and progressive undercutting during draulic resistance provided by the apron. high runoff periods which will resuit in washout of the structure. For corrugated metal (pipe or arch) _ *• ™ necessity for an apron or stilling basin is culvert installations, use of prefabricated end sec- determined largely by the soil characteristics of the tions may well prove desirable and economically »OJMent open channel and by the anticipated feasible. When a metal culvert outfall projects from maximum velocities and turbulence at the pipe out- an embankment fill at a substantial height above ^ Mo.3t culverts operate under free outfall comli- natural ground, either a cantiievered free outfall **»*• l-«- controlling tailwater is absent, and the. pipe or a pipe downspout will probably be required. discharge possesses kinetic energy in excess of that In either case the need for additional erosion pro- naturally occurring in the waterway. This excess tection requires consideration. kinetic energy often must be dissipated to control damaging erosion. The extent to which protective c. Various designs of energy dissipators, flared works are required for energy dissipation depends transitions and erosion protection for culvert out- On the amount of excess kinetic energy and the falls are discussed in detail in subsequent sections characteristics of the material in the outlet chan- of this manual. See paragraphs 7-1 through 7-4, nel. The soil type will indicate the maximum per-. and paragraph 10-3. missible velocities j_y open .channels. These vel- ocities are given in table-jVl. The velocity may be 4-6. Structural Stability regulated so far as it is feasible to vary the hydrau- -v ' j , •„ . • , * * -*u lic gradient of the or outfall ditch. If. The proposed structure_will be adequate to «rth- exce5sive discharge ve|ocules do __ an aprot stand so.l and hydrostat.c pressures, and in areas ^T^n5g-.3rff 5|~sg TesipTijll bgfe of seasonal freezing the effects of frost action. The ^. re(,uce ^ ve](^ties to ,„„&& falfe structure will be designed to preclude detrimental jg*, ^dittaul precautioni a £toff ^i, will be heave or lateral displacement as the result of frost j(ied t_ ^^ th_ ibiljt of undermining action The most satisfactory method of preventing the structure. Cmmte aprons wiu ^ designed to such damage is to'restrict frost penetration be- ,B_ 3truetura, dam from diffe?ential neath and behind the wall to nonfrost-susceptible movement caU3ed b frost action during no.flow materials. Positive drainage behind the wall » also ^ m _ , ^e _u_ de ^ essential. Bedding requirements will be deter- mined in accordance with procedures outlined in c. Recent studies give generalized results of note 4, table 2-3. Criteria for determining the tests for determining the extent of localized scour depth of backfill behind walls are given in TM anticipated in cohesionless soils downstream of cir- 5-818-1. cular storm-drain outlets as well as the size and ex- tent of a horizontal blanket of protective stone to 4-7 Slooahina prevent localized scour. Investigators have also re- * * ported on the maximum or limiting discharges for The proposed structure will be large enough to which an adequate performance was maintained preclude the partial or complete stoppage of the with various types of energy dissipators. drain by sloughing of the adjacent soil. This can , _ . , f . Drotective works „bes. t •b en accomplishe T • i d by• a straighutt — headwal li* o *r Jbly «>.r \thosi e fiel« d, 5installation " . n *•s wherP u eP condition«i^ s of f wmgwalls. Typical erosion problems result from headw-ater taiiwater and discharges are such that uncontrolled local inflow around the endwalls. The neaawater, taiiwater and discharges are sucn tnat recommended preventive for this type of failure is "cessive scour is not anticipated and where the the construction of a berm behind tnTendwall (out- -«°7 eiabora" anf.f °jB"»al/ U3ed *""& ,df fall headwall) to intercept local inflow and direct it JP*"! « «« '"?** Tefts WeJ^ ± h J properly to protected outlets such as field inlets determine the maximum values of the discharge and paved or sodded chutes that will conduct the Parameters considered satisfact^for various water into the outfall channel. The proper use of conditions of tailwater and flared outlet transitions. £olid sodding will often provide adequate headwall e. Test results of these simple outlet transitions md channel protection. with the apron at the same elevation as the culvert 4-a "* 52322 ~" - AR300I90 TM 5-420-3 invert are shown in M(WP*»JS*he maximum dis- 0.5D,, was used to classify satisfactory conditions. charge parameter for11 ^jffirtemulvert length of transition and tailwater can be calculated by the /. Figure 4-3 indicates that recessing, the apron following equation and providing an end sill at the downstream end did not significantly improve energy dissipation or Q TW / ^ N increase the applicable maximum value of the dis- —JI-—— =,1.60 ——— (-j^Q.4CD(./TW)w charge parameter, 'Q/D,,W. The limiting values of 0 " the discharge parameter for various outlet transi- tions and tailwater elevations are listed in table Similarly, the length of transition for a given situa- * tion can be selected by the interrelations shown in « , ., „ ., Figure 4-2, which is calculated by the following ) * Numerous endwall failures have occurred as a equation / resu" °* improper consideration of the relative * elevation of the apron and outfall channel. If prac- x ticable, the apron elevation will be selected to :n- 030 f P" ^ / Q ^ m I sure that sufficient depth of backwater occurs I TW / \ Dnw/ 2.5(TW/D«) f Over the apron during design flow conditions to ^^ " 1+*^^ prevent undesirable erosion, otherwise positive •n '*% , ^^ i** tm r* in i ^ erosion protection measures will be required. Variables are defined in appendix C and figure 4-1 Newly excavated channels erode slightly during shows that this type of protection is satisfactory the aging process, and proper allowance for this only for limited values of Q/DBM and TW/D,,. Arbi- action must be included in establishing the apron trary extent of scour depth equal to or less than elevation.

Table i-l. Limiting Valuet ofQID6ft

L/D. K/D. TW/D. Q/D. M .

3 0 0.25 0.88 3 0 0.5 1.78 3 0 1.00 2.56 3 0.25 0,25 1.28 3 0.25 0.50 1.78 , 3 0.25 LOO 2.56 3 0.50- 0.25 1.38 3 0.50 0.50 2.00 3 0.50 1.00 2.56 5 0 0.25 1.20 5 0 0.50 . 2,40 5 0 1.00 3.20 5 0.25 0.25 L5S 5 0.25 0.50 2.78 5 0.25 1.00 3.47 5 0.50 0.25 1.47 5 0.50 0.50 2.77 5 0.50 LOO 3.46 3 0 0.25 1.68 g 0 0.50 2.40 8 0 1.00 3.75 8 . — 0-25 0,25 2.17 8 0.25 0,50 52323 3.3s 8 0.25 1.00 4.44 8 0.50 0.25 2.46 8 0.50 0.50 3.85 3 0,50 1.00 4.55 * ft R 300 19 I *"* TM s-aao-3

Figure J>-^. Length offlartd outttt tnmitioH relative to discharge, tailwottr, and conduit *izt...... 4-5 flR300l-92 MALCOLM P,RN,E, ,NC.

PIRNIE SY....^i^...... ,DATE...^//l.L SHEETNO,.....L.OF CHKD. BY J/.£;4)ATE .....L^..t>./ JOB NO. ,....1A$£: • , SUBJECT ...£i£..^2..^.£.~-.^^

vT ' I ""-

22?- V

A.

* i.^y vT

V

—AH3UGil ^3 J,^._ „;.,,_/)__ i I .....!..... MALCOLM MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC. PIRNIE 8Y...... ,.~....™.^.DATE ...... ———— SHEET NO. CHKD. BY ...... ,__ DATE ...... ———— JOB NO.... SUBJECT ...... ——,..„.—^..^

*J±A TM 5-120-3

Dissipators

d50 = °'35'

50 » Stone Diameter (50% Size) D - Depth of Flow Average Velocity in

Figurt to-9. ecomwtHtt pnp nu». 52327

10-9 AR300I95 . MALCOL-M ^PIRNIE , INC. . . BY ...... S\..^..... DATE .....L»|#p. / SHEET NO...... L... OF......

CHKD. BY .E . JOB NO...... ; SUBJECT i

t/ /O.

p. jo

F" ^

1

X loiv \^ i •• "TTTC MALCOLM MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC. BY ...^^A..._._™ DATE .£?/ife/.Z/ . SHEET NO. ..":_.„ OF .....jife...... CHKD.BY.Jl^OATE...A/.5/a// JOBNO.. SUBJECT ....„, __„„.„.„._,....______!.„„„__.

dAl

3. " t UK .^.i

A) or

1RI3QQII97 TM 5-820-:

•H 0) W -I CUP 3 0) ion O /r (0 Q) « l-i 5 •-* O JJ O woo o Si U-| m O O C) •O "' U M h ui i- ' sel. g Frc I sho I ripi : dra : and $ are ; stra : and ? and !>• * Froi dete. dete scou hole; The toth or 1. use ( in ar*

**» H in o

;, .,..„ -....• . .".. ,,..,. .".." " .,, ."..,..-.. _,r_",. ,.. . . ." , . ' .52330 10-10 AR300I98 MA1COLM PIRNHE

APPENDIX L

PABER DAM REVIEW CRITERIA

0285-33-2 . ... - ,..__———.-., . . _.-__,_ ... ,..- -- .-,__..:_...... 52331 AR3QOI99 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES Post Office Box 8554 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105-8554 September 17, 1991 717-541-7902

Mr. Steve Miller Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. P.O. Box 1938 Buffalo, N'Y 14127 Re: DER File No. D 25-47 Dear Mr. Miller: Reference is made to information recently referred to this office by Naney Snyder of the Department's Northwest Regional Office concerning the proposed construction of a storm water detention dam in conjunction with the Millcreek Superfund Site. The dam is.to be located across Marshall Run in Millcreek Township, Erie County. Although Federal regulations do not require state permits to be issued for work involved at a Superfund clean up site, the design is required to meet all design criteria that would normally apply. This office will conduct a standard review of the proposed design and request comments from other involved State and Federal agencies. Upon completion of our technical review we will forward any comments directly to you. Sincerely yours,

Dennis R. Dickey, P.E. v. Chief, Project Review and Evaluation Section Division of Dam Safety Enclosures: Dam Applications (2) Checklist Environmental Assessment

52332

Recycled Paper .'iR.100200 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES FIELD OPERATIONS - WASTE MANAGEMENT 1012 Water Street •--•••' ~ Meadvllle, Pennsylvania 16335 -—-..:-. Telephone: A. C. 814/332-6848 November 7, 1991 Mill creek Superfund Site Erie County Mr. Anthony Roller (3HW21) Remedial Project Manager U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III 841 Chestnut Building Philadelphia, PA 19107 Dear Mr. Koller: The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PA DER) has completed Us review of the portions of the Mlllcreek Superfund Site Construction and Flood Retention Basin (FRB) Design Report that would be, regulated by the Pennsylvania Dam Safety & Encroachments Act. The following comment 1s a State Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement (ARAR): The Department's Chapter 105 Rules & Regulations would require a minimum design storm of 100-year return period for a dam with this classification. The dam may be able to safely pass the 100-year storm, but the Information submitted does not demonstrate this. No calculations are shown for the 100-year flood. Since the dam Is being built as a flood retention basin, the probable downstream hazard potential classification Is 2. The following comments are not State ARARs but should be considered in the FRB design: 1 * There Is a discrepancy in the Invert of this 2.5/ft. by 4.5/ft. low-level outlet. It Is given as 709.5 In Table 2 on Page 15 of the 100% Submittal Design Analysis Report and Is shown as 709.5 on the "FRB CONTROL STRUCTURE PLAN" on Sheet C-16, but 709.0 1s used 1n the routing (See HEC-1 Input, line 171). It 1s acknowledged that the effect of this discrepancy on the routing would be negligible. The degradation of filter material versus the specified perforation of the pipe Is questionable according to U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) guidelines. The following criteria are not met: o D85f/Max. pipe opening > 2 (USBR, 1987) 52333 D50f/Slot width > 1.2 (USACOE, 1986)

flR30020l -2-

The design of the geotextile selected for the toe drain should be based on the embankment fill material properties regardless of source. A fine grained soil should be specified for structural backfill along the FRB control structure. If you have any questions, please contact me at this office. Sincerely,

Nancy L._3nyder Project Manager Hazardous Sites Cleanup Program Northwest Region NLS/sn cc: Mr. Japp Mr. Millers- Mr. Leaver Mr. German

52334

AR300202 SR-DWM-12: Rev. 4W Recycled Pacer C**3 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA recycled raper i__rf DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES APPLICATION FOR DAM PERMIT ...... , 19 ..... In compliance with the provisions of the Act of November 26, 1978, P.L 1375, as amended (32 P.S. §693.1 et_seq.) known as the "Dam Safety and Encroachments Apt"; Act of October A-, 1978, P.L. S51 (32 P.S. 5679.101 etseq..}, known as the "Flood Plain Management Act"; and the Administrative Code, Act of April 9, 1929, P.L. 177, as amended, which empowers the Department of Environmental Resources to exercise certain powers and perform certain duties by law vested in and imposed upon the Water Supply Commission of Pennsylvania^ and the Water and Power Resources Board. ( ._ .-.•••-' .-...--:,.

(Applicant}

hereby makes application for the consent_qr_permit of the Department of Enyirgnmental Resources to ^construct, Zrepair,' .^modify, Cenlarge, Coperate and maintain, Hi breach, !3abandon ......

(State the. name of-the dam or reservoir if known)

in, along, or across ...... „..,„„,.. ("State name of stream or other .) at a point (Give location, by distance from mouth of stream, county, township, or municipal boundary; also give city, town or township and county in which located.)

or the purpose of,...... 4...™..—,,..._..;...„_„...... ,...... *...... „.,..... (State fully the purpose, necessity, and description of the dam.)

in accordance_with the complete maps,_plans, profiles, and specifications filed with this application and made a part hereof.

__ _ MUST 0E COMPLETED BY APPUCANT

Drainage Area ______.acres or square miles Maximum Depth to Top of Dam ______feet

Surface Area: at normal pool ______acres. ... ------—-Storage Volume: at normal pool ______acre-feet at top of dam ______.acres _ at top of dam ______acre-feet Size and Hazard Classification ____ .______. ____,_,„._„„,==£=.,,. ... Justification for Hazard Classification ______,______i______

FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY Application Fee______. .„„„.,.. _. -=„.„_,_.-,— .-^-Application No. Check No. -- ^ , . ™,,T.; -,., ,^,. .-n-.-;..--,^i». , —- -"-•—------Date Received ^^mmoun< t ______:______....,„ ,-„.,.,..„i-_..—.~.—».-- - •• - -,-»™-r- - - Municipal Notification Wck Date ______.,.._._...„,„„,__.-. _,__^_J...... , -.-, —County Notification _ r

{Continued on other aide) fi R 3 0 0 2 0 3 ER-DWM-12: Rov. 4/91 iWwUrf Da COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HCCyciea Paper DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES APPLICATION FOR DAM PERMIT ...... , 191 In compliance with the provisions of the Act of November 26, 1978, P.L. 137'5, as amended (32 P.S. §693.1'et seg.) known as the "Dam Safety and Encroachments Act"; Act of October 4, 1978, P.L. 851 (32 P.S, §679.101 etseq..), known as the "Flood Plain Management Act"; and the Administrative Code, Act of April 9, 1929, P.L..177,

(Applicant) hereby makes application^for the consent or permit of the Department of Environmental Resources to I] construct,'H repair, Zmodify, ^enlarge, !U operate and maintain, Cbreach, !j abandon ...... f,^..,.,...... „:_--«.,...,

(State the name of the dam or reservoir if known! in, along, or across ...... _„.„.„....„....„..„..,,..„..,...... ,..-...„,...... ,.,.. (State name of stream or other body of water.) at a point ...... ,..„.„.„._....._„..„...... „...... _...^ iGh/e location, by distance from mouth of stream, county, township, or municipal boundary; also give city, town or townshiq and county in which located.)

for the purpose of ,,...... ^.^~...... „.„..„„!.,...... „.„.„„..„.,...„ (State fully the purpose, necessity, and description of the dam.

in accordance with the complete maps, plans, profiles, and specifications filed with this application and made a part hereof.

MUST BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT

Drainage Aroa ______, acres or square miles Maximum Depth to Top of Dam ______feat

Surface Area: at normal pooi ______acres Storage Volume: at normal pool ______! at top of dam •______acres ' at top of dam ______acre-feet Size and Hazard Classification ______. _ + _....„. _...._.. '. . _ ...... Justification for Hazard Classification ______:

FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY Application Fee ______... Application No. Check No. ______.-,.-. . , . . Date Received Amount ______^._ . . . . . Municipal Notification Check Date ______= . __, County Notification _

(Continued on other side) 5R3Q020U APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR DAM PERMIT Permit application correctly signed, sealed and witnessed, with corporate "or municipal seals in accordance with Section 105,13. ....-- Application fee in accordance with Section 105.13(b). Evidence.of municipal and county notification. (See reverse side) The location, type, size, height, and purpose of the proposed dam and reservoir and appurtenant works. . ~ The storage capacities and reservoir surface areas for normal pool and maximum high water.' The size and hazard classification of the dam in accordance with Section 105.91 and justification for hazard classification. Proof of title or.adequate flowage easements for all land area below the top of the dam elevation that is subject to inundation. Data concerning subsoil and rock foundation conditions and the physical properties of the materials entering into the construction of the dam in accordance with Section 105.81(c). Design drawings, technical construction specifications and design report in sufficient detail that a determination of the adequacy of the proposed facility can be made. Registered professional engineer's seal and certification affixed to all plans, specifications and design reports accompanying the application in accordance with- Section lQ5.13(h). An Erosion and Sedimentation Pollution Control Plan and a copy of a letter of approval from the appropriate County Conservation District(s). Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses. The method and schedule of operation of the dam, including an emergency warning system in accordance with Section 105.134. Proof of financial responsibility in accordance with Section 105.20. An environmental assessment in accordance with Section 105-15. Information concerning the chemical content, viscosity, and other pertinent physical characteristi\ c of fluids or semi-fluids other than water. A plan for monitoring performance of the dam in accordance with Section 105.81(a)(5). The proposed time for commencement and anticipated completion of construction. . 52337 Reports of the most recent inspection of existing dams. A letter from the municipality indicating that the project is consistent with their floodplain and stormwater management programs. AR300205 ' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 105.15 GUIDELINES FOR PREPARATION

The following guidelines are intended to provide direction in the fulfillment of the-environ- mental assessment criteria in section 105.15 of the Departments Chapter 105 Rules and Regulations, 25 Pa. Code Chapter 105, 32 P.S. Section 693.1. Each application for construction of the following categories of activities shall include an environmental assessment: (1) Any dam or reservoir for the storage of water of size classification A or B or hazard classification 1 as defined in §105.91 (relating to classifications of dams and reservoirs). (2) Any dam or reservoir for the storage of fluids or semifluids other than water, the escape of which may result in air, water, or land pollution or may result in danger to persons or property. (3) Any dam, bridge, culvert, stream crossing, stream enclosure, dike, levee, flood wall, or stream relocation located in, along, or across a stream identified as a candidate for or included in the Federal or State wild and scenic systems. (4) Any stream enclosure, stream relocation, or any other activity or facility which the Department determines may have a significant impact on the environment. The criteria outlined on the following pages are intended to serve as a guide in identifying any adverse environmental impacts which may occur as the result of the project. Upon review of the assessment, the Department may require the submission of additional data pertaining to any of the information provided. The Department may further require the submission of additional information regarding the project. Included are alternatives to the proposed action including alternative locations, routings or designs to avoid or reduce any significant adverse environmental impacts. Furthermore, information concerning any actions that may be taken through design, location or operation of the proposed structure or other activities to mitigate any unavoidable signif- icant environmental impacts which would occur as the result of the project may also be required. The Department reserves the right to request additional analysis of any one or mope of the alternatives submitted, and to require further assessment of additional alternatives which it deems necessary. For the purposes of these guidelines and this chapter, any proposed activity which reduces, degrades, eliminates or stresses any of the functions, values or uses as listed in the following categories shall be deemed to constitute a significant adverse environmental impact. Each application for a permit under this chapter that requires an environmental assessment must contain a narrative addressing the impacts of the proposed activity on the following factors:

52338

SR30Q206 (b) Will the project alter stream flow in the primary stream or receiving stream? (c) Will the project have an affect on upstream or downstream water users? (d) Is the stream, identified as a candidate for, or included in the Federal or State • wild or scenic river system? (e) Is the stream identified as, or known to be a naturally reproducing wild trout stream? (f) Is the stream classified as a stocked or stockable trout stream by the Pa. Fish Commission? Cg) Is the_stream classified as high quality or exceptional value, or is it located in a watershed classified as such? Identify and explain all alternatives which were considered to avoid or reduce adverse impacts to any of the functions, values or uses identified above, and why each of those alternatives were considered feasible or infeasible. Identify and explain any actions taken through operation, location or design to mitigate any of the adverse effects to any of the functions, values or uses as identified above.

3. Other relevant significant environmental factors. Identify any impacts which will occur as a result of the project on each of the following environmental factors. Explain fully each' answer, and provide any supporting documen- tation necessary. (a) Federal and State Forests (b) Parks (c) Recreation, recreation areas (d) Prime Farmlands ...__. _ ..:...... -—- (e) Sites, areas or structures of historic, cultural or archaeological significance, including those having federal, state or local designation. (f) Threatened and endangered plant, animal and other species. (g) Sites listed on the National Registry of Natural Landmarks. (h) Public or private water supplies, supply intakes or reservoirs. (i) Coastal Zone Management Program area; is the project within the Coastal Zone, , and what impact, if any, will the project have upon the coastal resources? r 52339 ,.,_.-3- .. ._ . .=,_._,_ ....

r^"^ AR300207 Recycled Paper jjjpjjf MAUDOIM PIRNIE

APPENDIX M

STRUCTURAL DESIGN CALCULATIONS

52340 0285-33-2 - - / flR300208 •^MJ^A^FUTft - i PIRNIt BV...£P^ DATE ...%,..... SHEETNO....J...... OP. CHKD. BY ..AZL.. DATE .....t/.?./..... JOB NO.,. J SUBJECT

"^——————————!—————i .« f *T j i n ^

52341

A R 3(10209 MALCOLM MALCOLM P1RNIE, INC. BY ...R£~...... DATE a(3&L... SHEET NO. ..1...... OF __.„..„__ CHKD. BY ..A-fc. DATE .-.jU.flL... JOB NO...... ,...... ,.....,„,„.,„...„«. SUBJECT ,.J4lU.6.^.

1*0" 7

. ——— ,^ . ... . -i\.= 4*"

Pp

AT

____^j1 - . _-:. - ,4 +- -

-'Q -j. .- .,...._._? 3.3? if* ^ l^ -JH T ., <0 - .\S-T .Q%_ Cft Cow^t i F! "•*• /r"

52342 .flRSOQZJO ..._, MAILULM -ALGOL-PmN,,., me. PIRNIE Br..m..._^DATE.j?L. SHEETN0...... QF ...... ;....„ CHKD. BY .Afc- DATE ....1/3.!...... JOB NO. .,...... ,...„._„„„__. SUBJECT ...Mj.^£^.....<^^^

o « & .37 .07 o >.4") -7,3-7

£24 -

^ ,5(3.3*1)t

221

.J -

|2--. . SM-& w 3 cov£"^ OM TD? c "Z-1*. ow -3TM

AR3Q02 MALCOLM MALCOLM >,RN,C. ,NC.

PIRN It BV ™^———"——" DATE -4&/1'™ SHEET NO...!..... OF CHKD. BY ..,t4£L. DATE ....ilJfLl™. . JOB NO. .„.„.„„...... SUBJECT

,31

60r3..

+• f = ^,.

to-

Wflyc- I.Wt ,

] c MAiJUULM "ALCOLM P"""E' INC- PIRNIE ™.J££————0*n CHKD.BY..Ali:.OATE.-tZ.|3Ll™. JOB NO. SUBJECT .....l

H .5-0

^

ARJ002I3 MALDOLVl MALCOLM P,HH,e.,HC.

PIRNIE BY...fc^...... DATE..7(.?.L... SHEETNO.JL..OF...... CHKD. BY ..a... DATE ...Z.pl,L.... JOB NO...... SUBJECT ...^^,C^^^...7...,..^W^t.....^...,.VV^^,..

i!a"

\

52346

r/fsu= x-r

AR3002IU ,, lRNIt ' BY,.E^...,™.DATE.4ifA/--- SHEETN0....2.....0F ^'™ i ji _ (/•> i CHKDSUBJEC. BTY „.<&&:., DATE .....3,/;lL... JOB NO...... „...... „

. * . (So

f~- - -. •... • .p,

•-3^ PSF

^ - *,. ( ,-\ / _ / l ^-\*V NX171 G ""

52347 MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC.

BY ..&$&...... ,....„ DATE . j(&[f!L.., SHEET NO. JL... OF ...... CHKD. BY ..... DATE ...... Xp..!.. JOB NO...... „....'...... »„.... SUBJECT .../±J^fa^j£..^^

d

-03

« #£?#- &<*ffw

4 JVJ/\UJULM 1ALCOUM PIRNIE. IHC.

PIR^JIE BY..jgS£^_OATEjJffl[5l... SHEETNO. ..!„... OF,..„,„,..,..„.„...„..

CHKD.BY..n.t.-DATE.™.7j!.i.l...... JO0NO...... _.„..„„...... _„„.._...... SUBJECT

V 4l\

52349

Liii

COMC. -i ^

4',K

\H£tS"

AR3002I7 MALCOLM MALCOLM PIRNIE •Y...S^^...... OATE™7.(jlXffl.... SHEET NO. .1?...... OF...... CHKD. 8Y .jSJfc. DATE ...343.1. JOB NO. SUBJECT . * J - — - *- n -

!/so^ et.

£, y$ z'<.

trf I W. ' to'ft."

52350

AR300218 MAULJULM MALCOLM P1RHIE' 1NC" i PIRNIE »Y....tek™™OATB.2(Al|a..... SHEETNO....iLMOF...... __ CH»CD. BY -At..! DATE JIJ..1.L...... JOB NO...... __ .__„„>. SUBJECT -.

JNJC),

-X

v. p,

Coo)

A R 3.002 I 9 MALCOLM PimHE. ,NC. PIRNIE BY™£&..__DATE .jidlL.. SHEET NO. iL-..OF__ CHKD. BY .At.. DATE.Jj /ii—... JOB NO...... ,...... ___ SUBJECT ...llL^.££6£..:^

. 1.76, (u.-s") , i-a> t-.u iVV'.. "_. ' ^z""* J4T

8.44 "/'

. c - f.

52352 PJRISJIE BY.._Me___.DATE .-ak(&.. SHEETNO..j.3™OF, • CHKD.BY_ji.fe....DATE.™?J:iL..... JOB NO. _____.....-. SUBJECT «.

V(AH 4 /I

i u

^^^t'^.- .u- • 'ft.'o11.

/z*

52353 MAUOOLM MALCOLM PUNIC. INC. BY.J^...._....DATE. CHKD. BY -jSlfi-.... DATE ._3.p.U.... JOB NO. SUBJECT ~.M^&^je..,;:,..;.I:.§.L....

see

4-

o .80 .20 .10 .40 O • - - — .20

s /Vl/YUUULM

PlRNIt CHKD. BY .AB..... DATE ..«— «. JOB NO SUBJECT

V r T T r T t T ,.

. MlM

e

J^A £3.S_. 3S&. _r_Jto1'7 i^

f&

52355

^-n n p 9 3 WAtCOLM P1MNIE, INC.

BY.j£fc.,.__.DATE3il5:|a.L.. SHEETNO...&.....OF. CHKD. BY .At- DATE ._2|.fU...... JOB NO...... SUBJECT ..Mi^.fe^fefe...r...... f^....,,.$I.^CTH^™.™..M.

is"

- ee. .

52356

flR30022i4 PIRNIE

APPENDIX N

MISCELLANEOUS DESIGN CALCULATIONS

0285-33-2

M3Q0225 -'•• ! •• . I ... H !'.! .Ll...... U J-J MALCOLM MALCOLM PINNIE, INC. BY. -... DATE ....'4^49. t SHEET NO. ..../...... OF .....S. JOB NO. SUBJECT ....^1^

/ !^ frofefr** skdjuJ ^hti. tu 4. t &J2' attkw^ "teJht &-s //'/i / • 0 n

b, AvJfc-^

:— f\-t^jU J fat*-* ^ * /. ; 0 r. . .-. ;•i , . : ^ o -h>v aft .6. fi± ^LUsS

)

52359

AR300227 MALCOLM MALCOLM P,,N,E. ,NC

P I RN IE BV ""—— *•*•""" DATE -l"(/^P" SHEET NO. ...Z«.. OF .... JL CHKD. BY Jfefe,.. DATE JJ3L JOB NO. SUBJECT

u ^ ^ufci'^-fW ^1 80

Ll* -/L-—/ -^ '

J ( */fU Oft )

52360

ftR 30 0 2 2 8 MALOOIM «ALCOL< TM P,HHIE.1H^ C _ BBY.JL3.L^...DATEJJ.Y •—^-L^-DATE ---£ - SHEET N0- "•*-" OF CHKD. BY .?^.... DATE . JJ/ * r L f SUBJECT ^JS&UMMS^

M^O .'

