File. 18G DRB
FINAL REPORT
INTRINSIC REMEDIATION ENGINEERING EVALUATION/COST ANALYSIS
for
SITE 45/57
EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE
ALASKA
December, 1995
Prepared for:
AIR FORCE CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EXCELLENCE BROOKS AIR FORCE BASE SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
AND
EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE ALASKA
Prepared by:
Utah State University/Utah Water Research Laboratory 1600 Canyon Rd. Logan, Utah 84322-8200 Final Report ( ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES-i LIST OF FIGURES LOF-i LIST OF TABLES LOT-i
1 INTRODUCTION i-i 1.1 'SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES i-i 1.2 FACILITY BACKGROUND 1-5 1.2.1 Operational History 1-5 1.2.2 Current Remedial Activities 1-10 2 SITE CHARACTERIZATION ACTIVITIES 2-1 2.1 DRILLING, MONITORING WELL AND GROUND WATER PROBE INSTALLATION, AND SOIL SAMPLING 2-2 2.1.1 Monitoring Well and Ground Water Probe Locations and Datum Survey 2-3 2.1.2 Ground Water Monitoring Probe and Monitoring Well Installation 2-3 2.1.3 Soil Core Sampling 2-8 ) ~~2.2 GROUND WATER SAMPLING 2-9 2.1.1 Monitoring Well Development 2-9 2.2.2 Ground Water Sampling Locations 2-10 2.2.3 Ground Water Analytes Measured 2-10 2.2.4 Ground Water Sampling Procedures 2-10 2.2.4.1 Ground Water Level Measurements 2-14 2.2.4.2 Ground Water Monitoring Well Sampling 2-14 2.2.4.3 Ground Water Probe Sampling 2-14 2.3 AQUIFER TESTING 2-15 2.4 SURVEYING 2-16 3 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AREA 3-1 3.1 SURFACE FEATURES 3-i 3.1.1 Topography and Surface Water Hydrology 3-1 3.1.2 Manmade Features 3-1 3.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY 3-2 3.3 SITE GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY 3-3 3.3.1 Lithology and Stratigraphic Relationships 3-3 3.3.2 Ground Water Hydraulics 3-3 3.3.2.1 Flow Direction and Hydraulic Gradient 3-3 3.3.2.2 Hydraulic Conductivity 3-3
-) ~~~~~~~~~TOC-1 Final Report
3.3.2.3 Effective Porosity 3 2/9 3.3.2.4 Advective Ground Water Velocity 3-9 3.3.2.5 Preferential Flow Paths 3-10 3.3.3 Ground Water Use 3-10 3.4 CLIMATOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS 3-10 4 NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION AND SOIL AND GROUND WATER GEOCHEMISTRY 4-1 4.1 'SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION 4-1 4.2 SOIL CHEMISTRY 4-1 4.2.1 DNAPL Contamination 4-1 4.2.2 Residual Phase Contamination 4-2 4.2.2.1 Soil Contamination 4-2 4.2.2.2 Soil Vapor Contamination 4-10 4.3 GROUND WATER CHEMISTRY 4-1 1 4.3.1 Dissolved-Phase TOE Contamination 4-1 1 4.3.2 Dissolved-Phase BTEX Contamination 4-15 4.3.3 Inorganic Chemistry and Geochemnical Indicators of Biodegradation 4-30
4.3.3.1 Dissolved Oxygen .4-31 4.3.3.2 Nitrate 4-34 4.3.3.3 Sulfate 4-37 4.3.3.4 Ferrous Iron/Manganese 4-38 4.3.3.5 Methane 4-47' 4.3.3.6 Redox Potential 4-50 4.3.3.7 Alkalinity 4-52 4.3.3.8 Temperature 4-52 4-4 BIOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATIONS OF CONTAMINANTS 4-54 4.4.1 Reductive Dehalogenation 4-54 4.4.1.1 Competing Electron Acceptors 4-57 4.4.1.2 Substrate Availability 4-63 4.4.1.3 Temperature 4-64 4.4.2 Oxidative Transformations 4-64 4.5 Mass Calculations 4-65 4.5.1 Thiessen Polygon Method 4-65 4.5.2 Center of Mass Calculaf ions 4-66 4.5.3 Results of Mass Calculations 4-70 4.5.4 Center of Mass Results 4-74 4.6 Expressed Aquifer Assimilative Capacity 4-81
TOC-2. Final Report 12/9 5 5. GROUND WATER MODELING 5-1 5.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW AND MODEL DESCRIPTION 5-1 5.2 MODEL INPUT 5-3 5.2.1 Hydraulic Properties 5-3 5.2.1.1 Pore water velocity 5-3 5.2.1.2 Dispersivity 5-4 5.2.2 Sorption Coefficient/Retardation Factor 5-4 5.3 'MODEL CALIBRATION 5-8 5.3.1 Model Calibration Procedures 5-8 5.3.1.1 Determination of Y and aT values 5-9 5.3.1.2 Hydraulic properties 5-10 5.3.1.3 Source dimensions 5-10 5.3.1.4 Determination Of X,/vr 5-11 5.3.1.5 Determination of C,, 5-12 5.3.1.6 Time since contaminant release 5-12 5.3.2 Predicted Mass Estimation 5-13 5.3.3 Source Removal Simulation 5-14 5.4 MODEL RESULTS 5-15 5.4.1 Results of Y and axT Calibration 5-15 5.4.2 Results Of X/vr Calibration 5-15 5.4.3 Results of C. Calibration 5-18 5.4.4 Results of Visual Screening 5-19 5.4.5 Results of Total Mass Calibration 5-22 5.4.6 Results of Degraded TCE Mass Predictions 5-25 5.4.7 Intermediate Product Mass Balance Calculations 5-27 5.4.8 Results of Source Lifetime Predictions 5-29 5.4.9 Results of a Source Removal Scenario 5-31 5.4.10O Hydrocarbon Degradation Rate Assessment 5-37
6. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES 6-1 6.1 Remedial Alternative Evaluation Criteria 6-1 6.1.1 Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence 6-1 6.1.2 Implementability 6-2 6.1.3 Cost 6-2 6.2 Factors Affecting Alternative Development 6-2 6.2.1 Objectives of Intrinsic Remediation Study 6-2 6.2.2 Contaminant Properties 6-3 6.2.2.1 Properties affecting TCE mobility 6-3 6.2.2.2 Properties affecting toxicity 6-6
TOC-3 Final Report 12/95 6.2.2.3 Properties affecting transformations 6-7 6.2.2.4 Observations on mobility 6-7 6.2.3 Site-Specific Conditions 6-8 6.2.3.1 Site physical/chemical characteristics 6-8 6.2.3.2 Future land use and potential exposure pathways 6-9 6.2.3.3 Remediation goals for shallow soil and - ~~ground water 6-10 6.3 Summary of Remedial Technology Screening 6-1 2 6.4 Brief Description of Remedial Alternatives 6-13 6.4.1 Alternative 1 - No Action Alternative (USAF, 1994b) 6-13 6.4.2 Alternative 2 - Source Control through SVE and Bioventing (USAF, 1994b) 6-1 4 6.4.3 Alternative 3 - Vapor Extraction and Ground Wafer Containment (USAF, 1994b) 6-1 6 6.4.4 Alternative 4 - Removal Alternative (USAF, 1994bj 6-18 6.4.5 Alternative 5 - Intrinsic Remediation 6-19 6.5 Evaluation of Remedial Alternatives 6-21 6.5.1 Effectiveness 6-21 6.5.2 Implementability 6-22 6.5.3 Cost 6-22- 6.6 Recommended Remedial Alternative 6-23 7. LONG-TERM MONITORING PLAN 7-1 7.1 Overview 7-1 7.2 Monitoring Networks 7-1 7.2.1 Long-Term Monitoring Wells 7-2 7.2.2 Point-of-Compliance Wells 7-6 7.3 Ground Water Sampling and Analysis 7-6 7.4 Hydrocarbon Plume Monitoring 7-7 8. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8-1 9. REFERENCES 9-1
TOC-4 Final Report ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95
APPENDICES Appendix A: Site 45/57 soil core textural characteristics from sieve analysis by the Soils Testing Laboratory, USU, and direct observation by the UWRL EQL A-i Appendix B: Results and data reduction program for slug tests conducted at Site 45/57, EAFB in September, 1994, and July, 1995 B-i B-i Slug test data collected from Monitoring Well 45MW08 at EAFB, Site 45/57 in September, 1994. B-2 B-2 Slug test data collected from Monitoring Well UWRLMWO8 at EAFB, Site 45/57 in September, 1994. B-3 B-3 QuickBasic program for slug test data reduction and conductivity estimates B-4 B-4 Summary results for slug test data reduction and conductivity estimates B-6 B-S Summary results f or slug test data reduction and conductivity estimates for data collected from Site 45/57 at EAFB in July, 1995 B-7 Appendix C: Soil core % organic carbon, and soil nutrient content data for samples collected at Site 45/57, EAFB in November, 1993 c-i Appendix D: Soil and soil gas specific compound hydrocarbon data for samples collected at Site 45/57 from November, 1993, to July, 1995 D-i Site 45/57 soil purge and trap specific compound data collected November, 1993 D-1 D-2 Site 45/57 soil soxhlet extraction, semivolafile specific compound data collected November, 1993 D-30 D-3 Site 45/57 soil gas sample specific compound data collected May, 1994 D-57 D-4 Site 45/57 soil gas sample specific compound data collected July, 1995 D-61 Appendix E: Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point chlorinated solvent specific compound data for samples collected at Site 45/57 from May, 1993, to July, 1995 E-1 Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point chlorinated solvent specific compound data collected May, 1994 E-1
9 ~~~~~~~~~TOO-S5I Final Report 12/95 E-2 Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point chlorinated solvent specific compound data collected September, 1994 E-8 E-3 Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point chlorinated solvent specific compound data collected July, 1995 E-15 Appendix F: Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point hydrocarbon purge & trap analyses specific compound data for samples collected at Site 45/57 from May, 1993, to July, 1995 F-i Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point hydrocarbon purge & trap analyses specific compound data collected November, 1993 F-i F-2 Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point hydrocarbon purge & trap analyses specific compound data collected May, 1994 F-13 F-3 Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point hydrocarbon purge & trap analyses specific compound data collected September, 1994 F-31 F-4 Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point hydrocarbon purge & trap analyses specific compound data collected July, 1995 F-48 Appendix G: Thiessen Polygon Method for Assignment of Areas to Ground Water Monitoring Points for Plume Mass Estimates G-1 Appendix H: Site 45/57 Total Mass and Center of Mass calculations for samples collected at Site 45/57 from May, 1993, to July, 1995 H-i Site 45/57 Total Mass and Center of Mass calculations for samples collected November, 1993 H-i H-2 Site 45/57 Total Mass and Center of Mass calculations for samples collected May, 1994 H-14 H-3 Site 45/57 Total Mass and Center of Mass calculations for samples collected September, 1994 H-30 H-4 Site 45/57 Total Mass and Center of Mass calculations for samples collected July, 1995 H-49 H-5 Site 45/57 Total Mass and Center of Mass calculations for samples collected from May, 1994 to July, 1995. Calculations made using a consistent sampling grid H-67
TOC-6 Final Report 12/95 Appendix I Numerical results from Y and aT calibration runs using samples collected from Site 45/57 in July, 1995 1-1 Appendix 2 Centerline concentration profile data collected from Site 45/57 in July, 1995, along with selected centerline concentration profile predictions J- 1 J-1 Appendix J-1: Observed TCE ground water centerline concentrations from Site 45/57 collected by the UWRL in July, 1995 J-2 J-2 Centerline calibrated modeling results for Co = 91,979 gg/L J-3 J-3 Centerline calibrated modeling results for C = 92,791 gLg/L- J-5 J-4 Centerline calibrated modeling results for C 0, = 93,134 g.g/L J-7 J-5 Centerline calibrated modeling results for Co = 96,242 jgg/L 2-9 J-6 Centerline calibrated modeling results for Co =33,394 gg/K 2-1 1 J-7 Centerline calibrated modeling results for Co =68,525 gg/L J-14 J-8 Centerline calibrated modeling results for Co =39,1 01 gg/L J-16-
TOC-7 ( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95
LIST OF FIGURES
1-1 Regional location map for EAFB, Alaska (from USAF, 1994a) 1-6 1-2 Source Area locations for OUs 3, 4 and 5. EAFB, Alaska (from USAF, 1994a) 1-7 1-3 Approximate Administrative Boundaries of Source Areas WP45 and SS57, EAFB, Alaska (from USAF, 1994a) 1-8 2-1 Ground water monitoring well and soil core sampling locations at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, as of July, 1995 2-4 2-2 Ground water monitoring well and shallow monitoring point locations at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, as of July, 1995. The bordered area encompasses the main contaminant plume 2-5 2-3 Detail of sampling well locations in vicinity of source area at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, as of July, 1995 2-6 2-4 Schematic of slug test apparatus and data collection system utilized at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska 2-15 3-1 Local ground water elevation contour map from data collected at Site 45/57, November, 1993 3-4 3-2 Local ground water elevation contour map from data collected at Site 45/57, May, 1994 3-5 3-3 Local ground water elevation contour map from data collected at Site 45/57, September, 1994 3-6 34Local ground water elevation contour map from data collected at Site 45/57, June to July, 1995 3-7 4-1 Location of soil borings collected from site 45/57 by PNL in August to September 1992, (45SB and 57SB samples) and of soil borings and soil gas samples collected by the UWRL in this study 4-3 4-2 TCE shallow ground water contour plot generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL May, 1994 4-1 6 4-3 TOE shallow ground water contour plot generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL September, 1994 4-17 4-4 TOE shallow ground water contour plot generated from samples .collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL July, 1995 4-18 4-5 Benzene shallow ground water contour plot generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL May, 1994 4-24 4-6 Total BTEX shallow ground water contour plot generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL May, 1994 4-25
LOF-1 Final Report ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 4-7 Total BTEX shallow ground water contour plot generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL September, 1994 4-26 4-8 Benzene shallow ground water contour plot generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL July, 1995 4-27 4-9 Toluene shallow ground water contour plot generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL July, 1995 4-28 4-1lOTotal BTEX shallow ground water contour plot generated from sartples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL July, 1995 4-29 4-1 1 BTEX shallow ground water contour plot with TEA bubble plot overlay generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL May, 1994 4-39 4-12 BTEX shallow ground water contour plot with TEA bubble plot overlay generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL September, 1994 4-40 4-13 BTEX shallow ground water contour plot with TEA bubble plot overlay generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL July, 1995 4-41 4-14 BTEX shallow ground water contour plot with dissolved iron and manganese bubble plot overlay generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL May, 1994 4-43 4-15 BTEX shallow ground water contour plot with dissolved iron and manganese bubble plot overlay generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL September, 1994 4-44 4-16 BTEX shallow ground water contour plot with dissolved iron and manganese bubble plot overlay generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL July, 1995 4-45 4-17 Overlay of TOE and DOE shallow ground water contour plots generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL May, 1994 4-55 4-18 Overlay of TOE, DOE and dissolved ethylene shallow ground water contour plots generated from samples collected from Site 45/57 by the UWRL September, 1994 4-56 4-19 Overlay of TCE, cis- and trans-DCE, vinyl chloride and ethylene shallow ground water contour plots generated from samples collected by the UWRL from Site 45/57 in July, 1995 4-58 4-2Ocis-DCE ground water contour plot generated from samples collected by the UWRL from Site 45/57 July, 1995 4-59 4-21 trans-DOE ground water contour plot generated from samples collected by the UWRL from Site 45/57 July, 1995 4-60
3 ~~~~~~~~~~LOF-2 Final Report 12/95
4-22 Vinyl chloride ground waler contour plot generated from samples collected by the UWRIL from Site 45/57 July, 1995 4-61 4-23 Ethylene ground water contour plot generated from samples collected by the UWRL from Site 45/57 July, 1995 4-62 4-24 COD ground water contour plot generated from samples collected by the UWRL from Site 45/57 July, 1995 4-65 4-25Thi~ssen area assignments for sampling points utilized in UWRL sampling at Site 45/57 in the May, 1994, sampling event 4-69 4-26 Outer plume boundary used for Thiessen area assignments for samples collected at Site 45/57 by PNL in 1992, sampling events 4-70 4-27 Center of mass trajectory for TOE for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid 4-79 4-28 Center of mass trajectory for cis-DCE for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid 4-79 4-29 Center of mdss trajectory for trans-DOE for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid 4-80 4-30 Center of mass trajectory for benzene for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid 4-80 4-31 Center of mass trajectory for toluene for samples collected from - Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid 4-81 4-32 Center of mass trajectory for BTEX for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid 4-81 4-33 Center of mass trajectory for ethylene for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid 4-82 5-1 Graphical output of Equation 5.8 solution for Y and aT values for TCE ground water data collected in July, 1995, from various sampling- point pairs 5-1 6 5-2 Graphical output of model results from calibrated input data for X and Co, along with field determined TOE ground water data collected by PNL in 1992, and the UWRL from 1993 to 1995 5-20
LOF-3 Final Report 12/95 5-3 Graphical output of model results for best fit curve to field determined TOE ground water data collected by PNL in 1992, and the UWRL from 1993 to 1995. Input data values for X and Co, are 0.0026/d and 39,101 gg/L, respectively 5-21 5-4 July, 1995, Thiessen areas at Site 45/57 showiing model boundaries used to verify model predictions for dissolved plume TOE mass 5-24 5-5 Graphical output of model results for zero degradation rate and preferred input combination scenarios. Field determined TOE ground water data collected by PNL in 1992, and the UWRL from 1993 to 1995 ore also shown 5-27 5-6 Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for preferred input combination scenario 3 and 5 years following complete source removal 5-33 5-7 Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for preferred input combination scenario 8 years following complete source removal 5-33 5-8 Predicted TOE contours at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, 1 year after source removal for preferred input combination scenario 5-34 5-9 Predicted TOE contours at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, 3 years after source removal for preferred input combination scenario 5-35 5-1 0 Predicted TO E contours at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, 7 years after source removal for preferred input combination scenario 5-36 5-1 1 Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for benzene data collected July, 1995 5-39 5-12 Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for toluene data collected July, 1995 5-40 5-13 Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for ethylbenzene data collected July, 1995 5-40 5-14 Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for p-xylene data collected July, 1995 5-41 5-15 Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for 1,3-dimethylpentane data collected July, 1995 5-41 5-16 Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene data collected July, 1995 5-42 5-17 Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene data collected July, 1995 5-42
LOF-4 Final Report 12/95 5-18 Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for 1,2,3-trimethylbenzene data collected July, 1995 5-43 7-1 Location of long-term monitoring and point-of-compliance wells. Long term monitoring wells 45MW01, 45MW04 and 45MW08 are existing 7-2
A-i Sit6-45/5 7 soil core textural characteristics from direct observation in UWRL EQL A-i A-2 Site 45/57 soil core textural characteristics from sieve analysis conducted by the Soils Testing Laboratory, Utah State University A-2 C-i Site 45/57 soil % organic carbon content results from the Soils Testing Laboratory, Utah State University C-2 C-2 Site 45/57 soil nutrient (P and K) content results, mg/kg soil from the Soils Testing Laboratory, Utah State University C-3 C-3 Site 45/57 soil nitrogen content (NO3-N and TKN) results, mg/kg and %, respectively, from the Soils Testing Laboratory, Utah State University C-4 G-i Thiessen Polygon Method areas for field samples collected at Site 45/57 during the November, 1993, sampling trip G-9 G-2 Thiessen Polygon Method areas for field samples collected at Site 45/57 during the May, 1994, sampling trip G-1IO G-3 Thiessen Polygon Method areas for field samples collected at- Site 45/57 during the September, 1994, sampling trip G-I11 0-4 Thiessen Polygon Method areas for field samples collected at Site 45/57 during the July, 1995, sampling trip G-12
K> ~~~~~~~~~~LOF-5 Final Report 12/95
LIST OF TABLES
2-1 Survey data for Site 45/57. Coordinate data are referenced to the Elelson AFB griid; TOC data are given feet AMSL 2-7 2-2 Summary of sampling locations for which data were collected at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, November 1993, May and September 1994, and June to July, 1995 2-11 2-3 Summary of analytes for which data were measured at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, November 1993, and May and September 1994 2-12 3-1 Ground water elevation data collected durihg the field study at Site 45/57 EAFB, AK 3-7 4-1 Constituents detected in soil samples collected from Site 45/57 (gg/kg) in August to September, 1992, by Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratories (USAF, 1993) 4-4 4-2 TPH purge and trap soil data for field samples collected from soil boring S88 at Site 45/57 during the November, 1993, sampling trip 4-5 4-3 TPH purge and trap soil data for field samples collected from soil boring 5B9 at Site 45/57 during the November, 1993, sampling trip 4-6 4-4 TPH Soxhlet soil data for field samples collected at Site 45/57 during the November, 1993 sampling trip 4-7 4-5 Specific compound (MetC1, TCE and POE) laboratory sail purge- and trap data for field samples collected from soil boring SBS at Site 45/57 during the November, 1993, sampling trip 4-8 4-6 Specific compound (Met~l, TOE and PCE) laboratory soil purge and trap data for field samples collected from soil boring 5B9 at Site 45/57 during the November, 1993, sampling trip 4-9 4-7 Soil gas totdl hydrocarbon concentration data collected from throughout Site 45/57 during the May, 1994, and July, 1995, sampling trips 4-10 4-8 Constituents detected in ground water samples collected from Site 45/57 (ggIL) in August to November, 1992, by Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratories 4-12 4-9 Selected ground water chlorinated solvent data for field samples collected by the UWRL at Site 45/57 during the May and September, 1994, and July, 1995, sampling events 4-14
) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~LOT-I Final Report 12/95
4-10 Total purge & trap and BTEX constituents detected in ground water samples collected from Site 45/57 (iggIL) in November, 1993, by the UWRL 4-19 4-1 1 Total purge & trap and BTEX constituents detected in ground water samples collected from Site 45/57 (ug/L) in May, 1994, by the UWRL 4-20 4-12 Tdtal purge & trap and BTEX constituents detected in ground water samples collected from Site 45/57 (ug/L) in September, 1994, by the UWRL 4-21 4-13 Total purge & trap and BTEX constituents detected in ground water samples collected from Site 45/57 (ug/L) in July, 1995, by the UWRL 4-22 4-14 Dissolved oxygen in ground water samples collected by the UWRL from monitoring wells and sampling probes at Site 45/57 from November, 1993, to July, 1995 4-32 4-15 Nitrate and sulfate concentrations in ground water samples collected by the UWRL from monitoring wells and sampling probes at Site 45/57 in November, 1993, to July, 1995 4-35 '7 ~4-16 Dissolved iron and manganese concentrations in ground water samples collected by the UWRL from monitoring wells and sampling probes at Site 45/57 from November, 1993, to July, 1995 4-42 4-17 Dissolved methane and ethylene concentrations in ground water~- samples collected by the UWRL from monitoring wells and sampling probes at Site 45/57 in September, 1994, and July, 1995 4-48 4-18 ORP, pH and alkalinity in ground water samples collected by the UWRL in monitoring wells and sampling probes from Site 45/57 in May and September, 1994, and July, 1995 14-51 4-19 Ground water temperature in monitoring wells and sampling probes from Site 45/57 observed from November, 1993, to July, 1995 4-53 4-20 COD concentration in ground water samples collected by the UWRL in monitoring wells and sampling probes frotn Site 45/57 in July, 1995 4-66 4-21 Results of contaminant mass calculations for PNL and UWRL sampling events at EAFB Site 45/57, Fall 1992 to July, 1995. Mass units are kg of each compound. All sampling points were used in mass estimate 4-73
'9 ~~~~~~~~~~LOT-2 Final Report 12/95 4-22 Results of contaminant mass calculations for UWRL sampling events at EAFB Site 45/57, May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. Mass units are kg of each compound 4.74 4-23 CaM results for select compounds from UWRL sampling events at EAFB Site 45/57, May, 1994, to July, 1995,using a consistent sampling grid over time 4-77 4-24 Contaminant travel distance calculations for UWRL sampling events from May, 1994, to July, 1995, at EAFB Site 45/57, based on results using a consistent sampling grid over time 4-78 4-25 Expressed assimilative capacity of the aquifer system at EAFB Site 45/57 based on UWRL field sampling from November, 1993, to July, 1995 4-84 4-26 Total mass of electron donor and electron acceptors and TEA assimilative capacity of the aquifer system at EAFB Site 45/57 based on UWRL field sampling in July, 1995 4-85 5-1 Results of TOE Kd determinations 5-6 5-2 Retardation values estimated using spatial TOE ground water data measured at Site 45/57, 1993 to 1995 5-7 5-3 Results of Y and aT calibration runs 5-16 5-4 Results Of X/vr calibration runs using results from Table 5-3 for Sampling Point Set 1 5-17 5-5 Results Of X/vr calibration runs using results from Table 5-3 for Sampling Point Set 5 5-18 5-6 Results of 0o calibration runs using results from Table 5-3 for Sampling Point Set 1 5-19 5-7 Results of Co calibration runs using results from Table 5-3 for Sampling Point Set 5 5-20 5-8 Predicted dissolved TCE mass for range of input values for X and C. 5-23 5-9 Predicted total TOE mass degraded for range of input values for Xand Co 5-26 5-1 0 Results of mass balance calculations for TOE degradation and DOE intermediate product formation based on ground water concentration data observed at Site 45/57 in July, 1995 5-28 5-1 1 Results of source removal simulations using the range of Co and X values generated from model calibration to Site 45/57 field data 5-32
LOT-3 Final Report 12/95 5-12 Hydrocarbon centerline concentration data measured at Site 45/57 in July, 1995, used for model calibration. Units are gg/L. Values in parentheses indicate dlowngradient distance from source well 5-38 5-13 Hydrocarbon degradation rates generated from model calibration for the July, 1995, data collected at Site 45/57 5-39 6-1 Physicochernical properties of compounds of interest at EAFB Site- 45/57 6-4 6-2 Summary of cancer risk and Hazard Index estimates for EAFB Site 45/57 from RI/FS for OUs 3, 4 and 5 (USAF, 1994b) 6-1 1 6-3 Summary of alternative clean-up levels for soils and contaminant drinking water MOLs appropriate for EAFB Site 45/57 (USAF, 1994b) 6-12 6-4 Summary of remedial alternatives appropriate for EAFB Site 45/57 and their achievement of various NCP goals (USAF, 1994b) 6-13 6-5 Comparison of estimated present worth of remedial alternatives evaluated for EAFB Site 45/57 (USAF, 1994b) 6-23 7-1 Long-term monitoring analytical protocol, Site 45/57 intrinsic remnediation EE/CA, Eielson AFB, Alaska 7-
G-1 Individual sampling point area and total plume area estimated for field samples collected at Site 45/57 during the November, 1993, sampling trip using the Thiessen Polygon Method G-5 0-2 Individual sampling point area and total plume area estimated for field samples collected at Site 45/57 during the May, 1994, sampling trip using the Thiessen Polygon Method G-6 G-3 Individual sampling point area and total plume area estimated for field samples collected at Site 45/57 during the September, 1994, sampling trip using the Thiessen Polygon Method G-7 G-4 Individual sampling point area and total plume area estimated for field samples collected at Site 45/57 during the July, 1995 sampling trip using the Thiessen Polygon Method G-8
LOT-4 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~Final Report 12/95
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the results of an engineering evaluation/cost analysis (EE/OA) carried out by a Researbh Team from the Utah Water Research Laboratory (UWRL) at Utah State University (USU) for Site 45/57 at Elelson Air Force Base (EAFB), Alaska. The purpose of this effort was to evaluate the efficacy of intrinsic remediation as a remedial alternative for the management of a TOE/fuel hydrocarbon ground water plume existing in the shallow aquifer below the site. Soil and ground water contamination exists at the site in the-form of low level sorbed species and dissolved contaminant mass. There is currently no evidence of residual dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) existing within the source area at the site, nor does there appear to be any residual fuel material in the form of light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL). This study .has focused on evaluating the current extent of the dissolved TOE plume, investigating evidence of TOE degradation existing throughout the site in the form of anaerobic dechlorination intermediate products, and evaluating the likelihood of biological mediated reactions based on mass balance estimates and known stoichiometric relationships for these anaerobic transformation processes. Site history and results of historical soil, soil gas and ground water investigations and more recent data collected at this site by UWRL personnel are also highlighted in the report.
A critical component of this study is the assessment of the potential for contaminant migration from the source area at Site 45/57 to vulnerable receptors before contaminant mass is attenuated and assimilated into the aquifer. The relative rate and extent of contaminant migration was evaluated through the use of a 3-dimensional advective/dispersive ground water model that incorporates ground water flow, contaminant sorption, and contaminant biodegradation to describe the downgradient movement of contaminant within the aquifer over time. A significant effort was made to define a representative source configuration and source strength based on the most likely scenario for original source generation and ground water contamination at the site. This source analysis was carried through a calibration procedure described by Domenico (1987) which yields representative values of the source area cross-plume dimension, Y, dispersivity terms, contaminant source strength concentration, and contaminant degradation rate based on calibration with measured field data. In
ES-i Final Report 12/95 addition, model generated calibration parameters were verified based on the current extent of contaminant migration that has been observed, and the change in the TCE contaminant plume from 1992 to the present. Input parameters for the ground water model were obtained from existing site characterization data, and those data generated from four ground water sampling events carried out by the UWRL Research Team in November, 1993, and May and September, 1994, and July, 1995. Extensive site-specific soil characterization and ground waler quality/ground water flow data were incorporated into the modeling effort. Model parameters that were not available nor measured at the site were estimated using representative literature values, Final model calibration was carried out using the July, 1995, sampling data that was collected specifically to optimize this, model calibration effort The results of this study suggest that the dissolved TCE plume existing in the shallow ground water below Site 45/57 does not pose a significant threat to human health nor the environment due to its attenuation and slow migration velocity (= 26 in/yr pore water velocity,.with = 12 in/yr retarded TOE ground water velocity based on measured field data) in this aquifer under existing environmental conditions. With approximately 7 kg of TOE mass apparently lost in the aquifer over a 2 year monitoring period it appears that TOE degradation is occurring at a first order degradation rate of approximately 0.0026/d (O.26%/d). yielding a TOE half life of approximately 0.8 years. With these values of contaminant velocity, apparent degradation rate, and an estimated source configuration based on model calibration, the remaining source of TOE contamination is predicted to be exhausted in approximately 0.4 to 4 years, with the subsequent ground water plume generated from this source being attenuated within the aquifer to below regulatory limits of 5 gg/L within 5 to 8 years, and approximately 220 m of the source using mean calibrated values for TOE transport and degradation.
Due to the slow contaminant migration velocity and the existing distances between monitoring points, it is recommended that subsequent to the UWRL July, 1995, sampling event, ground water monitoring be carried out every 1 to 2 years to verify that intrinsic plume containment is continuing, and that the plume continues to pose no danger to potential downgradient receptors. The existing ground water monitoring network was suggested to be augmented by one upgradient well, two near-source downgradient wells, and three point-of- compliance dlowngradient wells to ensure that no net migration of TOE
ES-2 Final Report 12/95 beyond the regulatory limit of 5 jgg/L takes place within the, site boundaries over the projected lifetime of the TCE plume. Long-term monitoring based on within plume and point-of-compliance wells should continue for approximately 8 years if an intrinsic remediation plume management approach is to be implemented at Site 45/57.
A hydrocarbon plume downgradient of the TCE source area was not located until near-source monitoring points were installed at the site in July, 1995. The modeling that was possible using the July data indicated that degradation of benzene and toluene appeared to be taking place, but that ethylbenzene and p-xylene did not appear to be degrading under natural site conditions. Measured concentrations of these latter two compounds were below their MCLs, indicating that they do not pose a ground water risk at Site 45/57. Measured field data, supported by fate and transport modeling, suggested that the release has occurred recently, i.e., approximately 3 years in the past, and consequently steady- state conditions appears not to have been reached for a ethylbenzene, p-xylene and the tracer compounds used in this study. It appears prudent then to consider monitoring in the immediate vicinity of the apparent ) ~~source of hydrocarbon release annually for several years to verify that steady-state conditions have been reached for this hydrocarbon plume. Because of the highly localized nature of this plume it is further recommended that the near-source monitoring network installed in-July, 1995, as part of this study be used for monitoring of this hydrocarbon plume. Based on a qualitative evaluation of compliance with the goals of the National Contingency Plan (NCP) plus a quantitative present worth cost analysis of proposed remedial alternatives for the site, it is recommended that the Intrinsic Remediation alternative evaluated in this study be implemented at Site 45/57. This Intrinsic Remediation plume management approach provides protection of human health and the environment, effectively meeting the goals of the NCP, while also being the least cost alternative for contaminant removal and plume containment.
3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~ES-3 Final Report 12/95
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION
This report, prepared by the Utah Water Research Laboratory (UWRL) at Utah State University (USU), contains the results of an engineering evaluation/cost analysis (EE/CA] conducted to evaluate the use of intrinsic remediation as a remedial alternative for fuel and solvent ground water contamination at Site 45/57, Eielson Air Force Base (FAFB), Alaska. Previous site investigations have identified, and four sampling events conducted by a UWRL Research Team from November, 1993, to July, 1995, hove verified that trichloroethylene (TCE) isthe main soil and ground water contaminant at the site. The main emphasis of the work described in this report is to evaluate the efficacy of intrinsic remediation to eliminate, or reduce to acceptable levels, the risk posed to both human receptors. and the environment by the observed ground water contamination at this site.
1.1 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES
The UWRL was retained by the United States Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence Technology Transfer Division (AFCEE/ERT) to conduct an evaluation of intrinsic remediation taking place at two sites in cold, norther n climates, and develop a protocol for intrinsic remediaiion evaluation that can be implemented at Eielson AFB and other DoD sites contaminated with petroleum releases from abandoned USTs. This protocol involves: 1) the comprehensive delineation of ground water contaminant plumes using an extensive network of small diameter, discrete screen interval, single and multi-level ground water sampling points, in conjunction with conventional ground water monitoring wells; 2) the estimation of contaminant mass and mass center migration using a Thiessen area approach for areas represented by each monitoring point;
1-1 Final Report ( 12/95 3) the use of appropriate stoichiometry for the verification of biodegradation through the tracking of terminal electron acceptors (TEAs) and/or appropriate intermediate and terminal end products formed through biodegradation reactions; and 4) the analysis of fate and transport modeling to provide additional support for the observation of attenuation of contaminant plumes through adsorption, dilution and biodegradation reactions taking place within the contaminated ground w4ater under prevailing aquifer conditions.
The actual scope of work for this project involved the following specific tasks:
* Review existing hydrogeologic and soil and ground water quality data available for the site;
* Conduct supplemental site characterization activities to verify the nature and extent of soil and ground water contamination which occurs throughout the Site 45/57 area, and to attempt to more clearly define the source of ground water contamination observed at this site;
* Collect appropriate ground water quality data in support of the assessment and characterization of intrinsic remediation, and for the quantification of intrinsic remediation reaction rates taking place throughout the site. This task resulted in the conduct of four field sampling events for site data collection which took place during November, 1993; May and September, 1994; and June to July, 1995;
* Develop a conceptual hydrogeologic model of the shallow ground water system, including the existing distribution of contaminants, TEAs, and degradation by-products;
* Estimate the total mass, center of mass (CoM), mass center trajectories, and mass center velocities based on Thiessen area determination for the site sampling network;
* Carry out contaminant fate and transport modeling based on site- specific hydrogeological conditions and contaminant-specific
1-2 Final lReport 12/95 physical/chemical properties affecting their transport and fate using a conventional, 3-dimensional advective/dispersive transport model with degradation;
*Evaluate a range of model input parameters to determine the sensitivity of the model to these inputs and calibrate the model to contaminant concentration data measured during the field sampling effort conducted in this study:
*Determine if intrinsic process can be expected to contain the contaminant plumes so that ground water quality dlowngradient of the source does not impact ground water resources above the compliance levels required by regulatory agencies;
*Use the field-calibrated model to evaluate the desirability of source removal, and to recommend the most appropriate remedial option for ground water contaminant management at the site; and
*Provide recommendations regarding a long term monitoring plan to ( ~~~~allow continued verification of plume attenuation over the expected lifetime of the contaminant plumes at Site 45/57.
Site characterization activities in support of intrinsic remediation included collection and analysis of soil core samples, and installation and sampling of one conventional ground water monitoring well and 45 single and multi-level, surface-driven gravel-point monitoring probes. In addition, a number of existing monitoring well and shallow ground water probes installed by other investigators were incorporated into the UWRL sampling program developed in this study.
Site-specific data were used to simulate the fate and transport of BTEX components and TCE and its breakdown products with a conventional, 3- dimensional advection/dispersion ground water transport model which includes sorption and degradation. As part of the EE/CA process, the modeling effort has four primary objectives: 1) to use historical and current spatial ground water contaminant concentration data to aid in the development of feasible source term/contaminant release scenarios that are descriptive of known ground water conditions, and that can be used to carry out Objective 2; 2) to use the model calibrated in Objective
1-3 Final Report ( 12/95 1 to predict the future magnitude and spatial distribution of the dissolved contaminant plume with and without source term removal over the expected lifetime of the contaminant source; 3) assess the possible impact to dlowngradient receptors based on the outcome of Objective 2; and 4) provide technical support for selection and implementation of the intrinsic remediation ground water contaminant plume management option at Site 45/57.
The applicability of intrinsic remediation with long-term monitoring was evaluated as a feasible remediation option for Site 45/57 along with more conventional site remediation techniques including soil vapor extraction and bioventing, source area containment, and source area excavation, all of which were included in the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Reports prepared for Bielson's Operable Units (OUs) 3, 4 and 5 (USAF, 1994a,b). The field work conducted by the UWRL Research Team was oriented toward the intrinsic remediation option, with the previously reported data from OUs 3,4 and 5 RI/FS used for the other alternatives.
This report contains nine sections in its main body plus supporting data in eight appendixes. Section 1 is composed of introductory material, facility background and historical operational information. Section 2 summarizes historical and UWRL-directed site characterization activities, while Section 3 summarizes the physical characteristics of the stUdy hield site. Section 4 provides a summary of the nature and extent of past and current soil and ground water contamination observed at the study site, describes soil and ground water geochemistry relevant to hydrocarbon and TOE transformations, highlights the nature of reductive dehalogenation and co-metabolic reactions that may be important in TOE attenuation in ground water systems, and ends with a discussion of procedures used to conduct mass balance calculations for compounds of interest at the site. Section 5 describes the fate and transport model used in development of a conceptual model of the site. This section details the assumptions and input parameters used for model calibration, as well as those used in the generation of predictive model output for long-term contaminant transport and degradation in the shallow ground water both with and without source removal activities taking place at Site 45/57. Section 7 presents a recommended long-term monitoring program for implementation at this site, while Section 8 presents the conclusions of this work that lead to the selection of intrinsic remediation for ground
1-4 Final Report 12/95 water plume management for Site 45/57. Section 9 provides a list of references used in the development and compilation of this EE/CA. Finally, the appendix material includes the following: Appendix A - soil boring togs, Appendix B - slug test results,Appendix C - soil property data, Appendix D - soil analytical results, Appendix E- ground water chlorinated solvent analytical results, Appendix F - ground water hydrocarbon analytical results, Appendix G - Thiessen polygon method for plume area determinations, and Appendix H - mass balance and CaM calculation summary results.
1.2 FACILITY BACKGROUND
1.2.1. Operational History
The field site termed Site 45/57 in the UWRL study is actually composed of two previously distinct source areas WP 45 and SS 57 as defined in EAFB RI/FS documentation (USAF 1993; 1994a; 1994b). Figure 1-1 shows a regional location map for EAFB taken from Operable Units (OU) 3, 4 and 5 Feasibility Study (USAF, 1994b), while Figure 1-2 indicates source area locations for Site 45/57 with respect to other locations considered as part of OUs 3, 4 and 5 (USAF, 1994a). WP 45 surrounds Building 1183 near the main taxi way at EAFB as indicated in Figure 1-3. During previous investigations the suspected source of contamination at this site was a small photography laboratory located in Building 1183. where photographic chemicals allegedly had been disposed of in a dry well. The definitive operational history of this dry well is not known; however, no laboratory wastewater or chemical-recovery systems were in operation at this site during its operation. Data obtained during site investigation activities conducted by Pacific Northwest Laboratories (PNL) in 1992 (USAF, 1994a) and by the IJWRL in 1993 to 1994 indicate that the source of TOE ground water contamination is likely upgradient of Building 1183 (photographic laboratory) near Building 1206 (fire station).
The source area labeled SS 57 lies to the southwest of WP 45 and to the west of Building 1206, the fire station (Figure 1-3). Past fire training practices near the fire station included digging small pits in the soil, dumping waste fuel and/or waste solvents into the pit, and lighting the waste flammables on fire to provide airmen with training in extinguishing them (USAF, 1994a). These practices could have resulted in a number of
1-5 psit. sa s..
crew*1 -- FIL O
~~YX~sC ThK~~~ \ Jf~ KY7A *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:
RTS IsNWRIGH
FiueNi einllcainmpfrEFAasa Fo SF 94)
V~~~~~~~~~~TA~ h Y ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ON~~~~~~~~~o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (f C~MC
(0 ~ 0
N' (
0 3
>n- 10
-4-
U 0)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 J (so~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Ll: ______~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95
LI*) £f6
V)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C c u- a C ON M/1 <)
LU 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 U, LU L0
< <) a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a u-
cc ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CE
U)~~~~~~~~~~L ") ~~~~~~~~~~~~J 4L ~~~~~~~rL
)D0 ± ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0~~~~~~~
CO a 0
0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 .LZ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ______a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'oa Ao~~~~~~~poo~~~~~~~~g( 1-8~~~~~~~~ Final Report 12/95 small TCE sources in the area surrounding the fire station, and also could explain the apparent BTEX source at Site 88 57. The TCE contamination present may also originate from an old maintenance shed northeast of the fire station. The maintenance shed was located just upgradient from 45MW08 in the northwest corner of the SS 57 source area shown on Figure 1-3. Unfortunately, however, the operational history of this shed is also not known and all that currently remains of it isa foundation. For the purposes of the UWRL study based on UWRL observations, and those made in previous USAF documentation (USAF, 1994a) which indicates a possible overlap of source areas WP 45 and SS 57, these sites were combined to form Site 45/57 for all site characterization and sampling, intrinsic remediation and modeling efforts. Several additional IRP investigations and related field activities have been conducted which include Source Areas WP 45 and SS 57. These include: * Stage 4. RI/FS. Vol. III (Harding, Lawson and Associates, 1989 to 1990): * Automatic Water-Level Measurements, Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, September 1991 through August 1992. Prepared for the USAF, Eielson Air Force Base Environmental Restoration Program, Fairbanks, Alaska (Pacific Northwest Laboratories, 1993); * OL~s 3, 4, 5 Draft RI Report (USAF, 1993); * OUs 3, 4, 5 RI Report - Vol. 1 (USAF, 1994a); and * OUs 3, 4, and 5 Feasibility Study - Revised Draft (USAF, 1994b). The site-specific data presented in Sections 3, 4 and 5 of this EE/CA are based on a review of these documents, and on those data collected from field sampling events conducted at Site 45/57 by the UJWRL Research Team between November, 1993, and July, 1995. 1-9 Final Report 12/95 1.2.2 Current Remedial Activities No remedial activities are currently taking place at Site 45/57. The effort described in this EE/CA isthe UWRL Research Team's effort designed to evaluate the potential for intrinsic remediation at the site, and to aid in the selection of an appropriate remedial action for this combined source area. 1-10 Final Report 12/95 SECTION 2 SITE CHARACTERIZATION ACTIVITIES This section presents the methods used by the UWRL Research Team and their subcontractors to obtain site-specific soil, ground water and soil gas data at Site 45/57 at EAFB, Alaska. Soil sampling was cardied out using hollow-stem auger techniques with soil retrieval via split barrel coring devices. This technique for soil sample collection was also used to collect soil core data from throughout the study site by previous investigators. Previous ground water data from Site 45/57 were collected using a variety of techniques and sampling point configurations including bailing from convehtional monitoring wells and bailing and peristaltic sampling from small diameter ground probe sampling locations. Ground water sampling by the UWRL Research Team at Site 45/57 included existing monitoring wells and ground probes, plus a newly constructed monitoring well and a network of 45 small diameter, driven gravel point monitoring probes. All ground water samples collected by UWRL personnel were done so using battery driven peristaltic ground water sampling pumps. The initial ground water sampling event conducted in this study in November, 1993, included field determined ambient temperature headspace measurements of all water samples to aid in the initial plume delineation/site assessment efforts at the site. Aquifer testing at Site 45/57 consisted of a limited number of single well slug tests carried out during the September, 1994, and June to July, 1995, field sampling events. Soil gas data were collected from surface driven, small diameter steel sampling probes placed at various depths within the vadlose zone using portable, direct-reading soil gas analyzers connected directly to the soil gas probes. Soil gas was analyzed for oxygen, carbon dioxide, and total petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations using a flame photometric detector based on a gaseous hexane standard. Physical and chemical data collected from sampling locations placed throughout Site 45/57 by the UWRL Research Team included the following: 2-1 Final Report( 12/95 • Depth below top of casing (BTOO) of ground water table surface in monitoring wells and ground water probes; * Dissolved oxygen (DO), nitrate, sulfate, dissolved iron and manganese, chloride, dissolved methane, chemical oxygen demand (COD); * Temperature, electricdl conductivity (EC), oxidation/reduction potential (redox), pH, and total alkalinity; * Oxygen, carbon dioxide and total hydrocarbons in soil gas; * Dissolved methane, vinyl chloride, and ethylene based on laboratory headspace analyses; • Twenty-two specific aromatic and aliphatic hydrocarbons, hydrocarbon boiling point splits from 0-6 to 0-15, and total hexane equivalent hydrocarbon concentrations in soil and ground water samples using gas chromatography/flame ionization detection ) ~~~(GO/FID) methods; and * TOE; cis- and trans-DOE; 1,1,2-TCA; POE and methylene chloride in ground water and soil samples using gas chromatography/ion'tra-p detection (GC/lTD) methods; The following sections describe the procedures that were followed in the placement of monitoring wells and sampling 'Points, and in the collection of soil, ground water and soil gas data from the site. Additional details regarding site assessment and routine process monitoring activities carried out by the UWRL Research Team are located in the project Treatment Study Test Design (TSTD) and in Addenda to the Project Health and Safety Plan (HSP) that were submitted to AFCEE and EAFB prior to each sampling event (UWRL, 1994a; 1994b; 1994c, 1995). 2.1 DRILLING, MONITORING WELL AND GROUND WATER PROBE INSTALLATION, AND SOIL SAMPLING The UWRL Research team conducted four field data collection efforts at Site 45/57 which included: November, 1993; and May and September, 1994; and June to July, 1995. These efforts involved installation of one 2-2 Final Report 12/95 monitoring well and 45 ground water probe sampling points, collection of three soil cores, installation of eight vapor probes, and laboratory and field analyses of ground water, soil and soil gas samples collected from the site. Sample collection, handling and analyses procedures were performed as specified in the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) contained in the Project TSTD (UWRL, 1994a), and summarized in the following sections. 2.1.1 Monitoring Well and Ground Water Probe Locations and Datum Survey One monitoring well (UWRL MWO8) and 45 shallow ground water sampling probes (single point, SP, or triple point, TP, 1 to 45) were installed during the period from November, 1993, to July, 1995, to provide detailed delineation of the contaminant plume, and to allow the assessment of contaminant degradation and transformation reactions taking place in the ground water below Site 45/57. The specific locations of existing monitoring wells, and the monitoring well installed and soil core samples collected by the UWRL during this EE/CA at Site 45/57 are shown in Figure 2-1. Figure 2-2 indicates the location of the shallow ground waler sampling probes installed at Site 45/57, while Figure 2-3 shows a detail of sampling probe locations installed within the heart of the contaminant plume as of July, 1995. The exact coordinates of each well and monitoring point in the EAFB coordinate system are provided in Table 2-1, along wiith top of casing (TOO) elevation data in ft above mean sea level (AMSL). 2.1.2 Ground Water Monitoring Probe and Monitoring Well Installation The drilling services of Shannon and Wilson, Inc., Fairbanks, Alaska, were used to install the permanent ground water monitoring well, the 28 surface driven ground water sampling points, and to collect two soil and aquifer core samples from Site 45/57. Single level ground water probe sampling points of 1.6 in ID, wieth 2 ft screen length, were driven to depths such that they were approximately centered across the ground water table measured during field activities in November, 1993. Multi-level points fTP designation on Figure 2-2) were driven in "nests" of three, With one point's screen spanning 9 to 11 ft below 2-3 Final Report 12/95 LO' Li) (D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( 0)0 -E ~~~~~~ ~ON/. C) 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C O 0, CK '1S UOts.AIQ 3, ¶ 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'C 0 0~~~~ 0 V)~~~~~U 3m4: 'C r 'C~~~~~3 CO 0 _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ WA~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CD< 0) U- AD~~~~~~~~~~pOOJ9~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C 9~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Kaj- LO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Q)~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L u ~ 0-~ ~ ~ 4 0 v) '- 'J~Ci In £~~CON M/1 0 cowCuE 0 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-0 C0 C) ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C 0-0-0-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0C C~~~~~~~~C o 00 C) o 0- V~~~)cf 0~~~~ 0 I L6 COD~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C 0 D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -0 0 2-5~~~~~~0- Final Report 12/95 t hlo ronWelltEBELSONMonitoring ae AFB SITE 45/57 o Shallo Ground Watber MoioigPitSampling well locations * P1* GroundProbe ~~~~~~~~inplume area July 1995 SP7 45MW03 0 SP43 0 5P41 PI 0 SP38 5P12 o 0 0 SP44 SP21 18 0 45±101 5P 5 4t SP39 S P35 __) ~~~~SP45 SP42 0 TP9 SP3a 0 S~~~~~~P3 3 a 0P04 0 SP30 GPOO * 0 * GP16 4- GP1S SP37 ASM WOO 45MtO2 0 SP34 0 TP13 02~~ 048 45MWO7 UWRL MWOO * Approx(imate Scale 100 meters 5P15 Figure 2-3. Detail of sampling well locations in vicinity of source area at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, as of July, 1995. 2-6 Final Report 12/95 Table 2-1 Survey data for site 45/57. Coordinate data are referenced to the Elelson AFB grid; TOG data are given f eet AMSL Location N Coordinate ECoordinate Top of Casing Designation (if) (if) (if) SF1 229810.4 387024.1 541.68 SF2 230062.3 386640.5 541.19 TP3S 230226.0 386241.3 54,3.01 TP3M 230226.0 386241.3 541.33 TP3B 230226.0 386241.3 .542.55 SF4 230096.9 386086.0 .539.97 SPS 229835.9 386017.5 541.11 SF6 229275.3 3867,58.9 .541.68 SP7 229017.4 386719.0 542.74 SF8 229045.5 386102.6 540.18 TP9S 228947.3 386444.5 544.42 TF9M 228947.3 386444.5 542.46 1P98 228947.3 386444.5 543.23 SF10 228810.7 386681.5 542.87 SF12 228656.2 386686.1 543.21 TP13S 22863.4.2 386405.4 544.88 TP13M 228634.2 386405.4 542.81 TP13B 228634.2 386405.4 544.1 1 SF15 228513.2 386126.3 543.18 SF16 228373.8 386523.6 543.03 SF18 228182.0 386264.1 543.21 SF19 228146.3 386416.7 541.37 SP20 227956.5 386756.2 539.11 SP21 229246.2 386407.1 541.37 TP22S 229598.1 386592.2 538.27 TP22M 229598.1 386592.2 541.64 TP22B 229598.1 386592.2 541.65 SF23 227820.1 386751.4 540.08 SP24 227757.1 386486.8 542.45 SP25 227650.4 386775.1 541.65 SP26 227615.6 386545.0 542.88 SF27 230521.0 386245.8 SP28 230800.0 386130.0 SF29 228772.9 386520.1 539.34 SP30 228767.4 386451.6 544.89 SF31 228761.5 386381.2 541.75 SF32 228807.2 386518.8 539.38 SP33 228805.5 386449.4 544.58 SF34 228803.2 386378.0 541.27 SF35 228873.7 386496.8 .541.47 SF36 228868.6 386446.9 539.62 SF37 228860.2 386365.2 540.43 SP38 229071.0 386333.2 544.79 SF39 229069.9 386421.9 539.10 SF40 229064.6 386355.6 544.24 SF41 229243.9 386476.9 .542.89 SF42 229244.3 386333.2 544.44 SP43 229464.1 386418.7 545.22 SF44 229453.6 386370.0 545.49 SF45 229443.8 386291.0 540.72 45MWOI 229188.8 386422.0 542.22 45MW02 229256.8 386192.8 537.89 45MW03 229437.6 386507.1 .541.60 45MW04 229914.2 386343.3 539.51 45MW06 229640.5 386756.6 540.97 45MW07 228587.6 386278.5 544.15 45MW08 228721.9 386456.2 542.60 45MW09 229602.8 386292.9 543.46 UWRLMWO8 229051.1 386101.0 541.12 2-7 Final Report( 12/95 the water table, one at 1 to 3 ft below the water table, and one at 1 to 3 ft above the November, 1993, water table depth. The end of each sampling point was threaded and capped to isolate them from the surface between monitoring events. The actual placement of the single and multi-level piezometer sampling points was done to provide representative data regarding the lateral and vertical distribution of contamination in ground water at the field site. The conventional monitoring well was installed at Site 45/57 according to guidance provided by U.S. EPA (1986a) and consisted of 2 in ID, schedule 40, threaded PVC casing slotted over a maximum 5 ft interval within the saturated zone. A minimum of 1 ft of 3/8 in bentonite chips was placed 2 ft above the screen, and bentonite/cement grout was placed from this depth to 2 ft below grade to isolate each well from the surface. Finally, a protective, locking monument case was placed over each well head and secured into the ground using premixed concrete. 2.1.3 Soil Core Sampling Soil core samples were collected in November, 1993, from two locations at Site 45/57 shown in Figure 2-1 using a split spoon sampler. Soil samples were obtained every 18in from 3 ff to a final depth of 19.5 to,21 ft depending upon the specific location from which the sample was collected. The spoon was driven with a 140 lb hammer by the Shannon and Wilson drilling crews, and was brought to the surface for sample collection and handling by the UWRL Research team. Once the core was brought to the surface, soil VOA samples were collected by placing approximately 2 to 4 g of soil from the interior of the core into a pretared, 40 mL VOA vial containing a known weight of methaonol. When VOA sample collection was complete, a corresponding 250 to 300 g sernivolatile soil sample was collected from the split spoon and placed into a 6 in long brass or stainless steel core barrel. These core barrels were sealed, labeled and placed along with the VOA vials into a cooler for storage prior to shipment to the UWRL for extraction and analysis. The VOA vials were filled with methanol and reweighed in the field trailer/mobile laboratory prior to overnight shipment to the UWRL for purging and analysis. All soil cuttings from wells installation and soil sampling were stored in 55 gal drums on-site for proper disposal by EAFB Hazardous Materials personnel. 2-8 Final Report 12/95 Soil textural characteristics were determined from physical inspection in the laboratory of all discrete samples collected at 6 in intervals during field sampling. These data are summarized in Appendix A. 2.2 GROUND WATER SAMPLING This section describes the procedures used for collecting ground water quality samples. These procedures, and all supporting QA/QO efforts are detailed in the Quality Assurance Project Plan that was submitted to AFCEE 25 June, 1994, as part of the TSTD (UWRL, 1994a) for this field research project. The reader is referred to this document for more information. Ground water sampling at Site 45/57 took place in November, 1993; May and September, 1994; and June to July, 1995; for the determination of the nature and extent of contaminant distribution and shallow ground water quality impact beneath the site. Activities included measurement of both field determined analytes and ground water elevations, as well as sample collection and transport to a field laboratory and to the UWRL's Environmental Quality Laboratory (EQL) for further sample chemical analysis. 2.2.1 Monitoring Well Development Before being sampled, the newly installed monitoring well was developed by using a Grundfos Redi-Flo 2® submersible pump to remove sediment, fines, and drill cuttings from the interior of the well. The pump was raised and lowered within the casing to agitate and dislodge the fines so that they could be pumped to the surface for collection and disposal. Development was continued until the pumped water had no visible signs of suspended sediment (approximately five bore hole volumes). All well development water was collected in 55 gal drums, which were properly labeled and stored on-site prior to proper handling and disposal by EAFB Hazardous Material personnel. The small diameter ground water sampling probes were not developed as they were driven from the surface and were in intimate contact with the formation. 