175

i;

52361

flR300229 MALCOLM

PIRNIE BY.....li^.DATE..!.(f^/.. SHEETN0..1...... 0F CHKD. BY JtZZJ*. DATE ..U^.k^.TLf.. JOB NO. r SUBJECT

4 r.vinu) oJ? w . TP A/1 PU

to

3

A - . »> i" /o'w* /

* f

AR300230*ilnonnoAn *5"=^ ! fr c "fo /VlAIJUUIJV4. 4 A I _TTO| ik 4 MALCOLc, M PIRNIE. INC.i L if PIRNJIF BY..,.....&^...... DATEJ././r^/l/ SHEETNO...*L.~OF ...... „„. 1 II\J vIL -- . -----L L* s ?&i" 2"> CHKD. BY .ZVM, DATE ..'.//jWi/O./ JOB NO. ..Q.KS^...'.^^.J SUBJECT .™..li«lfe.^&£a....£k|£.jl

52363 AR3.Q023I I T PIRNI|TTUL*^V-a_EJ Y I CHKD. BY ,....„_.. DATE .„..„. J...... JOB NO. SUBJECT .^^^M^^.....Q^.....^E^.^i^...

(3 /SV-gQ 7/4 j .. 7/4,

.

{- ^ 5 'f^n^^/^— TIP T^rt^r^^*^ r . ; 52364 flR300232 PIRNIE CHKDB . BY ...... DATE ...... JOB NO SUBJECT ....M^k^£VL.^

6 i?^5oee^ /Of^g f 0^6*5 « "7/<:,'?7-'7/?,S _-54fe%

S.f f^a^c^ T

'- -1, 81 '/» fl

i.p o ". "7/5, 8 1 + ^> 8 i 7K,

14.1-L -/ __

52365

ftR3QT)233 DATE .1&JU./34 SHEET NO. . JL™ OF ..J.!L....,;..,.,,,, -^?

SUBJECT .../S^^I*¥.~5 ^

t,

-2- , /

1? V C*AJ^ < c f ^ ~ ife n ^ £u ^x. p u-/o i^ c( So ^ ^;:^ v ' iAOc -f^v^^a. ~M. tt u ' f-

9 ^Cut ra^- ^ > e. co^v 5 e. ,

'£Vl £^0

-/ MALCOLM PtNNlE. INC. TQQ ^. ,- PrllYI^ilI D WIF L BY •*••*•*"&=••--•* • DATE J£f .fU...... SHEET NO. ..£Z~ OF -™I.?T CHKD.BY ™'3>.. DATE ity..*^^, JOB NO. SUBJECT ......

*Vi t G

& \s-t- o h /j Ct-^£- $\ I^MjlS*Mx^v** ?*? r&*u. l&r fyc*4€v/d/ d>\ 4^>n eft ' ct.

IS- <*•*&**- -faj- CjfrU+U, V7i ^ A>£ 5tt ^ r oft £$'<

ft*, y r<- 1 ^v-^wt JF rcv^e. / r-*-- ^ ^ rt^-S C/) fb^rtl Vfe - , *** a ^tc^-

t* I / AI - .^ ' -f- f / O>Q fu> c d i ^tc-H c^ i c*Jj fa to^ <^ co t a € "3 52367

3R300235 (Vl/AI t i JI JV1 "UM.UULH futmc, INC. PIRNIE B ..LQ/L/IC. CHKD. BY .!^ DATE ..E?jf l$L JOB NO. V SUBJECT ...... __.—-„

77+- "

,A

0 - p.. -- - J. *-

6. ?s' £t ^

; 3

o x- o

;^^ c^b F*fc-<& --p

flR3Q0236 /VIAIJUUL\4 AI /"Y~y 44M MALCOLSTQSMJ PIRNIE, INC. .,-, is A PIRNIE >vJ£(L___OATl.&/U^.. SHEETNO.-4.....0F CHKD. BY JKL~.. DATE M..74^... SUBJECT ......

y 3 *. " A. ^(o

t,

71 /

/

"(,/""

/? 52369 flRi00237 MALCOLM PIRNIC. INC.

JOB NO. v i/ SUBJECT ...... _

77"° ' <^3 'V> A/ (f/,

' ~" J a f \

C <

(I 1

fa,

52370

flR300238 ^flilfeBSKr.11.- - - — ! — - ——— "-STSai^^aatgriiBEBa:-

66 Designing wtth Geotoxtlt« Chap. 2 2.3 DESIGNING FOR SEPARATION 2.3.1 Overview of Applications Specific application areas for geotextiles being used in the separation function were given in Section 1.2.3. There are indeed many specific uses, and one could say in a gen- eral sense that geotextiles always serve a separation function. Indeed, if they do not serve this function1, the other, usually primary, function will not be served properly. This should not give the impression that geotextiles as separators always play a secondary role. Many situations call for separation only, and in such cases the fabrics do indeed serve a noble function. Perhaps the target application which can best illustrate the use of geotextiles as separators is its placement between reasonably firm soils below it and stone base course, aggregate, or ballast above it. We say "reasonably firm" because it is assumed that the subgrade deflection is not sufficient to mobilize significant tensile stress in the fabric. (The application of geotextiles in unpaved roads on soft soils wherein membrane-type reinforcement is developed is treated in Section 2.4.1.) Thus for the separation function the fabric has only to be placed on the site and the stone dumped, spread, and com- pacted above it. A number of scenarios can be developed showing what required fabric diar properties are required for a given situation. 2.3.2 Burst Resistance Consider a geotextile on a soil subgrade with stone of average particle diameter (

k fs. P RA. i&iOtHXXf 0ITH

AR300239 Sec, 2.3 Designing for Separation 67

^f^—~ Tire inf latton — il•^""^ pressure, p !|UI

Figure 2.13 Geotextile being forced up into voids of stone base by traffic tire loads, diameter. Thus the equation above can be rewritten as follows: ' ' (inlb/in.2) t This equation has been solved for a number of pressure values (from 50 io 150 Ib/in. ) and for a number of stone aggregate sizes (from 0.5 to 12 in.) as shown in Figure 2.14. The following example illustrates the use of the curve in a design manner. Example: Given a 100-lb/b.1 truck tire inflation pressure on a uniformly graded stone base course consisting of 3-in. maximum-size stone. What is the required burst strength of the geotextile assuming a factor of safety of 3.0? Solution: Using the approximate relationship of p' = 0.75p, gives p' = 75 lb/in.J. Now from the intersection of the 75 Ib/in.2 tire inflation and 3-in. aggregate size curve, one obtains a burst pressure of 75 Ib/in.1. For a factor of safety of 3.0, the required burst pres- sure is 225 Ib/in.2. Geotextile manufacturer's literature must be consulted to compare this to the actual value. Note that the example assumes uniformly sized stone. With well-graded stone the ag- gregate voids become much smaller and the required burst pressure becomes proportion- ately reduced. 2.3.3 Tensile Strength Requirement Continuing the general problem just addressed, there is another action also acting on the fabric at the same time as a tendency to burst. This is one of tensile stress being mobi- lized by in-plane deformation. The geotextile is locked into position by the aggregate above it and the soil below it. As an upper piece of aggregate is forced between two lower pieces (these being adjacent to the fabric), a lateral, or in-plane, stress will be imposed. See Figure 2. 15, where an analogy to the grab tension test can readily be visu- alized. Here one can estimate the maximum strain that the fabric will undergo as the

52372

AR3002UO 3 8/I-L"

68 Designing with Geotextiles Chap. 2 See: pe 600 - he

Note Thus page them stone

wher

Toil:

75 100 125 150 Flfure 2.14 Design guide for burst Pressure n geowxtile/none bt» interface (Ib/in?) anilysis of geottxtile used in a separation (a 0.75 lire inflation pressure) function.

Stone bait count >^v xxxxxxxxxxTjrxxxxxxxxxxlCJtxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx EO '•'•'' H'. - "Soil subgradt.'. • •-". i-*

(a) Althc must of at Fifure 2.15 Geotewife being subjected to fr tensile (jrab) stress u surface pressure is applied and stone base tends to spread tilep laterally, (a) Actual situation; (b) analogous areii (b) grab tension lest cally

52373 ;-»"-- -F *

Sec. 2.3 Designing for Separation 69 upper stone wedges itself down to the level of the fabric. Using the. dimensions shown (where S ~- d/2), the strain can be calculated:

iw - (2.19)

= 75% - ' . Note that the assumptions above result in a strain that is independent of particle size. Thus the strain in the fabric could be as high as 75%, assuming no stone-to-fabric slip- page of the two stones being wedged aside as the upper stone forces its way between them. Now the tensile force being, mobilized is related1 to the pressure exerting on the stone as follows [31]: ' .r = _9'(e)2 . ' (2.20) where T = mobilized tensile force p' = pressure _e-—strain of the geotextile between contact jwints To illustrate the design procedure of the situation above, the following example is given. Example: Given a 100-lb/in.1 truck tire inflation pressure on a stone base course of "3-in. maximum size with a geotextile beneath it. Calculate the maximum grab tensile stress on the geotextile assuming that no slippage between the fabric and stone will occur. Since this is a very conservative assumption, a factor"of safety of 2~.0~is adequate. Solution: As shown, the strain in the fabric will be 75% and using p' - 0.75p,, '

. =(0.75) (100) (0.75)2 ' j-^-i = 421b and for FS - 2.0,

For the problem chosen with a 3-in.-diameter stone size, the "grip" on the fabric will be in the center third, or approximately 1 in., which is exactly the dimensions of the grab test itself (recall Section 2.1.3.2). Thus one needs a fabric of grab strength 84 Ib or greater. If smaller stone had been used and the "grip" on the fabric was less than I in., the required grab strength would have had to be proportionately larger. Conversely, with larger stone there is • reduction in required grab strength. 2.3.4 Puncture (Tear) Resistance Although not only related to the separation function, the geotextile during its placement usf'survive the installation process. Indeed, fabric survivability is critical in all types of applications; without it, the best of designs are futile. In this regard, sharp stones, tree stumps, roots, miscellaneous debris, and so on, on the ground beneath the geotex- tile present a problem for puncturing through the fabric after stone base and traffic loads are imposed above it. The design method suggested for this situation is shown schemati- cally in Figure 2.16. For these conditions, the vertical force exerted on the geotextile

i^i*i !-r- ?! : 52374 *

»pi-««-Mw««*fcr^: •_- A MO 0,21*"2 L'.<&.^ ^^^"^T-- 70 Designing wtth Gtotcxtflcs Chap. 2 r s*c.I

Figure 2.16 Visualization of a stone puncturing a geotextile as pressure is applied from above. (which is gradually tightening around the object) is as follows: where F^ = total vertical force imposed on the fibers adjacent to the puncture dh =2 average diameter of the hole, where 4.(maximum) = d, da = average diameter of the aggregate (or stump, etc.) hh = propagation height (*=

52375 Sec. 2.3 Designing for Separation 71

This value of 7^ can be compared to the puncture test (if the object is blunt, causing puncture) or "to the tear test (if the object is sharp, causing tear). Both types of tests were described in Section 2.1.3. Using some assumptions (which can be modified as described) a design guide can be developed as shown in Figure 2.17. It was developed on the basis that the geotextile had ah initial opening size of 0.06 mm (= 0JDD236 in".)"arid the protruding stones had a sphericity of 0.4. Thus ,%_ = (Q.W236ird,)p'(l - 0.4) = Q.W445dap' Example: What is the required puncture resistance of a woven geotextile of AOS = No. 30 •

16 - 24-in. Stone size (average size)

14 -

Pressure on gotttxtiJt lib/in3) (a 0.75 tire inflation pressure} Finn 2.17 Typical puncture resistance design guide. 72 Designing wtth Geotexttles Chap. 4

sieve, on a 12-in. rock of sphericity 0.32? Trucks with tire inflation pressure of 135 Ib/in. * will be on the stone base above the fabric. Use FS = 2.0. Solution: Using the stress on the fabric of p' = 0.75p,, p' = 0.75(135) = 101 Ib/in.2 and a No. 30 sieve = 0.0232-in. openings,

- 7r(0.0232) (12) (101)0.0 - 0.32) = 60 Ib T^ = 60(2.0) = 120 Ib This value is now to be compared to the puncture strength of the candidate geotextile. U should be noted that many geotextiles do not have 120 Ib puncture resistance, thus illus- trating the severity of this example.

52377 flR3"OD2l»5 MALJDCXM PIRNiE

APPENDIX O

MISCELLANEOUS CATALOG INFORMATION

0285-33-2 ,..- .-- ,- , ... — -: w^,:._ ,..;....---,.,.,;-.,_.-:- --V-:- " . 52378 flR3002U6 CLOW FLAP VALVES IRON BODY, BRONZE MOUNTED 4' THRU 30'

F-30I4 F-3016 Spigot End Hub End

Eddy-Iowa Flap Valves are used for end do- Eddy-Iowa Flap Valves are uaed in filtration sure of outfall lines, or in manholes, to prevent and disposal plants and in various indus- entrance of backwater._They awing open under trial installations, "4- thru 12-inch valves may direct pressure to release the outfall Suid and be of all iron construction, but are regularly cloee tightly when the .direct pressure is re- furnished fully bronze mounted, with bronze it« axe bolted on lieved. Back pressure serves to hold the valve binge pin, flap ring, and seat ring. Flap valves tightly against its seat. are available in sizes 4 thru 30 inches. jgth of liftin gates. Extended s length required DIMENSIONS

L i ii F-3O12 F-3014 F-3016 K- Flanged End Spigot End Hub End •3008 End Dimension*—Inches Valve Siae...... ^.,.,.Inches 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 24 30 • i. .-•-.•• A jQutsicfe diameter of spigot 15N 31k ft) 24 30 B IFace of seat to face of flange, 10 10 10 10 10 18 22 C|[Fac e of seat to end 'of ' spig 'o 12 12 12 12 11 22 DiFace of aeat to end of hub . 8 110 12 12 15 Elpeptni h of hub 4 4 4 4 4 F' Slnside diameter q£ hub , . 10 12^ 16H ISM 20^ 4 I 4 P 12H115 |17 21 H 23 ^ 3 HJ [Diamete2 r of end fUgge. ^ 11 13HJ16 119 21 25 32 38 T JThlckneaa of end flange .77 TA ; 1 13 \i 7 [Diameter of bolt circle. 7M 17 29^ 38 58^4 K JNumber and fliie of bolts. 12-1 16-1 16-1M 20-1 H|20-l K 28-1H L !Diameterofflappin(bronze)j X H H \ 1 ! 1 M IDiamejer jf ^p lug hole. ... H K ' 1 . • 1 ['wtnicted. Flangea are faced and drilled to ANSI 125 pound template, unless otherwise instructed. 173

52379

AR3002U7 RED VALVE Check Valves

?N&

f ^^•••^^^^^^^^^•^^^^t•^•^•^•^•^•^•^••^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•^•K.. v^i»^r ^^ 52380

>v -^ ->•*——' L ujfc'i. CHECK VALVES

CHECK VALVES THAT REVOLUTIONIZE BACKFLOW PREVENTION

TIDE-FLEX^ AND SERIES "33" Red Valve's Check LOW HEAD LOSS Pumping dollars are reduced with Valves are designed for handling the backflow of liquids, Bed Valve Check Valves. In a recent independent la slurries, and gases. The valves are totally passive tory study, Red Valve Check Valves tested as h _ devices requiring no outside energy source for operation significantly lower head loss than the best swing check or maintenance. Red Valve Check Valves operate solely valve. Low head loss allows for substantial savings in on line back pressure. Sliding, rotating, swinging, pumping costs. (See graphs on page 7) springs, and plunging parts are not needed. The valves - . - . are constructed entirely of rubber enabling them to seal ..*..*....„....*, . , . " around debris in the line. The unique one piece design - HON-SLAMMINQ Loud slamming, generally occurs of Red Valve Check Valve sleeves enables the vaive to wlth ^P'03' Swin9 chec* va ves because of rapid flow open with low fine pressure, yet withstand great amounts ^ersal. Regardless of valve size and flow velocity, of back pressure without slamming. Red Valve Check 1^*^*™**™^ I K, "T? Valves are the most effective method of preventing bllle0d rubber ?fsign' They are fle*'ble en°ugth *! °P? backflow from entering systems. °" 2 inch°f of "ne Pressure; f< ab'e ° Wlthfand "p *> 3 150 psi of back pressure and the turbulent waters, of high tides or flash'. .. LOW MAINTENANCE Advantages are endless with Red Valve Check Valves. Any industry needing the prevention of backflow can benefit from Red Valve's rub- ber check valve design. Since the rubber check sleeve allows closure over debris caught in the line, blockage, common to conventional gate valves, is eliminated. Red Valve Check Valves have no metal parts that can freeze open or shut making them excellent replacement parts for ineffective tide gate and flapper style check valves. Overall, Red Valve Check Valves require no mainte- nance or repair and are substantially rr.ore cost efficient. - '..—- .- ...... Conventional check valves clog.

52381 TESTING A critical phase of manufacturing this unique product is testing. Each valve is hydraulicaily tested prior to-Shipment to verify that the* valve will open-with the stated line pressure and will withstand the required back__ _ pressure. Due to the operating principle oTtfiis valve7.itIs" ~ therefore Imperative that when ordering, both the7 line and back pressure re'quired'are stated".'"" APPLICATIONS Because of the unique all-rubber con- struction, Red Valve Check. Valves are able to handle a wide variety of applications and many diverse' media:"

Media Applications Tide-Flex Check Valve being installed in Boston. • Heavy Slurry • Municipal Sewer....-__ .. __._ • Raw Sewage " " •'• Interceptors .' . • Industrial Waste , • Industrial Outfall Lines * Brine and Salt Water '•'Discharge Side of' • Lime Systems ' Pumps "" . "" •• • Ash Handling. -Wet Wells. , .... • Mud Slurry • • Wet/Dry Wells ; • Bottom Ash • Tailing Systems * Caustic Slurry • Scrubber Systems • Water Dredging

FEATURES ' . New York's 54" Tide-Flex as interceptor discharge'valve. • Seal on Entrapped • Silent, Non-slamming; 'Solids - ' Energy Absorbing • Lowest Head Lass • Maintenance Free; r" • Full Fio.w ...... Only 1 Part ". • 100% Shut-off at • Wide Variety of 1 PSt . Materials for Abrasive • Installed in any and* Corrosive "" position . -Environments .

Eacfi Red Valve Check Valve is built to customer specifi- cations. Through choice of elastomers and hardness , „ . variations, valves can be contoured to accommodate a Installation of Fort Launderdafe's Red Valve Tide-Flex. wide range of sizes and back pressures. Valves can be installed in any horizontal or vertical position. Red Valve manufactures two styles of check_vaive_s_; the Tide-Flex for outfall lines, and the Series "33" for in-line service. The basic function of a check valve is quite simple; to allow flow through in one direction and to "check" flow in the other. Red Valve Check Valves accomplish this role expertly and cost effectively due to their sleeve design. Problems such as slamming, high head loss, and high maintenance costs inherent of hinged valve designs, are all eliminated with Red Valve's revolutionary Check Valves; the Tide-Flex and Series "33". Installed Tide-Flex in Vancouver. ' AR30Q250 TIDE-FLEX*

Tide-Flex^' CHECK VALVE The Tide-Flex Check Valve is Red Valve's slip-on rub- ber check valve manufactured in sizes 1/2" to 120". A three year development program re- sulted in this revolutionary back- flow prevention device. The Tide-Flex is maintenance free and is able to seal tightly around entrapped solids. It can open with as little as 2 inches of water in a combined sewer. Yet the Tide-Flex is sturdy enough to withstand up to 150 feet of back pressure from tides and the pounding of ocean waves. Traditionally, tide gate valves Patented were employed to protect col- Tide-Flex® lector sewers and interceptors from the inflow of tidal or high river-stage waters. Without such control devices, backflows sur- charge collector sewers causing flood conditions, flood- Specifying information on line pressure to open ing of interceptors, pumping stations, and treatment in the direction of flow as well as the back pressure the plants. This adversely affects the sewage treatment valve will withstand, must be stated when ordering. process and the capacity of the drainage system. There are several problems with the types of tide or flood gates currently in use such as failure to close tight {because of debris blockage, warpage, and corrosion), a tendency to get stuck in one position, and the need Available Elastomers for regular maintenance. Poor tide gate performance results in higher treatment costs, treatment plant upsets, NEOPRENE is non-deteriorating when exposed 10 oil. greater pollutional loads due to downstream overflows and grease and is also resilient to moderate chemicals, and plant bypassing, and flooding in upland tributary ozone, fats, and hydrocarbons. drainage areas. Municipalities try to maintain them, EpDM -s effectjve Qn g wat and diluted acids_ _ but maintenance is expensive and time consuming. =..,..... Therefore, there is a genuine heed for Red Valve Com- PURE GUM RUBBER has excellent resiliency, tensile pany's all rubber Tide-Flex Check Valve to overcome strength, and is abrasive resilient. Effective on weak. the problems described. . .. • chemicals, organic acids, alcohols, and keystones. . The Red Valve Company's Tide-Flex Check Valve is a HYPALON is resistant to heat, ozone, weathering, oxi- totally passive device requiring no outside energy source dizing chemicals, and strong acids.. . .:. _^. to operate and is virtually maintenance free, • BUTY|_ js ,resistant to animal and vegetabte fatSi oils. The all rubber construction of the Tide-Flex allows the .greases, strong and oxidizing chemicals, and heat. valve to operate in this fashion. Neoprene with an EPDM resjstan( hydrocarbons, fats, oite. cover » normally furnished. Pure Gum Rubber Hypalon, kerose ^ ^ chemicals. Butyl, Buna N, Food Grade Elastomers, and Viton can . also be supplied. The Tide-Flex utilizes two metal VITON resists ozone, oils, chemicals, _ clamps to connect it to the outfall line, halogenatea hydrocarbons, oxygen, and weathering. 52383 4 HRJU025I SPECIFICATIONS-Serfe^=ie«fft*efmx Check Valves SIZE ODE "ltS?UM MAXIMUM are to be all rubber and of'the flow operated check type. (NOM.) 0-0- LENGTH HEIGHT with a slip-on end connection, Inlelport afeas shall be L H 100% of "the mating pipe portsize,_The port arei_|haJL .840 2y2" ^32 contour down "to'a'duckbilf which shall allow passage of 3/4" 1.050 2%" ' 17 flow in one direction while, preventing reverse flow. The. 1" 1.315 3" 2" check valve is .designed to slfp .over the specified pipe 1.660 3y4" 2" outside diameter. The flexible duckbill sleeve shall be 1.900 4" ' one piece rubber construction with fabric reinforcement. The check valve shall also have a protective EPDM. 2" 23/s" exterior wrapping for protection.against sunlight attack. 2Va" Check valves shall be attached to the pipe outside 3" 3V2" 7" diameter by means .of vendor furnished clamps. Com- 4" 4V" 13" pany name, plant location, and valve size and serial 6" number shall be bonded to the check, valve, 6%" 16" B" 85/8" 18" 10" 20" 12" 14" 14" , 19" 19« 16" 16" 24" 227/8" 18" 18" 27%" 263/4" 20" 20" 27y4" 24" 24" 41 y4" 36" 30" 30" 36" 43%" 36" 36" 46" 52» 42" 42" 48" 52" 48" 48" 54" 713/a* 54" 54" 90yz" 703/4" 60' 60" 72" 78,, 72" 72" 75" 106" 84" 96" 114" 96" 108" 130" 108" 124" 148" 120" 140" 164"

52384 Series 35 For applications requiring a flanged construction, The Series "35" is available. Identical in design to the Tide-Flex, dimensions and price iriformation can be obtained by consulting the Factory. (S.ee page 6)

•A R 300252 ocRIcOCDICOo 3O3O

Series 33 CHECK VALVE The Red Valve Series "33" Check Valve is designed for handling the bacKflow of fluids, solids, and slurries. The in-line Series "33" Check Valve is simple in design. • There are only two parts; body and rubber check sleeve. Sliding, rotating, swinging, and. parts are not required. The valve is maintenance-free. Series "33" Check Valves can be installed in any hori- zontal or vertical position. There is no slamming when the valve closes against backflow. The Valve seals com- pletely around solid objects making it ideal for handling fly ash, raw sewage, and sludge applications. Series "33" check sleeves are available in Neoprene, Pure Gum Rubber, Hypalon, Butyl, EPDM, Buna N, Food Grade Elastomers, and Viton. Standard valve bodies are Cast Iron or Aluminum. Stainless Stee! and Ductile Iron are also available. Bodies can be rubber lined SPECIFICATIONS Valves are to be of the flow operated for more severe applications...... check type with flanged joint ends on both check^leeve Flange size, facing, and drilling conform to the ANSI B . an^ metal body. Port areas shall be 100% of the mating 16.1, Class 125# Cast Iron Fittings. Flushing connections pipe port area. The .port area shall contour down to a are furnished on both top and bottom. duckbifrwriichshall allow passage in one direction ,of flQj and prevent reverse flow. The flexible duckbill Available in sizes 1' to 36", Red Valve Series "33" Check shaj| be one pjece construction with one flange d Valves have been in service for over 17 years, and are ANS, 125# standard. The duckbill check tube shall also find.ng wider applications in all industries. be Nylon reinforced with an exterior wrapping of 1/8" Series 35 CHECK VALVE The Series "33" can thick Neoprene. Valve body shall be drilled and tapped be furnished without a housing for applications where for a flushing connection on top and bottom of the nous- the check valve is either discharging into a tank or ing. Valve body shall".be two piece split body construe- an open stream. It can be furnished complete with steel " tion. The two halves shall be sealed by diamond shaped backup rings for bolting to the adjoining pipe. Flanges, cross.section rubber gasket permanently locked by a working pressures, and sleeve materials are identical groove machined in the. valve body. Company name _and to those 'shown for the Series "33" Check Valve. . .location shall be cast onto the valve body.

FLUSH MAXIMUM VALVE CONN. WORKING BACK WEIGHT SIZE LENGTH WIDTH HtKtHT "C" PRESSURE PRESSURE CAST IRON "D" FTOF "A" (MAT.) (P.S.I.) (M.I.) (LBS.) 1" 4V 5%" 4%" y«" 125 - 100 8 11/a" 6V 6%" 5" y«" 125 . 100 16 2" 8V3" 7%" 6" %H 125 100 30 21/4" 9V 8" 7" %" 125 100 aa_. 3" iw 8V TV y*" 125 . 100. 53 4" 1 1 V4" 9V 9" V4" 100 100 80 6" 19" 15%" 11" %" 75 75 163 Q" 21" i6y«" 13V V*" 75 75 233 10" 23" 19%" 16" %" 75 50 425 12" 25" 223/4" 19" y4" 75 50 640 14" 29" 24" 21" y2" 50 50 . 780 16" 33" 25" 23%" :/2" 50 50 910 18" 37V 25" 50 25 1275 20" 41V 31V V 50 / 25 1704 • Consult factory for sizes 24" through 36" • All flanges nave A.N.S.1.125/150 Flange Drilling Dimensions . Q 'fl R 3 0 0 2 5 3 ' ENGINEERING DATA

RED VALVE CHECK VALVES HAVE LOWEST HEAD LOSS HEAD LOSS Low head loss is an inherent benefit of all Red Valve Check Valves. Flow tests conducted by an independent research laboratory, resulted in the head loss graph at top right. For all velocities and all flow rates. Red Valve Rubber Check Valves prove to have sig- ,nificantly lower head loss than conventional check valves. Plotted are Red Valve's 4", 8", 16", and 30" check valves shown in reference to conventional 12" and 30" swing check valves. Not only is head loss consistently lower with all Red Valve Check Valves, but as valve size increases, head loss decreases. . When compared to a variety of conventional check valves,- Red Valve Check Valves continue, to have the lowest reported head loss. The bottom right chart illus- trates this. It is based on 6" size valves. ° 5 ,__1° 1S 2° VELOCITY IN FT/SEC Red Valve's maintenance free, non-slamming, rubber Check Valves are cost efficient due to their low head loss. Less pumping is required of valves with low head loss. Therefore, pumping costs are substantially reduced with c Ded Valve Check Vafves, . ., .- —.-,.- . |

* .5 6 78 9 10 11 12 VELOCITY IN FT/SEC

TEAR HERE ORDERING INFORMATION MUST INCLUDE BACK PRESSURE 52386 Maximum Back Pressure R Have salesman nail Flow Rate • information in: Line Pressure CATALOGS Please Onnte tn me on: S!2E. . - • G Control Pinch Valves G WWTP Valve C Manual Pinch Valves •H Engineering Handbook H Knife Gam Valves n Other i Name m Title Phone i Company ~ 1 Address i Citv — M ,•-. -^ .-. n r\ r- i —— State ————————— Zip —— Gundle Lining Systems inc

. --".j- j— „„__ i......

GUNDL!NE» HD is a high quality formulaion of High Density Polyethylene ccinta 97.5% polymer and 2.5% of carbon black,anti-oxidants and..heat stabilizers. "The'p _._ „_ .... __M..__ ., ; . .___ I specifically for exposed conditions.. It contains no additives cr fillers which canjeach out and cause '____ . .' . : _'_-_"" embrittlement over time.