2-9 <¾) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 2.2.2 Ground Water Sampling Locations Ground water samples were collected from existing and newly installed monitoring wells and ground water sampling probes from locations identified in Figure 2-2 and 2-3. Not all sampling locations were sampled in every sampling event covered by this EE/CA, and Table 2-2 summarizes specific sampling locations from which samples were collected in each of the three sampling events carried out by the UWRL Research Team. 2.2.3 Ground Water Analytes Measured Various ground water quality parameters were determined using field measurements and laboratory analyses conducted at the Utah Water Research Laboratory during the course of the field sampling that took place at Site 45/57 during the period from November, 1993, to July. 1995. The specific analyte list was modified as more information became available regarding the distribution of contaminants and the existence of intermediate products detected within and downgradient of the ) ~~apparent source area at the site. Table 2-3 presents a summary of 'the specific physical and chemical analytes measured at each of the UWRL sampling events. 2.2.4 Ground Water Sampling Procedures Care was taken to prevent cross-contamination of ground water sampling locations from improperly cleaned sampling and analysis equipment. Water level probes and probe cable used to determine ground water depths were thoroughly cleaned with a detergent wash, and tap and distilled water rinses before and after use between ground water sampling locations. All other equipment used in sample collection and analyte determinations at the field sampling location or in the field laboratory were decontaminated with identical procedures as specified in the QAPP (UWRL, 1994a). For the May and September, 1994, and June to July, 1995, sampling events, appropriate lengths of high density polyethylene tubing were dedicated to each ground water monitoring probe and remained down the probes between sampling events. This tubing was rinsed with ground water from each probe during purging and was used to collect ground water samples from each probe without -~~~ further cleaning. 2-10 Final Report ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 Table 2-2. Summary of sampling locations for which data were collected at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, November 1993, May and September 1994, and June to July, 1995. Grovel PoinitA'ell I______Location Samle orn led -1 Sonmled I mld Designotlon I Nove---- Mc S9* ember-4.ueoJI- sPI j x x SP2X TP3S 5P25 x I X_ _ SP9I I ___ I____ SP32 I - TP 33 1 ______r ___xx_ __3B 2 II__x - r _ _ _ r ___x x - r20 _ x x 1 _P _ A Art _ I _ TPr2 r _ _ _ ~~SP23 _ I - r4 x SP25 _ - r2 _ _I27_ SPr8-r __I29r n SP3r r 45 W31 ______j XNx 45MW09 I N N N~~~~~~~...... Ir 1;44TI - ravel--- WeSls det ontufon____ Frozen~~~~~ well~ 2-11~~~~~~~~~ ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 Table 2-3. Summary of anailytes for which data were measured at Site 45/57, EAFB, Alaska, November, 1993; May and September, 1994; and June to July, 1995. Analyte Quantified Quantified Quantified Quantified List Nov-93 May-94 Sep-94 June to July-95 DO X X X X pH X X X X Temperature X X X X ORP X X X Alkalinity X X X Nitrate X X X X Sulfate X X X X Iron X X X X Manganese X X X X Chloride X X X X TPH X X X X Specific Aromatics X X X X Boiling Point Splits X X X X Trimethylbenzenes _____ X X X ChIorinated Solvents X X X x COD _ __ _ _X x( Methane ______X X Ethylene ______X X Vinyl Chloride X X X X The following general procedures were used for sample handling and collection to preserve their integrity prior to field and laboratory analyses: * Measure ground water elevations in monitoring and gravel point wells; * Purge monitoring and gravel point wells of approximately three casing plus bore volumes using a motorized turbine (Grundfos Ready Flo®) and peristaltic pumps, respectively; * Measure down-hole dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations and temperature of the ground water using a dissolved oxygen probe and meter; *Measure DO concentrations in monitoring and gravel point wells using a zero headspace flow-through cell during ground water -~~~ ~sample collection. 2-12 Final Report 12/95 Sample ground water from monitoring and gravel point wells using motorized peristaltic pumps or bailers where necessary when small sample volumes and low gravel point recovery rates are observed. Samples to be collected include: two 40 mL VOA samples without headspace for purge and trap volatile hydrocarbon and chlorinated solvents; two 150 mL glass serum bottle without headspace for the analysis of dissolved gases (methane, vinyl chloride and ethylene) and COD; 100 mL sample in plastic sample bottles collected without headspace for field laboratory measurements of pH, ORP and alkalinity; 40 mL samples in plastic syringes for field laboratory filtration for nutrient and metal analysis; * Measure pH, ORP and alkalinity of ground water samples in a field laboratory using standard methods of analysis as specified in the QAPP (UWRL, 1994a); * Prepare samples for laboratory nutrient and metals analysis by filtration and dispensing into plastic bottles for transport to the UWRL for analysis. Sample containers for metals analyses contain small amounts of nitric acid for preservation as per the GAPP (UWRL, 1994a); * Sample soil vapor monitoring points using direct reading 'field oxygen/carbon dioxide and total hydrocarbon field; * Collect soil gas samples in evacuated stainless steel canister and Tedlar gas sample bags for laboratory analysis of total and specific petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents; * Perform slug tests to determine site-specific hydraulic conductivity (took place during September, 1994,and June to July, 1995, sampling event); and * Pack and ship samples to the EOL at the UWRL, Utah State University, Logan, for analysis of laboratory determined parameters including: purge and trap specific and total hydrocarbon concentrations via GC/FID; purge and trap specific chlorinated hydrocarbon concentrations via GO/ITO; dissolved iron and manganese concentrations via AA; nitrate, sulfate, and chloride concentrations via ion chromatography (IC); headspoce K ~~~~concentrations of dissolved methane, vinyl chloride and ethylene 2-13 Final Report 12/95 via gas chromatography/flame ionization detection (GO/FID) and gas chromatography/ion trap detection (GC/ITD); oxygen, carbon dioxide, and methane soil gas composition via gas chromatography/thermal conductivity detection (GCITCD); specific compound and total hydrocarbon soil gas concentrations via OC/FID; and COD via dichromate acid digestion/spectro- photometry. Specific sampling and analysis procedures for both field and laboratory methods are detailed in Sections 4.2 (Field Sampling Plan), 4.3 (Laboratory Sampling Plan) and 4.4 (QAPP) of the Final Treatment Study Test Design document for this project dated 25 June, 1994. In addition, dissolved gas measurements using an ambient headspace analysis method were detailed in the Addenda to the Project Health and Safety Plan (HSP) submitted to AFCEE and EAFB, August, 1994. 2.2.4.1 Ground Water Level Measurements Water levels in ground water sampling probes and monitoring wells ) ~~were measured from the top of casing to the waster level using a Slope- Indicator, Inc. (Seattle, WA) model 51453 Water Level,lIndicator. This instrument allows resolution of water level to 0.01 ft. 2.2.4.2 Ground Water Monitoring Well Sampling Ground water samples from monitoring wells were collected after purging three casing plus boring volumes from the wells. The wells were purged using a Grundfos (Allentown, PA), Redi-Flo 2 submersible pump. Following recharge, temperature and DO were measured and samples were collected using a 1.5 inch diameter, bottom draining, Teflon bailer (November, 1993) or battery driven peristaltic sampling pumps with dedicated tubing (May and September, 1994, and June to July, 1995). Containers and sample handling procedures used to collect monitoring well samples were those described above. 2.2.4.3 Ground Water Probe Sampling At the time of placement of the ground water probe sampling points, the following in situ measurements were made in order of collection:y depth to ground water, temperature, and DO. These monitoring probes 2-14 Final Report ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 were then sampled without bailing, using a hand driven peristaltic pump and high density polyethylene tubing placed into the interior of the probes. Ground water probe samples collected in May and September, 1994, were obtained in a similar fashion except that three probe volumes were purged using a motorized peristaltic pump and dedicated tubing, after depth to groundwater, and temperature, and DO concentrations were measured in the probe purge water using a zero headspace flowthrough cell. Samples for VOA, metals, nutrients, semnivolatiles and dissolved gasses were collected using a motorized peristaltic pump after the sampling probes recharged; usually within 2 to 12 h after purging. 2.3 AQUIFER TESTING A series of slug tests were performed at two wells at Site 45/57 to determine the magnitude and variability of hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer below the site. Tests were performed in September, 1994, using wells 45MW08 and UWRL-MWO8, and in July, 1995, using wells 45MW01, 45MW03, 45MW07, 45MW08, 45MW09, and UWRL MWO8 (Figure 2-1). The test procedure used is a modified form of the Bouwer-Rice slug test method for unconfined aquifers (Bouwer, 1978; Kruseman and Ridder, 1989), and consisted of the following steps (refer to Figure 2-4 for the expehimental set-up for slug test measurements): data logger plug sMV .7. . .*7x.-. -7 . .: * ** * ~ ~ ~~~.7...... pressur. transducer Figue 2..Sceai ofsu.tstapaausa... a oleto syte utlie at Sie4.7 A lsa * *. ~- . . . . . Final Report 12/95 * Insertion of a plug into the well casing to force the water level in the casing to rise. The plug was then left in place until the water level in the well returned to a constant level: and • The plug was then quickly removed from the well to cause a rapid reduction in water level in the well, with continuous monitoring of water pressure in the well at a fixed point using a pressure transducer and data logger data collection system to track ground water recharge into the well. Pressure measurements were made using a Druck Pressure Transducer model PDCR 830 connected to a Campbell Scientific 21X Data Logger. Data were collected at sampling frequencies ranging from 5 to 20 Hz, and for total periods between 0.5 and 2.0 minutes. Due to the highly permeable nature of the aquifer (mostly cobbles, gravel and sand), and the small size of the plug, the well response was very rapid, recovering to the original water level in the well in 2 minutes or less in most cases. The data collection period and sampling frequencies were sufficient, however, to yield complete data sets that could be processed to estimate aquifer permeability values. Three replicates of each slug test were performed at each well to indicate the consistency of field determined permeability values using the slug test procedure described above. Drawdown versus time data collected during the slug tests were analyzed according to the method of Bower and Rice using the algorithm described by Kemblowski and Klein (1988). Well properties, such as well casing radius, well effective radius, screen length and water depth to screen bottom, were obtained from existing documentation available for each well, and ore summarized in Appendix B. Results of this analysis are also presented in Appendix B, and are discussed in detail in Section 3.3.2.2 of this EE/GA. 2.4 SURVEYING Surveying for the UJWRL ground water sampling points and monitoring wells was completed in May, 1994, and July, 1995. Locations and TOC elevations of existing monitoring wells were also verified at that time. Horizontal location was surveyed to the nearest 0.1 ft, while vertical location was surveyed to the nearest 0.01 ft. Sampling point coordinates were determined using a Lietz Set 4C total station and existing horizontal K 2-16 Final Report ( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 control. TOC elevations were determined using an auto level and existing benchmarks. Results of this effort have been presented earlier in Table 2- 2-17 Final Report 12/95 SECTION 3 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AREA This section incorporates data collected during investigations as summarized by the USAF (1994b), and of more recent investigations conducted by t he UWRL Research Team over the period from November, 1993, to July, 1995. Investigative techniques utilized by UWRL personnel and their subcontractors to determine the physical characteristics of the source area at Site 45/57 are discussed in detail in Section 2 of this EE/CA. 3.1 SURFACE FEATURES 3.1.1 Topography and Surface Water Hydrology EAFB is located in the Tanania River Valley. Most of the Base has been constructed on fill material. The Base's flat terrain is underlain by a shallow, unconfined aquifer comprised of 200 to 300 ft of loose alluvial sands and gravels overlying relatively low-permeability bedrock (USAF, 1994b). Surface topography at Site 45/57 is virtually flat, and there are no naturally occurring surface water bodies in the immediate vicinity. There are, however, many manmade features at the site which may influence surface water runoff. 3.1.2 Manmade Features Surface cover at Site 45/57 consist primarily of asphalt roads and parking areas, with somewhat smaller areas of grass and natural vegetation. Drainage structures are limited, so that in addition to direct infiltration in unpaved areas, it is likely that much of the precipitation falling on the site infiltrates into the ground at the edges of the pavement K ~~and parking areas. 3-1 Final Report 12/95 3.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY The developed portion of Elelson AFB is located on the floodplain of the Tanana River, which is underlain by unconsolidated fluvial and glaciofluvial deposits. The depth to bedrock beneath the unconsolidated sediments is approximately 400 to 600 ft (Pewe, 1975). The sediments are composed primarily of sand and gravel with cobbles up to 8 in diameter. The silt and clay content is variable, but is generally less than 10 wt%. The aquifer within these sediments is bounded to the northeast by the Yukon- Tanana uplands and is estimated to be 45 to 50 miles wide at Eielson AFB (CH2M-Hill, 1982). The aquifer is unconfined, although discontinuous permafrost layers may act as confining or semi-confining layers in undeveloped areas of the base (PNL, 1993b). Discontinuous permafrost exists throughout the Tanana River floodplain sediments (Nelson, 1978). Well logs for wells drilled at Eielson AFB during the 1940s and 1950s indicate layers of permafrost in sand and gravel between 16 and 124 ft below ground surface (bgs). Permafrost was not reported in well logs for monitoring wells drilled in the developed part of the base after 1986 (these wells have a maximum depth of 60 to 100 ft bgs). Removal of the original ground cover and development on the base have caused most of the permafrost in the lowland area to thaw. Permafrost occurs in the silty, aeolian deposits blanketing the upland area of the base, and in sand and gravel deposits between 2 and 15 ft bgs at Source Areas SS14, ST15, and ST19. These areas are located in the southeast portion of the base, which is less developed. Permafrost in alluvial floodplain deposits generally has a low ice content, and ice is restricted to pore spaces or thin seams in silt and clay (Pewe, 1982; PNL, 1993b). The alluvial aquifer is recharged by the Tanana River and its tributaries, percolation of snow melt and rainfall, and subsurface flow and runoff from the Yukon-Tanana upland area (Anderson, 1970). The Tanana River lies about 3 miles west of Eielson AFB. Tributaries flowing through Eielson AFB include Piledriver Slough to the west, and Moose Creek and French Creek to the east and northeast. Garrison Slough, which is largely a manmade channel, flows from south to north through the developed portion of the base (PNL, 1993b). The direction of ground water flow in the lowland area of the base isto the north-northwest at a gradient of 4 to 6 ft/mile. The depth to the water table istypically 3 to 10 ft bgs (PNL, 1993a). 3-2 Final Report 12/95 3.3 SITE GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY 3.3.1 Lithology and Stratigraphic Relationships Figures A-i and A-2 in Appendix A show the results of textural analyses on sail borings collected in November, 1993, from two locations at Site 45/57. The results of other soil physical/chemical analyses of these soil samples (% organic carbon, P, K, N03-N, and TKN) are given in Appendix C. The soils at Site 45/57 consist mainly of sands and sandy gravels, with small layers of gravely sand and sandy loam. A very small fraction of the soils analyzed were found to have a silty texture. 3.3.2 Ground Water Hydraulics 3.3.2.1 Flow Direction and Hydraulic Gradient Figures 3-1 through 3-4 show water table elevation contour plots from the November, 1993; May and September, 1994; and July, 1995 data sets, respectively, while the raw data for these plots are summarized in Table 3- 1. From these plots, ground water flow direction and hydraulic gradient can -be estimated. Ground water flow was observed to be generally northerly during all sampling events, and significant changes in flow direction at this site were not observed over the sampling period from November, 1993, to July, 1995. The average hydraulic gradient is defined as the change in hydraulic head divided by the corresponding change in length. The average hydraulic gradient at Site 45/57 was estimated to be 0.00 13 ft/ft based on the results of all ground water level observations. 3.3.2.2 Hydraulic Conductivity The hydraulic conductivity at-Site 45/57 was estimated based on slug test data that were collected at the site during the September, 1994, sampling event. These data were analyzed according to the method of Bouwer and Rice using the algorithm described by Kemblowski and Klein K ~~(1 988). A QuickBasic program written to perform permeability estimates 3-3 S~ ~ ~~FnlRpr N) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 C~)> Q)~ > ~ ~ ~~~~~ 0L.>> cu- ~~~~~ ~ ~O 0 U~~~~~~~~0 -0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ cz E ~~~ ~ ~ ~ t 0 >~~~~~~~~~~~~ - ~~0 3:+S~~110 0 UO.oi ;. 0 U C-) ______01 0~~~~~~o CL C: Z~~~~- 0-~~~~~~~~ 0 ~ ~~~~~CO ZCO 3-4 7Th ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalRe port I ~12/95 LD Lo~0 Liu Z C) I C' ON M/1 2 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Fu 0,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _ _ _ _~__ j E C 0 CL~ ~C 40 ~~~~~~~~~0' 0~0 0~~~0 M ~~~~~~~~U _ co _ _ _ _ - -' I~~~~~~~ a) I~~~~V E 0 4?0 'C~~~~~~~ 9~~~~~~C 3-5~~~~~~ Final Report _) IF12/95 030 Ln LUC* 0~~~~~~~~~~0 L/)~~~~~~~o U >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -7~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- 0~~~~~~~~~N. V) cn c E~t 0 V) ~ < ~ ~ ~ U. -0 1SUO~~~~~~\- ~ #0 SE a *I ~0) 0o~~~~~~~~~~ 3: > i.,, ~~~~~~~~~~~)-V- 0~~~~~~ 0)~~~~~~~~0 Cr C~~~~0 II~~~~~~~_~~0) 3-6 Final Report 12/95 D C > U~~~~lON M/1 E 0~ LU~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i I ~~~~0. CE C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E7 ;s UOIL *s Oe (t 0~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~. 'K I~~~~~~~ - U)~~~~~~~ w 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 -Jc 0~ ~ ~ 10) - a~~~~~~~~~ __ _ _ _ I~~~~~~~~~~~~ D-7 ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 Table 3-1. Ground water elevation data collected during the field study at Site 45/57 EAFB. AK. ______11-93 05-94 09-94 07-95 Sample Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation Location (ft AMSL) (ft AMSL) (ft AMSL] (ft AMSL) SPI 529.53 529.81 529.01 529.82 SP2 529.59 530.07 529.09 529.86 TP3M 529.51 531.71 529.04 529.79 5P4 529.57 530.12 529.27 529.85 SP5 529.78 530.38 529.38 530.13 SP6 1530.34 530.63 1 _____ 1___ 5P7 530.34 530.26 531.10 SPS 530.68 531.67 530.33 531.04 TP9M 530.83 531.6 530.16 531.21 SPIO 531.01 531.72 530.62 531.38 SPI2 531.21 532.14 530.81 531.57 TP13M 531.26 ______531.69 TP13B ____ 532.21 531.11 531.61 SPI5 531.2 532.01 530.83 531.50 5P16 531.41 532.05 531.23 531.80 SPIS 531.46 532.54 531.24 531.95 SPi9 531.51 ______531.92 SP20 531.84 532.68 531.51 532.24 SP21 530.57 5.30.87 530.07 530.84 -' ~~~~~~ ~~~~~TP22M530.04 530.29 529.57 530.38 ) ~~~~~ ~~~~____ ~~SP23532.81 531.68 532.38 5P24 532.05 532.95 531.75 532.32 SP25 532.12 532.89 532.05 532.38 SP26 532.02 532.99 531.89 532.54 SP27 ______ SP28 ______ SP29 ______531.34 SP30 ______531.38 SP31 ______531.50 SP32 ______531.43 SP33 ______531.49 SP34 ______531.32 SP35 ______531.43 SP36 ______531.32 SP37______531.25 SP38 ____ 531.01 SP39 ______531.01 SP40 _____ 531.18 SP41O______530.89 SP42 ______531.09 SP43 ______530.70 SP44 ______530.79 SP45 ______530.75 45 MWO1l____ 530.12 542.22 45 MW02 ______530.02 530.73 45 MWO3 529.84 .2 i. 45 MWO4 529.37 530.13 45 MWO6 ______529.47 530.17 45 MW07 ______530.87 531)49 45 MWO8 ______530.77 531.40 9 45 MW09MW______4_ 529.64 530.35k 1UWRL MWO8 ______530.77 1534.46 3-8 Final Report 12/95 based on Kemblowski and Klein's algorithm is presented in Appendix B along with the actual results of the slug tests conducted at Site 45/57 and Site 13/26 in September, 1994, and July, 1995. Hydraulic conductivity values were found to range from 1.6 to approximately 90 ft/day, resulting in a mean value, thought to be representative of average conditions within the native aquifer material, of 45 ft/day. Due to the high permeability of the formation below Site 45/57, maximum drawdown in the wells during the slug tests, ranged from 0.15 to 0.5 ft. Constant data collection provided pressure transducer readings of ground water elevations in the well every 5 seconds, so while the magnitude of well response to the slug was not ideal, the data collection system isthought to have provided sufficient response information to yield representative measurements of formation conductivity for use in subsequent fate and transport calculations. 3.3.2.3 Effective Porosity An effective porosity of 25% was assumed based on previously reported values (USAF, 1993) which are consistent with porosity values normally reported for sand and gravel aquifer materials in the literature (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). 3.3.2.4 Advective Groundwater Velocity The advective groundwater velocity below Site 45/57 was calculated using Darcy's Law. Equation 3.1 gives the Darcy's Law equation for advective ground water velocity determinations: ~KdH OedL (3.1) where v = mean advective ground water velocity or seepage velocity, L/time: K =hydraulic conductivity, L/time; dH/dL = hydraulic gradient, L/L, =0.0013 ft/ft for Site 45/57; and Ge = effective porosity, unitless, = 0.25 for Site 45/57. 3-9 Final Report 12/95 Using Equation 3.1 and site-specific aquifer property and soil characteristic data, the mean ground water velocity (pore water velocity) was estimated to be approximately 0.07 in/day (0.23 ft/day =84 ft/yr). 3.3.2.5 Preferential Flow Paths No preferential flow paths were evident at Site 45/57. Both ground water table contours and contaminant contours were examined for evidence of preferential flow paths. Although it is likely that preferential flow exists on a local level, site-wide preferential flow was not evident from either data collected in this study or data available from previous investigations conducted during the RI/FS process at the site. 3.3.3 Ground Water Use Ground water from the shallow aquifer at EAFB is not extracted for potable use. Potable water for on-base use is obtained from a number of deep supply wells more than a mile northeast of Site 45/57, extracting water fromn locations more than 100 ft bgs. Construction activities related to an Air National Guard building on the north end of Site 45/57 is the only future activity expected to be potentially impacted by the contaminant plume as shallow ground water pumping during foundation installation may be required. 3.4 CLIMATOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS Eielson AFB is located in interior Alaska approximately 100 miles south of the Arctic Circle. The climate is characterized by large diurnal and seasonal temperature Variations, low precipitation, and low humidity. Average summer temperatures range between 450 and 610F. Average winter temperatures range between -14o and 8%F. The extreme temperatures recorded since 1944 are a high of 920F in June and a low of -640F in January. The average annual precipitation is 14 inches, which includes 72 inches of snow (USAF, 1994b). 3-10 Final Report 12/95 SECTION 4 NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION AND SOIL AND GROUND WATER GEOCHEMISTRY 4.1 SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION The actual source(s) of contamination at Site 45/57, along with the exact amount and characteristics of the contaminants, are unknown. It is likely that one major source exists near Building 1206, along with a minor source near Building 1183. The plumes resulting from these sources have co-mingled, so separate plumes for each source are not distinguishable. The main contaminant at Site 45/57 is TCE, however, some. low-levels of BTEX compounds are also present. 4.2 SOIL CHEMISTRY 4.2.1 DNAPL Contamnination Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids, or DNAPLs, tend to migrate vertically under the influence of gravity. DNAPL which penetrates the ground water table will continue to migrate vertically through the saturated zone until either the volume is exhausted by retention of product in the soil as "residual-phase contamination" (Huling and Weaver, 1991), or until a low-permeability confining layer isencountered. Based on the relatively low TCE concentrations (compared to the solubility of TCE) measured in the upper 3 m of the aquifer below Site 45/57, it is unlikely that this portion of the aquifer is contaminated with a large, continuous source of free-phase DNAPL. However, small globules of free-phase DNAPL may be trapped in aquifer pore spaces, in the capillary fringe, or in the unsaturated zone, residing in these areas as occluded residual saturation. K ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4-1 Final Report 12/95 4.2.2 Residual-Phase Contamination Residual phase contamination iscaused by the release and dissolution of contaminants which are either sorbed to aquifer solids or trapped in pore space by cohesive and capillary forces. The following sections discuss the residual phase contamination that potentially exists at Site 45/57. 4.2.2.1 Soil Contamination Figure 4-1 shows the locations of the two soil boring samples collected by the UWRL Research Team in November, 1993, along with the location of soil samples collected by PNL during the installation of several monitoring wells in 1992. The locations of soil gas vapor probes are also shown on Figure 4-1. Table 4-1 shows the specific compound and total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) results for soil samples collected by PNL in 1992, while Tables 4-2 through 4-6 summarize the total volatile purge and trap, total semivolatile hydrocarbon, and specific compound chlorinated solvent contaminant concentrations levels, respectively, in soils collected by the UWRL Research Team in 1993. Raw data to support the UWRL data are contained in Appendix D. Elevated levels of TPH and BTEX components (TPH reaching 81 0 mg/kg, and m,p-xylene reaching 150 mg/kg) were found in the PNL sampling event only in samples 57SB02 and 57SB03, south of Building 1206: In addition to 0.70 to 5.0 mg/kg TEX levels in soils from 45SB08, soils from Source Area 45 contained only 3.0 to 12.0 mg/kg TOE in the August to September, 1992, sampling event. Benzene levels in all soil samples collected by PNL were very low, reaching a high of only 0.0022 mg/kg detected in a single sample in boriing 57SB03. Soil data collected by the UWRL in November, 1993, confirmed the low concentrations of BTEX contaminants seen in the PNL samples. The chlorinated solvent soil data summarized in Tables 4-5 and 4-6 also indicate very low contaminant levels of methyiene chloride, TOE and POE in the soils collected downgradient of the TOE source area near soil boring 455B08 suggesting a localized source of contamination at the site. The 4-2 Final Report "~~~~~~ ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~12/951 C~~~~-n 0 ~ 0 LO~~ ~I I 0 Q~ LO~~ LU M 0~. 0C-4 'a ~ ~ 0*0) V) C 0,~rC co 0~~~ 0) CL C 'ON M/0)i EI 0 a~ra 0 0~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 n *~~~~~~~~0 ------6) C .2E~~~~~u m> ~ ~ ~ . Li) Ao~pooJ9 K)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C Final Report CN ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 0' Wj E j ~~~~VIVV:VVi i VV CD I QL~~1 'U I I Lfl 0 --~~~~~:0 - '0~~~~~~~ 01 4)L: 1 I v ) oo u V VVY V V V V~V Vi V VV W:V V a 0- 0 " -- a-fl i0)vao 00 t ~~~~ I1 V V V'V W:V WV 0itt C z NIC'~~~~~~~~MN q:I 0 N)I flN ViV ~~~~~~~~~~~~~VV: V VV'.: I Au CN0i - 'C) ol CINC.' CNNm 0 " S ~~~~~~~~~~~~~.,~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a 0 0 CC 0- '0 ~~ ~~ ~ ~ (t) a,~~~~0 '~~~~~~ . 0 c$ -4 U)U U)~~~~~~~~d It a)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/ ,CIC vv viv vv too -)IIV: a 0 -) I V (A-~~~~~~: I 0 1NC4 cII aII ii VI -, 0 ' 4-4~~~~~~~~~~i,... Final Report 12/95 Table 4-2. TPH purge and trap sail data for field samples collected from soil boring SB8 at Site 45/57 during the November, 1993, sampling trip. ______Concentration Sample UWRL Sample C-6 Date Log # Depth (tt) (mg/kg dry wt) 11/8/93 421 7 3.0 60.3 11/8/93 4208 3.5 17.0 11/8/93 4210 4.0 13.3 11/8/93 4203 4.5 25.7 11/8/93 4194 5.5 15.5 11/8/93 4216 6.0 20.4 11/8/93 4209 6.5 16.3 11/8/93 4207 7.0 10.9 11/8/93 4202 7.5 17.7 11/8/93 41 97 8.0 23.6 11/8/93 4206 8.5 17.4 11/8/93 4215 9.0 28.9 11/8/93 41 93 9.5 35.6 11/8/93 4201 10.0 8.8 11/8/93 4196 10.5 19.2 11/8/94 4192 11.0 31.0 11/8/93 4214 11.5 7.8 11/8/93 4211 12.0 10.4 11/8/93 4205 12.5 13.3 11/8/93 4200 13.0 6.4 11/8/93 4179 13.5 4.6 11/8/93 4195 14.0 22.9 11/8/93 4191 14.5 8.3 11/8/93 4213 15.0 7.3 11/8/93 4212 15.5 20.7 11/8/93 4204 16.0 4.8 11/8/93 4199 16.5 8.6 11/8/93 41 76 17.0 0.2 11/8/93 4189 17.5 15.8 11/8/93 4180 ie&.0 639 11/8/93 4185 18.5 10.9 11/8/93 4182 19.0 15.2 11/8/93 41 77 19.5 22.4 11/8/93 1 41 78 20.0 11.9 11/8/93 4184 20.5 12.7 11/8/93 Trip Blank ______24.7 11/8/93 IMethod Blank _____ 0.42 K ~~~~~~~~~~~~4-5 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-3. TPH purge and trap soil data far field samples collected from soil boring SB39 at Site 45/57 during the November, 1993, sampling trip. Concentration Sample UWRL Sample C-6 Date Log # Depth (ft) (mg/kg dry wt) 11/2/9-3 3784 3.0 45.3 11/2/93 3785 3.5 12.0 11/2/93 3786 4.0 9.2 11/2/93 1 3787 4.5 15.9 11/2/93 3788 5.0 8.5 11/2/93 3789 5.5 2.2 11/2/93 3790 6.0 3.1 11/2/93 3791 6.5 3.1 11/2/93 3792 7.0 1.02 11/2/93 3793 7.5 0.92 11/2/93 1 3794 8.0 0.48 11/2/93 3795 8.5 0.41 11/2/93 Trip Blank ______0.48 11/2/93 3797 9.5 0.27 11/2/93 3799 10.5 0.21 11/2/93 3800 11.0 7.5 11/2/93 3801 11.5 15.8 11/2/93 I 3802 12.0 9.2 11/2/93 3803 12.5 8.4 11/2/93 3804 13.0 8.8 11/2/93 3805 13.5 7.3 11/2/93 3806 14.0 7.9 11/2/93 3807 14.5 6.3 11/2/93 3808 15.0 22.8 11/2/93 3809 15.5 12.0 11/2/93 3810 16.0 7.6 11/2/93 3811 16.5 15.2 11/2/93 3812 17.0 9.1 11/2/93 3813 17.5 16.0 11/2/93 3814 18.0 9.9 11/2/93 3815 18.5 4.6 111/2/93 3816 19.0 3.5 112/31/93 IMethod Blank _____ 0.26 12/31/93 IMethod Blank ______0.53 4-6 ______Concentration Sample UWL Sample C-6____ Date ig4 Depth (1ff(1mgtkg dry vfl) 1118193 3997 3.0 47.9 11/8/93 3998 3.5 9.1 1181/93 3999 4.0 3.8 11/8/93 4000 4.5 4.5 11/8/93 Btonk 6.1 21/8/93 Blank 0.0 11/8/93 4001 5.5 1.5 11/8/93 4002 6.0 4.3 11/8/93 4004 7053 11/8/93 4005 7.5 4.2 1118/93 4029 19.5 1.0 11/8/93 43200 7.4 11/8/93 4031 20.5 37.9 12/7/93 43-pk 205 93.0 12/7/93 4031-SpikeDup 20.5 101 Sol Boring SB 9 ______Concentration Sample IJWRL Sample C-6 Date Lg4 Dph(l gk r t 1112/93 366 3.0 2.7 1112/9NZ 97 j 11/2/93 3968 4.0 0.0 11/2/93 3969 4.5 0.94 11/2/93 3970 5.0 7.1 11/2/93 3971 5.5 3.0 11/2/93 3972 6.0 2.4 11/2/93 3973 6.5 1.0 11/2/93 3974 7.0 7.1 11/2/93 3975 7.5 1 0.0 11/2/93 3976 8.0 0.0 11/2/93 3977 8.5 2.6 11//93 3978 920 2.3 11/2/93 3979 10.5 0.0 11/2193 3979 Spike 20.5 124 11/2/93 I3979 Spike Duo 10.5 89.2 11/2/93 1 3980 11.0 1.4 11/2/93 3981 11.5 17.1 11/2/93 3982 12.0 0.0 11/2/93 3983 12.5 2.9 11/2/93 3984 13.0 1. 11/2/93 3985 13.5 3.7 12/2/93 3986 14.0 0.0 11/2/93 3987 14.5 0.28 11/2/93 3988 15.0 5.0 11/2/93 3989 15.5 0.0 11/2/93 I 3990 16.0 I 11.4 11/2/93 3991 16.5 0.0 1/29 3992 17.0 3.5 11/2/93 3993 17,5 I7 11/2/93 3994 28.0 0.0 11/2/93 3995 18.5 1.2 11/2/93 3996 19.0 8.9 4-7 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-5. Specific compound (Met~l, TOE and POE) laboratory soil purge and trap data for field samples collected from soil boring 588 at Site 45/57 during the November, 19931 sampling trip. Sample UWRL Sample MetCl TCE PCE Date Log # Depth (ff1 (mg/kg dry wt) (mg/kg dry wt) (mg/kg dry wtI 11/8/93 41 79 13.5 ND BDL BDL 11/8/93 4180 18.0 3.9 BDL BDL 11/2/93 3809 15.5 BDL 0.77 BDL 11/2/93 3810 16.0 BDL 0.40 BDL 11/2/93 3812 17.0 BDL 0.60 BDL 11/2/93 1 3813 17.5 BDL 0.37 BDL 11/8/93 3816-1 19.0 BDL 0.30 BDIL 11/8/93 381 6-2 19.0 BDL 0.30 BDL 1/5/94 Blank BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 4203 4.5 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 4200 13.0 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 4189 17.5 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 4182 19.0 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 4184 20.5 BDL BDL BDL 1/6/94 Blank ______BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 41 94 5.5 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 4207 7.0 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 4202 7.5 2.5 BDL BDL 11/8/93 4206 8.5 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 421 5 9.0 BDL BDL BDL- 11/8/93 4215-Spike 9.0 BDL 0.25 0.29 11/8/93 4215-Spike Dup 9.0 BDL 0.27 0.32 11/8/93 4201 10.0 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 41 96 10.5 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 41 91 14.5 BOL BDL BDL 11/8/93 4204 16.0 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 41 99 16.5 BDL BDL BDL 1/7/94 1 Blank ______BDL ND BDL 11/8/93 421 7 3.0 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 4217-Spike 3.0 BDL 0.47 0.46 11/8/93 4217-Spike Dug) 3.0 BDL 0.41 0.38 11/8/93 4210 4.0 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 421 6 6.0 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 421 4 11.5 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 4211 12.0 BDL BDL BDL 11/8/93 1 421 3 15.0 BDL BDL BDL 1/10/94 Blank BDL BDL BDL MDL ______2.3 0.20 0.22 4-8 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-6. Specific compound (Met~l, TOE and PCE) laboratory soil purge and trap data for field samples collected from soil boring SB39 at Site 45/57 during the November, 1993, sampling trip. Sample JRL Sample MetCl 7CE I PCE Dae o Death (Ift (ma/kg dry wil (ak r t 1 m/pdyv1 11/2/93 3784 3.0 BD1 801L BOL 11/2/93 3785 3.5 ND BD01 BDL 11/2/93 375-v 3.5 BD1 801 j 801 11/2/93 3786 4.0 BDL 801 BDAL 11/2/93 3787 4.5mm BDL BDL AOBL 11/2/93 3793 7.5 fNC 801 BDL 11/2/93 3794 8.0 ND BDL BDAL 12/28/93 Blank BDL DL801 BDL 1112/93 3788 5.0 BDL B01L BDL l.22192.. 3_789 5.5 801 801 801 11/2/93 3791 6.5 801 801D0 11/2/93 3792 7.0 BDL BD1 AOL 11/2/93 3795 8.5 Nv 801 ADL 11/2/93 3797 9.5 NC ADL I BL 11/2/93 3802 12.0 ND 0.O62 j 801 11/2/93 Trip Blank 801 801 801 11/2/93 ITdri Blank ______ND BDL D 11/2/93 3799 10.5 B01 0.26 BDL 11/2/93 3800 11.0 BDAL 0.35BD 11/2/93 3801 11.5 j BDL 0.50 B01 11/2/93 3803 12.5 250.60 801L 11/U2/93 3804 13.0 NC50.57 11/2/93 3805 13.5 801 0.52 1 AL 11/2/93 3806 14.DAL 04 0 11/2/93 3807 14.5 AOL 0.27 801 11/2/93 3808 15.0 BDL 0.78 j BDL 1112L2L 238.. 16.5..JL... ___0.68 BDL 11/2/93 3814 18.0 ND 0.2 O 11/2/93 3815 18.5 NC`.75BO 11/8/93 4177 19.5 NCV BDL j 80 11/8/93 4178 20.0 NC BD1 BD80 1.2L/3 tiL __Ag± ND B01 11/8/93 4208 3.5 B0 81 I O i11/8/93 ------4j, BDLAO 11/8/93 4197 8.0 BDL 801 a DL 11/8/93 4192 11.0 801 AOL AOL 11/8/93 4205 12. BjQj AOL BD 11/8/93 4212 15.5 AOL 81 AL 11/8/93 4212-Spike Dup 15.5 8010.7 0.3 11/8/93 4176 17.0 tz SOL I 801 11/8/93 Trip Blank BD______O L I AL 4-9 Final Report 12/95 maximum TPH concentration found in the UWRL-collected soil samples was at 18 ft depth in soil boring SB 8, with a benzene concentration in the sample being only 14.2 mg/kg dry wt soil. All soxhlet TPH concentrations were below 100 mg/kg dry wt soil, while all TOE and POE soil concentrations were below 0.8 mg/kg dry wt soil in SB 8 and SB 9. 4.2.2.2 Soil Vapor Contamination Soil vapor concentrations were likewise low throughout Site 45/57 during UWRL field sampling events. Table 4-7 summarizes soil gas data from the May 1994, and July, 1995, sampling events for which a complete set of field and laboratory soil gas composition data are available. Specific compound results for these soil gas samples are provided in Appendixes D-3 and D-4. As indicated in Table 4-7, only VPO7 showed significant concentrations of hydrocarbons based on laboratory GO analysis. The benzene soil gas concentration in this sample was less than 10 gg/l- While field screening hydrocarbon results showed highly variable data, inconsistent with laboratory results, all of the field data were also low, below 300 ppmv, once again suggesting the limited extent of hydrocarbon contamination existing throughout Site 45/57. Table 4-7. Soil gas total hydrocarbon concentration data collected from throughout Site 45/57 during the May, 1994, and July. 195 sampling trips. 