... I "CIUINUL.INC HD SPECIFICATIOrJO -• - ~ ———— • -^-r- - _ - «—————" —————

I •• TYPICAL TEST GAUGE ^B H PROPERTIES* METHOD (NOMINAL) _H I 30 mil 40 mil 50 mil 60 mil 80 mil 100 mil 120 mil 140 mil (0,75mm) (1.0 mm) (1.25 mm) (1.5mm) !2.0 mm) (2.5 mm) (3.0 mm) {3.5 mm) : Density, g/cc. (Min.) ASTM D1505 0.94 0.94 0.94 0."94 . _0.94 0.94" 0,94 0.94 Mdt Row Index. ASTM D1238 0.3 0,3 0.3 . 0,3 _..'0.. 3 .- 03- 0.3 _ 0.3 ^ 3 g/10min. (Max.) Condition E(190°C, 2,16 kg.) Tensile Properties ASTM 0 638 Type IV . (Typical) Dumb-bell at_2 ipm. - 1 . Tensile Strength at Break 120 160 200 240 320 400 480 .; ; 5SQ TZ": (Pounds/inch widtn) 2. Tensile Strength at Yield 70 95 115 140. 190 . ..24Q 29Q 340 ~~\ | (Pounds/inch width) 3. Elongation at Sreak 700 700 700 700 . 700 700 700 700 1 (Percent) 4. Elongitton at Yield 13 13 13 13 13 13: 13 13 (Percent) —— : —— A I Tear Resistance Initiation. ASTM 01004 Die C 22 - 30 37 45 55 Q5 80 „ ^^P 1 Ibs. (Typical) Low Temperature Brittteness. *f ASTM D746 Procedure B -112 -112 -112 --112 -112 -112 -112... -112 __ I (Typical) I Dimensional Stability. % Change ASTM 01204 ±2 ±2 ±2 i2. ±2 . *2 . ±Z -*2 ~ -A Each direction. (Max.) 212f 1 hf. Resistance to Soil Burial. ASTM D3083 using Percent change ASTM 0638 Type IV I in original value. (Typical) Dumb-bell at 2 ipm. Tensile Strength at Break % Change ±10 ±io ±10 ±10 ±10 ilO ±10 ; ±10 __ I and Yield Elongation at Break % Change ±10 ±10 ±10 - ±10 ±10 ±1.0 ±10.,.. .-10 :_ I I and Yield Environmental Stress Crack. ASTM 01693 1500 15001500 15001500 1500 . 1500.. 1500 ;~~l Hours. (Min.) (10% Igepal, 50°C) Puncture Resistance. FTMS101 30 52 65 80 105 130 150 169 1 I Pounds. (Typical) Method 2065 Coefficient of Linear ASTM 0696 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 '1.2 1.2 1.2 . I I Thermal Expansion. f Thermal Stability ASTM 03895 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000. 2000 ', . I Oxioative Induction Time (OIT). 13«rC. 800 psi 02 Minutes. (Min.) 'Note: All values except when specified as minimum or maximum are typical test results. 52387 1 \ ^ 1

j Th*» cpcciftcmtlons are offered a* » guide tor consideration to assist engineers with their spaottcations; however. Gundle assumes no liability in connection wdh iho use of this inlormatKXv 1 ' The specifications on this data sheet are subjoct to change without noiice, ' 1 MRJUU^bb • O o o 5|y*c^J CO 8 CO a C s S ~ Q. s™ Lt wo" M^ CC zut o o s o _ * LliB^B ii^T 10 ^ ^ rv S ?£" ' < ^ |

Q. Ji o ? ^ ^ a R o s ^B |?I •q ? S r3 = 2 o £~ § 2 s i T ^^^^™ ' c3 w Aj^H CO ^ X • a-o S 8 O •*f ^B^^^^ T ^" ^H go:" § a a t-g S a R i 1 1 fi - a •• I&H ^^ g S 03 xo in 1 a __ c s to ul o ^ - S o s IN a i TJ uo to CxJ gw o s a * a i£> I 8 B R a sg " i R - I S SoT O LO n n a OO) g a 5 s ro i a *

dill S s s 3 O S e ? c 8

go CO o ul q 8 |ui -T a a s oz 5 5 H in 8 i"i 8 s a CM 8 O § 5 U_

O WO in in n o S UJ || i CL = 0) X. 2" o s s t «! 9 S m ul s 5*2. o § s O _cy s S .S g ' IfS S ^ a 8 c 'c di " ".iw!" 2 i S R ' 8 H- "§1 — fe 3 D ^ o'a "" - i'S'oT m g g r...g| ^^S CD ! 1 cv i 52388 ^•p -*^ UJ i S Ct CD « « <"" u ^ ' • 0? o ~ • w a. §£• 8 j, a - -. _ _ - ~ uj "" fX 0) > 2 « -S '« • . i 3 g ,JJ > S • O " -aS S =8 s 'cO s cS ^ ? i8 CO S 5 3 i 5" 1 • ' s 2 a J;§c3 ig . . J CO 5 in s 1 s T T 1 C I i || 1| i a Q c a 6 6 Q Q O O C Q 6 U- i E s 3 7 5 3 5 S 2 > S 5 =? j 3 "5 — •? 2 5 o C" S 2 go: . Ig J5 en w « « tj S w S in OJ S * S y < S g'g-jS 33 "i Q) *" ^x ^ § * ^ ** ** — S S^^Sa S¥ "D CO ,t= CO I, J ...... j: || I|| t|2 || O w ^ T o B _ S a*j.ec- ^?~3 CcOo . - . £= I s * J£ a I i .i i 1 |3* * * S s •S a O .0 ® g •o c O i| i!fi|I| i i|s M B 3 ffl S,^- 1 . ... CT d ^ a.— ^- 3j |"a C w o c O if jllflff- c o e »S ^5 i c Ul UJ, C U •£ C g Ii m 0§8| £| . .. Q. a £ "c o "Jo Q- §f" 81 -^ o O Ol S. o

^ „ . cg_ c (D cL-2 i^'5 c o-i.^?-0-S^ .o ^ 2 QJ C • g- S o co E £ & B: ° ^ >«M :C>O Oc c ca SmRjRi^ .-^o .as i.fljy-a^^-s^a.y-s ^^is-^ig.^tslllllillro 5^= -l^cfo . E - - u •*d>- o 0) O _c v. 0) •D TO (U -J £0)

, i ,•• i c3 O 1 1 3 m 5 oS' ! g,N 9 J7 Ol (V O O ys. jo o Crg. c If 5 ^ -"31 c V o c o ir ^ 2 CMo T5 o m CM cc u' o o gai tr- r- S o c <=I-o ^S: o cc J? u 01 o T" •— CM U" CM (N. ill «3 ! CM n. I I CO ^ LTD 1 13 -. o Oiq IJ « in S CNJ 0) i! 8 t m m c en co 22 to O ? fo *~- . i^» -^ >- CM S o -w • • 5 ^1 0 IT° 2in m ^ *~ c'3 -O in — CD tt - o g|? (T CO CD r-. co 2 in i^> en r- ^ c^ m If 03 mDiBlnb'ulo i t ^. t- us 2" ^^ c o 13 g m o ? O CM Q .& = S § m o c CD CM CM — m o m o 3- " 2 ^ c n LO TA •s T; C*l 03 in 2 Q nz Q S S S- S S i o n O o2 £ *~ a r- fo - 0 o2 tr. Q •^~ *~ i- CM to 2 m I^-CM ns o f — ^CM •3 III o -i co o> m o o CO CD CM — re «> S« S -T 0 £ S ° 0 O 0> _Q (D u T— r-. „ 2m-^^ m-^ T—- rjmj fi\^ CD T V • n o a> g N 0 UOm S o2 £,* *"" fv 1*- O - 0 02 M CO S p e $ (O r- en en r~oi C\ •- ' ^OJ r— ^5 ai> "o c £ - ' s S{2 c £ &. _V m in in o? 3) oca *.§ 55 £1 co r- Q - m c r- o a — c ° ° s £ r^. -T -7 •' 5? CLZ) r- m 0 §— CO CT) u- o 3 en ro " o |§ g m o P-m. co o2 *~ O f-. CO - o o2 n HQ LO (O CD CM r-CN c^J ^CM m a >. ^ coo UJQT imeo f ihi i S \x *» openin g s 1^1 CC O 0? * jd=> aui> O) H ? CM ^ ^co in o o o 0 - 0^ Sa 01 en -7A oQ 3 ^•r- tf q in 2 o o m o Z & p ^r «0 S 0 o co £j 5 UJ^ CD -3- OJ o2 « 5 C "• N. CD - d o2 ^r ^3- m S ^- r-cy .5= o C f^-CM O *.% '11 T3 w ,-,cn co>- ">i "°o M ° in o o ^ (D 3> J CD Q 01CO T O O O o UJH CV <• o 01 3 C••• Pr^ «I4 co S oo^ oS "t^i •c—o im—O CD -7 T a 0 0O 0 m cc 02 (0 W r- in CM O 0° -T ^S*- CO UO CO CO CO CO i >-C\J |S CO £' r-CM — 1^ S 6 $£ £ » - CD 1^. CM CM n <*- CD *- ^ c CO r^- CM "CO o '2 Is- r*. co SCO CO CO O3 2s; r^- OJ CO r-. CO c 2 i*- r~~ to m Is- r— 'r ? £2 i^l»-, tCdO CO CO CO co en O> s co «- rr •q- T co co ^r >- r £2 •*-• ? - "* sT OJQ CO *- ^r **• TT CO CO f^ —* a M , tf § -S S S '« ? & UJ % 1 c I-= ^ " S S- ^ .Q Q. t !> 3! S e - c "c « w to 'o tl ,S 2 5' 75 E =9 33 J -Q b <"E o 5 rs- r- E £ • a. Q) S £ o a c VI £ ?E CO 5s CD all6"" « O) o CO 10 'E «^ < CO 2 s to o F , _ , w"2 .1CO= ya o S 18 CJ CJ s HM! >- 3 ti z 5" — 2 « s c •- Q =• — a 5. ,9 u s C (0 Q U £ 9- J= "c 93 E 0) y S g5 075 5 'In | c 5 £ I co-s JZ J3 0 *-• Q 5 § og g. j= ujmi o c T aj a c S-s 2 c co 2 « £ ca >. Hi c ^ -= ra (/).£ OQ 1 O i_ 01 £ ,-; — 5 O C V. S5 < a> ^•h « •- ra -s a co ro 1 ^ O «- V) JC „ — 1? ^ 0) 4 -C -= (1 s au. n x II CL g«-•&-.? 2, »2 ®« « = » >^ 0 o c C H O tn cr S- 55 ^ 01*^0"= i- > ^ s S i o: > ^ 0 C COUJ ivi 3 . C ^= s » ca _t g CO Is E 03 2 5 Ob •c •* o n o =f c C o "^' j; £i .y (o j•jDs 5a£ Osc« * • 1=)= C ^D e^ E1™ co "cJ c II 0 CD c a J — 2 ir CD 3— =1 ^ to D ^ ^ •y^ -c0a c>CJ-?. ^ 1 E CO "5 S 550 3 to £M £ca 4rt O „ ££ i£ 6O ii= a. 25 Q. O_ < CO S cc c CO LL. LL. ^ 5O ti=X ^ I£ Q, 3 .£*L .21 O) CO - - - - H" ? ll S ,•£-.:.":

'. flR3'0"0259 CM CQ

Z O o LU CO

52392 AR300260 MALDCXM PIRNIE

FINAL SITE-SPECIFIC QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN

CAP CONSTRUCTION AND FLOOD RETENTION BASIN HAZARDOUS WASTE CLEAN-UP MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ERIE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS OMAHA DISTRICT CONTRACT NO. DACW45-89-C-0190 PROJECT 0285-33-2

NOVEMBER 1991

MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC. S-3515 Abbott Road P. O. Box 1938 Boffclo, New York 14219 52393 0235-33-2105 . _- • . ' AR30026I MAIODIM PIRNIE SITE SPECIFIC QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 GENERAL...... 1-1 1.1 PURPOSE ...... 1-1 1.2 PROJECT SCOPE AND INSCRIPTION ."...... 1-1 1.2.1 Scope ...... :...... 1-1 1.2.2 Site Description ... \...... ~ ? ...... 1-1 1.2.3 - .^References .. ™ .-'...-,...... 1-3 1.3 ^ CHEMICAL HAZARD IDENTIFICATiON ...... 1-4

2.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES ...... 2-1 ' 2.1 GOVERNMENT ...... 2-1 2.1.1 Contracting Officer ...... '._ . . ..;'.".";...... 2-1 2.1.2 QA Laboratory ...... 2-2 2.2 CONTRACTOR ...... 2-2 2.2.1 Project Manager ...... 2-3 2.2.2 Quality Control Manager ...... 2-3. 2.2.3 Laboratory Personnel ...... 2-4

3.0 LABORATORY AND EQUIPMENT ._...... 3-1 3.1 PROVISIONS AND SELECTION ...... ;...... 3-1 3.2 INSPECTION AND APPROVAL ...... 3-1

4.0 SAMPLING AND SAMPLE CUSTODY PROCEDURES ...... 4-1 4.1 SAMPLING PLAN ...... 4-1 4.1.1 Air Quality Monitoring ...... 4-1 4.1.2 Drum Sampling Methods ...... 4-2 4.1.3 Soil Sampling Methods ...... 4-3 4.2 SAMPLE CONTAINERS AND PRESERVATION METHODS .... A-A 4.3 SAMPLE HANDLING ...,...... ,:...... 4-5 43.1 Packaging and Shipping ...... 4-5 43.2 . Sample Labeling ...... 4-6 4.33 Chain-of-Custody ...... 4-6 4.4 RECORD-KEEPING PROCEDURES ...... 4-7 4.5 DECONTAMINATION OF EQUIPMENT ...... 4-8 4.6 FIELD SAMPLE STORAGE ...... 4-9

0285=33-2105 . . " ...... ' ... . -i- 52394 flR30"0262 A4AUDOLM PIRNIE TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

______Page

5.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES ...... ;...... 5-1 5,1 ANALYTICAL METHODS/PROCEDURES ...... 5-1 5.1.1 Analytical Instrumentation ...... 5-1 5,1.2 Analytical Methodology Details ...... 5-2, 5.1.3 Analytical Procedures ...... ".. 5-2 5.1.4 Calculations ...... 5-2 5.2 ANALYnCAL/STATTSTICAL/CONTROL PARAMETERS ..... 5-3 5.2.1 Accuracy of Each Analytical Method ...... ^. .,. 5-3-, 5.2.1.1 Matrix Spikes ...... 5-4 5.2.1.2 Quality Assurance (QA) ...... ^.. . 5^4- 5.2.2- Sensitivity of Each Analytical Method .„.,,;...... 5-5._ 5.2.3 Precision of Each Analytical Method ...... 5-5 5.2.4 Quality Control Samples ...... -.._.,...... ,,. 5-5, 5.2.4.1 Surrogate Standards ...... 5-5- 5.2.4.2 Field Blank ...... ~.. 5-6, 5.2.43 Method Blank ...... 5-6 5.2.5 Data Comparability ...... 5-7 5.2.6 Data Validation ...... -.-...... 5-7

6.0 CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY ...... 6-1 6.1 GENERAL ...... 6-1

7.0 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES AND SCHEDULES ...... 7-1 7.1 GENERAL ...... 7-1

8.0 DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORTING ...... 8-1

9.0 GOVERNMENT AND CONTRACTOR REPORTS ...... 9-1 9.1 GOVERNMENT REPORTS ...... 9-1 9.1.1 QA Result Reports ...... 9-1 9.1.2 Chemical Quality Assurance Report ...... 9-1 9.2 CONTRACTOR REPORTS ...... 9-2 9.2.1 Contractor Chemical Data Acquisition Plan (CDAP) ...... 9-2 9,2.2 Contractor Daily Quality Control (DQC) Reports ...... 9-3 9.2.3 Contractor Quality Control Summary Report (CQCSR) ...... 9-4

52395 0285-33-2105 -ii-. AR300263 MALCOLM PIRNIE _ TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

LIST OF TABLES

Tabl_T e - < Followv „ s -—————————.______PagNo. „ e QM-t Occurrence of Contaminants: Ground Water ...... 1-4

QM-2 Occurrence of Cbntarhinants: "Unsaturated Sou Samples ...... 1-4

QM-3 . Summary of Results: Wetland Sediment...... 1-4

QM-4 Summary of VQC ResuItsfSaturated Soils . 1....."...... ;... J 1-4 QM-5 _ Containers, Preservatives .and Holding Timesi Drum - Contents and Collected Soil Samples . . "."...... 4-5

52396 0285^3-2105 " " _-..-__....,... --. - - - -

13R30026U MAIJDOLM PIRNIE 1.0 GENERAL

1.1 PURPOSE

This Site Specific Chemical Quality Management Plan (SSQMP) outlines the respective U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Construction Contractor quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) interactions and related responsibilities, and describes the project data.collection requirements including sampling, sample handling, custody, documentation and analytical procedures. This SSQMP, in conjunction with chemical quality management contract specifications, is intended to assure that the Construction Contractor collects, analyzes and documents chemical data during the project duration that is legally and scientifically defensible.

1.2 PROJECT SCOPE AND DESCRIPTION "

1.2.1 Scope This SSQMP is considered a working document for internal use by USACE construction personnel during the construction o£,the cap and flood retention basin (FRB) at the Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania. Sampling of excavated drums encountered during grading operations and soils contaminated from leaking drums may be required during the construction period. The Contractor shall prepare a Chemical Data Acquisition Plan (CDAP) which describes the QA/QC procedures and QM program which will be utilized by the Contractor and its subcontractors during cap and FRB construction and for the first year following completion of construction activities.

1.2.2 Site Description The Millcreek site is an 78.4-acre tract of land located in Millcreek Township, Erie County, Pennsylvania. The site was formerly a freshwater wetland. Between 1941 and 1981, all but 4 acres were filled with foundry sand and industrial and municipal waste. Beginning

0285-33-2105 .".. .:.-"" - - - "-.~^- -1-1 " " " " "" " " " " 523Q7 AR300265 MALCOLM PIRNIE in the mid-1970s, waste oils containing PCBs were bulk-disposed in the fill, along with liquid wastes containing phthalates, phenols, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and heavy metals. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PADER) first advised the landfill operator to cease operations in August 1980. In July 19.82, at the request of PADER, five monitoring wells (MW-1 - MW-5) were installed by the Millcreek Township on the Township's 4-acre parcel of land. A hazard ranking score was determined after a USEPA Technical Assistance Team performed a site assessment in August 1982. USEPA Region Ill's Remedial Investigation, completed in 1985, discovered extensive soil, sediment, and surface water contamination. The major classes of compounds detected included:

• VOCs such as vinyl chloride, trichloroethene, 1,2-dichloroethene, 1,1,1- trichloroethane, 1,2-dichloroethane and 1,1-dichloroethene in the ground water;

• semi-volatile organic chemicals such as bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, naphtha- lene and benzo(a)pyrene in on-site fill materials;

• PCBs in the fill and in some sediment samples, and;

• lead in the fill.

In addition to the contaminants listed, numerous other metals, PAHs and phthalates were detected in the fill materials. On May 1, 1986 the USEPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) which proposed remedial actions for the site based on the RI/FS. In 1989, apre-design study was completed in which remedial actions were recommended to:

• prevent the air dispersion and off-site transport of contaminants; * prevent direct contact with contaminants by humans and wildlife; and reduce soil, sediment, surface water and ground water contaminant concentrations to levels acceptable to the USEPA and the PADER.

52398 0285^3-2105 " 1-2 flR300266 MALCOLM PIRNIE The selected remedial actions for the site included:

* site grading/placing a vegetated topsoil cover;

• construction of a flood retention basin and improved surface water drainage system; and

• extraction and treatment of contaminated ground water.

1.2.3 References Additional information concerning the site history and contaminants can be found in the following reports: '. ' ' .

• Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie. , Courity,"Penhsylvania7 dated August 1985.

• Record of Decision, Remedial Alternative Selection, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, "Pennsylvania, dated 1 May 1986. • Draft Engineering Report, Remedial Clean-up Treatability Study, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania, June 1989.

* Soil Gas Survey Report, Remedial Clean-up Treatability Study, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania, August 1988. • Field Investigation Report, Remedial Clean-up Treatability Study, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania, August 1988.

• Ground Water Treatability Testing Report, Remedial Clean-up Treatability Study, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania, February 1989. * Wetlands Sediment Sampling Report, Remedial Clean-up Treatability Study, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County,, Pennsylvania, August 1989. * Exploratory Soil Borings Investigation, Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania, August 1989.

The following references also describe procedures for chemical quality data management and shall be used in the preparation of the CDAP:

• Sample Handling Protocol for Low, Medium and High Concentration Samples of Hazardous Waste, Appendix F, ER1110-1-263, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, October 1990. -

_ 02SS-33-2105 " 1-3 flR300267 A4AKXXM PIRNIE Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, USEPA Office of Solid Waste, SW-846, 3rd Edition, published November 1986, revised December 1987.

Federal Register Vol. 51, No. 114, 06/13/86, 40 CFR Part 261. .

Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, USEPA Environmen- tal Monitoring and Support Laboratory, USEPA 600/4-79-020, Revised March 1983. . . Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 16th Ed., 1985. Procedures for Handling and Chemical Analysis of Sediment and Water Samples, USEPA/USACE-81-1, May 1981.

13 CHEMICAL HAZARD IDENTIFICATION

Field investigations performed on behalf of PADER (1982), USEPA (1982, 1984, and 1987) and the USACE (1987-1989) have identified a variety of contaminants in the soils, sediments and ground water at the site. A summary of the occurrence of contaminants detected in various media during field investigations for the USACE are presented in Tables QM-1 through QM-4. The health and safety considerations for the contaminants of concern are discussed in the Health-and Safety Design Analysis prepared in conjunction with the SSQMP.

52400 0285-33-2105 • - M i3R300268 H1LLCREEK ...... ____TABLE QK-1: OCCURRENCE OF CONTAMINANTS: GROUND WATER RESULTS

CONCENTRATION j] I CONCENTRATION PARAMETER FREQUENCY MAXIMUM MINIMUM |j PARAMETER FREQUENCY |MAXIMUM MINIMUM 1 1 VOLATILE ORGANICS ACID EXTRACTABLES (ug/l) | | Aluminum 29 3 0.03 2,4-Dimethylphenol 1 2 || Antimony 0 1 1 Arsenic 13 0.027 0.005 BASE/NEUTRAL SXTRAC., (ug/tj || Barium 28 ; 0.56 0.05 Acenaphthene 1 0.4 || Cadmium 7 ! 0.010 0.006 ,8is C2-ethylhexyl> phthalate 6 81 0.8 || Calcium 29 j 170 0.12 Diethylphthalate * 0.2 || Chromium 1 | 0.010 Oi-n-butyl phthalate * 0.4 || Copper 12 [ 0.073 0.006 Fluorene 1 0.2 jj Iron 29 | 21 0.02 Isophorone 4 180 1 I! Lead 4 | 0.07 0.05 Naphthalene 2 4 1 H Magnesium 29 | 86 0.13 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 11 1 0.2 || NcnganeM 29 | 1.7 0.006 Phenanthrene 1 0.2 jj Mercury 0 I j| Nickel 1 I 0.06 [ PCSs (ug/l> JI Silver 4 I 0.011 0.006 i Aroclor-1260 2 0.44 0.24 j| Sodium 29 | 300 11 ; JI Zinc 26 | 0.15 0.006 TRPH

NOTES:

1. Number of detections does not include QC duplicate samples. 2. Total nuifcer of samples collected: 29 3. List includes parameters detected during previous RI.

52401 A R 30Q2_6_9 HILLCREEK TABLE QH-2: OCCURRENCE OF CONTAMINANTS: UNSATURATED SOIL SAMPLES

I | | CONCENTRATION ]] | j CONCENTRAT iSmm*^ 1 PARAMETER 1 FREQUENCY] MAXIMUM MINIMUM | j PARAMETER (FREQUENCY} MAXIMUM MINIMUM | —————— . —————— „ ——— „ ———————————————— , ————— ] ]_..,. ——————— ______„ ______IVOLATILE ORCANICS anthracene 0 [Benzene 28 190 0.3 ||Benzo £ ^ **• g. * 5 ,1 I _s CJ as a O, eo m - o -aS* = *z cia cMj —Q. h- -x. (_ 9 en (M 1— - 3 -^ CL X eo x N ------•-* — „*-c a ^o ^_Oe- wco o o .0"O O O CO «O O O ^ 10 e- •O ui •* CJ S3 •- ^ K *- w Kl •*»• CM 8-x. a CJ E

o- a -> •» ca -> -» ^ -» O eo O gcv •- o o - • in ru CM co ^ cj S Ka *C-D i/CO\ -^ 3B Q » •- ~i -» a ^ m -* tlj O CO W K -0 O — z z z S 2 2 — »- «- (M s ° •— * CM Q • CJ g" UJ o -s 5 V) (/» CM (j O a, •> .^ »CM. —ca .«_ .Z Z Z.Z Z. O CJ a >• - o a o 1 O> V S«" CNJ <<<«<< 5 Z =E Z X Z SZ Z ^BX* ^£ Z ^fZc^Szz££x^££zE ^^ ^E ^ ^b H^ ^E ^ ^ z^E M UJ • -• .- « -» ca ^ -» ^ ^ -i CD •«. ^O ^* C9 ^4 ^O O C9 So ca o tn No. .0 o o o p o h- **• • ' w •- m in KI CM « O •— O CM fn co KI cj ci o. O N a O r- CJ CM r- CM m CJ Kl CM , •- *- CM •- CM O o Q a CJ 03 U CM CJ <«<<<< < "s. t. m 3 s z S 3 2 Z Z Z X Z Z zzzzSEXzza:z ol K(*M U« (M 51 ^ •» 9^; t•i ^ W V o *r CM M o e ^ *^ !•- '-I JJ- »- OJ «* K» « gSSSRlg ssag*ScMfe§ss - • - CM 0

Of UI UJ u »- a. x% ' * ca < >• CM 5 ° - -X _• Z UJ UJ 01 » Jg — J -J ^tC 3 iff ^x rt 5 . si 5-5 ? .... ._ £ e? * S _E M M c £ £ ^^ «l *• « <- w CJ — o a ** X (A - S S "O fi j; —. j= — ^ jc « — B a. CJ *.* C - ^~ V W U C- ff B -~ A •— . c. E x — C u jc *; £ « TJ CO z o.c ut'eC B c>| ^ I | -i. O S— 'j =* *S _.jc « JDo » 1f—« C §UO .. fc «Q.C.fle«o»jjc>C ** 1-- Sgl^fs A- « 8 CM a U o M c - < £ c • a.«»• J2 -^ ** C Lft X UJ u c — • a — jr *- C « « ^J^.'^'SJ «!^J.c U> -jfiv^v uj x u z; o B •^3 Qt ^tf i ^5 C aUJ: UJ i— 5 x « c -^. *- Q » <- o oo o o ^ — » »4MXAO««QjCg« (J < »ocCv I s < x ^ »- m CM KI < < GO e1 ta cf 5 ffl 5 flR30027l CM •— — —— —— —— —— —— *— — "———— — - —— —— —— —— —— _- —— —— —— —— UJ *5 2 o w *•» S' "^ ^t v u — o o - . o K^I. ^ "** Q£ CM § ff to o I J «— • w ^ CM 0!

g a o. * * 1* * * S z z z z z z =e z z z m 3 l_ 1 " * 1 S CJ ^ - .