05-94 07-95 TPH FedGC TPH Field GC Sample UWRL Sample C-6 TPH C-6 UIWRL Sample C-6 TPH C-6 Name Loa Type (Vig/L) (ppmv) Log # Type (i'g/1) (ppmv) vPOi 5310 Canister 0.0 140 7768 Canister 6.1 79 vP02 5311 Canister 2.7 160 7767 Canister 1.5 12 VP03 531 5 TelrBg15.0 ___ 7751 Canister 0.0 ____ VP04 5312 Canister 0.0 46 VP05 5313 Canister ____ 120 7760 Canister 59.9 70 vP06 5320 TelrBg0.0 16 7761 Canister 22.0 90 vP07 5316 TelrBg180 19 ___ TP3S - 7766 Canister 6.8 130 TP9S ______7754 Canister 8.5 130 TP13S 5314 Canister 0.17 160 7765 Canister 3.6 11 5 TP22S ______7753 Canister 7.4 95 SP36 ______70 Canister 9.8 280 Ambient Air 5309 Caitr 0.46 ____ 72Canister5. ____ Blank blank Air 0.0 ______ Blank blank Air 0.0 ______.9~~~~~~~~~~~~41 Final Report 12/95 4.3 GROUND WATER CHEMISTRY The fluctuating ground water table at EAFB makes results of dissolved phase contamination analyses more difficult to interpret than if ground water elevations were constant over time. When the water table rises, into areas where contaminants are located within the capillary fringe and lower vadose zone, additional contaminant may be redissolved into the shallow ground water, resulting in increased contaminant concentrations measured in ground water sampling probes and monitoring wells. On the other hand, a rising water table which moves into areas of uncontaminated capillary fringe/vadose zone, would result in decreases in dissolved-phase concentration due to dilution and partitioning of contaminant out of the water phase and on to the solid phase as the system approaches equilibrium. An attempt has been mode to make comparisons of contaminant concentration and contaminant mass between time periods with equivalent ground water elevation so that these dynamic, unsteady-state conditions provide minimal complications in data analysis and interpretation. 4.3.1 Dissolved-Phase TCE Contaminatifon Ground water samples from numerous sampling events, both before and during this UWRL study, have confirmed that the shallow saturated zone beneath Site 45/57 is indeed contaminated with TCE. Results of chlorinated solvent analyses conducted for samples collected by PNL in August through November, 1992,are summarized in Table 4-8. Locations of shallow ground water probe samples (GP) that PNL collected at that time are indicated in Figure 4-1. Results of chlorinated solvent analyses for samples collected during the May and September, 1994, and July, 1995, sampling events by the UWRL Research Team are shown in Table 4-9, while the complete data set for these samples is located in Appendix E. Both cis- and trans-dichloroethylene (DCE) were found in ground water samples collected in the PNL and UWRL sampling events. The appearance of these compounds, particularly cis-DCE, is indicative of biologically-mediated, anaerobic dlechlorination of TCE. The relatively low concentrations of these intermediate products found in the ground 4-11 Final Report 12/95 :3 0)~~ 4:~~~~~~~~~~~~O _ '0 ~~ 5 'O ~ 2~~9i'N~q~cd - V e. -I 0) __ C v C vv v CL0 7LI) N N N N N -0O~~~ on 8 0 v V V v V V V VVC V C 0~~~~~~~~~~~ U, ~~~+ L..~ ~ ~ > -.> > C. ' N 0 D <~V V << V<<< VV < < 0~~~~~. o6 U)~~~~~~41 Final Report 12/95 0 CA E a~~~~~~ VVvV I Lr) U4 O <~~C- C v'; 4;;;r~ ~ 0 0 ~~~~II~~~~I O S~~ I ~~II -a V V~~Iv I - V- ngjVV-~ Q) 0 9- 99 09u E0 $3 - - V~~~~~~~~~~~~t0~~~ CO V VV Vm V _V . V V 1 V eq - (f V0 La~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cI Iaa 2 -o ~ vlvv~~~~~~~~~~~~~~vvvvVv V V V;; VV V V V.V V to V V V 6~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~V *0OQ ID 0 >- V1 V 0I------I-~~~~~~0 I r o V~~~~. .?n0 ig~- E ci ;U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I C ID:~~~~~~~ CI I > > >> > >I > > > > > > I > r:'6 I! zz I _iz ~C) a,-1~ GE Id C> 0------IRI~I V vVVV ~V 1 VV V'CVV _ 1o . E~- D~~~~~~ ------a! - IoC o c.o0 . .0 .. ao .0 .0 i~00 ~o . '<~ Z1>> >> >> C6 ~ ! I 2ZZZ 22ZZ2222 -~~2UO -4t ~ ~ ~ ~~ r~C. -0 o~~~~~~~~~41 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-9. Selected ground water chlorinated solvent data for field samples collected by the UWRL at Site 45/57 during the May and September, 1994, and July, 1995,_sampling eventst. 03-4 0944 0745 05.94 09M44 0745 OCS 7CE DEWC Ibnts OE ME',CsC IfotoN) 45 MWOI ~~~~~2692.6 M9D,538025)7 45W2 3.3 44 6A8 3.53*, 3.7.. ML,3.1 45W3 SQL 1.6 69 NEI 3) MQL ML I0.A21,I 4MW4 2.2, 3.1 6.3 317 ND ND). 1131.4 MQl35 SQL, 1 Is MW~ ND SSO Q NO, ND SL, SML BQL MQL 45MW0 16.2 3.0 MQL 2.5 ND MAL32... SDM 1.2 45MW 5.03 4.90 2410 III89..2 133.33) SQt. 6.6. [BOL 4 6) ML, 14A 45MWV9______~ND.. ~.______17,.8 6A 6.1 SF) ND SML ND, ND ND, ND '92 ND ND SQl ND, ND SQL SMt SQL SML VW3 2.) ND, ND YEWS 'I__42 3 6.1.3.2 2A. IA I4 IA 1 1 . NOl2A..- SOLSOL ND,SMt IFS SML 10 SQ NO. 3.7 41 ,4.1 DM, Is 396 ND NN SP? ___ _ No MQL MQLSQL ND. ND SR ND 21 QNL0.94 MSL,SQL MQLSQL 190M 3.' 35.01b ND, ND ML,. SQL ND, ND P$o10 ND NDSQ ND ND ND.N, ND, SQL $912 NO MQL ND. ND DML ND TP13h 270. 210 ____ 28 ND, ND ND. SQL TP13B ISO 39. 532 ND. ND ND. SQL ND. SQL 0915 ND _ _ _ D N PI16 HD SQL SL ND12 SL L SQ.I via N.N D Q ND, N.D. ND32..5 ND Q 0919 NO SQL SL N.N Q Q Q Q 592 ND SQL ROL ND24 Jl.... NDD 092 M5.520 503 2Ms . S 4 j.. . 4 1P2 NM I1 SQIOD SQL NN 19225 423 2. 4.4 ) RO25SQSL, 1 592 ND SQ .5 Q PL&SL, 2.) N.ND Q . $MI NED SQMQtD23 .9L.....~A. $925 ND SQL, SML SL N D N Q Q) N Q J M.~~~~~~~~S2 ND ND SQL ND, ND NO, SQL ND D 5927 ____ N 2.5 SQL Mt .3 . 5929______23. ND, 52. SF3 1___35 ND '2? SF35______23~~.1 SIX 2.5 SF56 859~~~~~~~ BOL, 2.1 0937 ______~~~~211 ______SL.RO______. 5938______13.9 ______S______SF39______106~I DM 'A 5940 _____ 50~~~~~.6 ML(. 2 SF41 __ _ U1__4 ______4MI. SF42 ______152 SQL '.1 SF43 _ _ _ 329 6.1.8 SF44 ______52.5 6.3. 5.5 5945 ______16.8 ______2*2*2 LIEVVL(4908 ND SOL SQ HD. NO SOL. SQL ND, NO 0Gm _ _ _ ml__35 ______ROL__0144 09D4 ___ 7___6.2 ____ St.5 0GM ______920 ______No, 114 09 5 ______394 ______S L 30 C916 ______1.9. 32Z FIELDSLANK ___ ND SL _ ____ ND, ND ND, No FIELDBLANK ____ SQL SOL C,_____ND N D.NO N FIELDBLA NK W____D ______ND~NO ______FIELDBLANK ND ______NO, NO _ _ _ _ _ TRIP 01LNK SQM QL ______ND. NDODN TRIP BLAINK ND SQL ______NO. NO ND D TRWDV NK ND SQL I _____ ND.N NMN 18)`BILANK ND MQL I______ND. NDOD.N TR)9 LANK _ ___ SOL I______ND, NO ______9401 0.Sob O4wbl Ioob OSO3~4gob 2.0 2.1 go ..09~ tND indicates the compound peak was not detected in the sample; BQL indicates that a compound peak was detected, but the concentration was below its Method Guantitation Limit (MGL). -~~~~~~~~~ ~~~4-14 Final Report 12/95 water suggest limited degradation of the TOE, or the rapid degradation of these by-products once they are formed at Site 45/57. A discussion of what is known regarding biological transformations of chlorinated solvents that can take place under aquifer conditions is provided below in Section 4.5. Figures 4-2, 4-3 and 4-4 show the spatial distribution of TOE at Site 45/57 in May and September, 1994, and July, 1995, based on the ground water data collected by the UWRL. These figures indicate that the TOE plume is contained to the immediate vicinity of 45MW08, and appears to have migrated only to a limited extent to the east and slightly north of this monitoring well. Figure 4-4 shows an expanded view of the shallow monitoring probes installed in June, 1995, in the proximity of monitoring well 45MW08. This figure shows clearly that TOE concentrations decrease rapidly away from the source area, dropping from more than 90,000 ppb at GPO8, to approximately 100 ppm at SP39, 110 rn downgradient. As indicated in these figures, the MOL (5 pg/L) contour appears to extend only 250 to 400 m downgradient of the source area depending upon the actual ground water table elevation. The concentration of trans-DOE at Site 45/57 during the UWRL sampling events, did not exceed its MOL value of 100 pg/L, as the maximum trans- DOE levels observed was in September, 1994, at 49 pg/L. A maximum cis- DOE level of 114 pg/L, exceeding its MCL of 70 pg/L, was observed in the June to July, 1995, sampling event in GPOS, the apparent center of the source area. The concentration of these TOE daughter products are generally more than one to two orders of magnitude lower than those observed for TOE. It is important to note, however that fthe DOE plumes are generally co-located or slightly dlowngradient of the apparent TOE source area. This observation is consistent with the argument that DOE at the site is generated from the anaerobic dechlorination of TOE originating near 45MW08/GPO8, and supports the contention that biologically mediated degradation of TOE istaking place at this site. 4.3.2 Dissolved- Phase BTEX Contamination The results of dissolved-phase BTEX analyses are shown in Table 4-8 for previous investigations carried out at the site by PNL, and in Tables 4-10 through 4-13 for November, 1993, May and September. 1994, and June to 4-15 rn ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Broadway C - 0 3 -1 C~~~~~ii. C ill~(1 rri CD -n~~~~~~~~~~~~~D : Q (~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~D 0 C :3 a.~~~~~~~~~~~~~a (a 0 UŽI lo (0~~~~~~~~~~~~ -J r 0 . 1O ~ ~~~0 £081C) n 0 A a, 4-0 :3 0~~~~~-i0 0 .9( -48Division St. 3 ?-tu Ln 0~~~~~( 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ cn ~ - rn 8** 0z CA a'V Xo- n 0 0 :3 z ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~: 3 8 -0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V) -0 0 >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' cn n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~n (0) C Broadway n C m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - r m Q <~~~~~~~~~~r - 0~~~~~ ~ ~ ~0 4 x Ln~~~~~~~~n (D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(f Final Report 12/95 CL u /) LL- - LU C II J O / \C - Lu fl14 x~~~~ C / I" I (1)0'cL U)~ 14 'no ~ ~ ~ ~ no Ln ~~~~~~~~~~0- C> - ca,.~~~~~~~~~ Jo U) -) P~~~m o0 U) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ca 0~ I a)Y Lu~~~~~f) / ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~EU 0 CD 4-18~~~~~~~~~~I Final Report 12/95 Table 4-1 0. Total purge & trap and BTEX constituents detected in ground water samples collected from Site 45/57 (gg/L) in November, 1993, by the UWRL. Sample Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene p-Xylene P&TTPH Name ~~(iic/L) (igL](WL) C-6 (ligfL 45 MW OI ______ 45 MWO2 _ __ 45 MWO3 ______ 45 M W O4 ______ 45 M W O6 ______ 45 MW07 ___ 45 MWOS8__ 45 M W 09 ______ SPI 0.0 2.8 0.93 1.9 17.3 SP2 5.0 7.9 2.8 4.1 96.3 TP3M 0.0 3.1 0.3 3.6 164 TPO3B 0.20 1.5 0.0 1.7 1 13.4 SP4 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 60.3 SP5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.6 SP6 0.8 2.2 0.0 1.5 31.1 5P7 0.0 0.57 0.0 0.78 11.8 SPE 1.2 1.9 0.0 1.9 24.9 TP09M 0.0 19.0 0.0 0.0 31.6 TP09B 11.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 62.4 SPIO 1.4 2.6 0.0 0.0 15.1 SPJ2 1.4 9.1 10.5 4.8 97.6 TP13M 5.1 158 5.8 23.6 706 TP13B 440 1347 13.2 16.7 6,582 SP15 0.0 4.3 3.5 2.5 114 SP16 0.92 0.91 0.33 0.9 14.0 SPiS 8.1 2.1 0.0 1.7 48.9 5P19 4.3 3.7 0.0 0.0 44.5 SP20 0.0 0.56 0.0 4 289 SP21 68.6 40.3 10.6 54.2 483 TP22M 0.0 0.0 0.15 0.17 14.3 TP22B 1.4 4.3 1.5 0.0 57.2 SP23 1.3 6.2 7.0 4.8 202 SP24 12.4 42.8 11 .6 65.3 368 SP25 0.0 13.4 3.0 23.9 361 SP26 13.5 45.2 14.4 87.9 415 SP27 ______ SP28 ______ UWRL MWO8 ______ 4-19 ( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 Table 4-1 1. Total purge & trap and BTEX constituents detected in ground water samples collected from Site 45/57 (gg/L) in May, 1994, by the UWRL. Sample Benzene Toluene ~thlbenene iD-ylene P&TTPH Name (At/L) hig-q/L-)- -(p/L) ig/L) C-6 (pg/L) 45 MWO1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 109 45 MWO2 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.0 45 MWO3 jI0.0 18.8 0.0 0.0 53.6 45 MWO4 j 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 27.5 45 MWO6 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.2 45 MW07 __6__4 1.4 0.0 0.0 78.6 45 MWOS 3.2 259 2.8 21.0 2,081 45 MWO9 0.0 0.24 I 0.0 0.0 78.1 SPI 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.4 50.9 SP2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.4 TP3M 0.0 1.0 0.0 3.0 60.0 TP03B I______ ______0-.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.3 SP5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 55.0 SF6 10.0 1.5 0.0 _____ 26.5 SP7 _ _ _ _ spa 1 1. 022 0. .0 69.7 TP09M 40.0 -00 0.0 0.23 60.1 TP09B 13.8 6.2 2.7 0.0 441 SPlO 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 SP12 1 0.0 00. 0.0 oo 15.8 TPI3M 10.0 1~21 0.0 0.0 153 SPiS 1 . 0.0 0.0O 0.0 SP16 10.0 0.13 0.0 0.17 26.1 SPiB 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 73.0 SP1~9 0.0 5.7 0.0 22.9 67.4 5P20 1I0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.6 SP21 15 0.92 0.00 0.0 0.0 208 TP22M 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.0 TP22B 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 65.3 SP23 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.9 SP24 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.9 SP25 0.0 0.13 0.0 0.0 15.2 SP26 , 0 00.0 0.0 O-r 25 .2 SP27 ___ _ SP28 I______UWRL MWO8 0.0 0.12 0.0 . 63.0 4-20 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-12. Total purge & trap and BTEX constituents detected in ground waler samples collected from Site 45/57 (pgg/L) in September, 1994, by the UWRL. Sample Benizene Toluene Ethylbenzene p-Xylene P&TTPH Name (pig/L) (pig/L) (gg/L) Jiq/L) C-6 Wgq/L) 45 MWO1 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 180 45 MWO2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 45 MWO3 0.0 0.17 0.0 0.0 1.4 45 MWO4 0.0 10.9 0.0 0.0 63.2 45 MW06 0.0 0.14 0.0 0.0 7.5 45 MW07 3.7 0.18 1 0.0 0.0 132.6 45 MWO8 0.0 201 1 3.3 8.4 12.311 45 MW09 1.4 0.15 0.0 0.0 16.6 SP I______SP2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 TP3M ______TP03B 0.0 0.67 0.0 0.0 24.8 SP4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.7 SP5 0.0 0.0 I 0.0 0.0 33.1 SP6 ______I I_ SP7 0.20 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.7 SP8 1.0 0.28 0.0 0.43 35.6 TP09M 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 36.1 TP09B 9.2 20.6 8.4 14.7 1,147 SPlO 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.3 SP12 0.0 0.14 0.0 0.23 24.1 TP 13M ______TP13B 0.0 393 0.0 0.0 1,511 SP15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.5 SP16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.3 SPIB 2.4 0.0 0.14 0.0 37.6 SP19 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 41.8 SP2D 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.5 SP21 0.55 0.55 0.0 0.0 213 TP22M 0.0 0.0 I 0.0 0.0 I26.1 TP22B 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.3 SP23 0.21 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.2 SP24 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.4 SP25 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.8 SP26 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.3 SP27 0.56 3.5 0.0 4.9 40.7 SP28 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 14.3 UWRL MWO8 0.0 0.0 I 0.0 0.0 0.66 4-21 (Th ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 Table 4-13. Total purge & trap and BTEX constituents detected in ground water samples collected from Site 45/57 (gg/L) in July, 1995, by the UWRL. NoMnie Beze I -ok Efhylbenze. o-Xylene P&TIFH Nae unL)L ..ffisLL. fagh Jv~jLi C-6 lug/fL 45 MWOI 0.21 0.0 0.0 0.0 88.7 _ -7r~y r -r r 45 MW03 0.0 0.49 0.14 0.39 103 45 MW04 0.28 040 0.0 0 12 17.6 45 MW06 0.18 0.0 Oro 0.0 17.4 45 MW0Z 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.1 45 MWOS 8.6 135 0. . 2,133 45 MW09 0.5 0 5 0.0 0.0 30 4 SP1 0.09 0.0 0.0 040 11.0 WP3M TP03B 0.27 0.8 0.23 0.9? 15.2 SF4 0.0 012 0*0 OhW 824 5P5 0.0 00O 0.0 0.0 11.9 SF? 00 . 0.0 03 SM8 1.4 00 0 0.0 19W9 TPO9M I2.9 50O 2.6 1w2 527 FF098 2w8 5.7 248 1.3 542 SF12 0w60 36 0.5 6.4 46w2 IFP13M 0w21 - 0.0 -00 0 13 III. 1?3 2 070 0612 12 1.o656 SPIS 0 0 014 0.0 0.0 21.7 SP18 0.89 1:3 1 9 00O 43.7 SF19 2. 2.2 00 5.3 51.6 SP2D 0.38 094 0 1.8 2347 TP2lM ff09 - 00 00 0 112 TPf2B 0f0 0.90 0.0 0.0 19 SP23 0.0 0a94 0.0 1.2 16.6 SP24 0.25 0.18 0.0 0M08 11.6 _-7 -T -= r r - r r SP26 To0 -0-0- 00 00 9.8 SP27 040 00 0.0 0.0 138 SF29 1.062 5.,874 193 1.341 40,532 ______223 9 236 129 7,143 SP32 57 1,051 110 -68-2- 8 57 5 SF33 24 73?7 22.4 926 5680 SF35 28 5-3 10 2 163 SP36- - -F8- 014 OX 31.1 SF38 0.49 066 0 0 U./ r.I -r -r0 41.3r4 SF40 00 0.2 00 0.0 9.3 SP1 8- ,74 0.0 4.8 3.2 SP42 1.4 052 O.) 040 83.9 SF43 0.73 0.37 0-32 0.10 28.2 SP" r5 -mrT wr 7r- -Zr, SF45 00- 044 -0.0 00i 2799 UWLMWOB8 - - -0 ff0 . . GFO2 0.2-8 0-86 0 0 045 172 0P04 0.33 041? 0.0 0.0 50.0 GPO8 99.6 2.552 138_____ 711 48.545 GP1 0.-0 -798 00W 90 543 GF6 459 I34Y 28.4 436 10.135 K, ~~~~~~~~~~~~4-22 Final Report 12/95 July, 1995, UWRL sampling events, respectively. Raw analytical data are located in Appendix F. Despite the elevated soil concentrations reported by PNL for 57SB02, south of Building 1206, hydrocarbon concentrations in the ground water near that area were found to be low, both for specific BTEX comp ounds and for total hydrocarbons (as represented by purge and trap analyses expressed on a hexane equivalent basis). With the installation of additional ground water sampling points in July, 1995, high TPH and BTEX concentrations were observed north and east of the ICE source area (Table 4-13). Benzene was found to exceed its MCL value at single locations in November, 1993, (mean of 212 ggIL in TP13) and May, 1994, (6.4 gg/L in 45 MWO7). With additional near-source sampling points in July, 1995, a number of locations immediately downgradient of the source area contained elevated dissolved benzene concentrations (SP29, SP30, SF32, SF33, SP41, GP08-and GP1 6), along with dissolved toluene concentrations above its MCL of 1,000 R±g/L (SP29, SP32, SP411, and GPO8). All other aromatic components of interest were found at concentrations below their MCL and localized north of monitoring well 45MW08. Figure 4-5 shows the limited benzene plume centered around 45MW07, in May, 1994, while Figures 4-6 and 4-7 show the combined BTEX plume existing at Site 45/57 in May and September, 1994, respectively. The BTEX plumes were constructed based on the preliminary remediation goat (PRG) of 10 gg/L defined in USAF (1994b). These plots indicated that the BTEX plume had moved less than 150 m away from the apparent source of contamination at Site 45/57. The data collected in July, 1995, confirm these earlier concentration profiles as indicated in Figures 4-8, 4-9 and 4- 10 for benzene, toluene and dissolved BTEX, respectively. As shown in Figure 4-8, benzene concentrations are reduced from 1,062 gg/L at SP29, to less than 3 p~g/L at SF35, approximately 30 m downgradient, while Figure 4-8 indicates the reduction in toluene ground water concentrations from 5,874 ggIL to 5.3 pg/L over this same distance. An additional hydrocarbon source is suggested north of Building 1183 based on data from SP41 (benzene = 486 gg/L), however, this hydrocarbon plume is also seen to attenuate rapidly as benzene ground water concentrations are non-detectable at the closest downgradient well, 45MW03, approximately 75 m away. Overall, it appears that 4-23 - Broadway rn C: CD' CrDH * UO(D - (0 CD~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~= Ca C 0 to tX~ CINa aaC0 :3 X&!i -D c4~~~X ~t-iD E N) (C) CD C_ aCD I (O _D j c40 XCo Irc -~~~~~~~~Q~~CrimI CD 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 00 N M~~~~~~~~~0 (Q. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Broadway 0'~~~~~~~C O CD ( (0 CD~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 C -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C :3 Co sr~dCu 2- Cf 0 xt)c'( CD0 70 x~~o 3' -I~U)X~ :3 CD 0- ~~~~~~~(l00 . 0 3' 3 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~: (A~~~~~~~C dXC T/N. o 0~~~~~~~~ Ln~~~O-L (D C) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~d~~) Go m~~~~~~~~ 90~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~: 000'0 -n (D ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Broadway IT, (DO 0-o (D x, B-I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- :3- CD C C a :3 f~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~D (D 0 0 'F [jAOil x~cn0 C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C -r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- cn 0*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L (D. (D 0n N~~~~~a (D 0 a Jat~A N) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~u iiinSt. CD- U)P CD w~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C S. ~~~~~~~CJ)~~~C Q7Lm ~~T/WNO.3 Xo~~~~~~~ - r (D cn I Cb 0' m XITWN. cN- 0 >~ ~~~4 (n C) C -n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- :3~~~~~~~~: Qn~(nl Final Report 12/95 IoOa UJ ~~~~~~~C1 CoII eo U- O - L------2 < r zU ~~o O 0 a)0 E - ~~~~~~~~~~E (nO (00 0)~~~~0 0 .0) I n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FL 0 -C fin~~~~~~~~~~~~~ v C 0 en -a)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~)- C-) 0) 4-27 Final Report 12/95 CK~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U. 0 .0 ~ O 0 ao 0 o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2 to- -0 *0 LU Z) It~U a :2 E- 6 - 0 U Ct \- 0 Z C5~~~~~~ ~ Ct)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r U- 0~~~~~~0 (nO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O 0) :~~~~~~~Cio a~~~~~~~~~~~~-4) I- ) 2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4-28 Final Report 12/95 .0~~~. 0- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' * 0 I CD 0. < 0 ~'.r (D Z 0 0 I Lii ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E (D E cnr( ~~~~~~~~~~~ 00~~~~~~~~~~ 00" (~~~~~~)0~ ~ ~~ ~ C a~~~~~~~~~~~C LU .aO~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~L '~~6cnt ~ 4-a Final Report 12/95 -corrective action considerations at 45/57 will be driven by TOE contamination, rather than the limit ed hydrocarbon plumes existing at the site. 4.3.3. Inorganic Chemistry and Geochemnicall Indicators of Biodegradation Contaminant degradation takes place by microorganisms when the contaminants serve either as a primary energy source (electron donor), or are fortuitously metabolized when other primary substrates are available to the microorganisms (co-metabolism). In order for the electron donors to be utilized by the indigenous microbial community, compounds must also be available which accept electrons and allow energy use by the microorganisms to take place. These compounds are classified as electron acceptors. and are generally believed to be utilized in a sequential fashion based on the energy yield that results to the microorganisms when energy production and electron donor utilization is taking place. This sequence of electron acceptor utilization is as follows: oxygen, nitrate, manganese, iron, sulfate, carbon dioxide, and organic carbon. Oxygen provides the greatest energy yield per unit of substrate processed, and results is the broadest utilization of electron donors of all of the electron acceptors listed above, but is only slightly soluble in water and therefore often plays a minor role in natural ground water contaminant removal. Oxygen metabolism of chlorinated solvents does not occur directly, however, due to the highly oxidized nature of these materials, and aerobic TOE degradation is thought to only occur through co-metabolic processes (McCarty, 1994). These oxidized, chlorinated solvents may serve as electron acceptors and be transformed readily under anaerobic conditions. Consideration of the type and amount of electron acceptors, and the oxidation/reduction (redox) status of the aquifer system are important in defining the primary biological reaction mechanisms that may be taking place under actual field conditions. Additional discussion of biological transformations of chlorinated solvents that can take place under various aquifer conditions is presented in Section 4.4 of this chapter. Typically, dominating electron acceptors and aquifer redox conditions will change as one moves downgradient, away from the source of ground water contamination. Near the source oxygen and nitrate would 4-30 Final Report 12/95 be depleted, high dissolved iron and manganese concentrations would be observed, and under these highly reducing conditions, methanogenesis and sulfate utilization would be the primary reaction mechanisms that would be observed. More dlowngradient from the source sulfate reduction should give way to primarily iron and manganese metabolism, which would eventually switch to nitrate dominated metabolism, and ultimately to oxygen metabolism in areas away from the source that are once again enriched in dissolved oxygen. The occurrence of specific non-oxygen electron acceptor reaction zones is dependent upon the pool of each electron acceptor available in the aquifer, and the nature of the electron donor available to the microorganisms from the contaminant release. In addition, the specific position of each reaction zone and the location of the points of transition from one dominant electron acceptor area to the other would be dependent upon the release rate of the contaminants from the source, the nature of the contaminants in terms of their rate of utilization under specific electron acceptor conditions, the replenishment of electron acceptor within the contaminant plume, and the rate of ground water migration through the site. As both chlorinated solvent and hydrocarbon contamination are found at Site 45/57, the presence of both aerobic and anaerobic metabolism was investigated. Data are presented and discussed below regarding the nature and distribution of electron acceptors across Site 45/57. These results are used to indicate the potential for both TCE and hydrocarbon degradation taking place there. 4.3.3.1 Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved oxygen (DO) is the most energetically favorable electron acceptor in respiratory metabolism. The consumption of dissolved oxygen in an aquifer indicates the activity of aerobic microorganisms, and is a primary indicator for the existence of biologically mediated reactions at a contaminated site. Aerobic microorganisms are capable of degrading many hydrocarbon compounds found in fuels, including BTEX, but are not responsible for TOE degradation where TCE is used directly as an energy source. Table 4-14 shows the results of dissolved oxygen measurements collected at Site 45/57 for the period from November, 1993, through July, 1995. 4-31 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~Final Report 12/95 Table 4-14. Dissolved oxygen in ground water samples collected by the UWRL from monitoring wells and sampling probes at Site 45/57 from November, 1993, to July, 1995. 11-93 05-94 09.94 07.95 LocotWo DO DO DO DO Omignoion mgL) m/L)) mg/LI) (rig/LI) 45 MWOI 0.7 '0.5 0.6 45 MWO2 2.1 1.1 '0.5 45 MW03 5.1 AZ5disttd '0.5 45 MWO4 '0.5 '0.5 '0.5 45 MWO6 '0. '0.5 '0. 45 MWOZ '0. 035 '0.5 45 MWOB 2.6 '0. '03 45 MW09 '0.5 '03 '0.5 W1 '0<.5-- SP2 0.7 '0.5 '03 '05 79W 0.6 2.9 1.6 P%3 1.3 '03 '0.5 SPA 32 1.9 0.8 <0.5 S'5 0.8 1.0 '03 '.5 S'S 2.2 2.4 WP7 2.2 1.7 '0.5 1.4I '0.5 2.8 '0.5 TP9M 023 27 '03 '0.5 1P99 0.6 '045 '03 '0.5 5910 1.2 '0.5 1.0 '0.5 5912 _ 1.7 '0.5 I 9 . .5 TPI3M 1.3 '0.5 0.7 79138 1.9 3.8 1 2.8 1.5 5915 1.3 047 '0.5 '0.5 $916 1.2 '0.5 <03 1.8 pis8 3.8 '0. '03 1.9 SP79 3.8 '0. '03 1 592 2.3 '05 '0.5 1.5 SP27 7.6 3.0 '03 '0.5 TP22M 039 4.2 '03 1.6 S924 1.0 1.4 '0. 1.8 595 0.9 '0.5 <03 '0.5 SP26 0.6 0.8 '03 1.6 SP7V0. 5P28 _ UWRLMWB '. SF29 ______'. SF30 '.5<______PSF1 '. SF32 '0.5 SF38 '05 SF34 '05 SF35 '05 SF37 '05 SFP3 '05 SF3, '0.5 SF40 ______' 5 I SF41 ______<05 SF4a '5 SF43 '0. SP"4 - '5 SF45 '0.5 GP2 2.- GF4 GMl _ _0.5 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~4-32 Final Report 12/95 DO concentrations have consistently been observed to be low throughout Site 45/57, generally being found at less than 1.0 mg/L at most locations including those installed in July, 1995, near the source area. The highest DO concentrations (1.5 to 3.8 mg/L at locations SF6, SP12, and 3P16 to SP2O) have been observed in areas outside of the TOE/hydrocarbon plume and upgradient from 45MW08. The TCE plume projected from the July, 1995, data (Figure 4-4) lies entirely within a region of the site with DO concentrations of less than 0.5 mg/L, strongly suggesting that conditions exist for the anoehobic metabolism of TCE at the site. The BTEX plumes observed at the site during the course of UWRL sampling (Figures 4-5 through 4-10) have generally been confined to the immediate vicinities of monitoring wells 45MW07 and 45MW08, with an additional plume area localized around monitoring point SP41 as indicated above from the July, 1995, data. These regions of Site 45/57 are dissolved oxygen depleted as would be expected when these aromatic constituents of the fuel exhibit an oxygen demand that results in rapid oxygen depletion. Quantitatively the mass of oxygen depleted in the degradation of hydrocarbon contaminants can be estimated from the balanced equations for the conversion of benzene (pseudo-compoundifof the aromatic hydrocarbons) and hexane (pseudo-compound for the alkanes) to carbon dioxide and water using oxygen as the electron acceptor. These balanced equations can be written as follows: C6H-6 +7.5 02 -60C02 +3 H20 (4-1) C61-14 + 9.5 02 60026 + 7 H20 (4-2) These stoichiometric relationships indicate that from 7.5 to 9.5 gmol of oxygen are required to oxidize one gmol of hydrocarbon contaminant. This suggests that from 3.1 g ([7.5 x 323/[78)) to 3.5 ([9.5 x 32]/[86]) of oxygen Will be consumed per gram of hydrocarbon degraded. This provides a conservative estimate of oxygen consumption and expected hydrocarbon depletion as it does not account for the carbon utilized in cell mass production. The level of net cell mass would be expected to be 4-33 Final Report ( 12/95 low due to infinite solids residence times in the aquifer, and the low level of substrate available: however, making endlogenous respiration a significant reaction under field aquifer conditions. Using the stoichiometry described above, and with a maximum ground water aquifer concentration of 3.8 mg/L observed at upgradient sampling points SP18 and SP19, the maximum hydrocarbon concentration that could be expected to be assimilated in the aquifer from aerobic metabolism is approximately 1.15 mg/L (3.8/3.3), or 1,150 g.g/L, approximately 14 percent of the 8,470 pVg/L maximum BTEX concentration observed near the apparent source area at Site 45/57 during the July, 1995, UWRL field sampling event. Dissolved oxygen can also be used by microorganisms which fortuitously degrade TCE while growing on primary substrates such as toluene, phenol or methane. Dissolved oxygen acts as an inhibitor to reductive dechlorination, which occurs only under anaerobic conditions. However, as indicated above, much of the aquifer below Site 45/57 is devoid of oxygen, suggesting that the primary mechanism for TOE loss at this site would be through anaerobic dlechlorination. 4.3.3.2 Nitrate Nitrate is also used as an electron acceptor in respiratory metabolism. Nitrate will generally be used once the dissolved oxygen in a system is depleted. Microorganisms using nitrate as a terminal electron acceptor are also capable of hydrocarbon degradation. Table 4-15 shows the results of nitrate measurements at Site 45/57 for the period from November, 1993, through July, 1995. As indicated in Table 4-15, nitrate concentrations were generally 2 mg/L or less within the hydrocarbon/TCE contaminant plume at Site 45/57. This was particularly true in the November, 1993, and July, 1995, sampling events where elevated nitrate levels were only seen in the northeast portion of the site, well downgradient and east of the contaminant plume, This depletion of nitrate in the proximity of the hydrocarbon plume is consistent with the fact that nitrate can be utilized by microorganisms in the metabolism of aromatic hydrocarbons. 4-34 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-15. Nitrate and sulfate concentrations in ground wafer samples collected by the UWVRL from monitoring wells and sampling probes at Site 45/57 from November, 1993, to July, 1995. 11-9 3 5 0-409-94 07-95 LoIcntb N03- S04-2 iN03- S04-2 N03- 5 04-2 N03- S04-3 Designation (mgIL) (mg/L)i(mg/L.) (mg/L. (mg/L i (mg/L) (Mg/IL) frg/L) -45 MW01 - a 1.0 15.6 10.0 16.4 4.0 26.3 45 MW02 0.64 12.7 10.92 15.3 8.5 13.6 45 MWOA 0.57 12Y.2. 0.48.T . 13.2 1.3 12.8 . 45MW0S 1.9 11.6 0.0 12.3 5.9 13.5 45 MAW07 0.60 9.9 0.0 12.7 1.3 10.7 45 MW08 52I. . 5 0.0 14. 45 MW09 * 6.8 16.5 0.0 17.1 16.4 16.1 SPI 23.0 135 6.8 151.2 0.93 113 SP2 0.14 23.7j0.57 17.7 1.5 i23.4 2.0 16.6 TP3M 0.25 32.4 0.43 23.8 TP3B 0.48 16.1 . 9 0.0 14.7 SPA 2.7 28.0 1 7 20.3 1.2 28 S.4 11.2 SI . 3 2. . 26.5 5.5 35.8 SP6 0.82 17.7 3.3 26.7 SF7 0.38 6.3 0.0 2.9 SP8 0424 .4 11 7.2 8.6 10.9 TPM 0.98 6.8 1.2 5.5 1.1 10.9 6.0 15.5 TP98 1.4 21.9 0.24 12.3 0.86 1I 6 0.0 24.4 SP10 0.58 24.8 0.53 23.4 0.0 17.2 0.44 17.4 SF12...... i. .. .. iE...t.57 ~1.422 ..... z'4...... 4.. 492... 2..5i 36..5..i.g TP13M 0.48 12.7 0.0 156.0 0.0 0.0 TP 13B 0.30 1 0.9 0.55 68 1.5 6.6 SF5 0.56 27.'5 0.83 16.9 0.43 22.2 0.9 19.1 SP1d 0.35 5.7 0.32 6.2 10.41I 6.4 5.6 7.9 SF18 0.38 21.4 2.1 13.1 1 1.3 19.3 0.0 9.7 SF19 0.4 1 16.8 0.0 I08 I 0.0 13.5 0.0 0.0 I SF20 0.40 1.0 . 0.0 5S0 . 0.71 0.0 S .. 21 1.0. 53.6 3.4 43.9 0...:76 23.5 20.4 5. TP22M 0.51 28B.1 7.0 34.6 4.1 31.1 2.5 12.0 TP22B 0.57 25.3 0.9 4 121 00 1. . 2.0 SF230.51 5.7 1.4 ~~~~9.90.31 7.6 0.0 9.0 SF24 0.68 22.3 1.8 20.9 0.34 12.8 26.5 13.-2 SF25 0.49 37.9 0.21 9.0 0.48 13.7 0.0 9.4 SF26 0.83 22.5 0.20 8.8 0.40 13 4 2.2 11.2 SF27 ______0.45 16.6 2.4 16.2 UVWRLMWB 0.79 5.3 8.8 2.0 SF29 0.48 3.8 SF30 0.19 9.5 SF31 0.00 1 5.1 SF32 0.29 2.9 SF34 0.0 11.0 SF35 SF37 ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1.635.7 SF38 0.0 13.3 SF39 ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0.9813.7 SF40 ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0.9813.6 SP41 3.4 12.0 SF42 10 13.7 SF43 ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0.014.9 SF44 0.38 15.3 SF45 18.2 13.5 GP2 0.0 15.2 SF8______~~~ ~ ~~0.09.4 SF15 0.60 22.5 SF16 ______0.0 10.5 K)~~~~~~~~~~~43 Final Report 12/95 Quantitatively the mass of nitrate depleted in the degradation of hydrocarbon contaminants can be estimated from the balanced equations for the conversion of benzene (pseudo-compound for the aromatic hydrocarbons) to carbon dioxide and water using oxygen as the electron acceptor. This balanced equations can be written as follows: C61-6 -4 6 N03--' 6H+ -*~ 6 C02 + 6 H20 + 3 N2 (4-3) It is evident then that 6 gmol of nitrate are required to oxidize one gmol of aromatic hydrocarbon contaminant. This suggests that 1.07 g ([6 x 14]/[78J) of nitrate-nitrogen will be consumed per gram of hydrocarbon degraded. This provides a conservative estimate of nitrate consumption and expected hydrocarbon depletion as it does not account for the carbon utilized in cell mass production. The net production of cell mass would be expected to be small, making the calculations only slightly conservative in nature, and acceptable for degradation potential estimates used in this EE/CA. Using the stoichiometry described above, and with a maximum ground water aquifer concentration of approximately 9 mg/L observed at Site 45/57, the maximum hydrocarbon concentration that could be expected to be degraded within the aquifer from nitrate metabolism is approximately 8.4 mg/L (9.0/1.07), or 8,400 gg/L, approximately equal to the 8,470 gg/L maximum BTEX concentration observed at Site 45/57 during the July, 1995, UWRL field sampling event. The dlechlorination of halogenated compounds, such as TCE, is inhibited in the presence of nitrate because of higher energy yields to the microorganisms during their metabolism when nitrate is preferentially used as a terminal electron acceptor. Table 4-15 indicates that much of the aquifer below Site 45/57 is depleted of nitrate, particularly near the source area of the TCE and BTEX plumes. Because of this lack of nitrate availability, aquifer conditions should be supportive of microbial mechanisms resulting in the anaerobic dlechlorination of TCE in that region of the site. ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~4-36 7> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 4.3.3.3 Sulfate Sulfate can be used as a terminal electron acceptor in anoxic systems, resulting in the production of hydrogen sulfide gas and the characteristic '.rotten egg" smell of highly reducing, anaerobic environments. Table 4-15 summarizes ground water sulfate concentrations measured throughout Site 45/57 during the UWRL sampling period from November, 1993, to July, 1995. Sulfate concentrations were found to range from 50 to 150 mg/L outside of the plume area in SPi and SP12, to approximately 20 mg/L or less within the boundaries of the hydrocarbon and chlorinated solvent ground water plumes. This is particularly evident from the July, 1995, data where sulfate concentrations at monitoring points (3P30, SP32, SP33 and SP34) directly adjacent to the primary BTEX plume originating at monitoring point SP29 range only from 2.9 to 11.0 mg/L. Quantitatively the mass of sulfate utilized in the degradation of hydrocarbon contaminants can be estimated from the balanced equations for the conversion of benzene (pseudo-compound for the aromatic hydrocarbons) and hexane,(pseudo-compound for the alkanes) to carbon dioxide and waler using oxygen as the electron acceptor. These balanced equations can be written as follows: C6H-6 + 3.75 S042 + 7.5 H+-* 6 002 + 3.75 H25 + 3 H20 (4-4) C6H-14 + 4.75 S042- + 9.5 H+-* 60C02 + 4.75 H2S + 7 H20 (4-5) These stoichiometric relationships indicate that from 3.75 to 4.75 gmol of sulfate are utilized when one mole of hydrocarbon contaminant is oxidized using dissolved sulfate as the terminal electron acceptor. This suggests that from 4.6 g ([3.75 x 96J/[78]) to 5.3 g ([4.75 x 96J/[86]) of sulfate will be produced per gram of hydrocarbon degraded. The resulting concentration of BTEX that could be assimilated through sulfate reduction based on a conservative estimate of the observed change in sulfate concentration across the plume of 30 mg/L is 6.06 mg/L (30/4.95) or approximately 70 percent of the 8,470 gg/L maximum BTEX concentration observed at Site 45/57 during the July, 1995, UWRL field sampling event. K, / ~~~~~~~~~~4-37 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~Final Report 12/95 Sulfate reduction observed at Site 45/57 is of additional significance based -on the observation by McCarty (1994) in that sulfate reduction provides direct evidence for the potential for anaerobic dlechlorination of TOE. McCarty (1994) indicated that extensive reductive dlehalogenation of PCE and TOE is possible under sulfate-reducing conditions, although such transformations may not be complete. He also indicates that dlehalogenation of TOE under sulfate reduction would be expected to terminate at cis-DCE, the primary end product observed at Site 45/57, with further reduction to ethylene only taking place under more reducing, methanogenic conditions. Figures 4-11ito 4-13 summarize the relationship observed between the distribution of BTEX components and the terminal electron acceptors (TEAs) oxygen, nitrate and sulfate for May and September, 1994, and July, 1995, respectively. As indicated in the discussions above, there is generally an inverse relationship observed between BTEX components and TEAs. This relationship is particularly evident from .the July, 1995, data shown in Figure 4-13, where the total amount of TEA is reduced through the BTEX plume, and the TEA composition becomes enriched in sulfate and depleted in oxygen and nitrate as one moves dlowngradient from the TOE plume source area near monitoring well 45MW08/ground probe GPO8 and the BTEX plume source area near monitorihg point SP29. Again, this is consistent with the microbiological use of these TEAs in the degraddtidn of BTEX and other hydrocarbon ground water contaminants at Site 45/57. 