X S SS K« L. • CM ^r B g CM 41 *-> *^ O ™* ~* a CO O S >*• K p fQ o s- ** to CM a ^j Q. *- uS Ok ja e"a^ •4'O'Or-mOCJO i— -^p> *- • -CM CM o o o UJ 8 <0 w CM o n a. •c- 5 cx *; ~» ^ _1 u M o o O KI O--O KOOj*OinOOO ^ ->»T. KI o s ' si g CM tf O CJ w» CM CJ CA 2 « g 3 41 UJ CJ z £ 55 £ z z z z a; z z-£ zzzzxzz if* as O u_ a 3 O CM O t I ae z z I 31z<v u z £ zS S 3C X 4 ^ ^K **»i^ii*t»i^^^^3t-*fc to S" V «M a -» "» •» g 4mJ ^ g fi K» X> 3 ^!SKtot«S5o^iS'<>'° S • pA U CM CM ** *OO OCM.'v-CM . *• •** O CM" IW O CJ

•C UI UJ Ui 1— Q. m a g at ut ai a. a. < _UJ1 52404 a. < 5 3 5 *^ ^ ^ c* w Cf> Q UI C § -J 4* § EB f •£ o "c *"* ** Ca *T° i•n* ut rt °-5 J EC M —i •** ae ^ ^ 2 S 5 ft £ « S J •t «^ S. M C^ fl ** UJ SI 1 ^"> -^ US »— t. C. X U K ^^ £ ^^ *** • UJ IU w O O UJ —.^ iC JT ^ O "^ C «7 **" ^ C ^ "^ ^ V i 1 a ^ •» £ **5iB*^'iiiS&c^o>i>^>o «£ •4- X XO 1— •M^lU1Cc*.Q,OWtL.U-^C >" *J S •? t a "1 ^o, ^-a

m -1 -* P 9: 0 ** CJ Ki in tO -— *M ac *•* — •~ in KI O »- CM W m» u•-i, ea -1 ~J -» tn - 5 O K» in KI — *- (M O o • >-. M ca in , •^ -^ ca ca ^ -a CO ^ 1 o. eo 5 «! 1^ KI CM T- KI CM Kl in -v — o O* *~ *~ KI '— a>a C-^M aOt in

^ Q 0- O O . »* W CO — O Kt «-«-<*** JM « ca in -i M O- o o Z eo —• p in *»• T ^. — »- CO O K M c1a ^-. (0 m -t ca O KI 0 »» M- eo — S>- «* ^ < eo o CM CO ^ Ol in ca ca -mt -» o* O 03 — ' K> O CM •- O« T £ "p S3 0 CM ea —*«• . en in ^» -» 3 o aA oGB "a* m o in »» . o o in «* o 40 ... *!0 ....ea in N. O w ^> ^=: ^t* *•* * KI O g I . ca ^CM CA -I « ca ~» -,3 * 1=5 | c> in *- * K. 40 — • S "* CM- > — AX e ai CcJj MO V« S-3 *i-• - tft • S 5 « ? — p C C *- — *•* 8* 5 —— 4} C. *fi• **• ps- "B •_ 41 —*—* — • O- ^ OJi ,O B X 4J • c e -p — § a t- O B — l_ C Q.« ** *• .J —. Z « 4> Z £ 1 "8 £ g * f * "5- "&• ** ** U .O 41 2 S 3 - CJ O C — 4> Ji CO "S. B S CJ V iB 4?« g |.« « 4> «t O —' J« — ET en en — -O JT ^ jc c. 5 « ** (_ *• ** U • .— (X It a Z •— +J fc" 3 tn < •*. 4> y « % 2 & £ € -5 «J ia . — _ £- 55 5 0 f — _e — *; M 5 3 W t- fe.t- e cj jr ** L. o O « N E O O O « 0*0*' •—**** fiXi*^ C, —— ^rf M 0 *<• O ^^ "^^ t-XXltJL.^Q. UI -O W O JC £ ^ e c t. <- jc I < — — ~- « w B y -J 41 J3 «*- O O «- £ C O O — — o«_w S>-_2 ** S *« 53JS3S*0 i— o S i~ «- a aS 5 "x £ ^- i — c g UJ < < UJ UI l > < « JS o o • • • X XT 3 -OX* O _j <>(___.- i- CM £ **.^^^ — C. —• «_ csa i » • t 'Q Q o o « .c .e: * -. 4J «l O » «. — X 41 > •< o o o *- ^~*-UI*'l-»-*->X a. 52405 AR300273 IRNI 2.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The Construction Contractor is responsible for chemical quality control, while the government is responsible for quality assurance.

2.1 GOVERNMENT

Chemical data quality management responsibilities for the USACE .are discussed below, ...... , _., ...... -. .. — - -

2.1.1 Contracting Officer The Contracting Officer will have the following responsibilities: f • Approving the Contractor's Chemical Data Acquisition Plan (CDAP).

• Arranging meetings, if necessary, between appropriate USACE representa- tives and the Contractor to clarify or discuss required QA/QC practices.

• Receiving Daily Quality Control (DQC) Reports from the Contractor when samples for chemical analysis are collected, handled or analyzed.

• Receiving analytical results from the Contractor. * Coordinating government review of the DQC reports, records, or analyti- cal/QC problems on a daily basis with the QA Laboratory or as soon as possible after a problem arises. * Ensuring that the Contractor furnishes duplicate or split samples and field blanks to the QA Laboratory in accordance with the requirements of the applicable Drum Handling and Chemical Data Management Specifications. • Furnishing performance audit samples (from Design Division or QA Laboratory) to Contractor promptly. * Furnishing analytical results (from the Contractor) to the QA Laboratory. • Ensuring (with the assistance from QA Laboratory) that contract Specifica- tions and CDAP requirements are met for number, quality and type of QA/QC field samples (duplicates and splits and appropriate blanks, one set

52406 0285^33^2105 _.....__..____..... 2-1 flR30027l+ MALCOLM PIRNIE for QC and another set for QA), minimum sample sizes, sample handling and preservation, etc.

* Ensuring (with QA Laboratory assistance) that QC provisions described in the CDAP are executed by the Contractor.

* Ensuring (with QA laboratory assistance) that instrument calibrations, preventive maintenance, etc., are satisfactorily performed and recorded.

• Ensuring (with QA Laboratory assistance) that all documentation regarding sampling, analysis, chain-of-custody and transportation manifests (if applicable) is thoroughly and properly recorded.

2.1.2 QA Laboratory The QA laboratory will have the following responsibilities:

• Furnishing performance audit samples to the Contracting Officer promptly. • Reviewing in a timely fashion Contractor validation sample results. • Reviewing analytical results (from Contractor) promptly.

* Analyzing duplicate or split samples and blanks promptly.

* Assisting the Contracting Officer to ensure that contract Specifications and CDAP requirements are met.

• Reviewing on a timely basis Contractor DQC Reports. * Assisting the Contracting Officer in solving laboratory and chemical problems as they occur.

23 CONTRACTOR

As part of the CDAP, the Contractor shall prepare a description of his quality control organization including assigned individuals for prime contractor and any subcontrac- tors. A discussion of corresponding QC responsibilities and related qualifications shall also be provided; channels of interaction between the Contractor and subcontractors should be identified. The QC organization shall be independent of the project management organization and QC personnel shall report to a senior officer within the Contractor's firm! Quality management provisions shall be in accordance with USACE ER 1110-1-263. 52407 0285-33-2105 2-2 - SR300275 , PIRNIE ^--L;^--;-::-----——---..-.-::---^.-.--.r- General descriptions of key QC personnel responsibilities and qualifications are provided for guidance in Sections 2.2.1 through 2.2.3.

2.2.1 Project Manager It should be the Contractor's policy that a Project Manager (supervisor or equivalent) be responsible for the quality of all work performed under his direction. The Project Manager (PM) shall, therefore, direct Contractor's personnel to comply with the specified quality requirements of the CDAP and the Specifications. He shall assure that site i personnel have access on-site to all procedures• - , plans, and specification• s pertainin. g to quality requirements for on-site work activities. The PM may delegate authority to expedite and facilitate the implementation of the CDAP.

2.2.2 Quality Control Manager The Quality Control Manager (or equivalent) has the responsibility for independent- ly monitoring project activities for compliance with any specified chemical quality requirements. It is not anticipated that the QC Manager needs to be present on site at all times.during performance of the contracted work for this project. The QC Manager reports directly to an officer of the Contractor's firm responsible for Quality Control. This officer shall provide a signed letter to the QC Manager describing his responsibilities and authorities. The QC Manager's responsibilities include:

• • ensuring that field personnel are familiar with and adhering to proper sampling procedures, field measurement techniques, and sample identifica- tion and chain-of-custody procedures; , * coordinating with the analytical laboratories for the receipt of samples, the reporting of analytical results, and recommending corrective actions to correct deficiencies in the analytical protocol or sampling; * reviewing all chemical quality management submittals to the USACE by the Contractor and documenting this review by signing the applicable copy;

* monitoring and auditing of quality control procedures for chemical analysis; • completing the chemical quality management portion of the DQC on a daily basis and submitting these reports to the Contracting Officer within five work days of when the work was performed; and 52408 0285.33-2105 ; " ^_::\-.-. '... :. ""..= . ;. 2-3 . '- -,:.." - " .... flR300276 MALCOLM PIRNIE assuring compliance with the Specifications and implementing the approved CDAP.

The QC Manager must be authorized and have the ability to determine the acceptability or non-acceptability of laboratory work with respect to specified quality requirements. His determinations are directly conveyed to his project management and the Contracting Officer's representative. He is authorized to specify the required steps to resolve any work he finds non-acceptable. The Contractor must submit the resume of the person who will be the Quality Control Manager to the USACE. The QC Manager must have at least one year of experience with the review of HTW chemical data. The QC Manager will assess the data quality and implement corrective actions in situations when unacceptable data has been generated.

223 Laboratory Personnel Chemical analysis will be performed at a qualified USACE-validated off-site laboratory. The Contractor's laboratory personnel shall be experienced in the type of testing . to be done. A list of key individuals for various project components shall be compiled. The project-related qualifications of the Contractor's analytical laboratory in terms of equipment, facilities, and assigned scientific personnel (supervisors, chemists, and technicians) shall be provided. The Contractor shall include qualifications of assigned scientific personnel with complete chronological resumes listing appropriate education and experience. The minimum education requirement for supervisors and chemists is a BS in Chemistry or equivalent. Appropriate education and experience required for analytical techniques may vary from one year (for inorganic extractions) to as much as five years (for Gas Chromato- graphy/Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) spectral interpretation). Staff with degrees in other areas of science or engineering shall prove equivalency in education and experience in terms of the number and types of chemistry courses necessary to fulfill a BS in Chemistry. A MS degree in Chemistry or related field may be equivalent to one year of experience. Technicians shall have a minimum of 2 years of college science or the equivalent and shall work under the close and continuous supervision of a chemist

0285.33-2105 2-4 AR300277 NIALCOIM PIRNIE 3.0 LABORATORY AND EQUIPMENT

3.1 PROVISIONS AND SELECTION

For any chemical analysis, the contractor will be required to provide and coordinate the services of testing laboratories to perform specified analyses and services. Where on-site laboratories are utilized, the on-site laboratory must be validated by the U[SACE. The contractor must notify the Contracting Officer in advance as to any laboratory or subcontractor laboratory which will be used. Any changes, such as the • laboratory, instrumentation, personnel, or delegation of laboratory work must be approved by the USACE- in advance. The Contractor should provide a Laboratory Quality Management Manual (LQMM) describing laboratory facilities, list of analytical instrumentation (manufac- turer, model, years of purchase), and complete personnel qualifications, including appropriate education and experience, QC program, sample handling and storage, chain-of- custody procedures, sample analysis and tracking system, etc.

3.2 INSPECTION AND APPROVAL

The Resident Engineer (RE) of the local USACE Construction District/Division should be aware that the laboratory evaluation process can be time consuming and that the RE plays an active role in the initiation procedure. Appendix A at the end of the section, Chemical Quality Management in the specifications, outlines the initiation procedures as well as the three implementation steps of the USACE Commercial Laboratory Validation process. The implementation steps for validation of the Contractor's laboratory by CEMRD-EP-EC are: submittal of the lab LQMM, completion of performance evaluation samples and laboratory inspection. Ordinarily each step in the implementation procedures is completed before the subsequent step is initiated. If the capabilities of the laboratory appear adequate to meet project requirements based on review of the LQMM by CEMRD- EP-EC and the QA Laboratory, matrix-specific and analyte-specific performance audit (PA) samples will be provided through CEMRD-EP-EC for analysis by the laboratory. Upon

52410 0285-33-2105 ' - 3-1 fiR3Q0278 \iALJDOL_M PIRNIE successful completion of the PA samples, a representative of CEMRD-EP-EC and/or the QA Laboratory (acting as an agent for CEMRD-EP-EC) will inspect the Contractor's laboratory and organization. The inspection will concentrate on project-related analyses and procedures. If the inspection reveals deficiencies, the Contractor shall rectify them. If necessary, additional scheduled inspections will be made. The Contractor's laboratory and organization must be approved by the Contracting Officer (assisted by QA Laboratory and the Design Division) prior to receiving any samples for analysis. Satisfactory completion of the entire laboratory validation process and approval of the CDAP in accordance with this document and the provisions of Appendix C of ERlllO-1-263 are required. All laboratories must be validated and approved by the Contracting Officer prior to receiving any samples for analysis.

52411 0285-33-2105 3-2 - ....;.- flR300279 MALCOLM PIRNIE _ 4.0 SAMPLING AND SAMPLE CUSTODY PROCEDURES

Sampling and sample custody procedures shall be consistent with United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and COE, guidelines (NIOSH for air monitoring) unless otherwise specified. Normally, sample handling and chain-of-custody procedures shall follow the latest COE Sample Handling Protocol. In some cases, special COE procedures or American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) procedures (or NIOSH for air monitoring) Yecc^mmended by the USEPA can be used. Guidelines to be followed include:

* Sampling Manual for the Investigation of Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites; Characterization of Hazardous Waste Sites - A Methods Manual Volume II -Available Sampling Methods (USEPA-60U74-04-076), December 1984; • RCRA Ground_ Water Monitoring Technical Enforcement Guidance Document, USEPA OSWER-9950.1, September 1986;

* Preparation ofSoil Sampling Protocol: Tectmiques and Strategies, USEPA- 600/54-83-021)7 August71983; and""' • Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste Physical/Chemical Methods (SW- 846, 3rd edition),

• Sample Handling Protocol for Low, Medium and High Concentration Samples of Hazardous Waste, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Draft September 1988. - -

4.1 SAMPLING PLAN

• The Contractor shall prepare a sampling plan which thoroughly addresses the procedures to be-used to obtain representative soil, drum contents and air monitoring samples, descriptions of sampling equipment, containers and sample site. The Contractor shall provide in the CQCP a description of the techniques to be used (random, stratified, etc.) to select sampling sites... This description shall include the selection rationale and criteria to be employed for each matrix or phase.

0285-33-2105 . , - ——-4-1 . ' 52472 . AR300280 MALCOtM PIRNIE Any air quality sample sites shall be selected with respect to wind direction, site configuration, work activity, and locations of nearby residences or places of employment. Air quality sampling (time-weighted average) shall include ori-site portable (personnel monitoring) and perimeter air monitoring for particulates. These procedures shall be in accordance with the COE "Interim Standard Air Monitoring Guide for Hazardous Waste Sites," June 1984, and appropriate NIOSH methods. For perimeter air monitoring, USEPA methods may be appropriate. The Contractor shall institute appropriate sampling procedures to collect representative samples. The Contractor is required to provide a description of the technique, the rationale, and the criteria to be employed for selecting locations and sampling each matrix. Specific sampling procedures to be used (USEPA, NIOSH, ASTM) shall be referenced. For non-standard or modified sampling methods, detailed procedures with appropriate references will be required. Examples of procedures for the collection of drum" content and soil samples contaminated by leaking drums are described below.

4.1.1 Drum Sampling Methods All sampling of liquids and solid materials from excavated drums shall be performed by the Contractor. Sampling procedures shall be in accordance with procedures set forth in the USEPA document EPA/600/2-86/013 "Drum Handling Procedures at Hazardous Waste Sites." The Contractor shall provide all sample containers and be responsible for sample compositing, packing, preservation and transport. The Contractor shall maintain field log documentation of all drum sampling and chain-of-custody for sample handling. Split samples shall be made available to the Contract Officer or representatives of regulatory agencies upon request. The Contractor shall include in its proposal a detailed, site-specific sampling and analytical program for excavated drums. The objective of this program shall be to characterize the wastes as required to: : .:

* determine waste compatibility to insure safe drum staging and segregation, waste bulking, or recontainerization (screening); determine if drummed material is hazardous;

52413 0285-33-2105 4-2 AR30028I MALGOLM PIRNIE • determine treatment and disposal requirements; and

* allow transportation of wastes in accordance with regulatory requirements.

Except Tor hazardous waste determination, the referenced drum handling procedures list all necessary parameters to" be tested for to achieve the above objectives. Hazardous waste shall be characterized by the following RCRA hazardous waste characteristics:

• TCLP- metals, volatiles, semi-volatiles, pesticides, PCBs, and herbicides;

• corrosiviry;

• ignitability; and • reactivity.

4.1.2 Soil Sampling Methods Soil surrounding excavated, drums suspected to be contaminated by leaking drum contents will be collected for screening and RCRA hazardous waste characterization. Collected soil shall be placed in drums for staging. All sampling of drummed soil shall be performed by the Contractor. Sampling procedures shall be in accordance with procedures set forth in the USEPA document EPA/600/2-86/013 "Drum Handling Procedures at Hazardous Waste Sites." The Contractor shall provide all sample containers and be responsible for sample collection, packing, preservation and transport. The Contractor shall maintain field log documentation of all soil sampling and chain-of-custody for sample handling. Split samples shall be made available to the Contract Officer or representatives ,of regulatory agenciesTJpon request. . The Contractor shall "include in its proposal a detailed, site-specific sampling and analytical program for drummed soil suspected to be contaminated. The objective of this program shall be to characterize the suspected contaminated soil as required to:

* determine waste compatibility to insure safe staging and segregation, waste bulking, or recontainerization (screening); * determine if collected soil is hazardous;

• determine treatment and disposal requirements; and

52414 0285-33-2105 ' . - "•«'"'"'" " : .4R3UQ282 H^LCOLM PIRNIE allow transportation of wastes in accordance with regulatory requirements.

Except for hazardous waste determination, the referenced drum handling procedures list all necessary parameters to be tested for to achieve the above objectives. Hazardous waste shall be characterized by the following RCRA hazardous waste characteristics: "

* TCLP metals, volatiles, semi-volatiles, pesticides, PCBs, and herbicides

* corrosivity;

* ignitability; and

* reactivity.

42 SAMPLE CONTAINERS AND PRESERVATION METHODS

Samples will be collected in precleaned bottles as supplied by the analytical laboratory. All sample containers provided by the analytical laboratories will be properly cleaned for the appropriate trace analysis using USEPA-approved methods. All sample bottles utilized for sample splitting and duplicates will be subjected to the same cleaning procedures. Examples of sample container cleaning procedures are listed below: • AH polyethylene bottles (for inorganic analysis) are to be:

1. washed using a non-phosphate laboratory grade detergent 2. tap water rinsed 3. nitric acid washed 25% v/v nitric acid/deionized water 4. rinsed with copious quantities of deionized water (at least four rinsings) * AH glass bottles except volatile vials (for organic analysis) are to be: 1. washed using a non-phosphate laboratory grade detergent 2. tap water rinsed . 3. rinsed with acetone (pesticide grade) 4. rinsed with copious quantities of deionized water (at least six rinsings and two complete fillings of bottle to overflowing). • All volatile vials are to be: -

1. washed using a non-phosphate laboratory grade detergent 2. rinsed with copious quantities of deionized water (at least six rinsings) 3. dried for one hour in a 103°C oven (without caps and septa)

52415 Q2S5-33-21Q5 4-4 AR300283 MALCOLM PIRNIE 4. cooled and capped with precleaned septa (washed with non-phosphate laboratory grade detergent and rinsed with deionized water, dried at 103°Cfor:ihour.)

-All glassware shall be thoroughly dried before use. Samples should be placed in the sample containers, preserved and analyzed within the holding times as listed in Table QM-5. The Contractor shall specify the sample containers, preservatives and holding times in his CQCP using appropriate USEPA guidelines (e.g. Publication SW-846, 3rd Edition)..

43 SAMPLE HANDLING

43.1 Packaging and Shipping Environmental "samples collected at the site will be considered low concentration samples, where the hazards are thought to be significantly reduced by normal environmental processes. In accordance with the COE Sample Handling Protocol, the following procedures should be implemented for packaging and shipping low concentration samples.

• Waterproof metal or equivalent strength plastic ice chests or coolers only should be used. • After collecting the sample and filling out the pertinent information on the sample label and tag, secure the sample lid with strapping tape on all sample bottles other than VOA bottles, secure the string from the numbered approved tag around the lid.

• Mark volume level on bottle with grease pencil.

* Place about 3 inches of inert cushioning material, such as vermiculite, in the bottom of the cooler.

N. . * Enclose the bottles in clear plastic bags through which sample tags and labels are visible, and seal the bag. Place bottles upright in the cooler in such a way that they do not touch and will not touch during shipment. * Ensure that the cooler will not exceed shipper's weight limit. * Put in additional inert packing material to partially cover sample bottles (more than half way). Place sealed bags of ice around, among, and on top of the sample bottles. 52416 0285O3-2105 . . _..__' ---4-5 ,: ._ ,. ._.-...- A R 30028V MALCOLM PIRNIE

S i ^ *fc a £ "S

Q- € ir? S

S, •gc- 1

d ' i S s, a: s V V V w i Q. 2 1. ^ V 1 X • U" U "U" U" u 1 s •» fo* _ O O Q £ O TABL E Q M O O

ail i^-r?1!

— O S3 f 3 £ S, jt, J -••a 8. £. S£ E JS E «>

o '"§i J1S ^sn i£ SI •8k a*

S s o B I O o r O n o r Aqueou s o poiyethyle n Aque o pole t

_-e y o C So l 1 5- = >

• taiittS-l UM U3 Wt W tl> S e AH30Q285 MALCOLM PIRNIE

.a VI

• c .3

M i H a. e Bfl-J .2 2 H 2 a 1 •o i u •3 u • e e U o 1 O 1u o '•5 u E •6 s •o •o £ o D- a. u d T3 'u [y S. - - P P fc < < H H u c 3 SC*J 10 P "5. z S j^ Jo" 3 s^ 11 II V S . 1 9 t •a "D W i/} ^3 ^s 2. u V 4- a. •a C •a i2 |o •D s a | .1 £ 1 '3 w U '3 u — ° o- - cr -5 ?3? £*^ ^*i K S •o •a p !•• s u o o V u b! K ^ n c .0 _03 *" •& § i| O o Cd "5 l- £2 Z |u S td o S» - ® cY ^O^ <^ c- 2 *» ** KI ^2 •O (jo "^ a 5 — H 1" .> S z ^ §* c 1 O * u .25 W *> u S -^ S .S ^ ri -S 13 "S

2 O Paramete r CJ i (aqueou s sample only ) - Sulfu r Conten t • Organochlorin e Percenta g • Physica l Stat e @ TO P • Phases/Layerin g * Therma l Conten t * I f sampl e i s soli d materia l * Preservativ e refer s t o aq u N A = No t applicable . TCL P a s describe d i n 4 0 C F Se e als o Federa l Register , V 1 * Hydrocarbo n compositio | • Solubilit y i n Wate r 1 » Viscosit y MAUQOyVt PIRNIE * Fill cooler with cushioning material.

• Put paperwork (chain-of-custody record) in a waterproof plastic bag and tape it with masking tape to the inside lid of the cooler.

* Tape the cooler drain shut.

* Secure cooler lid by taping. Wrap the cooler completely with strapping tape at a minimum of two locations. Do not cover any labels.

* Attach completed shipping label to top of the cooler. • Put "This Side Up" labels on all four sides and "Fragile" labels on at least two sides. - • .-..-.

* Affix numbered and signed custody seals on front side, and back left of cooler. Cover seals with wide, clear tape.

For samples from drums, direct discharges, chemical spills or areas where there is little or no evidence of environmental dilution, the packaging and shipping procedures for "high concentration" samples should be followed. These procedures are detailed in the COE Sample Handling Protocol.

432 Sample Labeling All samples will be carefully identified using waterproof labels and indelible ink. The labels will be covered with clear plastic waterproof tape after all sample identification information has been recorded. Labels will contain the following information: sample number, date and time of sampling, source, sampling location, required analysis and sampler's name. Each sample will receive a unique number to allow for the retrieval of information pertaining to a particular sample,

433 Chain-of-Custody Chain-of-custody records begin in the field at the time of sampling. A person is in custody of a sample if the sample is:

• in that person's physical possession; • in view after being in that person's physical possession; * placed in a locked repository by that person, or; • placed in a secure, restricted area by that person. 52419 0285-33-2105 "" .4-6 3R3Q0287 MALCOLM PIRNIE - • A chain-of-custody record will be maintained for all refuse, soil, liquid, and air samples obtained in the field. The person obtaining the samples in the field initiates the chain-of-custody record by reporting the following minimum data as the samples are collected:

Name of person obtaining sample. Sample number. Sample type. Date collected. —_.-.._ Time collected. Amount collected. Containers collected.

Other information such as preservatives added, analyses required, laboratory destination, description, and conditions shall be added as appropriate. Chain-of-custody forms will be completed for each sample at the time of collection and will be maintained while shipping the sample to the laboratory. At each change of possession, the form must be signed by the person relinquishing the samples and the person receiving the samples. This could occur as the samples are transferred from the contaminated portion of the site to a designated clean area, as the samples are transported to the lab, or when the samples are received at the analytical laboratory. All records will be attached to the sample container. Chain-of-custody tapes will be used to seal the con- tainer to prevent tampering and to ensure sample integrity is maintained during shipment. If for any reason, samples on a chain-of-custody log are split and sent' to separate destinations, multiple copies of the logs will be generated with a clear indication of which sample went to which destination. When the sample arrives at the laboratory following shipment, the sample is received by the sample custodian. Any inconsistencies between the samples and the custody record and the condition of the samples and shipping package should be noted at the time of sample receipt. The sample handling procedures utilized by the analytical laboratory should be described in the laboratory QA/QC Procedures Manuals.

52420 0285-33-2105 .... . - .. .. «_ = .. =L^=^J-.__^==^.—4-7 . - - - - - flR300288 MALCOLM PIRNIE 4.4 RECORD-KEEPING PROCEDURES

The following information shall be recorded in a bound field notebook at the time of sampling:

Unique sample designation, location, sketch Name of sampler Weather Method of collection Time and date of sampling HNTJ meter readings (if applicable) Sample matrix, volume Analyses required and sample container types Field measurements and calibration (if applicable) Observations and remarks Sample transport

A bound field log book shall be maintained in which to record the daily activities. All entries shall be made in indelible ink. Incorrect entries will be corrected by a single stroke through the error and shall be verified with the recorder's initials. Entries to the log book shall include:

Date Start and finish times Summary of work performed (inc. samples collected) Name of personnel present Names of visitors Weather Level of personnel protection used during various activities Observations and remarks Signature of person making entry

A sufficient amount of information should be recorded so that the field activities can be reconstructed without relying on an individual's memory.

0285-33-2105 4_8 52421 flR300289 PIRNIE ^ 4.5 DECONTAMINATION OF EQUIPMENT

.The Contractor is required to submit a detailed description of decontamination procedures for sampling equipment as part of the CQCP. Decontamination techniques are described in applicable USEPA guidance documents. Sampling methods and equipment shall be chosen so as to minimize decontamination requirements and the possibility of cross contamination between samples and sample locations. Sample tubing, rope, rods, etc., shall be disposed of after sampling. Any sampling equipment used at more than one location will be decontaminated between locations by following these basic steps:

• The equipment can"initially be steam-cleaned with spray from a portable steam generator. " " '' v "

* The equipment shall then be scrubbed with brushes and non-phosphate laboratory grade detergent and rinsed with potable tap water (minimum three rinses). * The equipment should be rinsed with a solvent as determined by the required chemical analysis.

• The equipment will then be triple rinsed with deionized analyte-free water.

• The equipment will be wrapped with foil or other material to prevent contamination during storage.

4.6 FIELD SAMPLE STORAGE

Field storage of samples shall be adequate to prevent damage, loss, or unacceptable deterioration. Samples shall not be subjected to excessive moisture and the temperature shall be maintained at 4°C. All items shall be stored so that ready access for maintenance is possible without excessive handling. Samples should not be stored on site for more than 24 hours. Site storage of samples prior to and after testing shall follow the above requirements. Storage supervision is the responsibility of the laboratory supervisor. All samples stored on site will be recorded on an inventory record with copies on file in the laboratory and the storage facility, if separate from the laboratory. Sample chain-of-custody procedures shall

0285-33-2105 -„- ,,...,:,= -: ...... 4-9 52422 flR300290 MAUQCXM PIRNIE be maintained. At the end of the project, the Contracting Officer, will decide on long-term sample storage.

02S5-33-2105 4_10 52423 AR30029I MALCOLM PIRNIE i 5.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

5.1 ANALYTICAL METHODS/PROCEDURES

The Contractor shall specifically state in the CDAP the analytical procedures which are proposed. The CDAP shall fully describe and provide references for the specific analytical methods which will be used to determine sample characteristics, transportation and disposal of wastes. Analytical methods used shall be USEPA-approved standard methods (e,g. SW-84_6).wherever practical. Where alternate standard methods are available, normally the most cost-effective method will be used provided it satisfies project requirements" for precision, accuracy, specificity and sensitivity, and has received approval from the Contracting Officer,'QA Laboratory and USACE Design Division. ... Specific sampling procedures and the related extraction procedures and analytical methods (e.g., USEPA, ASTM, NIOSH) selected for chemical analyses shall be submitted by the Contractor. These include field sampling techniques and laboratory procedures. For non-standard or modified sampling methods, detailed method write-ups with appropriate references are required. Specific references shall be cited for selection of sample size, sampling containers, sample container cleaning, sampling apparatus, procedures to prevent sample contamination, sample preservation and holding times (in accordance with USEPA and USACE guidelines). Application of a method shall be limited to specific chemicals or • classes of chemicals and appropriate concentration ranges and matrices to which it is appropriate. • ......

5.1.1 Analytical Instrumentation The apparatus to be used for all analyses shall be identified including:

• Specific field and laboratory instrumentation, including manufacturers, model and detectors.

• - Operating parameters of the instruments and identification of any applicable accessories, such as chromatography columns. MALOCXM PIRNIE * Laboratory chemicals necessary to perform analyses, including list of sources and purity of analytical reference materials. * Standards needed for calibration.

5.1.2 Analytical Methodology Details Published analytical methods used for this contract shall be properly referenced. Any method proposed which is not published shall be described in such detail as to provide the following information:

# Applicability of the method (specific chemicals or classes of chemicals and appropriate concentration ranges and matrices).

* Sensitivity and detection limits of each method which must be sufficient for the objectives of the analysis (e.g. proposed action levels). * Possible matrix or chemical interferences.

5.13 Analytical Procedures The analytical procedures which will be used shall be referenced or described in sufficient detail, including:

• A detailed step-by-step procedure for analyzing samples, as well as instru- ment calibration procedures, or a reference to the appropriate published method. * The procedures used to validate the method used when they are not specified in or differ from those described in the method. These procedures may include method blank analysis, calibration checks, surrogate recoveries, matrix spike recoveries, arid duplicate sample analysis.

5.1.4 Calculations The Contractor shall describe in detail the manner used to obtain sample concentrations in the original matrix from responses obtained in the analysis as they appear in the raw data. The Contractor shall provide equations, units, and formats to be used for the standardization of the data.

52425 0285-33-2105 .. - 5-2 " AR3Q0293 NAAl£OLM PIRNIE —— ^_-.."-._-.:.-.;:^,-u^r^,-.-:-•-. 5.2 ANALYTICAL/STATISTICAL/CONTROL PARAMETERS

The Contractor shall provide in the CDAP the procedures, or reference to standard procedures, which will be used to determine analytical/statistical/control parameters to establish technically sound criteria for each measurement. As part of the analytical quality control (QC) program, the Contractor's laboratory should determine precision and accuracy for each parameter analyzed. The requirements for precision and accuracy shall be no less stringent than the guidelines listed in,SW-846. _ As the number of samples which may be analyzed is relatively small, the use of project-specific precision and accuracy limits may not be appropriate; therefore, USEPA QC acceptancecriteria.specific to the analytical methods selected may be used. The following definitions will be used for this project: .

* Replicate (duplicate) samples are essentially identical samples collected at the same time, in the same way, and contained, preserved and transported in the same manner. : ' . • Split samples are replicate samples given to the Contracting Officer- for analysis. In the SSQMP, QA samples are field split samples that are analyzed by the USACE through their QA Laboratory. . " i • QC samples are replicate samples that are analyzed by the Contractor.

Criteria for data acceptance shall address the items discussed in the following sections in a concise mannet.'

5.2.1 Accuracy of Each Analytical Method Discussion shall include the accuracy of each analytical method as applied to a given analytical instrument for given analytes in given matrices and the degree of accuracy required for this project. Analytical methods shall be validated for the same or similar matrix. This may require discussion of instrumentation, reference standards or spiked samples, sample collection, analytical procedures, calibration procedures and performance evaluation samples. Requirements of accuracy shall be no less stringent than the guidelines listed for each method in SW-846.

0285-33-2105 . . • .:. . . - - -. ;.——5-3 - - '--,- '--•--- --'-."- -- • 52426 I . fiR30029lt MALCOLM PIRNIE 5.2.1.1 Matrix Spikes To determine the accuracy of an analytical method and/or laboratory analyst, a TOgram of sample spiking is carried out. Spiking frequency is based on the reference ethod; generally one of every 20 samples is spiked. The results of sample spiking are used i calculate the quality control parameter (i.e., the Percent Recovery [%R]) for accuracy evaluation. Field blanks are not to be used as a spiked sample. The percent recovery is defined as the observed spiked sample concentration, minus the sample concentration, divided by the true concentration of the spike multiplied by 100.

5.2.1.2 Quality Assurance (QA) Quality assurance samples are evaluated to assess quantitative data systematically and independently, determining if analytical results are within acceptable control limits. The CDAP, with guidance from the Contracting Officer, will delineate the types and percentages of samples to be supplied by the Contractor to the government (e.g., the QA Laboratory) for external QA checks. Quality assurance checks normally comprise a percentage of total samples collected/ analyzed by the Contractor, (e.g., 5-10%) consisting of duplicates, splits and blanks which are collected along with QC samples. Exceptions to the percentage Specified in the CDAP can be made by the Contractor only after receiving approval from the Contracting Officer or Contracting Officer's representative. The Contractor shall develop a schedule of field and laboratory inspections to be conducted and shall support any additional government inspections. The Contractor shall develop a method of performing, documenting, and monitoring quality control operations of the prime contractor and any subcontractors, including frequency of inspections/checks. The Contractor shall provide to NED Laboratories QA samples to be supplied to the government (NED Laboratories) for external QA checks. QA samples are to be collected by the Contractor and shipped to:

USACE _ New England Division (NED) Environmental Laboratory Barre Falls Dam Hubbardston, MA 01452 POC Brian Condike (508)928-4238 ;

0285-33-2105 S4 ' 52427 AR300295 MALJDOLM PIRNIE

522 Sensitivity of Each Analytical Method Discussion shall include the sensitivity of each proposed analytical method in each matrix involved at this site and the sensitivity required for this project. Sensitivity shall be related to detection levels required for this project. Calibration methods for determining detection levels shall be addressed, as well as a discussion of the appropriate detection limits.

5.23 Precision of Each Analytical Method Discussion shall include the analytical methodology used to determine the precision of each analytical methoc- using duplicate samples and instrumentation checks, and the degree of precision necessary for this project. In determining the precision of the analytical method forgiven a'nalytes, the exact sample matrix shall be taken into account. Precision requirements shall .exceed or be equivalent to the guidelines listed in SW-846.

i 5.2.4 Quality Control Samples The Contractor shafl provide a system of internal quality control checks designed to establish technically sound criteria for each measurement parameter which will serve to accept or reject data in a uniform and systematic manner. The Contractor shall perform the QC procedures specified by the referenced method. If the method does not specify a frequency; the QC procedures shall be conducted at a 5% frequency. These checks are designed to insure accirracy"m"the sampling procedure and the analytical methods and include laboratory blanks, laboratory duplicates, matrix spikes, matrix spike duplicates, calibration verification samples and surrogate standards, reference standards and perform- ance evaluation samples. Note that some construction-related sampling does not require QA/QC samples.

5.2.4.1 Surrogate Standards In addition to sample spiking, surrogate standards will be added to all samples and blanks for organic analyses. The surrogates and aceepTable percent recovery ranges for GC/MS methods are listed in the USEPA-approved methods. These ranges are to be used as guidelines in evaluating results because sample matrix effects may present unique

0285-33-2105 " '" . 5-5" -.-." .."--_"," .T"- -. - 52428

M 300296 MAlfXXM PIRNIE problems outside the control of the laboratory. The evaluation of the data will be based on the surrogate recovery and other quality control parameters.

5.2.4.2 Field Blank A field blank is an artificial sample designed to monitor the introduction of artifacts into the sampling and analytical process. Generally, one field blank will be analyzed for each ten to twenty samples. One such field blank, the equipment rinsate, is to be prepared in the field by passing Type n Reagent Water through sampling equipment after decontamination and prior to sample collection to assure that proper decontamination was performed. However, if dedicated sampling equipment is used or the sample is collected directly into the sample container, then no equipment rinsate blank is required. The Type II Reagent Water shall be supplied by the Contractor's laboratory. Equipment rinsate samples apply to liquid samples only. Trip blanks will be required for VOC analysis. Trip blanks accompany other sample containers through sample collection, handling and transportation to identify possible sources of contamination. Trip blanks are to be prepared using Type II Reagent Water at the Contractor's laboratory. Trip blanks are not to be opened on-site, but shall be exposed to the same field conditions as the field samples collected for volatile organic analysis (i.e., trip blanks should not be kept in a sealed container separate from field sample). Trip blanks are applicable only to liquid samples. The frequency for both the QC and the QA lab for trip blanks shall be one set (two 40 ml VOA vials) with every "batch of volatile organic samples sent to the respective QC or QA lab. Trip and field blanks will be submitted to USACE for analysis with QA samples.

5.2.43 Method Blank A method blank will be analyzed with each set of samples. The method blank is defined by following the analytical method step by step, including the addition of all-reagents and solvents in the quantity required by the method. If the cumulative method blank interferes with the determination, steps must be taken to eliminate or reduce the interference to a level that will permit this combination of solvents and reagents to be used. If the method blank interference cannot be eliminated, the magnitude of the interference

52429 0285-33-2105 = 5-6 AR300297 MAUDOiM PIRNIE .::.,i:^^^-^.:::=^--rT^-^r^^viv.-:- must be considered when calculating the concentration of specific constituents in the sample analyzed by the method. The number of method blanks analyzed is determined by the method of analysis and the number of samples analyzed at a given time., At a minimum, there should be a method blank analyzed every 20 samples or for any batch of less than 20 samples.

523 Data Comparability The ContractoT's CDA^P shall include the methodology for data comparison, listing specific units, equations and data formats to be used, including:

• - Checks foi.transrtiittal, data reduction and reporting errors.

* Any process used for data validation must be close to the origin of the data, while being .independent of the data production process.

* Supportive rationale that samples are. representative of the matrix being analyzed or the site location. , ,

5.2.6 Data Validation As part of the analytical quality control program, the laboratory must apply precision and accuracy criteria "to"each parameter analyzed. When analysis of a sample set is completed, the quality control data are reviewed and evaluated to validate the data set. All data must be reviewed and checked independently by an individual familiar with the test procedure who has not generated the data. Quality control limits for surrogate percent recovery and matrix spikes results as referenced by standard USEiPA methods will be used in validating the data. Complexity of sample matrix, blanks and methodology are also considered in evaluating the project data. The CDAP shall also include a discussion of the corrective action to be taken if values are questionable or outside the established control limits. The following items shall be addressed in this section of the CDAP:

* Limits of data acceptability for each analytical parameter and sample matrix along with the corrective action to be taken when these limits are exceeded.

52430 028S33-21Q5 " .:....-". ::'VV--~i—~ —— v 5:7 '3 R 3 0 02 9 8 MAICCXM PIRNIE Information regarding the poor precision shall be documented if the limits are exceeded.

Personnel responsible for initiating and performing the corrective action shall be indicated. -

52431 0285-33-2105 , 5-8 fiR300299 MAUCQLM 1RNII 6.0 CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY

6.1 GENERAL

Calibration procedures and frequency should be consistent with the standard USEPA methods referenced in the CDAP. Nons'tandard calibration will be described for all field and laboratory instrumentation. The Contractor must describe the daily calibration or calibration check of the selected air monitoring instruments. Information shall be provided on the manufacturer, model and accessories which will be used. Analytical balances should be calibrated on a daily basis with Class S weights. All standards, weights, and other reference materials shall be traceable to National Bureau of Standards (NBS), USEPA, ASTM, NIOSH, or another' appropriate independent organization...... _.. •

1=94.32 0285-33-2105 - ...... :._„,_.„..-_ ^™™™__. 6-1 , - . ..-.-..- .. .. . - ... J *•»*** a R 3 003 0 0. 7.0 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES AND SCHEDULES

7.1 GENERAL

The Contractor shall provide and describe in the CDAP a system for the preventive maintenance of all analytical equipment and instrumentation to be used either in the laboratory or on site (including the frequency of these maintenance operations). Equipment maintenance procedures shall be documented for all analytical, testing, and measuring instruments requiring routine maintenance. This equipment should be tagged, with maintenance labels indicating the date of required maintenance, the person maintaining equipment, and the next maintenance date. Detailed records of these operations shall be maintained and must be available for inspection by the Contracting Officer on request. Information pertaining to life histories of equipment maintenance shall be stored in individual logs for each instrument requiring routine maintenance. Routine maintenance should be performed according to manufacturer's recommen- dations defined in the operation and maintenance manuals accompanying the instrument. Major laboratory instrumentation must be maintained under service contract with the respective manufacturers. Scheduled maintenance shall be performed by qualified factory personnel so that laboratory instrumentation is maintained in good condition.

0285-33-2105 -^ ------7-1 52433 AR3Q030 MALJCQLM PIRNIE 8.0 DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORTING

For each analytical method and" major parameter, the Contractor shall provide in the CDAP the following information: ' '. ' • The data analysis scheme, including units and equations, required to calculate concentrations or the value of the measured parameter.

• The principal criteria that will be used to assure data integrity during collection and reporting.

• Plans for treating 'outliers.

• Description of the data management systems, including but not limited to, ' the collection of. raw data, data storage and data quality assurance documen- tation.

* Identification of raw data, data storage and data quality control and assurance documentation with appropriate units (e.g., ug/g, ug/1, mg/m3).

* Identification of individuals to be involved in the reporting sequence.

0285-23-2105 . ,-: -'. -f.^-^.-^.^=..^-.-=, =^.&i V ..„ 52434 flR300302."' '.""' 9.0 GOVERNMENT AND CONTRACTOR REPORTS

9.1 GOVERNMENT REPORTS

9.1.1 QA Result Reports The QA Laboratory should submit QA results to the Contracting Officer in a timely fashion. This will permit rapid result evaluation and problem identification. Initial notification may be, verbal but written documentation should be submitted in a timely fashion. Since understanding of these documents requires trained chemical personnel, the QA Laboratory should compare their results of duplicate or reference samples to those of the Contractor and make appropriate recommendations to the Contracting Officer regarding any corrective "actions required by the Contractor's laboratory. Significant problems and possible solutions should also be included in this report and reported within two working days or sooner.

9.12 Chemical Quality Assurance Report The CQAR is~wfitten by the USACE Quality Assurance Laboratory and sent to the Contracting Officer within_30 days of receipt of the Contractor's data and completion of the quality assurance data. This report should address the following concerns: * overall performance of the laboratory — commercial or USACE — that analyzed the site primary samples; • detailed evaluation of the Contractor's data — laboratory blanks, replicate analyses, agreement between duplicates/splits, acceptability of spike and surrogate recoveries; * comparison of the quality assurance analytical results with those of the project laboratory; * any other problems or issues encountered such as packing and shipment errors, chain-of-custody failures, etc. * lessons learned.

0285-33-2105 ._...... , „"..;. ------' 9-1 flR300303 Tables should be prepared which compare the results for duplicates, splits and blanks sent to both laboratories. The quality assurance data with internal quality control results should be appended. Guidance provided herein is based on Appendix E of USACE ERll 10-1-263, Chemical Data Quality Management for Hazardous Waste Remedial Activities, October 1990,

92 CONTRACTOR REPORTS

92.1 Contractor Chemical Data Acquisition Plan (CDAP) The Contractor must submit a CDAP in conformance with the contract specifications and as noted herein. The CDAP must be submitted to the USACE .and approved by the USACE prior to the Contracting Officer issuing notice to proceed for any activities which involve chemical QA/QC requirements or for the Contractor tor receive any samples for analysis. In addition to the elements detailed herein (SSQMP), the CDAP shall address the following items:

• The Contractor's quality control organization, including the role of any subcontractor(s). * A copy of the letter notifying the Contractor personnel responsible for quality control about exact duties and responsibilities. The letter should be signed by a responsible executive/manager of the company. * Authorities and responsibilities of all quality control personnel. * Schedule of field or laboratory inspections. • Proposed sample collection, handling, storage, transfer, and recording protocols, including chain-of-custody procedures; names of personnel collecting samples; monitoring equipment used (brand, model, serial number); calibration of monitoring equipment; names of work personnel wearing monitoring equipment; description of work site and any unusual conditions. * Selection and testing of replicate and split samples, blanks and standard (known) samples.

52436 0285-33-2105 . '9-2 : ." flR30030U • Provision of performance audit samples to the Contractor's laboratory, if appropriate, and provision of split/replicate samples and field blanks to the USACE for QA purposes.

* Procedures to assess the precision, accuracy and completeness of all measurement parameters. The Contractor shall, also report precision based on standards and known additions. t>, The CDAP shall include a protocol describing corrective actions to be taken by the Contractor and specifically defined feedback systems. Limits of data acceptability shall be included with the corrective action to be taken when these limits are exceeded. Information justifying the poor recovery .of precision will be documented when limits are exceeded. The USACE QA Laboratory will then decide what further corrective action, if any, need be taken. Personnel responsible for initiating and executing corrective action shall be indicated in the protocol. Those individuals responsible for the corrective actions shall sign the bound laboratory log books and all documentation citing the corrective action.

922 Contractor Daily Quality Control (DQC) Reports At the conclusion of each day of work on site involving sampling or chemical QA/QC requirements, the"Contracto r shall prepare and complete a DQC Report which summarizes the activities completed that, day. The DQC Report, at a minimum, shall contain: ------

. • Location of work. • Weather information. * Work performed, including analytical and QC results. • . Specific inspections performed and results (e.g.,~ check for truck decontami- nation). * Quality control problems and corrective actions required (if any). • Written instructions from the government personnel for retesting. • Samples collected, types of test performed, personnel involved and results of tests. * Calibration documentation (procedures and recording)

0285-33-2105 .... _, ... __-_-9-3 fiR3G0305 • Contractor's certifications

* General remarks.

The DQC Reports shall be submitted weekly to the Contracting Officer during sampling activities. This report shall be dated and signed by the Contractor's Chemical Data Acquisition Manager. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to report to the Contracting Officer In writing within two working days any significant problems with analytical procedures, instrument calibrations or QC along with corrective actions that have been taken to solve the problem. The Contracting Officer should coordinate the Contractor DQC reports on a weekly basis with the QA Laboratory. Reports generated by the Contractor regarding significant problems, such as those stated above, should be forwarded promptly to the QA Laboratory when received by the Contracting Officer. It is essential that qualified chemical personnel review these reports for both their validity and accuracy.

923 Contractor Quality Control Summary Report (CQCSR) The CQCSR shall be prepared by the Contractor at the completion of remedial activities at the site. This report shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer for approval The report will include, at a minimum, the following items:

* A brief summary of sampling procedures, noting any deviations from procedures proposed in the CDAP. • A consolidation and summary of Contractor DQC reports. • An outline of QC practices employed, including problems encountered and corrective actions taken.

In addition, the Contractor shall ensure that at the end of the project all temporary on-site facilities have been demobilized. Prior to leaving the site, all equipment, facilities (trailers), and temporary utilities which have entered the Exclusion Zone or are suspected to be contaminated shall be decontaminated. This final decontamination must be documented and signed by the Contractor and submitted as part of the Chemical Data Acquisition Project Summary Report,

52438 0285-33-2105 9-4 AR300306 CO CD

Z O O LU

52439 BR300307 MALODLM PIRNIE

FINAL HEALTH AND SAFETY DESIGN ANALYSIS

CAP CONSTRUCTION AND FLOOD RETENTION BASIN HAZARDOUS WASTE CLEAN-UP MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE ERIE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS OMAHA DISTRICT CONTRACT NO. DACW-45-89-O4)190

MPI PROJECT 0285-33-2

NOVEMBER 1991

MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC

S-3515 Abbott Road P. O. Box 1938 Buffalo, New York 14219

0285-33-2106 , "•--_,:.:.." • i":"". ± ":.:.". : .::.:~":~~.:~":7;1 """ " ' 52440 AR300308 MALJCOUvi PIRNIE HEALTH AND SAFETY DESIGN ANALYSIS CAP CONSTRUCTION AND FLOOD RETENTION BASIN MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION . ."..",. 7. ...".~ ."." .._.,.„ ...... -1-1 1.1 Purpose ...... „...„...... ^ ... 1-1 1.2 . Regulatory Requirements and Guidelines ...... 1-1 13 Site Description and Background ...... 1-1

2.0 HAZARD ASSESSMENT ...... 2-1 2.1._ Hazardous Substance Characteristics and Toxicology ...... 2-1 2.2 Surrimary"of Project eel Risks ...... 2-9 2.3 Description of Remediation Activities ...... 2-10 2.4 Levels of Personal Protective Equipment ...... 2-14

3.0 MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE AND EXPOSURE MONITORING ...... 3-1 3.1 Medical Surveillance ...... 3-t 3.2 Exposure Monitoring ...... 3-2

4.0 HAZARD COMMUNICATION AND TRAINING ...... 4-1 4;i Health and Safety Orientation Training ...... 4-1 4.2 Specialized Training ...... 4-1 4.3 Pre-Remediation Health and Safety Briefing ...... 4-1 4-4 Safety, Meetings ...... ^ ."...... ,.,,...... 4-2 4.5' . Post-Remediation Health and Safety Briefing ...... 4-2

5.0 SITE CONTROL .....,..., ...... 5-1 5.1 " Access/Egress ...... "., . .,-...... _.'.:.,,,....,./...... ,...... 5-1 5.2 Work Zones. '.'-...... "."'.Y7YI.7...... 5-1

6.0 SAFE WORK PRACTICES ...... 6-1

7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING ...... 7-1 7.1 Air Monitoring Instrumentation .. ... t: ...... ^.^ ...... 7-1 7.2 Air Monitoring Requirements ...... '...... !...... 7-1 7.3 Sampling Requirements ...... '...... 7-3

8.0 DECONTAMINATION ...... 8-1 8.1 Personal Decontamination ...... t ...... ^,.. 8-1 8.2 Decontaihinatibn of Field Equipment ...... 8-2 8.3 Decontamination for Medical Emergencies ...... 8-2

, ...... _ ._.. 52441 02B5--33-2106 . i J^****l flR300309 MALOXjVl PIRNIE HEALTH AND SAFETY DESIGN ANALYSIS CAP CONSTRUCTION AND FLOOD RETENTION BASIN MILLCREEK SUPERFUND SITE

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Page

9.0 EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT AND COMMUNICATION ...... 9-1 9.1 Emergency Equipment ...... _^ . _.. 9-1. 9.2 Communications ...... 7. '...... ^ ... 9-2,

10.0 EMERGENCY INFORMATION/RESPONSE ...... 10-1 10.1 Emergency Medical Treatment ...... f.. f...... ^. 10-1 10.2 Personal Injury ...... >".....,-.....,..._... 10-1. 103 Recommended Actions for Personnel Exposure ...... 10-1 10.4 Environmental Accident (Spread of Contamination ...... 10-2 10.5 Adverse Weather Conditions ...... _'.... 10-2 10.6 Fire Protection and Prevention ...... ,^ ,. f 10-2 10.7 Emergency Numbers ...... ^...... 10-3

11.0 RECORDKEEPING ...... 11-1

12.0 SAFETY AND HEALTH PERSONNEL ORGANIZATION ...... 12-1 12.1 Contractor's Personnel ...... 12-1 12.2 Government ...... :. ... 12-3

LIST OF TABLES

Table Following No.______Description ______Page

2.1A Chemical Health and Physical Characteristics - Ground Water Results ...... 2-9-

2, IB Chemical Health and Physical Characteristics - Unsaturated Soil Samples ...... 2-9 2.2 Summary of Projected Risks ...... ~...... 2-9

52442 0285-33-2106 ii flR3003IO MALDCXJU "'IRNII 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE

" This site specific Health and Safety Design Analysis (HSDA) has been developed as a basis for hazard identification, assessment, and evaluation for the construction of the cap and flood retention basin (FRB) at the Millcreek Superfund Site, Erie County, Pennsylvania. This HSDA is intended for internal use by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to "evaluate the Contractor's health and safety protocols. Recommended safety, health and emergency response procedures are outlined for use while construction and remediation activities are ongoing at the site. Included in this HSDA are the recommended assignment of responsibilities, personnel protection minimum requirements, safe work practices and emergency response procedures which the Contractor should describe in the Safety, Health and Emergency Response Plan (SHERP). USACE approval of the SHERP is require'd prior to the commencement of any remedial activities. The document includes historical information germane to remediation activities associated with this site. ,

12 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES

Site activities conducted by the Contractor "are to be in compliance with the Occupational Safety"an'd Health Administration (OSHA) requirements contained in 29 CFR 1910 and 1926 including the final rule.contained in 29 CFR..1910.120. Procedures must also be consistent with the guidance contained in the USACE Safety and Health Requirements Manual (EM 385-1-1), the Occupational Safety and Health Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Site Activities jointly prepared by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), OSHA, USCG and USEPA and USEPA Standard Operating Safety Guides. While this HSDA references these requirements and guidelines in general, it is the responsibility of the Contractor to'meet all applicable laws and regulations.

52443 0285-33-2106" . . _...._' .. '"^-....-. -- -.: .1-1 ...... fiR3003 /SMLDOUvi PIRNIE 13 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

The Millcreek Site comprises approximately 78.4 acres of a former wetland located adjacent to a highly developed residential area within the Town of Millcreek, Erie County, Pennsylvania. The topography is relatively flat, with sparse vegetative growth in the central portion of the site. A wetland of approximately four acres lies southeast of the site, and the eastern corner of the site lies within the 100-year floodplain of Marshall's Run, an intermittent stream bordering the east side of the site. The average fill depth on-site is reported to be seven feet, and the depth to ground water in the center of the site during the Remedial Investigation was approximately seven feet. The Millcreek Site was used in the past for the disposal of a variety of waste materials. Information available on disposal practices indicates that most liquid wastes were bulk disposed within the fill materials. The types of wastes known to be on-site include:

* Foundry sa~nd, apparently contaminated with polynuclear aromatic hydrocar- bons (PNAs), phenolic compounds and metals; * Waste oils containing PCB's and phthalates; • Drums of solvents which could be the source for the numerous volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and other tentatively identified compounds (TICs) detected on-site;

* Construction and demolition debris, including creosote-treated railroad ties;

* Municipal refuse; and

* Other wastes such as polyester resins, ink wastes, caustics, paint wastes and slag which may also be the source of the numerous TICs detected in on-site media.

In addition, junk vehicles and pieces of abandoned equipment are scattered throughout the site.

52444 0285-33-2106 1-2 ... flR3003!2 MAlCOUVt PIRNIE 2.0 HAZARD ASSESSMENT

2.1 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE CHARACTERISTICS AND TOXICOLOGY

The surface and subsurface soils in the southeast and south central portions of the site are contaminated with elevated levels of polychlorinated biphenyls. Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PNAs) were detected in soil samples collected throughout the southern portion of the site. Trace metals, such as lead, copper and zinc, were detected at elevated concentrations throughout the site, but are concentrated in the southern portion of the site. Ground water in the eastern portion of the site is contaminated with volatile organic chemicals (VQCs), specifically, chlorinated ethanes and ethenes. Marshall's Run, a small stream running adjacent to the east side of this site, has been contaminated with VOCs in the past. The on-site and lowland wet area sediments are contaminated with PCBs and heavy metals. The contaminants of concern were selected based upon data collected during previous site investigations, after review of relative concentrations, frequency of detection, background levels, and toxicity.. _The_ contaminants of concern are representative of the various classes of compounds detected above background at the Millcreek Site (volatile organics, semivoiatiles, PCBs, metals, etc.) and can. be used as indicator compounds which are modeled to simulate-the physical behavior and health effects of other compounds in their classes. ..— - ----.--——^ The following selected contaminants of concern are believed to represent the chemical hazards most prevalent at the site. Summary appraisals of each compound of concern are given below. :

* Benzene ,.-. . .-

The most significant health effects of benzene are toxicity to the blood, immune system, and nervous system. Inhalation of benzene has been associated with a decrease in various cells of the circulating blood resulting ----- from bone marrow depression, which may lead to myelogenous leukemia. Benzene metabolites are believed to be the source of the hematological effects as agents known to. alter benzene metabolism (toluene, Aroclor-1254, phenobarbital, ethanol) have also altered benzene toxicity. Ethanol generally increases benzene toxicity. Aplastic anemia has also been associated with

0285-33-2106 " " " 2-1 52445 flR3003!3 MAl£XXM 1RNII benzene exposure. Benzene alters the immune system; symptoms of immune stimulation (allergy) have been reported as a result of occupational exposures. Central nervous system effects such as drowsiness, dizziness; headache. vertigo, delirium have been associated with benzene exposure. Benzene has been classified as a known human carcinogen, by the USEPA. * Isoph crone

Isophorone is an unsaturated cyclic ketone used in the formulation of lacquers. Inhalation exposures of guinea pigs .and rats at concentrations between 300 and 4600 ppm' resulted in irritation of eyes and nose, lacrimation. swelling of the nose, instability, respiratory difficulty or irregularity, diarrhea. and light narcosis. An increased heart rate was observed when exposure was continued over 12 hours. The vapor is highly irritating to the eyes, nose and throat of humans. Transitory conjunctivitis has also been reported at concentrations of 300 ppm for a few minutes. It is reported to be a weak irritant to the skin of rabbits. Isophorone has a relatively low acute oral toxicity in experimental animals.

* Methylene Chloride _ . , . __= _ _; High levels of methylene chloride in air (above 500 ppm) can irritate the yes, nose and throat. On the skin, methylene chloride usually evaporates quickly and causes only mild irritation. However, if it is trapped against the skin by gloves, shoes or clothing it can cause a . If it gets into the eyes, it could cause severe but temporary eye irritation. Methylene chloride can also affect the central nervous system. If it is inhaled at levels above 500_ ppm, it may cause sluggishness, irritability, lightheadedness, nausea and headaches. Some effects have been observed at levels as low as_ 300 ppm. These effects disappear quite rapidly after the exposure ends.

The results of animal studies suggest that frequent or lengthy exposures can cause serious changes in the liver and kidney. However, based on these studies and those of exposed workers, it appears unlikely that methylene chloride will cause serious liver or kidney damage .in humans unless, exposure is very high. In certain laboratory experiments animals exposed to high concentrations of this chemical throughout their lifetime developed cancer. Methylene chloride has not been shown to cause cancer in humans exposed at occupational levels; however, based on animal tests, it should be treated as a potential cancer-causing agent.

* Tetrachloroethene .... . _ ...... The effects of tetrachloroethene on humans have been established primarily from individuals accidentally or occupationally exposed to very high concentra- tions. Exposure to high concentrations of tetrachloroethene causes a variety of toxicological effects in humans. Effects upon the central nervous 52446 0285-33-2106 , - 2-2 ^ :. \ flR3003li» MAICOIM PIRNIE are generally the most noticeable following acute or excessive occupational exposures. Effects upon the kidney and liver have been observed and generally occur after an elapsed period of exposure to high concentrations. Liver effects attributed to exposure to tetrachloroethene at high levels include cirrhosis .of the liver, toxic hepatitis, liver cell necrosis .and enlarged liver. Symptoms of renal dysfunction include diminished excretion of urine, uremia, elevated serum creatinine. proteinuria and hematuria. Overexposure to high but unknown concentration of tetrachloroethene have also been associated with pulmonary damage.

• Vinyl Chloride

Vinyl chloride is a synthetic chlorinated organic chemical used in the manufacture of polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Its presence in site-specific circumstances may be attributable to breakdown of the halogenated aliphatic hydrocarbons TCE and 1,2-trans-dichloroeth.ene to vinyl chloride.

Acute, inhalation exposure to vinyl chloride results in central nervous system effects such as dizziness, giddiness, euphoria, ataxia, headache and narcosis. Skin contact with undiluted vinyl chloride results in frostbite by rapid evaporation and subsequent freezing, it is unlikely that these acute effects would be observed at the concentrations and site-specific exposure scenarios expected. Chronic exposure to vinyl chloride through inhalation has been associated with liver toxicity, fatty in particular. Vinyl chloride is considered to be a suspect carcinogen. "Vinyl Chloride Disease" is the name given.to a syndrome observed as a result of occupational exposure, which is characterized, .by .dissolution of the fingertips, circulatory disturbance in the extremities, Raynaud syndrome, scleroderrna, liver, kidney and lung damage. Inhalation exposures to vinyl chloride have been associated with impaired liver function or liver damage; Symptoms and signs of liver disease.have included pain in the abdomen, evidence of fibrosis and cirrhosis, and hepatomegaly. Severity of the disease appears to correlate with duration of exposure. Subtle neurotoxicity may be associated with occupational exposure, paternal occupational exposure may be associated with fetal loss. Several reports link liver cancer with occupational exposure to vinyl .chloride. USEPA has designated vinyl chloride as a known human carcinogen.

At the Millcreek Site, vinyl chloride was detected in the ground water at concentrations up to 470 ug/1. Inhalation of volatized vinyl chloride gas and direct skin ..contact with vinyl chloride contaminated ground water and saturated soil are potential exposure routes.

* 1.2-Dichloroethene ._ .__ ._ _...... In humans, the most significant impact of 1,2-dichloroethene is on the central nervous system. Inhalation of the chemical has been reported to cause dizziness, drowsiness, vertigo, and intracranial pressure. Exposure to trans-

0285-33-2106 . .__._._...... 23 _-.-.__,.____. . . . 52447 flR3003!5 PIRNIE 1,2-dichloroethene in air can also cause eye irritation. The symptoms subside upon removal from the exposure. The long-term health effects following exposure to low concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethene are unknown. Animals exposed to U2-dichloroethene via inhalation experienced lung and heart damage. Animals fed 1,2-dichloroethene developed pathological lesions in the liver and kidney. 1,2-dichioroethene is not known to have reproductive or teratogenic effects in humans or animals.

Exposure to 1,2-dichloroethene has been associated with nausea, drowsiness, fatigue, intracranial pressure and ocular irritation. No association between increased cancer incidence in humans and exposure to 1,2-dichloroethene is reported. USEPA classifies 1,2-dichloroethene as a probable human carcinogen. * Trichloroethene (TCE}

Trichloroethene is a common industrial solvent used primarily in dry cleaning and metal degreasing. Trichloroethene exposure at levels of 200 ppm has been associated with mild behavioral and psychomotor effects, including vertigo, fatigue and headache. TCE is a suspected human carcinogen. TCE was detected in the ground water at concentrations up to 1000 ug/1. TCE was detected in unsaturated soil samples at concentrations up to 19 mg/kg. The major potential exposure to TCE in site-specific circumstances is by inhalation of volatized TCE.

Inhalation exposure to trichloroethene is associated with central nervous system effects including depression (narcosis). Other symptoms include drowsiness, headache, dizziness, nausea, confusion, facial numbness,and blurred vision. Effects attributed to long-term exposure include decreased appetite and sleep disturbances. Liver damage, including necrosis, has resulted from acute occupational exposure. The USEPA has concluded, however, that chronic exposure to trichloroethene at concentrations found or expected in ambient air, are unlikely to result in liver damage. Kidney dysfunction and failure have also been associated with acute occupational and intentional exposure. Anorexia, nausea, vomiting and intolerance of fatty foods have been associated with long-term occupational exposures, Trichloro- ethene may also be associated with mild eye irritation and dry throats. Skin contact may result in irritation, burns and rashes; it may also act as a sensitizer as well as a primary irritant. Available evidence indicates that trichloroethene is carcinogenic in anirnals. The USEPA has classified it as a possible human carcinogen. * 1.2-trans-dicalQroethene .. ...;. __ ;._._

1,2-trans-dichloroethene is a synthetic organic chemical used in industry as a solvent and as a chemical intermediate. It is also believed to be a product of the anaerobic reductive-dehalogenation breakdown sequence of chlorinated 52448 0285-33-2106 2-4 .-....-. MAIODLM PIRNIE ethenes. It is often found "in ground water contamination situations involving halogenated aliphatic hydrocarbon solvents. One concern over the presence of 1,2-trans-dichioroethene in the ground water is the potential for being transformed into the more toxic compound, vinyl chloride. 1,2-dichloroethene occurs in" cis-and trans- forms; commercial mixtures are generally a combina- tion..of. .the two. The cis- form has an acrid, ethereal odor and may be narcotic or irritating at high concentrations. 1,2-dichloroethene is not believed to be carcinogenic. .' . "

1,2-trans-dichloroethene was the most frequently detected VOC found in the ground water., at the Millcreek site. Acute toxic effects from short-term exposure to 1,2-trans-dichloroethene at the maximum reported concentration (29,000 ug/1) in ground water would be unlikely under site-specific circum- stances. Concentrations in the soil ranged up to 6800 ug/kg.

* 1.1. l-Trichloraethane ;.,...

. • 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (methyl chloroform) is a colorless, synthetic chemical widely used as a degreasing arid dry cleaning solvent. At airborne concentra- tions of 350-500 ppm, there may be slight changes in perception, and methyl chloroform odor would be pronounced. At higher concentrations, dizziness, throat irritation and narcosis may occur. .

The principal health effect of overexposure to 1,1,1-trichloroethane involves the central nervous system. While thresholds for such effects are difficult to characterize, levels around 1000 ppm may result in coordination problems. At much higher levels, anesthesia becomes apparent and death may occur at 1 to 3 percent due to anesthesia and/or cardiac toxicity. Unlike other chlorinated hydrocarbons, 1,1,1-trichloroethane has not been associated with clearly evident liver or kidney damage. Exposure via inhalation is a potential exposure scenario, however, the levels encountered are expected to be lower than those associated with perceptible health effects.

Detections of methyl chloroform were observed in the ground water at concentrations up to 960 ug/I and in the soil up to 99 ug/kg. • 1.2-Dichloroethane ..._.__.. . _,, .._..- . - _

1,2-Dichloroethane, commonly known as ethylene dichloride (EDC), is a chlorinated hydrocarbon used primarily as a component of leaded fuel and as an intermediate in the production of several chlorinated hydrocarbons, . including vinyl chloride, trichloroethylene, and perchloroethylene. Little is known about EDCs potential toxic effects other than by inhalation. Subtle neurological effects, .including fatigue, irritability and sleeplessness, may be experienced at levels below 100 ppm. 1,2-Dichloroethane is considered to be a suspect human carcinogen. Acute health effects from ingestion of EDC are not well documented.

0285-33-2106 -- ._....-.-..:-_- : . 2--S "- .---. • 52449 flR3003!7 PRNIE Ethylene dichloride was infrequently detected in the ground water at concentrations of 3 ug/1, 6.0 ug/1 and 7.6 ug/1.

• 1.1-Dichloroethene .. ; . . .

1,1-dichloroethene (vjnylidene chloride) is a synthetic halogenated aliphatic hydrocarbon and is used as a copolymer in the production of synthetic materials including Saran. Vinylidene chloride is also used in the production of adhesives and synthetic fibers. It is highly reactive and, in the presence of air, can form explosive, complex peroxides. Formaldehyde, phosgene and hydrochloric acid may be produced from such an explosion.

The health effects of dichloroethene (vinyiidene chloride) in humans are generally unknown. In animal studies at high concentrations, dichloroethene has caused liver, kidney, heart and lung damage. It has also caused nervous system disturbances and death after brief exposures. After prolonged exposure at lower concentrations, liver damage has been observed. Exposure through inhalation appears to be the route in which the most harm occurs in animals. After brief exposures to high levels of dichloroethene, similar effects can be expected to occur in humans. The potential for inhalation is the most important route of exposure.

Detections of vinyiidene chloride in the ground water were limited, with concentrations ranging up to 16~ug/L

• Naphthalene Naphthalene is a chemical derived from the refining of petroleum and coal tar distillation. It has various uses including the production of "mothballs, pesticides, fungicides, and detergents. The main acute effect of naphthalene is the formation of cataracts, resulting from oral exposures of experimental animals. Hepatic changes, including increased liver weight, elevated alkaline phosphatase and aniline hydroxylase activity, and increased lipid peroxidation, may also result from oral exposure to naphthalene. No evidence of immunotoxicity was found in mice adminis- tered naphthalene by gavage. Naphthalene has been shown to inhibit mitochondrial respiration. In humans, dermal and ophthalmological changes have been observed in workers occupationally exposed to naphthalene.

The occurrence of naphthalene at the Millcreek Site is limited to the surface and subsurface soils. Naphthalene will bind tightly to soil particle organic constituents and, therefore, will tend not to mobilize into the ground water. Consequently, the exposure modes for naphthalene in the site-specific setting are through inhalation of contaminated airborne soil particles and through direct skin contact. 52450 02S5-33^2106 2-6 4R30Q3I8 MALGOLM PIRNIE * Benzol a Ipvrene .. .._.__..._...... , ____-.._ ...:. . ..

Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are a diverse class of compounds derived. from__both. natural and man-made sources. Benzo(a) pyrene (BaP), one of the most hazardous of the PA&s, causes cancer in mice and rats. (BaP) is readily absorbed by all routes of exposure. Absorbed (BaP) is distributed rapidly throughout the body, metabolized to conjugated derivatives, and eliminated. (BaP) is a well-studied, well-established experimental carcinogen. Its carcinogenicity has been demonstrated in laboratory animals by all routes for which humans would normally expect to be exposed. Few reports are available on the noncarcinogenic systemic effects of (BaP) in humans or experimental animals following inhalation, oral, or dermal exposures. Occupational exposures to complex mixtures and industrial processes that include PAHs have resulted in toxic effects including a variety of skin"lesions and non-cancer lung diseases such as bronchitis. However, it is not possible to determine from those studies the effect of individual PAHs. Results from studies in rodents indicate that in-utero exposure to (BaP) either by .the oral route or by injection is associated with developmental toxicity and adverse reproductive effects.

• Bis r2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate . \ * Subacute administration of high doses of bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate can produce hepatomegaly, hepatic peroxisome proliferation, and induction of peroxisomal enzymes in the rat. It also has effects on lipid metabolism in the liver and other tissues, and has been shown to induce hepatic mixed function oxidase activity in the rat. The evidence. for the genotoxicity of bis (2- ethylhexyl) phthalate is very weak. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) indicates that there is sufficient evidence to substantiate the carcinogenity of bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate in experimental animals, but insufficient evidence in humans. Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate has been shown to induce liver tumors in rats and mice. It has been hypothesized that this compound is a non-genetic carcinogen; its ability to produce tumors may relate to proliferation of peroxisomes. There is evidence that compounds which induce peroxisome proliferation in the liver of rodents do not have the same activity in humans, and hence the hepatpcarcinogenicity observed in rodents may not be indicative of a carcinogenic potential in humans.

Several species of phthalate compounds were detected at the Millcreek Site. Their occurrence is mainly confined to the soils and sediments on the site. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate has been selected as an indicator substance to describe the hazards associated with exposure to the phthalates as a class. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate poses -the most serious health hazard of the phthalates because of its potential for carcinogenic health effects. The primary exposure routes for bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate in the site-specific circumstances are via inhalation of contaminated airborne paniculate matter and through direct skin contact with contaminated .ground water. 52451 0285,33-2106: . . .._.__ _ ...... 2-7...... AR30CI3I9 MAlJOOUvi PIRNIE

Polvchlorinated biphenvls fPCBs'i

Polychlorinated biphenyis (PCBs) are highly stable, nonflammable compounds formerly used in capacitors and transformers and in the manufacture of plasticizers, hydraulic and lubricating fluids, as well as in paints and inks. PCBs are toxic to humans through ingestion, inhalation, and direct skin contact. The general population is exposed to PCBs, primarily through consumption of fish. Dermal absorption of PCBs may occur, but there is not adequate data to determine rates of absorption. Due to their lipophilicity, PCBs are distributed to the fat, skin, and other fat-containing organs. Occupational exposure to PCBs has been associated with reversible skin lesions and subclinical alterations of serum enzymes suggestive of liver enzyme induction and possible hepatocellular damage. The USEPA has determined that the positive evidence for carcinogenicity in animals, along with inade- quate evidence in humans, place PCBs in probably human carcinogen.

Four different species of Aroclors (1242, 1248, 1254, 1260) were identified at the Millcreek Site. Their occurrence is limited to the soils and to the on-site sediments. PCBs bind firmly to the organic constituents of soil particles and are, therefore, largely immobile or will migrate very slowly, except in the case of erosion transport. To facilitate discussion of the PCBs as a class, Aroclor- 1248, the most prevalent species observed, will be used as an indicator compound.

Concentrations of Aroclor-1248 in the soils at the site ranged up to 18 mg/kg. The primary modes of exposure to Aroclor-1248 are via inhalation of contami- nated soil particles and direct skin contact with contaminated soils. Acute health impacts from exposure to Arocior-1248 are unlikely because of the low probability of exposure. The probability of a chronic PCB exposure is very low, based on the contaminant's absence from any completed long-term exposure pathway such as daily skin contact, ingestion, or inhalation. Any non cancer chronic health impacts would be overshadowed by the potential carcinogenic effects of PCB exposure.

Lead is found throughout the environment at variable concentrations, depending upon local geological circumstances. Human-caused sources of lead contamination include its use in paint pigments, dyes, and inks. Frequent, low-level exposure to lead in the ambient air may result in hematologic, neurobehavioral and kidney effects.

High exposures to lead may result in kidney and brain damage. Low-level exposure may result in neurobehavioral deficits and growth retardation in young children and hypertension in middle-aged men. Effects on heme (a constituent of hemoglobin) synthesis also occurs at very low exposure levels

0285-33-2106 2-S . . . ; 52452 flR300320 PIRNIE In addition, low-level exposure to lead decreases the circulating levels of an active form of Vitamin D in children., This form of Vitamin D is largely responsible for calcium homeostasis in the body. Lead exposure of a mother during pregnancy may result in preterm birth, reduced birth weight, and decreased intelligence quotient (IQ) for the infant. USEPA has determined that data were sufficient to consider lead an animal carcinogen, but inade- quate for derivation of an estimate of carcinogenic potency in humans. Therefore, lead is classified as a probable, human carcinogen by the USEPA.

Lead was observed in the surface soils, sediments, ground and surface waters at the Millcreek Site. Its inclusion as a contaminant of concern in this assessment is based on its detection in the surface water (the swamp area on the southcentral side) in concentrations greater than the primary ^drinking water standard and its presence in a TCLP extract from a soil sample at greater ^thari, USEPA

22 SUMMARY OF PROJECTED RISKS

Due to both the disposal practices and the variety of wastes allegedly disposed of at the Millcreek Site, the potential exists that, during the field activities, workers will be exposed to hazardous substances. - - - . Although no work_at a site containing. chemical contamination can be considered completely risk-free, logical and reasonable precautions can be implemented to provide an .adequate level of protection for workers. The integration of medical evaluations, worker training relative to chemical hazards, safe work practices, proper personal protection, environmental monitoring, work zones and site control, appropriate decontamination procedures and contingency planning into the project approach minimizes the chances for unnecessary exposures and physical injuries, thereby ensuring the health and welfare of on- site workers. .~., 7." ; :::.""• ••__•_-•-— - -- --—-—---- Workers will potentially be exposed to both physical and chemical hazards during cap construction. Potential physical hazards will exist while working around heavy earthwork equipment such as excavators, dozers, and backhoes. Potential chemical hazards may involve exposure to contaminants of concern during intrusive site construction activities. Chemical health and physical characteristics for chemicals detected above background at the.. Millcreek site are presented in Tables 2. 1A and 2. IB. A detailed summary of potential hazards associated with specific construction activities is presented in Table 2.2...... __._ :. - _ .:.:::-.. .._...._

0285-33-2106...... ____...... : .. .ig___.-=.=. , . 52453 AR30032I PIRNIE

TABLE 2.1A

CHEMICAL HEALTH AN0 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS TABLE Ground Water Results

Concentration Vapor lonization Parameter Frequency Maximum Minimum TLV Pres. Pot. VOLATILE ORGANICS (ug/l)

1,1,1-Trichioroethane 3 510 ' 63 350 ppm 100mm 1.1-Dichlorocthane 6 420 . "9 100 ppm 1S2 mm 1,1-Dichioroethene 2 7 4 1,2-Dichloroethane 1' 3 50 ppm 62 mm 9.64 ev. 1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 14 4900 1 Acetone -26 8100 28 1000 ppm 266 'mm 6.69 ev Benzene 15 . 4 0.1 10 ppm 75 mm 9^5 ev Methyl Chloride 8 690 -2 500 ppm 350 mm 11.35 ev Toluene - -1 - 0.2- -. - - - 200 ppm ' 22mm 8.82. ev Total xyienes 2 no 2 100 ppm , 7 8.56 ev Trichloroethene 6 1000 ' 0.9 100 ppm 58 9.47 ev Vinyl chloride . '.,-..._ 8 470 30 . Ippm 2580 9.995 ev ACID EXTRACTABLES (ug/1) ' 2,4-Dimetfiylpheriol 1 2

BASE/NEUTRAL EXTRAC. (ug/1)

Acenaphthene ' 1 0.4 Bis (2-ethy[hexyl) phthlate 6 ' 81 0.8 Diethylephthalate 1 0.2 . -.- - Di-n-butyl phthalate . 1 0.4 Fluorene 1 0.2 .1 ppm 71 aim 19.69 Isophoroae 4 180 . .1 25 ppm .2 mm Naphttialene 2 4 1 10 ppm .05 mm 8.14-ev N-Nitrosod IphenyJamine 11 1 0.2 Phenanthrene 1 0.2 •....:'..-- -- PCBs fug/1) i i Aroclor-1260 2 0.44 . ' -024 i TRPH(mg/l) 5 1.30 1 J

___ 52454 0285-33-2106 " "" " "~ T2.1A - I " UR3.00322' MAKXXM PIRNIE

TABLE 2.1A

CHEMICAL HEALTH AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS TABLE Ground Water Results

Concentration Vapor Eonization Parameter Frequency Maximum Minimum TLV Pres. Pot. TOTAL METALS~(mg/l)

Aluminum 29 26 0.18 Aisenic 16 0.10 0.005 Barium 28 1.1 0.06 Cadmium Dust 24 0.017 0.005 Calcium 29 230 0.49 Chromium 10 0.036 0.007 Copper 21 • 1.25 - . 0.006 Iron 29 80 0.06. Lead Dust/Fumes 15 0.17 0.05 . Magnesium Fume 29 140 . 0.21 Manganese 29 2.S 0.096 I Nickel 3 0.10 0.07 Silver 4 0.009 - - 0.005 i 29 l Sodium -340 .13 ~ i Zinc 29 0.46 0.025 I SOLUBLE METALS (mg/I)

Aluminum 29 3 ... 0.03 Arsenic 13 0.027 0.005 10 ug/m3 Barium 28 0.56 0.05S mg/m3 Cadmium 7 0.010 D.006 ."2 riig/rn3 Calcium 29 170 - 0.12 Chromium 1 0.010 1 mg/m3 Copper 12 0.073 .. ._ 0.006 I mg/m3 Iron 29 21 0.02 Lead 4 0.07 Q.0.055 mg/m3 Magnesium 29 86 ' 0.13 Manganese 29 1.7 0.006 5 mg/m3 Nickel 1 0.06 1 mg/m3 Silver 4 0.011 0.006 .01 mg/m3 Sodium 29 s 300 . ... 11 Zinc Oxide Fume 26 0.15 O.G06 5 mg/m3 NOTES: ....'.

I. Number of detections docs not include QC duplicate samples. 2, Total number of samples collected: 29 3. List includes parameters detected during previous RI.

52455

02S5-33-2106 " T2.1A - 2 flR3G0323 \4__\LCOL_M PIRNIE

TABLE 2.1B CHEMICAL HEALTH AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS TABLE Unsaturated Soil Samples

Concentration Exposure Vapor lonization Parameter Frequency .Maximum Minimum Limit/ Pres. Pot. TLV VOLATILE ORGANICS

1,1,1-Trichioroethane 99 43 1900 mg/m3 100 mm 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroetbahe 1 1 35 mg/m3 8 mm 11.1 ev 1 . l-Dichloroethane 2 55 - 52 . 400 mg/m3 182 mm 1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 8 6,800 5 790 mg/m3 ISO . ' 9.65 ev 2-Butanon'e 1 32 ~ " 590 mg/m3 70 mm 9.48 ev 4-Methy!-2-pentanone 1 19,000 Acccone --50 51.000- - - 14 2400 mg/m3 266 mm 6.69 ev Benzene 23 -• • 190 0.3 10 ppm 75 mm 9.25 ev Bromodichloromenthane , 1 Carbon disulfide 2 41 4 20 ppm 300 mm 10.06 ev Chloroform 13 510 0.3 240 mg/m3 160 mm 11.42 ev Ethylbenzene 150,000 - .: - . 0.6 435 .mg/m3 7.1 mm 8.76 ev Methyleae Chloride 107 5,700 " .6 500 ppm 350mm 11.35 ev Tetrachloroethene 12 470 0.9 100 ppm 14 mm 9.32 ev Toluene . . _ . _ 56 38,000 - 0.3 200 ppm 22 mm 8.82 ev Total xylenes U . 1,600,000 7 4 435 mg/m3 7 mm 846 ev - ---2T Trichloroethene " 19,000 " 0.6 100 ppm 58 mm 9.47 ev t-l,2-Dich!oroethene 5 . 18 1 790 mg/m3 180- 9.65 ev 265 mm Vinyl acetate 1 1 ————————— ACID EXTRACTABLES

2,4-Dimethylphenol 13 12,000 " 64 2-MethyiphenoI 19 810 ' 57 4-Chloro-3-.methylphenol 1 4,800 - , - • 4-Methyiphenoi 24 8,200 , =-4 . Phenol 21 14,000 . . ..420. 19 mg/m3 .36 mm 84 ev Benzyl alcohol 2 - - 66 20 METALS (TOTAL) (ug/g)

Antimony 16 100 . 0.69 ,5 mg/m3 Arsenic -108 38 1.3 10 mg/m3 Barium 110 51,000 ..." 6.1 .5 mg/m3 Cadmium 50 790 0.58.2 mg/m3 Chromium 110 5,290 34 1 mg/m3 Copper 108 19,000 - -- - -0.45 1 mg/m3 Iron 110 . 203,000 150 Lead 103 ' 2,400 - 4.8 .05 mg/m3 Manganese 110 32400 . . ... 74 5 Mercury 24 1.5 O'.ll .1 Nickel 110 3,010 3.4 1 Selenium • ' 21 U 0.66 .2 Silver 67 33 ... - 045 .01 Zinc Oxide Fume 89 12,300 - . ..:. 8.9 5

0285-33-2106 " •;••---———v-^- - 72.13 -1 - - - 52456 AR30032U MALGOLS4 PIRNIE

TABLE 2.1B CHEMICAL HEALTH AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS TABLE Unsaturated Soil Samples

Concentration Exposure Vapor lonization Parameter Frequency Maximum Minimum Limit/ Pres. Pot. TLV TRPH (ug/g) 102 27,000 22 " _ BASE NEUTRAL EXT (ug/kg)

2-Chlotonaphl halene 1 430 2-Mcthylnaphthalcne 85 20,000 3 Acenaphthcnc 37 83,000 ' 17 AccnaphthyJene . 1 530 Anthracene 39 180,000 31 Benzidine 17 1,800,000 ". 1000 Benzoic acid 1 140 Bctizo(a)amhracene 82 220,000 = 57 Benzo(a)pyrene 85 190,000 . ' • 27 Beii2o(b)nuoranthene 86 590,000 " 90 8enz0(g(h,i)perylene 70 97,000 110 Bis (2-cthythcxyl) phthalate 41 16,000 64 Butyl benzyl phthalate 1 120 Cfarysene 91 140,000 77 Dibcnzo(a,h)anthraccne 51 39,000 90 Dibcnzofuran 52 - 39,000 1 Dicthylphthalate 2 9 8 Dl-n-butyl phthalatc 56 7,600 69 5 mg/m3 <0.01 mm Di-n-octylphthalatc 16 1,400 5 Ruoranthcne 82 510,000 94 Fluorene 13 82,000 ...... 50 .2 mg/m3 >1ATM 15.69 ev Ideno(l,23-cd)pyrenc 70 110.000 94 Isophorone 4 83,000 ;, 540 I'M) mg/m3 .2 mm Naphthalene 72 49,000 T" 100 50 mg/m3 .05 mm S.14 M-Nitrosodiphcnytamine 40 7,200 37 Phenanthrene 80 300,000 5 . . . .__-.._ Pyrcnc 83 390,000 .. . 90 ...... PCBi (ug/kg)

Arochlor-1248 14 18,000 50 Arochlor-1254 U 1,600 50. ArochloM26Q 7 8,200 50

______NOTES:

1. Frequency of detection based on field samples only. 2. Total number of samples collected: 110 ' 3. Parameter list includes only those chemicals detected in 1988 field investigation and 1985 RI. 4. Minimum concentration listed includes estimated (J). values. .

52457 0285-33-2106 T2.1B - 2 ^o/ 3R300'325 MAICOLM PIRNIE

"3 j; i O >i-_ " , - ' f ^a a.a "" g 2| ISf" '--"• =lit =-"^;" "- 2 £ A- 1 fl « | g

rt ^ "1 r* ^ O "^ t_^ - J/? ,— " ^^ I t t.l ? I s « 1" " 1 a 1 II - i-rt ^ *^ ^ "o tJ -S ^ ^* -'d**3 " ^S - J? ^ f^ nj "~* (C *J ^ jy u- **• 3- :' e .2 u £-. iril ll .11 -5l« ft^"| fr-5 ' e u -J 4> O 3J > 2" — "2 CO"- 5y-c!»Caci.an^^ 5..= 5 1 1 . ! 1 - -1 5 ^1 1 ^.-1 ° II 2 f 1 '^ ^ |l !i||i j .11 iJll If ll^flf! v; <£ ^"o"*- ajCD tfl-S1*^ <^ ^ t_J ofiQ^.S. ^J">2"3cO?^ Ei" *— ~« i-i ^N en Tf-- to " " so r^coc^

s: Cft '^T C ' " ». " " ~ ^J_'- "> rC _i 2 - 03 .,.",,._,.,-,--,-- s . 1 I 1 -f-; : -"•- P § n | S £ 9 c 5 8. - - £ " 1 - - 5 •s ••jPj w aO j- u . - g w . .3...... _ - ... l3 "w C a a N -. '3 1 § o §-! ,11" "" /"-" - ' " ra 2 "w ._W1 OC-1-*-- *-^00 3 "*" --TI "5 •rSa ^*" cCo c c y •? ^" 3 S ^ *" aM -^}

M o. S G "o C S3 .2 • u G 5 ^ ob 2S ' ";£ a 3

2 .. _ • 03 2? c .S , - ....-._ =3 •S 11 H a 5 0 •rt. O ^ " « C _C e __ - - . .. .. _ ^ '*fa• >« S § WO - - • U. vj U S

52458 flR300316 ...... ' MALGOLVI PIRNIE

u .2 ^ £ O ;. /, — * S y w 'S "^ ' '^ 5^ _\j 2 5 •" 3 " Ji w C K " S 5 15 ob s2 *" — — 3 •a y, n -S * g 6, *i C O* ^ g — w o S —. .h W *— ^ -o " £ 8 j. •o ^ jy: w c "S "ri .5 J S5 M 'l"^- . *« o "a •— s - 1? o *• _ so 2 1 -S 1 - S .s. a « u -s 'Z S- I •- ?" J la. 1 111 If I I e §gg 5 o^'o^nr§ « w § t^ &"V ^3 ^k ^j^>O ''seO f ™- ' fed e Q fc* ^? ^ O '^* « 1 « a •is S >> O "5^ "if -S1 & lllllfrSa^ 3 -Q ^ _2 3 e^y * j ™ •*" S H? 8 3 ac "* !>.w-l='') ^^a '•5 * v •§ I'^lsH |I-3 1 1 a | •* -1 s § ^wj-gg-uefiS^ « c«o"E.2i "el? 2 5 £ 1! u S^F^^ — -5« 1 1; 1 1 * I "3 s .-8 -c |S'12-0^33 ;8 | 8 Illl < Q.W D o, cn a o- c< Sg| l| § || *g !l c " — rsi to ^ —*

a ,= -3 -- - 'S .9 5 s* ^.S ca ;g; ;•=. g ui ^ 11"" . V a T e 2 : -—2 o a- c i> = y ™ij \/-J^ *^ U" UOT. ^4> •a O "2 )™ Q ~ O« '^ 1 =1 ^ 8. ri I f ' 2 -'-".*- "S c S So 5 -S g a o 8 > W C __ . -I" o E « §. . s -S . 5 g «> S -5 g « M ^ R ** ^ "O 1 •s i; "s. f ^ J* K § " g" > g 3* U _5* 2 O an »« XaI tS=O ^— 3fi -» 3S 1 I "Sil 2 £ «*•= •s| -g Sc Jff.g'S .= g _0 '^ ~ TABL E 2 4 O F PROJECTE D RISK S nsportin g soi l t o variou s a i angle d i n auger . >• 'Engin g load s ove r personne l 2 8sibi c exposur e t o sit conl i Binhalatio n an d ski contac i E 'S "§ * "S M *S « !3 !5 .. S SfsSJ^ § S£ S P £ *S « t« O S ^ (5 «3 C3 5 1 2 § ^ wD S -W " • I -1N « rf -r4<^ rr vS ^d *-^? f*l rf? * 1 w c .S , u S1 e 3 (ad i« y ~ S •" = c * 1 . C « jr 3 S 0 3 J Ml— 00 "O u *~" •= - C2 ui 2 cj § 2.3 | £ BIT '—— £ I " "S 2 * II i £ - 3 "C -3 *— 3 j= _ — i> 3 C! *x < il "u "c <§ M o '3 c e w ^ Q* fc" ^ l/l ^^* ^"" o _ "" t1 = SP 3 '3 .S &c °" —t: *s* -o**- j gs p1 3 — " 1 ii S Sf ^ E'~ p co -a "5 ' - - 1 s -g -fr a " .- S Jd c o- Co a .E -J c > a- u OT U3 u M u

jg 'o .s* •G t. V

u 2 Mc ts C 1 1 .2 c 2 fc- oS. E "•.55 g. £ E » o t,~2 -x^ "c i^S

- * 3 52459 g AR3QQ327 MALCOLPIRNIEM

.i- *- "H Sfi oLH r^ « O?- 4*-^• S5 «. 2 -a ^ ^ H ' » 6 "S = -0 M R. S •S.-g 15 3 ^ ,S 3 •§-. * ^ f *< *^ Si S So -s.- e . a, S o - s ^ . . .s .« 5 H J= Preventio n i p avoi d area . f y authoritie s an d isolat e are a t o preven off-gassing . Wea r require d PPI : jvhe n w > i n thes e areas , Wea r PP E i f splashin g o mistin occurs . smooth j Specia l car e an d precaution s n exposure . Contai n an y leakag e d safe ! remediate . , Segregat e contaminate d soil s t o drums/container s bein g transferre d f splashing . Secur e hos t o preven mpye i surface s an d tread; . Sole shoul no t b e wet , slipper y condition s aroun d hoses. : an d Handling ; Ai r Monitoring . I n gene ard s associate d wit h contenls . openings . dusly . , moved Notif y al l employee s potentiall 1 . Avoi d area s o f agitate groun wate r ca i 1 . Sta y clea r o f movin g equipmen t an d surf ; 3 . Wea r prope safet y shoe s wit h goo d igri p 1 , 2 & 3 . Se e section s o n Dru m Excavatio 2 . Se e Section s 6 an d 7 We l dow n area w 2 . Direc t discharg e hos o eliminal pote n 4 . Inspec t drum s an d container prio r 1 0 b e

, 6 U) e $ fr _: ta - D = 5- - "-• - - - « « c c w ij »-» *s ' - — ^ T) u '= 1 s.E-5-1? fl G £• E? u ^i '-5 - - - • - - ^ *•- « s 1 >fO > Mo "S'S" —T— ~" . 3 c -=•-« e --' - - 1l|Ss &.S g| * f If i|: . "3 w J §,. * j=- • Potentia l Hazar d J-lffJl-s - ^3 £ ^ 5 - ^ ' TABL E 2. 2 11 1| .a, f . £ S-to ? 55 ^ Potentia l fo r fir e o explosio n Spill s an d contaminate soils . Movemen t o f drums/contain e in g potentia l fo r leaks , spills . Possibl e exposur t o sit co m Constructio n equipmen t mov e vi a inhalation . Toxi c exposure . sur e t o workers . AR Y O F PROJECTE D RISK S 5 r-i fS t-1 T-« r^ fi> TT ^ r4 =S>. w tb « T3 - . ----- i Z I = T3 c ?! w U 'u * a c •a y .H Q. o .a •o o o 0 y « S _>. Siih« 'g J s a •ai > O 60 — ii 2 "3 -o M-a'2; t_ c u c . . iS_ S"3 5 4a— .C *S CO iss-sj ° s < 0 J= o c ^ = « .?f ' f-1 1 5P « 1 --••"• •c i a =B .s s «. •ca -Q j v..H " ------" - I s ^Ei c on. E . « I'i 3 Jt « 1 1 1 s5 § 0-r S i D -o -o ,S ~ S F

_btc> ^ Sn ..... <* .* ,o 1c^ 1 «o a c - rj w> X .S ' •oc a s 5 s • ^d s 3 u u M (3 Q Q CO

•d K CO

52460 flR300328 MALCCXM PIRNIE 23 DESCRIPTION OF REMEDIATION FIELD ACTIVITIES

The Contractor shall fully describe each of the major categories of construction activities planned to be used and assess both the potential hazards and minimum protection levels required. The Contractor shall assess the following work activities, at a minimum, in detail as part of the Contractor's Safety, Health and Emergency Response Plan (SHERP). The levels of protection described below are minimum levels of protection; the Contractor may need more-stringent protection depending upon the specific construction activities to be undertaken and/or the results of work area air monitoring. The rationale for levels of protection is based upon the potential for generating dust or releasing vapors during the course of remedial activities. Respirable dust levels at 5 mg/m3 are not expected at the outset of activities. Level D will be required initially with an option for wearing a dust mask. At respirable dust concentrations of 5 mg/m3 and above, respiratory protection will be upgraded to, at minimum, a half face respirator equipped with disposable cartridges approved containing high efficiency particulate filters (NIOSH/MSHA approved) (see full description of standard personal protective equipment triggered by this action level in "Level C-Particulates" as described in Section 2.4.3). If volatile organic vapor .levels exceed 5 ppm greater than background persistently in the breathing zone of the worker who has the potential for greatest exposure, the respiratory protection will be upgraded to a full facepiece respirator equipped with appropriate cartridges for toxic dusts, fumes and mists (see. full description of standard personal protective equipment triggered by this action level in "Level C-Vapors" as described in Section 2.4.2). For organic vapor concentrations in excess of 5 ppm persistently above background, supplied air will be required (see-full description of standard personal protective equipment triggered by this action level in "Level B" as described in Section 2.4.1). Air monitoring results will form the basis for determining levels of respiratory protection during site activities, as follows: _..... r.=.. .=..... _.-

Particulates - The action level for upgrading to a half-face respirator is 5 mg/m3 respirable-particulate. For concentrations below 5 mg/m3, dust masks will be available to workers as optional equipment. For concentrations above 5 mg/m3, a full facepiece air purifying respirator will be required. The rationale for the selection of 5 mg/m3 respirable particulate as the action level is provided in Section 2.4.

52461 0285-33-2106 * _~ ~ ~ "_ ———- ——— ;__ - - .2-10

flR300329 PIRNIE Organic .Yapors - The action level for upgrading to a full facepiece air purifying respirator equipped with combination organic vapof/p articulate cartridges will be persistent organic vapor readings above background to 5 ppm above background in the breathing zone of the mosrexposed worker. For persistent readings greater than 5 ppm above background, supplied air respirators will be required.

Protective clothing will be worn to limit skin contact, and safety gear will protect against physical hazards, as deterrnined_base_d onjsite conditions by the Site Safety Officer. . Minimum levels of protection will be as specified below. The Contractor has the option of incorporating more stringent guidance as conditions warrant. Table 2.3 lists levels of protection and the corresponding exposure limits.

TABLE 23 Protective Level Allowable Exposure Limits D - 0-1 ppm volatile organics (above background) 0-5 mg/m3 participates .

C 1-5 ppm volatile organics (above background) > 5 mg/m3 particulates

B 5-500 ppm volatiles (above background)

Field Engineering and Surveying Field engineering and surveying will be performed in all areas of the site. These activities will include monitoring the progress of cap" and FRB construction, and various .other site tasks. The level of protection for each activity will depend on the likelihood of exposure to contaminants. In general, surveying work will take place above ground, without appreciable risk of corning in contact with contaminated soil. This work will, at minimum, require all personnel to wear Level D health and safety protection, using the guidance outlined above for respiratory/personal protective upgrades. Most field engineering will also take place above ground and may require Level C-Particulate protection. Clearing, Grubbing and Brush Removal Clearing, grubbing and brush removal prior to proposed cap and FRB construction activities will be the first task performed. The clearing of all trees will take place above the

52462 0285-33-2106 " . " " , 2--11 . flR300330 /Vt/VLDOyVt PIRNIE ground surface. Clearing, grubbing and brush removal may result in the disturbance of some soil. Whenever the ground surface 'is disturbed, proper air monitoring will be required. This work will, at minimum, require all personnel to wear Level D health and safety protection, using the guidance outlined above for respiratory/personal protective upgrades. It may be necessary to upgrade to Level C Particulate or Vapor personal protective levels should airborne contaminants be detected. Since these tasks will require the use of motorized equipment, the hearing protection requirements as contained in 29 CFR 1926 J52 shall be met, as appropriate. Temporary Construction Facilities Electricity, telephone, water, sanitary facilities, first aid, fire protection, site security, access roads and parking, field offices, staging area, decontamination area and temporary and chain link fences will be installed on the site. The level of protection for each activity will depend on the likelihood of exposure to contaminants. This work will, at minimum require all personnel to wear Level D health and safety protection, using the guidance outlined above for respiratory/personal protective upgrades. Any activities which involve excavation or augering will require air monitoring and Level C-Particulate protection. It may be necessary to upgrade to Level C-Vapor respiratory protection if volatile vapors are' detected. Electrical work performed shall be in accordance with requirements contained in 29-CFR 1926.400. , . . Unloading Incoming Materials Materials such as imported fill (soil), topsoil, seed, filter fabric, select backfill, fencing, equipment, etc. will be delivered during the course of the project. This work will, at minimum, require all personnel to wear Level D health and safety protection, using the guidance outlined above for respiratory/personal protective upgrades. If unloading of the materials disrupts waste fill or contaminated surfaces, Level C-Particulate personal protective equipment will be required along with air monitoring. Vehicles leaving a contaminated area shall be decontaminated. Vehicles that 'did not come in contact with waste fill or contaminated areas will not require decontamination. The drivers shall remain in the vehicles during the entire time which the vehicle is within project limits, otherwise the driver shall undergo personal decontamination.

0285-33-2106 . 2-12 52463 AR3Q033I PIRNIE Site Preparation/Grading * Site preparation witi involve numerous activities such as heavy equipment operations and on-site hauling of the excavated material Each activity may require a different level of protection, dependent on the risk of exposure to contaminants. Excavation of fill' and native soils will potentially expose workers .to both contaminated soil and contaminated ground water. This work will, at minimum, require all personnel to wear Level D health and safety protection, using the guidance outlined above, for respiratory/personal protective upgrades. Real-time air monitoring will also be required. Hauling and redistribution of the excavated material on-site to achieve desired grades may require Level C particulate or vapor protective equipment. The redistributed on-site soils/waste fill should be compacted as soon as possible...... ---—...-•—,.---=-—--.• -==-.-• ------Dewatering Ground water may be .encountered during cap and FRB construction activities. This water will be pumped out and discharged into the pn-site pond or depressions. The water being pumped may be contaminated and therefore all personnel involved in this activity will be required to wear Level D protective equipment, using the guidance outlined above for respiratory/personal protective upgrades. Real-time air monitoring will also be required.

Drum Excavation and Handling The Contractor may encounte'r "drums and^containers containing unknown substances during site grading and preparation. The Contractor will be required to place exhumed drums in overpacks as necessary, log and field screen them using an appropriate hazardous material field screening kit, and immediately transport them to the on-site drum accumulation area for sampling and analysis prior to final disposition. If buried drums and containers are damaged in-place or during removal and materials are released, the Contractor will be required to collect those materials to the maximum extent practical and place the released .materials in clean drums. The Contractor will also be required to transfer the drummed materials to the on-site accumulation area for subsequent sampling prior to final disposition. ... - In general, drum excavation will proceed from the downwind end of the area towards the upwind end. The excavation area will be monitored for volatile organic vapors using a flame ionization detector (FID), and/or a photoionization detector (FED). At this time a

0285-33-2106 "' '"' " ~; —;—— ' . "~~" "."2-13 " '" ' " 52464 flR 3.003 32 ".._.... . • PIRNIE USACE representative may also log materials and collect samples for chemical analysis. The Contractor's foreman will direct the Contractor's personnel and equipment during the drum excavation. Other personnel, with the exception of the USACE representative will stand clear of the immediate area during the drum excavation. All work will proceed in a slow controlled manner so as to minimize the potential dangers associated with excavation and extraction of buried drums or other forms of waste materials. Level C-Vapor protective equipment will be required if the total organic vapor reading in the breathing zone is between 1 ppm to 5 ppm above background. All drum excavation work shall be conducted in accordance with OSHA interim standard, 29 CFR 1910.120, (Hazardous Waste Site Operation and Emergency Response). Backfilling This work will, at minimum, require all personnel to wear Level D health and safety protection, using the guidance outlined above for respiratory/personal protective upgrades.

2A LEVELS OF PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT

The Contractor shall provide all on-site personnel including the Contracting and visiting USACE, USEPA and PADER personnel with appropriate personal safety equipment and protective clothing. The Contractor shall provide up to four sets of equipment for Contracting Officer's Use. The Contractor shall ensure that all safety equip- ment is used properly and protective clothing is kept clean and well maintained. The Contractors certified Industrial Hygienist shall establish "action levels" at which the specified minimum levels of protection are either upgraded or downgraded based upon air monitoring. results and direct contact potential. Protocols for formally changing the level of protection and the communication network for doing so shall be .described in the SHERP. The action level for dust is protective for exposure to PAHs, which have been detected at high concentrations in unsaturated soil samples on-site. The action level for volatile organics is based on USEPA's rationale for total organic vapors. This method was adopted as a conservative measure, because of the variety of construction activities planned, including intrusive activities at various locations on-site. The high concentration of PAHs in unsaturated soil samples is of concern from an inhalation standpoint, on the site. The OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL) which i

0285-33-2106 "' 2-U

flR300333 MALCOLM PIRNIE applicable for these compounds is the PEL for coal tar pitch volatiles. Coal tar pitch is composed almost entirely of PAHs consisting of anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, phenanthrene, acridine, chrysene and pyrene. Five of these PAHs were detected in unsaturated soil samples collected on-site: , ••

Anthracene . 31 - 180,000 ug/kg Benzo(a)pyrene 27 -190,000 ug/kg Phenanthrene 5 - 300,000 ug/kg Chrysene " ,77 - 140,000 ug/kg Pyrene 90.-390,000 ug/kg

The sum of the maximum values is 1,200 mg/kg. If it is assumed that, during dusty conditions of 5 mg/m3, the airborne concentrations of coal tar pitch volatiles is in the same proportion as is found in the soil (using the maximum values), the level would be 0.006 mg/m3 coal tar pitch volatiles, which is 3% of the coal tar pitch volatiles PEL. Therefore, an action-level of 5 mg/m3 respirable dust is protective regarding likely exposure to these PAHs in airborne dust. The standard USEPA levels of protection are described as follows. While the respiratory protection shall be determined by the action levels, the needs for upgrading protective clothing shall be determined by the Site Safety Officer based upon the potential for inhalation or other opportunity for skin contact; safety gear will also be determined based upon safety hazards. . / 2.4.1 Level B

• Level B protection should be .selecte» d whe> n the highest level of respiratory protection is needed. The following equipment comprises Level B protection:

* Pressure-demand SCBA or supplied air respiratory system (OSHA/NIOSH approved), operated in the positive pressure mode and equipped with an emergency escape cylinder.

• Hooded, one-or two-piece chemical-resistant suit, Saranex-coated Tyvek or equivalent. • Gloves - Outer (Neoprene, nitrite or equivalent).

• Gloves - Inner (latex).

0285-33-2106 . 2-15 52466 AR3ij'0'33ii MAKXXM PIRNIE • Boots - Outer (Neoprene). * Boots - Inner (steel toe and shank). • Two-way radio communications. * Hard hat. . .

Level B protection will be used for the following conditions: • Total vapor levels exceeding 5 ppm above background in the breathing zone as indicated on a volatile organic vapor analyzer [i.e., Flame lonization Detector (FID) or Photoionization Detector (PID)].

• Confined space entry.

2A2 Level C-Vapor Level C-Vapor protection shall be selected when the types and concentrations of respirable material are known, when appropriate air purifying cartridges are available for the known contaminants, and continuous air monitoring of the site and individual work areas has been established. The following equipment comprises Level C protection:

• Full-face piece, air-purifying respirator with disposable combination organic vapor, and high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) cartridges (MSHA/NIOSH approved).

• Hooded one-or two-piece chemical resistant suit, Tyvek or equivalent (Saranex coated if splash hazard exists).

• Gloves - Outer (Neoprene, nitrile or equivalent).

• Gloves - Inner (latex). • Hard hat.

• Boots - Outer (Neoprene); Inner (steel toe and shank); or combination.

* Two-way radio communications (for remote operations).

* Escape air mask [for imminent danger to life or health (IDLH) conditions].

Level C-Vapor protection will be utilized under the following conditions:

0285-33-2106 ' 2-16 52467 3R300335 MAicoyvi PIRNIE • The types of hazards encountered on-site are well known and are compatible with Level C protective equipment. * Total organic vapor reading in the breathing zone of between 1 ppm above background to 5 ppm above background as indicated on an PID or a FID.

• Limited contact with soils and ground water in contaminated areas, such as trench excavation, dewatering, soils removal and monitoring well installation.

Air purifying respirators _ shall not be used in IDLH atmospheres or in atmospheres containing less than.. 19.5% or greater than 22% oxygen by volume.

2.43 Level C-ParticuJate Level C-Particulate will be required when dust levels in the work zone exist at equal to or greater than 5 mg/m3 and. total organic vapor levels are below upgrade action levels. The following equipment comprises Level C protection:

* Half-face piece air purifying respirator with disposable high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) cartridges (NIOSH/MSHA approved), as appropri- ate relative to detected contaminants.

• Gloves - Outer (Neoprene, nitrile or equivalent).

* Gloves - Inner (latex), . * Hooded one- or two-piece chemical resistant suit, tyvek or equivalent (saranex coated if splash hazard exists).

# Hard hat. . * Boots - Outer (Neoprene); Inner (steel toe arid shank); or combination.

• Two-way radio communications (for remote operations).

When dust levels in the work zone exist at equal to or greater than 5 mg/m3, as indicated by a respirable dust monitoring instrument, a half-face air purifying respirator with disposable HEPA cartridges shall be worn. Air purifying respirators shall not be used in IDLH atmospheres or in atmospheres containing less than 19.5% or greater than 22% oxygen by volume. Level C-Particulate wUlJ>e utilized where there is limited potential contact with soils in contaminated areas. General activities include Contaminant Reduction

0285-33-2106 " ' 2-17 , 52468 flR30"033"6' "" MALCOLM PIRNIE Zone activities or Exclusion Zone activities such as clearing and grubbing, sheet pile installation and removal and backfilling.

2.4.4 Level D Level D is the basic work uniform and should be worn only outside the Contaminant Reduction Zone and Exclusion Zone at this site. The following equipment comprises minimum Level D protection:

Coveralls (Tyvek). Boots/shoes - steel toe and shank. Hard hat (face shield optional). Gloves. Safety Glasses. - ; Two-way Radio Communications,

Level D protection will be utilized under the following conditions:

• No total toxic materials are known to exist as indicated by no readings above background levels on volatile organic vapor analyzers (i.e., PID and/or FID) and dust levels of less than 5 mg/m3.

* General work activities such as in the Support Zone, namely reconnaissance, traffic control, equipment transfer and construction of Support Zone activities.

• Oxygen levels are at least 19.5% or less than 22% oxygen by volume.

02S5-33-2106 2-18 52469 3R30~0337 MAIOXM PIRNIE 3.0 MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE AND EXPOSURE MONITORING

3.1 MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE

Contractor and subcontractor personnel, whose work may involve potential chemical exposure or present unusual physical parameters, will have initial employment, annual, and employment termination examinations^ MedicaL evaluations will, be performed by an occupational physician designated by the Contractor. Purpose - The purposes of the medical evaluation are to: 1) determine fitness for duty on hazardous waste sites, and 2) establish baseline data for future reference. Such an evaluation is based upon the employee's occupational and medical history, a comprehensive physical examination, and an evaluation of the ability to work while wearing protective equipment. Supplemental Examinations - Supplemental examinations may be performed whenever there is an actual or suspected excessive exposure to chemical contaminants or upon experience of exposure symptoms, Or following injuries or temperature stresses. Medical Records - In conformance with OSHA regulations, the Contractor will maintain and preserve medical records for a period of 30 years following termination of employment. Employees or their designated representative are the only persons who shall have access to the results of medical testing and medical records and analysis. Medical records will not be released to any person without express written consent of the employee. Contractor - The Contractor must supply medical certification for all Contractor and subcontractor personnel who will work at the Millcreek site. All Contractor and subcontrac- tor personnel involved in site activities will undergo a baseline medical examination at the expense of the Contractor, conducted by a board certified physician practicing occupational medicine. Contents of: the examination must be determined by the Contractor or subcontractor's medical consultants, who will have been provided by the Contractor or subcontractor with adequate information on the site hazards to enable an evaluation of fitness to be made. The examination must include an OSHA-type evaluation of the workers' ability to use respiratory protective equipment. Personnel who have undergone the medical examination and analyses within the past year may not need to be re-examined. A medical

0285-33-2106 ..,..'__ ..... il " MALCOLPIRNIEM approval is required prior to the start of work from the Contractor's or subcontractor's medical consultant to the USACE Contracting Officer certifying the medical fitness of each person to perform his duties and to wear respiratory protection. Medical Examinations - Medical surveillance protocol is the physician's responsibi but shall meet applicable OSHA the requirements contained in standard 29 CFR 1910.

3.2 EXPOSURE MONITORING

Whenever feasible, the level of protection established for workers will be based upon quantitative determinations of the chemical agents and physical stresses present in the work environment Heat Stress Monitoring - Heat stress is probably one of the most common and potentially serious illnesses at hazardous waste sites. The potential for heat stress is dependent on a number of factors, including environmental conditions, clothing, workload, physical conditioning, and age. The effects of heat stress can range from mild symptoms, such as fatigue, irritability, and decreased mobility, to death. The body's responses to heat stress include the following:

• Heat Rash: A result of continuous exposure to heat and humidity, heat rash decreases the body's ability to tolerate heat. • Heat Cramps: A result of profuse perspiration with inadequate fluid intake and chemical replacement, heat cramps are signaled by muscle spasms and pain in the abdomen and the extremities.

* Heat Exhaustion: A result of increased stress on various organs. The signs of heat exhaustion include shallow breathing; pale, cool, moist skin; profuse sweating; dizziness and lassitude. * Heat Stroke: The most severe form of heat stress, heat stroke must be relieved immediately to prevent severe injury or death. The signs of heat stroke are red, hot, dry skin; no perspiration; nausea; dizziness and confusion; strong, rapid pulse; coma. The body must be cooled and medical attention sought immediately.

Measures to prevent heat stress include regular work breaks during field activity, regular Quid replenishment, and the availability of shelter (i.e. shaded area). All personnel

0285-33-2106 3-2 52471

flR30Q339 MAKXXJV1 PIRNIE will be made aware of the symptoms of heat stress. Should one or more symptoms be detected, the affected worker will be assisted to seek shade, drink plenty of fluids, and seek medical attention, if required. Heat stress monitoring of ail personnel will commence when the ambient temperature in the work areas is above 70°F. Monitoring of heat stress conditions for persons wearing impermeable clothing shall comply with current ACGIH TLV's for heat stress. The frequency of heat stress monitoring shall depend initially on the air temperature adjusted for solar radiation and the level of physical work. A standard mercury-in-glass thermometer shall be available on site to measure air temperature. The frequency of heat stress monitoring shall govern the length of each work cycle, Several screening techniques can be used to detect early warning signs of heat stress. The following method, based on body temperature measurements, is simple and straightfor- ward and may be conducted by the Site Safety and Health Officer as indicated. Body temperature may be measured with a ditigal-readout clinical thermometer with disposable tips. ' Body temperature may be measured orally (3 minutes under the tongue) with a clinical thermometer at the end of each work period and before drinking. Oral temperature and the end of the work period should not exceed 99.6°F. If it does, the next work period should be shortened by 10 minutes (or 33%), while the length of the rest period stays the same. However, if the oral temperature exceeds 99.6°F at the beginning of the next rest period,. the following work cycle should be further shortened by 33%. Oral temperature should be measured again at the end of the rest period to make sure that it has dropped below 99°F. No worker may be permitted to continue wearing semipermeable or impermeable garments when his/her oral temperature exceeds 100.6°F.

Cold Exposure - Field personnel may be required -to work under conditions at or below freezing which could contribute to frostbite... Extreme cold for a short time may cause severe injury to the surface of the body or result in profound generalized cooling, causing death. Areas of the body that have a. high surface-area-to-volume ratio, such as fingers, toes, and ears, are the most susceptible to frostbite. Two factors influence the development of a cold injury: ambient temperature and the velocity of the wind. Wind chill is used to describe the chilling effect of moving air in

0285-33-2106 :_.--..---- "_. : . : " 3-3"" • -- — — , AR3003 MAUDOLM 1RN1I combination with low temperature. For instance, 10°F with a wind of 15 mph is equivalent in chilHng effect to still air at -18°F. , As a general rule, the greatest incremental increase in wind chill occurs when a wind of five mph increases to ten mph. Additionally, water conducts heat 240 times faster than air. Thus, the body cools suddenly when chemical-protective equipment is removed if the clothing underneath is soaked with perspiration. Some conditions of cold stress:.

1. Frost nip or incipient frostbite. The condition is characterized by sudden blanching or whitening of the skin. 2. Superficial frostbite. Skin has a waxy or white appearance and is firm to the touch, but tissue beneath is resilient, 3. Deep frostbite. Tissues are cold, pale, aiid solid; extremely serious injury.

Systemic hypothermia is caused by exposure to freezing or rapidly dropping temperature. Its symptoms are usually exhibited in five stages: (1) shiveru^ (2) apathy, listlessness, sleepiness and (sometimes) rapid cooling of the body to less than 95°F, (3) unconsciousness, glassy stare, slow pulse and slow respiratory rate, (4) freezing of the extremities, and finally, (5) death.

SYSTEMIC HYPOTHERMIA Risk Factors medications/drugs alcohol . wetting wind . medical conditions (circulatory problems) age Recognition mild hypothermia subtle behavioral changes decreased worker efficiency decreased level of communication forgetfuUness repetitive behavior poor motor skills • poor judgement

028*33-2106 3-4 52473 flR3003UI RNIE distraction " ...... denial most thermoregulatory mechanisms intact shivering goose flesh peripheral vasoconstriction (cold pale skin) person feels cold

moderate hypothermia conscious incapable of functioning effectively grossly disoriented mental function behavioral changes stupor disorientation hallucinations inappropriate affect bizarre behavior some loss of thermoregulatory mechanisms shivering absent goose flesh disappears slowed heart rate dilated peripheral blood vessels diminished feeling of cold

Treatment

All Stages . • rewarming _ passive - conservation of body heat active - applying heat

COLD STRESS

Types Systemic hypothermia Local hypothermia

Consider Air temperature wind speed equivalent chill temperature

Warning Signs Systemic - maximum severe shivering Local - pain in the extremities

0285-33-2106 . . , "3-5 52474 . -.flR30Q3L*2 ' MAlCOLSi PIRNIE HYPOTHERMIA: Prevention/Recommendations

loose fitting, dry clothing; outer windbreak garment high calorie diet avoid bare metal avoid exposure to moisture adequate work/rest periods - avoid/limit risk factors availability of enclosed, heated environment availability of dry changes of clothes conduct body temperature monitoring availability of hypothermia packs fluid replacement (warm drinks, soup) buddy system

LOCAL HYPOTHERMIA Types frostnip superficial frostbite deep frostbite - trench foot - non-freezing immersion foot - non-freezing

Risk Factors duration of exposure ambient temperature wind contact with cold metal or moisture clothing race acclimatization previous cold injury host factors (medications, smoking)

Recognition frostnip whitened area of skin slightly burning or pain superficial frostbite waxy, white skin; firm sensation; some resiliency feels warm to victim without pain deep frostbite skin cold, numb, pale, firm or hard

02S5-33-2I06 3-6 0-247M^TC5 AR3003U3 MALCOLM PIRNIE Treatment frostnip simple rewarming frostbite transport rather than definitive care as thawing and refreezing can cause severe damage institute basic measures, as follows: DO

prevent further heat loss and protect from further damage (cover); get victim to protected environment DO NOT

allow victim to smoke or drink alcohol, rub skin with anything; thaw with warm water or dry heat; walk on thawed foot/use thawed hand; break any blisters; apply heat

0285-33-2106 " " "" ~ " 3-7 " " ' 524?^ flR'3'O 031*1*' PIRNIE 4.0 HAZARD COMMUNICATION AND TRAINING

4.1 HEALTH AND SAFETY ORIENTATION TRAINING

All Contractor and Subcontractor personnel involved with the remediation activities will have completed the health and safety training requirements of 29 CFR 1910.120. This training, designed to orient personnel potentially exposed to hazardous substances, health hazards, or safety hazards, includes the following:

• Safety and health risk analysis; _-_,_:__.... • Use of personal protective clothing; * Work practices by which the employee can minimize risks from hazards; • Safe use of engineering controls and equipment;

• Medical surveillance requirements including recognition of symptoms and signs which might indicate overexposure to hazards;

• General safety concepts; and

* '. Emergency 'response plans.

42 SPECIALIZED TRAINING

All Contractor and subcontractor field personnel will be knowledgeable in the ' particular hazards that may be encountered during this project and shall be familiar with all safe operating procedures. They shall be trained to a level that will be consistent with the worker's particular job function and responsibilities. Field personnel shall also be familiar with all emergency response procedures outlined in the SHERP.

43 PRE-REMEDIATION HEALTH AND SAFETY BRIEFING

All Contractor and subcontractor personnel involved with the project shall attend a site-specific health and safety training program. The topics to be discussed include:

0285-33-2106 4-1 .477

•v • flR3003U5 I » PIRNIV_ «*Jl_^VrfT_JE T 1 * Characteristics and potential hazards of chemicals and other contamination known to be present at the site;

* Personal protective clothing: function, donning/doffing, demonstrations;

• Respirators: selection, use, care; * Personal hygiene;

• Environmental monitoring;

• Decontamination procedures; * Work zone designations; * Heat stress; • General safety concepts; and • Site contingency plans.

4.4 SAFETY MEETINGS

Safety and health briefings will be conducted at least weekly by the Site Safety and Health Officer as designated by the Contractor. Problems relative to respiratory protection, inclement weather, heat stress, or the interpretation of newly available environmental monitoring data are examples of topics which might be covered during these briefings. An outline report of meetings giving the date, time, attendees, subjects discussed, and instructor shall be maintained and copies furnished to the designated authority on request. Visitors shall be properly oriented to existing site conditions, planned activities, levels of personal protection and other procedures outlined in the Contractor's SHERP.

4.5 POST-REMEDIATION HEALTH AND SAFETY BRIEFING

A post-remediation health and safety briefing shall be conducted by the Site Health and Safety Officer to review, discuss, and evaluate past project activities. The effectiveness of the Safety Program Plan shall be evaluated. An outline report of the meeting shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer.

52478 02SS-33-2106 4-2 flR3003«*6 MALCOLM

5.0 SITE CONTROL

A log containing the names of personnel, site entry and exit times and their levels of personal protection will be maintained by the Site Safety and Health Officer.

5.1 ACCESS/EGRESS

Access;and emergency egress routes will be shown on the Contractor's drawings.

52 WORK ZONES

Work Areas or Zones shall be designated by the Contractor. The Contractor shall clearly layout and identify these Zones in the field and shall limit equipment, operations and personnel in the Zones as described in USEPA Standard Operating Safety Guides.

Exclusion Zone(s) (Hazardous Work or Hot Zone). Initially the entire site shall be designated the Exclusive Zone. After establishing the Support and Contamination Reduction Zones, the remaining portions of the Site shall be the Exclusion Zone as designated on the drawings. The level of personnel protective equipment required in this Zone shall be in accordance with the • requirements of Section 2.4 as a minimum or as determined by the Safety Officer after monitoring and on-site inspection.

• Contamination Reduction (Buffer) Zone(s). This Zone will occur at the . interface of Exclusion and Support Zones and will provide for the transfer of construction materials from clean areas to site dedicated equipment, the decontamination of waste transport vehicles prior to entering the Support Zone, the (decontamination of personneljmd clothing prior to entering the Support Zone, and for the physical segregation of the Support and Exclusion Zones. The level of personnel protective equipment required in this Zone shall be in accordance with the requirements of Section 2.4 as a minimum or as determined by the Safety Officer after monitoring and on-site inspection. • Support (Safe or Clean) Zone(s). This Zone will be established on the Site and is defined as the area outside the zone of significant contamination. The Support Zone shall be clearly delineated and shall be secured against active or passive contamination from the work site. Eating, drinking and smoking will be allowed only in this Zone. The level of personnel protective equip- ment required in this Zone shall be in accordance with the requirements of Section 2.4 as a minimum or as determined by the Safety Officer after

0285-33-2106 : . V- ....„.___-,--, .....-.,-,-' -5-1 ' """ • 52479 flR3003l4? MAKDLM PIRNIE monitoring and on-site inspection. The function of the Support zone is to provide:

* An entry area for personnel, material and equipment to the Exclusion Zone of site operations.

* An exit area for decontaminated personnel, materials and equipment from the Contamination Reduction Zone of site operations;

* An area for location of Support Area facilities; and

* A storage area for clean safety and work equipment.

Examples of other "clean zones" on the site include areas which have been regraded and covered with clean soil, and new roadways not used for hauling potentially contaminated spoil. Decontamination of personnel will be performed as outlined in Section 8.0 before entering the Support Zone. Access of non-essential personnel to the Exclusion and Contamination Reduction Zones will be strictly controlled. Only personnel who are essential to the completion of the task will be allowed access to these areas and only if they are wearing the prescribed level of protection. Entrance of non-contractor or subcontractor personnel must be approved by the Site Safety and Health Officer or the Contracting Officer. " "

52480 0285-33-2106 5-2 MALCOLM PIRNIE 6.0 SAFE WORK PRACTICES

The understanding of basic, precautionary concepts regarding personal health and safety is essential for field personnel assigned to sites where chemical contamination is known or suspected to be present. The Contractor should elaborate in' his SHERP all safe work practices. At a minimum, the safe work practices to1 be detailed include:

* The number of personnel and equipment on the site should be minimized, consistent with effective site operations.

* On-sfte^personnel will use the "buddy" system. No one may work alone, i.e., out of earshot or visual contact with other workers.

* Site activities will be performed to minimize dust production and soil disturbance. The maximum on-site vehicle speed will be 5 mph. . • Contact with surfaces/materials either suspected or known to be contaminated will be avoided to minimize the potential for transfer to personnel, the need for, decontamination and cross contamination. • All work areas will be lighted to not less than 5 foot candles. While most , work will be conducted outdoors, portable lighting may be required to support work in the dawn or dusk hours. / • Eating, drinking, chewing gum or tobacco, smoking, or any practice which increases the probability of hand-to-mouth transfer of contaminated material should be strictly prohibited on the site outside of the clean zone. t * The hands and face must be thoroughly washed upon leaving the work area and prior to engaging in any activity indicated above. Each individual must shower as soon as possible after the removal of protective clothing and equipment after the completion of the daily field activities. • Medicine and alcohol can potentiate the effects of exposure to toxic chemicals. Due to possible contraindications, use of prescribed drugs should be reviewed with the contractor or subcontractor occupational physician. Alcoholic beverage and illegal drug intake are strictly forbidden during.site work activities and is to be avoided during off-hours for the duration of field activity.

* Any respiratory protective equipment and clothing must be worn by personnel as outlined in the Contractor's SHERP. Excessive facial hair (i.e., beards, long mustaches or sideburns), which interferes with the satisfactory respirator- to-face seal is prohibited.

0285-33-2106 = ---"- - — -:- -——- - 6-1 ^ . JT^ ,52481

flR3D03U9 MALCOLM PIRNIE When it is necessary for a visitor to observe the field work, that person will be issued appropriate personal protective equipment, briefed on potential hazards, safety practices, decontamination procedures and site communica- tions by the Contractor. Respiratory equipment and proof of training testing must be supplied by all site visitors to the Site Safety Officer, i access will be denied those who do not have current medical, dearan training and fit test results. All employees have the obligation to correct or report unsafe work conditions. Use of contact lenses on-site will not be permitted. Workers wearing eyeglasses will be required to have a spectacle kit provided with their full-face respirator.

0285-33-2106 T 6-2 52482 flR300350 MA1COLM 'IRNII 7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

7.1 AIR MONITORING INSTRUMENTATION

. The following monitoring instruments are recommended for air monitoring during remediation activities:

• Foxboro Analytical Century Model OVA-128 Portable Organic Vapor Analyzer. i . • , • HNU Model PI 101 photoionization detector fitted with a 11.7 eV lamp. * MSA Portable Indicator and Alarm (Combustible Gas and Oxygen) Model 261.

* MIE, Inc. Miniram Model PDM-3 (Miniature Real-Time Aerosol Monitor),

•. Four high volume particulate sampling stations. * Wind sock.

The Contractor shall have the option of selecting equipment. If the Contractor > selects an HNu volatile organic vapor analyzer for monitoring, a 11.7eV lamp will be required as the primary monitoring instrument. The OVA-128 shall be used as secondary monitoring instrument. "....."","... . ._.. • All monitoring instruments will be protected from surface contamination during use to allow easy decontamination. All instrumentation will be calibrated before use; periodic calibration checks will be made and documented in the field over the duration of the field activities. . - -. •• •-• . Action levels will apply to persistent readings in the breathing zone of personnel conducting field remediation activities. Organic vapor action levels will be based on EPA's rationale for relating total atmospheric vapor concentrations to the selection of the level of personal protection as provided in the EPA 1988 Standard Operating Safety Guides.

0285-33-2106 . . . . 7-1 AR30035 MALCOLM PIRNIE 12 AIR MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

Real-time air monitoring will be required near each active work zone in the Exclusion Zone and in the Contaminant Reduction Zone. Real-time monitoring of the work zone is required continuously during all activities in which the potential for exposure to contaminated soils or water exists, induding monitoring well installation, excavation, staging or loading of potentially-contaminated soils and handling of contaminated liquids. Background air concentrations for VOCs and participates will be determined prior to the start of work each day. Instrument readings will be obtained at the site perimeter both downwind and upwind of the active work zone(s). The wind direction will be determined with the aid of a wind sock. Real-time air monitoring for explosive atmospheres and for oxygen shall be performed in each work zone. For atmospheres at less than 10% of the lower explosive limit (LEL), work may be performed without additional precautions. For atmospheres between 10% and 25% LEL, work zone monitoring shall be continued, with extreme caution as higher levels are encountered. At greater than 25% LEL, an explosion hazard exists and workers should be withdrawn from the area immediately. Oxygen levels at less than 19.5% oxygen by volume shall require continuous monitoring and self-contained breathing apparatus for workers. Oxygen levels between 19.5% and 25% by volume are acceptable to continue work. Deviations from the normal level may be due to the presence of other substances. Oxygen levels greater than 25% by volume present a fire hazard potential. Work should be discontinued and the fire department or other fire safety specialist should be consulted. Recommended action levels for VOCs in the work zone are described in Section 2.4, with appropriate respiratory protection requirements. An action level of 5 mg/m3 for the respirable fraction of participates in the work zone will be acceptable for determining when respiratory protection against dusts will be required. This limit is consistent with OSHA Permissible Exposure Limits (8-hour time-weighted average) in 29 CFR 1910.1000, Real-time air monitoring of VOCs at the site perimeter will be required any time that respiratory protection from VOCs is in use in the work zone (e.g., Level B or Level C). VOC concentrations will be recorded hourly at both the upwind and the downwind site perimeters. To protect the health and welfare of the community, the Contractor will be^^t

0285-33-2106 " 7-2 52484 BR3.00352 MALCOLM PIRNIE required to implement preventive measures if real-time site perimeter monitoring indicates that VOCs are persistently greater than background at the downwind site perimeter. Real-time respirable particulate monitoring will be required continuously near the work zone during all earth-moving activities, including excavation, hauling and grading. A personal monitoring device (such as a Miniram) should be used for work zone monitoring; attaching the device to a fixed location near the work zone will be an acceptable particulate monitoring method. An action level of 5.0 mg/m3 in the work zone will require respiratory protection for workers in the work zone or will necessitate dust source control by the Contractor to reduce work zone concentrations to acceptable levels. In the event that ; respirable dust concentrations in the work zone exceed 5.0 mg/m3, real-time air particulate monitoring will be required at the downwind site perimeter. If this real-time monitoring indicates respirable particulate concentrations in excess of 5.0 mg/m3 at the site perimeter, the Contractor shall implement preventive measures (viz. dust source control) to protect the health-of the community. The Contractor shall reposition particulate monitoring stations, as required or as necessary, when wind directions change. Continuous (time-weighted) air particulate monitoring will be required at the site perimeter during all earth-moving activities. Monitoring stations shall be established at two locations at the site perimeter, upwind and downwind of the potential dust source. Respirable dust concentrations at the downwind site perimeter in excess of the OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (5.0 mg/m3, 8-hour time-weighted average) will require the Contractor to implemerirpreventive measures to;protect the community health. \ 73 SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS

Remediation activities may generate dusts containing PAHs, PCBs and lead. In addition to the direct reading instrument used for determining respirable particulate levels for personal protection during site activities, integrated air samples will be collected to determine time-weighted average concentrations over the duration of workshifts. This information will be used to identify contaminant concentrations at the perimeter of the site, during site activities, and to determine need for engineering controls to limit exposures to these contaminants as work proceeds.

0285-33-2106 - - " - 7-3 ' "~ —— 52485 AR300353 MALCOLM '1RNII Particulate samples shall be collected with high-volume samplers, using the EPA Reference Method for the Determination of Suspended Particulate Matter in the Atmosphere (High-Volume Method, 40 CFR 50, Appendix B), Monitoring stations shall be established at four locations, one upwind and the remainder downwind of the potential dust source. The Contractor shall reposition particulate monitoring stations, as required or as necessary, when wind directions change. At the initiation of the project, three samples from each station will be submitted for analysis of total suspended particulates, lead, and total PAHs. Levels will be compared against applicable standards such as ambient air quality guidelines and adjusted permissible exposure limits. As work proceeds, samples will be submitted for analysis of these parameters, at minimum, once a month. Analytical results will be reported to the Contractor within two weeks of sample collection.

0285-33-2106 . 7-4 52486 AR30035U MALCOLPIRNIEM 8.0 DECONTAMINATION

8.1 PERSONAL DECONTAMINATION

The degree of decontamination required is a function of both a particular activity and the physical environment within which it takes place. Decontamination procedures will be according to Contractor's SHERP. Further, all on-site activities will be carried out in such a manner as to avoid undue contamination of personnel, protective equipment, tools and machinery. Decontamination activities for the remediation activities will take place an area designated as the Contamination Reduction Zone. The area is accessible by vehicle, facilitating decontamination efforts; the area will be clearly marked to segregate it from the Support Zone and the Exdusion Zone. Personnel egress to and from these sites shall be limited. This will minimize the potential spread of contaminated material to clean areas. Under no circumstances is a potentially-contaminated person to exit the site by any means other than through the Contaminant Reduction Zone. Upon leaving the site for lunch break or at the end of each work shift, personnel will be required to remove all contaminated protective clothing/equipment. Upon completion of remediation activities at each break or at the end of each work shift, the work crew will proceed toward the designated decontamination area. Equipment (i.e., shovels, tools, etc.) will remain at the sites. A large plastic sheet will be placed on the ground in the Contaminant Reduction Zone. Disposable towels will be used to contain spilled and splashed water. Prior to removal, boot covers or boots, aprons and outer gloves will be washed in large tubs with a soap and water solution (i.e. Alconox), rinsed with fresh water, and removed. A bristle brush will be used to remove gross soil contamination. A pump sprayer will be utilized for each rinse station. Unsoiled or decontaminated disposable protective equipment will be disposed of as trash. Wash and rinse water will be disposed of by the Contractor on-site at an on-site pond. Grossly contaminated equipment will be disposed of as fill under the topsoil cap.

0285-33-2106 ^ ------^ ~ - 52487 AR300355 MALCOLM PIRNIE 8.2 DECONTAMINATION OF FIELD EQUIPMENT

Decontamination procedures are to be provided by the contractor for all remediation activities. These procedures shall be performed in the Contamination Reduction Zone.,

83 DECONTAMINATION FOR MEDICAL EMERGENCIES

In the event of a minor, non-life threatening injury, personnel should follow the decontamination procedures as outlined above, and then administer first-aid. In the event of a major injury or other serious medical concern, immediate first-aid is to be administered in lieu of further decontamination efforts unless the environmental conditions would be considered "Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health," in which case ail personnel shall evacuate the area.

52488 0285-33-2106 8-2 fiR30Q356 MALCOLM PIRNIE 9.0 EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS

9.1 EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT

Emergency equipment will be readily accessible and distinctly marked. Contractor and subcontractor personnel will be familiar with the location and trained in the use of emergency equipment. Emergency equipment that will be available on-site includes:

Fire Extinguishers * . Fire extinguishers will be provided by contractor and subcontractors. • Two Class A, B dry chemical ffr^ extinguishers will be located on site. One will be located in field vehicles and one will be located within each on-site temporary facility. In addition fire extinguishers shall be located in the Contamination Reduction Zone.

• Fire extinguishers will be inspected, serviced, and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. As a minimum, all extinguishers shall be checked monthly and weighed semi-annually, and recharged if necessary.

* Immediately after each use, fire extinguishers will be either recharged or replaced.

• Fire extinguishers will be suitably placed, distinctly marked, 'and readily - . accessible.

First Aid Kits - First Aid Kits will conform to Red Cross and other applicable good health standards, and will consist of a weatherproof container with individually-sealed packages for each type of item. First Aid Kits will be fully equipped before being sent out on each job and will be checked-weekly by the Site Safety Officer to ensure that the expended items are replaced. First Aid Kits will be suitably placed, distinctly marked, and readily accessible. • . ..= ..-

Eye Wash - In the^ event 'of contamination by dust particles during any remedial activities, an emergency eye wash will be available on-site during all field activities. In such » an emergency, the eye will be immediately flushed with large amounts of water, occasionally lifting the lower and upper lids. Professional medical attention should be sought 5248

Emergency Sprayer/Shower - In the event that any part of the body comes in contact with contaminants during remedial activities, flushing facilities will be provided in the work area for immediate emergency use. Emergency flushing containers will be distinctly marked and located in areas known to all field personnel. If necessary, emergency medical attention will be sought. In addition to the emergency equipment, portable sanitary facilities win be provided on site for use by Contractor personnel.

9.2 COMMUNICATIONS

Provisions for on-site communication will be available. Mobile CB radios, FM transceivers or other portable communication devices may be used to enable personnel to maintain contact with the Contracting Officer and Site Safety Officer during remedial activities. - • In addition, a telephone will be maintained on site to allow for immediate contact with response personnel in the event of an emergency.

0285-33^106 9-2 52490 flR300358 MA1COLM PIRNIE 10.0 EMERGENCY INFORMATION/RESPONSE

10.1 EMERGENCY MEDICAL TREATMENT

In the event of a serious medical emergency, victims should be treated at an emergency-room equipped medical facility in Erie, PA. The Emergency Room Supervisor should be contacted in the case of a serious medical emergency for determination of the appropriate mode of transportation (i.e., by personal vehicle, ambulance, or ambulance after on-site treatment by paramedics). The hospital will be contacted and briefed on the situation, the potential hazards, and the substances involved. In addition, the Millcreek Police Department will be fully apprised of the proposed remediation activities. Written directions and map of the route to the hospital will be posted at the site during all activities.

10.2 PERSONAL INJURY

In the event of personal injury, emergency first-aid will be applied on site as deemed necessary. The individual will.be decontaminated as appropriate and transported to the nearest medical clinic if needed. During all field activities, at least one person on the site shall be certified in First Aid.

103 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS FOR PERSONNEL EXPOSURE

• Skin contact: If appropriate, based on chemical-specific information, use copious amounts of soap and water. Wash affected area for at least 15 minutes. Decontaminate and provide medical attention. Eyewash stations will be provided on site. If necessary, transport to appropriate emergency facility as determined by emergency response personnel.

• Inhalation: Move to fresh air and, if necessary, transport to appropriate emergency facility as determined by emergency response personnel.

• Ingestion: Decontaminate and transport to appropriate emergency facility as determined by emergency response personnel.

0285-33-2106 10-1 52491 AR300359 MALCOLM 1RNII 10.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ACCIDENT (SPREAD OF CONTAMINATION)

If an IDLH atmosphere does not exist and adequate personal protective equipment is being used, secure spread of contamination whenever possible. The Contracting Officer and the Site Safety Officer will be notified. Other appropriate emergency response groups and management will be notified as necessary by the Site Safety Officer. The Site Safety Officer or Contracting Officer will also determine whether art evacuation of the immediate areas is necessary and will announce that decision. If possible, personnel should leave the area through the Contamination Reduction Zone. If this is not possible, personnel should leave via the shortest route.

1G.5 ADVERSE WEATHER CONDITIONS

In the event of adverse weather conditions, the Site Safety Officer will determine if work can continue without sacrificing the health and safety of contractor and subcontractor workers. Some of the items to be considered prior to determining if work should continue are:

* Potential for heat stress or cold stress; * Inclement weather-related working conditions; • Limited visibility; • Potential for electrical or dust storms.

10.6 FIRE PROTECTION AND PREVENTION

* Recommended practices and standards of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and other applicable regulations will be followed in the development and application of Project Fire Prevention Programs. • The Contractor will prepare and submit a Fire Prevention Plan for the approval of the Contracting Officer.

52492 0285-33-2106 10-2 flR300360 MAICOLPIRNIEM Essential considerations for the Fire Prevention Plan will include:

• Proper site preparation and safe storage of combustible and flammable materials. • Availability of the coordination with private and public fire authorities.

* Adequate job-site fire protection and inspections for fire prevention.

* Adequate indoctrination and training of employees.

All storage, handling, or use of flammable and combustible substances will be under the supervision of qualified persons. All tanks, containers, and pumping equipment, portable or stationary, used for the storage or handling of flammable and combustible liquids, will meet the recommendations of the National Fire Protection Association.

10.7 EMERGENCY NUMBERS

Emergency telephone numbers will be available on site at all times in case of emergency. ;"":__ ~" " ~."~~"~....'.~.'.~.".'.-..-.,-,- - - •

0285-33-2106

AR30036. MAICOIM PIRNIE 11.0 RECORDKEEPING

It will be the responsibility of the Contractor to establish and assure adequate records of all:

• Exposure work-hours and a log of occupational injuries and illness. • Accident investigations.

• Daily record of all first-aid treatments not otherwise reportable.

• Reports to insurance carrier or state compensation agencies.

• Reports required by the client.

• Record and reports required by Local, State, and Federal agencies. • Related correspondence. ,

• . Safety training.

In the event of any accident/incident, the Site Safety Officer will immediately notify the Contracting Officer. All accidents will.be investigated, reported, and analyzed.. Within two working days of any reportabie accident, the Site Safety Officer will complete and submit to the Contracting Officer in Accident Report on ENG Form 3394 in accordance with AR 385-40 and USACE Supplement 1 to that regulation. Injured persons are responsible for reporting all injuries as soon as possible to the Site Safety Officer.

-0285-33-2106 flR300362 MALCOLM PIRNIE 12.0 SAFETY AND HEALTH PERSONNEL ORGANIZATION

12.1 CONTRACTOR'S PERSONNEL

The Contractor's health and safety personnel organization will be comprised of the following key individuals having the responsibilities discussed.

12.1.1 Safety Officer/Industrial Hygienist The Contractor's employee or Subcontractor with overall responsibility for the preparation, implementation and enforcement of the Site SHERP. The Safety Officer shall also conduct the initial site specific training on site and provide regular support for all health and safety activities, including upgrading or downgrading the level of personnel protection, as needed and only with documented approval by the Contracting Officer. The Safety Officer shall be a Certified Industrial Hygienist (American Board of Industrial Hygiene) with a minimum of three years of specialized experience on sites with hazardous wastes or hazardous materials with hazards similar to those anticipated on this project. This person shall also have demonstrable expertise in air monitoring techniques and development of respiratory protection programs for working in potentially toxic atmospheres. The Safety Officer shall have a broad working knowledge of State and Federal occupational safety and health regulations and formal educational training in occupational safety and health. The Safety Officer may delegate the implementation and enforcement of the SHERP to the Safety and Health Specialist/ Industrial Hygiene Technician defined below, with regular on- site supervision and continued evaluation of effectiveness of the plans to be performed by the Safety Officer.

12.1.2 Safety and Health Specialist/Industrial Hygiene Technician The Contractor's or subcontractor's employee assigned to the site on a full time basis for the duration of the project with functional responsibility for implementation and enforcement of the Site SHERP. The Safety and Health Specialist shall have authority to stop work any time unsafe work conditions are determined. The Safety and Health Special- */ ist shall complete a daily diary of activities with Health and Safety relevance including

__ 52495 0285-33-2106 . 12-1 8R300363 MALCOLM 1RNI! references to maintenance and calibration of Health and Safety equipment and shall maintain a written log containing the names of personnel, site entry and exit times and names of visitors. The Safety and Health Specialist/Industrial Hygiene Technician shall have a minimum of 6 months working experience on sites with hazardous wastes or hazardous materials with hazards similar to those anticipated on this project, and shall have a sound working knowledge of State and Federal occupational safety and health regulations. In addition the Safety and Health Specialist/Industrial Hygiene Technician shall have specialized training in personal and respiratory protective equipment program implementa- tion and in the proper use of air monitoring instruments, air sampling methods and procedures and have current certification in first aid and CPR as provided by a recognized approved organization such as the American Red Cross or the American Heart Association. Name, qualifications and work experience shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer prior to commencement of work at the site.

12.1.3 Project Manager The Contractor's employee responsible for conducting the work and for assuring that the work is conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. The Project Manager shall be site-dedicated for the duration of the Contract, and shall be experienced in and familiar with the management and day-do-day activities of hazardous waste clean-up operations.

12.1.4 Custodian The Contractor's employee or subcontractor responsible for keeping all health and safety equipment clean and ail facilities properly equipped and maintained.

12.1.5 Security Officer The Contractor's employee responsible for maintaining the security of the Site.

12.1.6 Physician A licensed physician, Board Certified Occupational Medicine by the American Board of Preventive Medicine, with experience in the practice of occupational medicine, and provided by the Contractor.

Q2S5-33-2I06 12-2 52496 A R 30036(4 MALCOLM PIRNIE 12.1.7 First Aid Technician The Contractor shall have at least one certified First Aid Technician on the site at all times. This person may perform other duties, but shall be immediately available to render first aid when needed. The First Aid individual should be certified in First Aid and CPR by the American Red Cross or equivalent. \ 12.2 GOVERNMENT

The following key individuals should be identified as part of the government's health and safety organization. .. _" ......

12.2.1 Contracting Officer (CO) Any person chosen by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers who has been delegated authority and responsibility for day-to-day surveillance activities.

12.2.2 On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) Any person designated by the .State Government for field surveillance duties. The Contractor shall take direction only from the Contracting Officer. Any responses or directives from the OSC will be directed only to the Contracting Officer.

0285-33-2106 " ",.-" z.____.„....._:.__:.,12-3 52497 - ' '. SR300365.