4.3.3.4 Ferrous Iron/Manganese Ferrous iron and manganese found in ground water samples may indicate the use of Fe3+ and Mn4 + as TEAs for respiratory metabolism. Both iron and manganese are energetically favorable electron acceptors in anoxic systems, and can play a major role in contaminant degradation when a high oxygen demand in impacted aquifer systems exceeds the limited oxygen and nitrate pools normally existing in ground water systems. Table 4-16-summarizes the results of dissolved iron and manganese measurements at Site 45/57 collected by the UWRL over the period of November, 1993, through July, 1995. Figures 4-14 to 4-16 show the distribution of dissolved iron and manganese overlain on the BTEX contaminant plumes observed in May and September, 1994, and July, 1995, respectively. 4-38 CD rn Broadway~~Cl C~~~~~~~~~~~~C -h H~~~~~~~~~- m ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-n _ (0 0]CD _ c (D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 (D~~ ~ JL 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 '0 C/J Wc CD a -0~~~~ 0z a-H fl~~t Division St. (D > Ic -0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- K)~~(1 y M < ~ w ~ T/W NO. 3 - Q- a.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C)7c EE~~~~~~____~~~- r 3w4 (Df Broadway M C C~~~~~~~~~~~~C (D~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~C rt~~~~~~~~c =0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 CD"'~~~~~~~~~C (Dc 0 on 3 iwo- -~~~~~~~~.~0 )L Ig----wf 3 o 0~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 w~~~0O z \o )- Division St. 70 cy-~~~~~~~~~~ r-C- 3 U)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' K C1U m4 '0- CD) )½M T/W NO. 3 CD I B ~~~~~~~~~(1-0H (D n1 0D 0 :3,C - z ______0 0 0 0 CT ____ 3 4-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~v 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ cnr ( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 (D Lo Nr~ N NO gy Oz - UE C> a -o < 0 cal u . ~ ~ c L-1 -0 11I cc?'>0 U t.~~~~~~~~D a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a 0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-- u~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~uI. 0 IP . t ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VOW~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L -~~~~~~~~~O0= 0) zU0 a U)~ ~ U. 0) 0 0 ON~~~~~~ SaIV 0 0) 0-x P. acouI LI) 4-41 i Final Report ~ 12/95 Table 4-16. Dissolved iron and manganese concentrations in ground water samples collected by the UWRL in monitoring wells and sampling probes from Site 45/57 in November, 1993, to July, 1995. 11-93 05-94 09-94 07-95 Location Fe Mn Fe Mn Fe Mn Fe Mn (emg/Lonirs~ mng/U) (mg/LI (Mg/L ma/Uh Inno/ (nol (mo/LI 45MWO ___ 0.73 1.8 1.4 2.0 0.17 0.80 45 MW02 __ _0.02 0.24 0.06 0.17 <0.015 <0.015 45 MW03 0.90 IS8 0.26 0.07 0.25 0.87 45 MW04 __ _9.3 5.2 0.09 1.9 0.31 137 45 MWO6 __ _0.31 2.3 046 2.6 45 MW07 __ _9.2 2.6 14.1 2.9 9.3 2.7 45 MW08 _ _7.1 2.7 8.4 2.5 9.2 2.7 45 MW09 3.4 1.4 15.4 1.2 5.3 1.2 SF1 4 6 4.4 0.89 0.42 1 __4.3 1 <0015 SP2 2.3 2.2 2.3 1.6 4.3 2.3 5.1 1.2 TP3M IS8 0.3 1.7 1.4 T?38 0.30 3.9 _ 1.1 1.2 SN4 0.64 0.34 0.03 0.17 0.04 0.18 <0.015 <0.015 SF5 0.30 4.6 0.01 0.05 0.47 0.04 7.3 -<0015 SF6 0.30 2.0 8.8 9.1 __ SP7 0.30 1.3 __ _0.31 0.01 SF8 11.7 1.0 14.2 0.42 21.7 0.29 18.9 0.48 1P9M 0.45 1.0 0.24 0.27 4.0 3.4 <0.015 <0.015 1F`98 0.30 1 2.6 2.0 3.0 3.6 2.3 SF10 2.8 17.8 2.5 3.5 5.8 3.0 3.8 3.5 SF12 3.7 4.3 0.17 0.40 0.31 2~4 <0.015 '0.015 TPI3M 0.30 2.0 0.12 0.4 0.77 2.3 '0.015 '0.015 TP13B 3.3 2.7 3.0 4.8 3.2 0.99 SF15 0.30 14.6 0.06 IS8 0.43 1.6 1.7 0.54 SF16 11.2 3.2 IS 2.5 15.2 2.4 19.1 321 SF18 1.5 2.9 0.01 0.00 1.9 2.3 __ SF19 29.9 5.9 25.8 5.1 44.0 7.4 25.3 7.1 SF20 25.5 3.1 5.2 2.3 24.0 2.8 SP21 0.35 7.3 O.l 1.9 1.9 3.5 2.8 0.79 1P22M 0.30 3.2 0.01 0.27 17 3 <01035 <0.015 TP22B 0.30 4.1 2.3 2.0 __ _2.1 24 SP23 10.8 39 2.6 2.9 11.3 2.7 SF24 0.30 6.9 0313 5.0 0.93 4.0 1.0 3.6 SF25 0.30 0-2-4 43 19 2.6 SF26 1.0 5.4 0.35 4.3 4.8 2.4 1.5 0.70 SP27 0.12 1,9 0.18 1.0 SP29 32.0 4.7 9.0 6.0 SF30 ___ _ _ 4.2 4.8 SP31 _____<0.015 3.2 SP32 9.5 4.8 SF33 ___ _ _ 0.65 6.2 SP34 ___ _ _ 0.18 1.2 SP35 __ _0.59 5.2 SP37 1.2 0.83 SF38 ______0.74 0.59 SP39 ______0.37 1.4 SF40 1.3 0.31 SP41 0.56 4.1 SF42 ____ _ 0.60 1.8 SP43 '0.015 1.5 SP44 1.__3 2.5 SP45 ____ _ 2.5 1.0 UWRI. MWO8 37.8 0.40 25.0 0744 GFO2 1.0 2 0 0P04 - ______.14 '0<015 (715-08~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~89 4 GPIS 7.4 3.0 - - ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~7.77.8 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~4-42 rn Broadway (5,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I (D t -'0~~~~~~~~~C -IC~~~~~~~~~~~~C on E MIn- 0 >~0 0 0< Ln~~~~~~~~~~r (A U, 3~~~~~~~~inr (D 9~~~~~~~ or- (Dn rl r) 0- 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o Broadway -n T C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CC 0 CD ucn (D 1 0 (Do .a 0 -1~ a' c-fl ______CD __IV 3 0~~~~~~C0 3 Oct~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c Ln LA (D~~~~~~( (DC aCO 0~~ E3 --- ~ 4- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ HI k~~~~~~ / ~~ Division St. (-D 3D 01 - <~~~~~~~~~~~ CD~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C r ______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(A ma LA~~~~~~~~~ -0cn~~~ '0 0 OriZV: ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 t~~~~~~~~~fl~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-0 I.- u"10( o- Co. -j I LU~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~U EC) LU C> V) co Cd T~~~~~~~~~~~~. lu~~~~~~~~~ Ei ui P. N~~~~~~M0- >a1( N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>L w~~~~~~c r~~~~n i f~~~~ -'N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l (n ) I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ca. N O~~~~~~~~DQ / 0~~~~~~~~U /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a, ~DC Ca) C-~~~~~ 0 0~~~C C0)u u 6 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~0) 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~4-45 Final Report 12/95 As indicated in Table 4-16. and Figures 4-14 to 4-16, dissolved iron and manganese concentrations were seen to be elevated at a number of locations throughout Site 45/57. This was particularly true for dissolved iron, which reached high concentrations of 20 to 40 mg/L in each sampling event. Elevated iron concentrations were shown to be generally associated with hydrocarbon plumes observed near 45MW08/GPO8 and slightly upgradient at point at SP19, inferring that iron is serving as an electron acceptor for hydrocarbon metabolism at the site. The dissolved manganese distribution data collected early in the study and plotted in Figures 4-1 4 and 4-15 do not show a consistent pattern relative to the hydrocarbon plume. A more conclusive correlation between high dissolved manganese levels (reaching nearly 8 mg/L at GP16) and elevated BTEX concentrations is evident from Figure 4-16, however, based on contaminant and TEA concentration data collected near the source are in July, 19 95. It appears from the July, 1995, data then that manganese is playing a role in the degradation of the dissolved hydrocarbon plume, at least within 75 m of the source area. Quantitatively the mass of dissolved iron produced in the degradation of hydrocarbon contaminants can be estimated from the balanced equations for the conversion of benzene (pseudo-compound for the aromatic hydrocarbons) and hexaine (pseudo-compound for the dlkd-nes) to carbon dioxide and water using oxygen as the electron acceptor. These balanced equations can be written as follows: C6H6-* 30Fe(OH)3 +60 H 4 -6 C02 +30 Fe2+ +78 H20 (4-6) 2 C6H-14 + 38 Fe(OH)3 + 76 HI - 6 C02 + 38 Fe + + 102 H20 (4-7) Similar reactions can be written for the use of manganese (Mn4 +) as a TEA in the reactions for benzene and hexane used as representative pseudo-compounds for the degradation of aromatics and alkanes in the contaminant plume, respectively: 06H6 + 15 MnO2 + 30 H 4- 6 CO2 + 15 Mn2+ + 18 H20 (4-8) 06H]4 + 19 MnO2 + 38 H 4- 6 C02 + 19 Mn 2 4+ 26 H20 (4-9) 4-46 Final Report 12/95 These stoichiometric relationships indicate that from 30 to 38 gmat of dissolved iron are produced when one ginol of hydrocarbon contaminant is oxidized using amorphous iron as the terminal electron acceptor. This suggests that from 21.5 g ([30 x 55.85]/[78J) to 24.7 g ([38 x 55.85]I[86]) of dissolved iron will be produced per gram of hydrocarbon degraded. Similarly, approximately 15 to 19 gmnol of dissolved Mn2+, or from 10.6 g ([1 5 x 54.9]/[78]) to 12.1 g ([19 x 54.9]/[86]) of this species would be expected to be generated per gram of hydrocarbon degraded. These calculations provide conservative estimates of dissolved iron and manganese production, and expected hydrocarbon depletion as it does not account for the small net mass of cell material generated dluring metabolism. Using the stoichiometry described above with a maximum dissolved ground water concentrations of approximately 10 mg/L of iron and 5 mg/L of manganese observed in the vicinity of the BTEX plume near the source area (GP8, GP 16, SP29, SP32, SP33, and 45MW08) at Site 45/57, yields an estimate of the maximum hydrocarbon concentration that could be expected to be assimilated in the aquifer from iron- and manganese-mediated metabolism of approximately 0.43 ing/L (10/23.1) and 0.44 (5/11.4), respectively. This yields a combined estimate of approximately 870 gg/L of BTEX equivalent assimilation capacity expressed in the aquifer below Site 45/57, or slightly more than 10 percent of the 8,470 gag/L maximum BTEX concentrations observed at Site 45/57 during the July, 1995, UWRL field sampling event. 4.3.3.5 Methane The detection of methane in ground water at a site indicates that highly reducing conditions (-350 to -450 my) are present, supporting the growth of methanogenic microorganisms which use 002 or bicarbonate ion as an electron acceptor. Under these highly reducing conditions, complete reductive dechlorination of POE and TOE to d~thylene is possible (Mc~arty, 1994). Table 4-17 shows the results of dissolved methane measurements that were collected from Site 45/57 during the September, 1994, and July, 1995, field sampling events. The data provided by the additional sampling locations installed in July, 1995, show lower methane concentrations than were observed in September, 1994, but are consistent with these earlier results. Both data sets indicate that methane 4-47 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-17. Dissolved methane and ethylene concentrations in ground water samples collected by the UWRL in monitoring wells and sampling probes from Site 45/57 in September, 1994, and July, 1995. 0-9A9 07.95 _ ____ Detlooo OWL) p/IL) tolL) .42A& (POA)~ too/I) 45 MWOI 4.0 SQL ROL 0 07 SQL ROL 4t5 MW02 29.8 ROL SQL 0 07 SQL SQL 45 MWO3 0.2 QL ROL 0.03 ROL SQL 45 MAW04 21.q2 SQL SQL 9.1 0.04 SQL 45 MAWD6 0 01 SQL SQL 0.06 Bat SQL 45 MW07 131 ROL SQL 6~1 SQL ROL 45SMWOO 31.5 SQL SQL 7.6 0 41 SQL 45 MWO 25 0 BQL SQL 8.6 SQL SQL SP] 0.25 SQL SQL 59I2 122 RQL SQL 3.8 002 SOL 193M ____ 28.2 0 02 501 7935 17.4 SQL SQL 4 4 0 07 RQL __94P 0.02 OL SL 0-06 SQL SQL S-PS 5.4 BQL RQL 0 06 0.05 ROL 597 m51.6 SQL RQL 11.4 a017 0P5 24) ROL SQL 152 0.08 SQL T99M 0 07 ROL SQL 023 0.09 0_66 T995 18.8 0.20 SQL 11.1 1.5 SQL $910 14 SQRL SQL .7.9 0.06 2.4 0912 005 SQ~~~BL SQL 0.07 0.04 SQL TP13M4 0.04 0 06 SQL TP13B 0.11 SQL ROL 0.08 0.54 __A ___ $9 IS5 0.02 SQL BQL 0. 12 0.0 RQL SP9i6 179 SQL Bat 705S ROL __9118 4.1 SQL SQL 5.2 009 SQL $919 65.3.1 QL0 28 SQL 0920 1.8 ROL SQL 221 0.08 0.90 5P2) 2.2 1.2 ROL 6.8 1.4 0.42 19221 05S3 ROL SQL .3SL SGL . TP225 30 4 ROL SQL 130 0.06 0.83 9P23 89.1 ROL SQL 0924 17.6 SQL SQL 5.3 0.04 SQL SP25 0.10 SQ SQL SP26 Dq06 SQ SQL 58 0.06 0.76 SP27 15. S QLIBa SQL 3.3 004 SQL- 5928 558 0.07 SQL __9I29 SI 30W9 21 2 SP3 4.6 17.0 32.3 S931 3.5 2.5 0 87 5P32 5.1 7.2 12.I S933 - -6.3 12.6 248B 5934 3,3 1090 IS5 9P35 19.6 0.86 SQL 5937 .0.32 1.3 SQL SP3E - 0 11 0.89 SQL 5939 7.3 I A SOL SP40 SLRO____13 SQL SP41 0.67 4 32 1P42 5.5 1.7 2 5 SP43 .1.6 1.1 SQL SP"- 8.4 0,94 SQL 5945 13.3 1.4 SQL UWRI MWO8 383 SQL SQL -8.7 ROL SQL 0904N ___ -200 S-Q-L SQL 0916 9.6 1.5 69 Tr~l S~ik 0.10 0.03 SQ Fle~~d~lor~ks______~0 05 0)10 SQ E~~tS~o,*______00_ 0_02 SQ MQL I0.0) 0.007 0,5 00) 0.007 05 4-48 Final Report 12/95 is largely concentrated to the west and south of the chlorinated solvent and hydrocarbon plumes. Methane ground water concentrations were found to range from 3 to 20 pg/L near the source area of the TOE plume, and while these concentrations are not the highest observed at the field site, this area also correspondles to the area of highest dissolved ethylene and vinyl chloride concentrations as shown in Table 4-17. This relative relationship of sequential degradation products is a significant observation in terms of providing evidence of the anaerobic dechlorination of TOE under site conditions, and is elaborated upon later in this section. Quantitatively the mass of methane produced in the degradation of hydrocarbon contaminants can be estimated from the balanced equations for the conversion of benzene (pseudo-compound for the aromatic hydrocarbons) and hexane (pseudo-compound for the alkanes) to carbon dioxide and water using organic carbon as both the electron acceptor and electron donor in this reaction. These balanced equations can be wr~itten as follows: C 61-6 + 4.5 H20 - 2.250C02 +3.75 OH4 (4-10) CH4+ 2.5 H 20 -. 1.250C02 + 4.75 OH4 (4-11) These stoichiometric relationships indicate that from 3.75 to 4.75 gmol of methane are produced when one mole of hydrocarbon contaminant is oxidized under methanogenic conditions. This suggests that from 0.77 g ([3.75 x 16]/(78]) to 0.88 g ([4.75 x 16J/[86J) of methane will be produced per gram of hydrocarbon degraded. The resulting estimate of the maximum concentration of hydrocarbon that could be assimilated through methanogenesis based on measured dissolved methane concentrations of approximately 20 pg/L near the source area of the hydrocarbon and chlorinated solvent plumes is 24 pg/L (20/0.825), an insignificant fraction of the 8,470 pg/L maximum BTEX concentration observed at Site 45/57 during the July, 1995, UWRL field sampling event. The true significance of methane being detected at this site is not the magnitude of hydrocarbon assimilation it represents, but its mere 1) ~~~~~~~~~~~4-49 Final Report 12/95 presence, as under methanogenic conditions the complete reductive dlechlorination of TCE is possible (McCarty, 1994). The detection of methane throughout Site 45/57 is additional evidence that favorable conditions exist to support the anaerobic dechlorination of TOE under natural aquifer conditions. 4.3.3.6 Redox Potential Redox potential is a measure of the oxidation/reduction potential of ground water, and indicates which redox couple dominates electron transfer at a given point in the aquifer. Highly oxidized systems will suppedt the growth of aerobic microorganisms, while reduced environments will support the growth of anaerobic microorganisms. The amount of energy released during electron transfer decreases with decreasing redox potential as oxygen rich, oxidizing environments are transformed to highly reducing environments following ground water impact. Redox potential, or oxidation/reduction potential (ORP) is measured electronically with a platinum electrode using the potential of the hydrogen electrode as the reference point. ORP measurements may not be'accurate since most ground water environments are not at redox equilibrium (Lindberg and Runnells, 1984). In addition, several potentially important redox couples 2 (e.g., 0 2/H-20; N0 3-IN2aq: S04 7/H2S; CH4aq/HCO3-) do not react rapidly and reversibly at the platinum surface, and are therefore, not measured by the platinum electrode (Drever, 1988). The ORP of waters in which the iron (Fe2+/Fe3 +) redox couple dominates is among those most accurately measured by the platinum electrode. Results of redox potential measurements are shown in Table 4-18 for the May and September, 1994, and July, 1995, sampling events. Measured redox conditions are generally consistent with the distribution of individual electron acceptors, with redox conditions of -50 to -135 my co- located with the core of the TOE plume (monitoring points (SP29 to SP35 and GPO2, GPOB, GP15 and GP16), and historical ORP readings of -150 or lower where elevated methane concentrations have been observed. These ORP results confirm the reduced environment in selected locations throughout the site in which methanogenesis and reductive dlechlorination reactions could be supported. 4-50 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-18. ORP, pH and alkalinity in ground water samples collected by the UWRL in monitoring welts and sampling probes from Site 45/57 in May and September, 1994, and July, 1995. ______05-94 _____09.94 07-95 Akoirlity ~~~~Akaokty AkoirRiY Location ORF j.p4.H m/o CRP p4. .n O P jos.H /o De .n..o(rotv)e (urdts) CoCO3) (mV) :(us-t.) ; CoCO3) (MV) (unit) ICoCO3) 45 MW01 25 7.29 149 -80 i7.08 i 184 106 7.00 21 7 45 W02 245 7.50 160 60 7.08 203 120 7.2 204 4SMWOS-60 6.99 193 104 700 2~~41 123 7.30 198 45 MW04 45 6.78 170 91 6.96 194 243 7.20 175 45AW06 185 6.78 143 56 6.89 ~: 192 -36 7.00 205 45 MWO8 .-30 6.82 170 -1118 7.708 236 -62 7.00 lao 45 MW09 20 60 10 6 .86 11 10 .1 B SP1 -112 6.18 458 _ __ 47 6.40 30 SF2 -35 7.36 21 7 17 63 20 -60 6.80 194 TPSO -64 6.97 27 -113 7.20 156 SP4 105 6.9 160 -3 6.92 253 13?7 7.30 124 SF5 75 7.02 418 1 2 693 266 186 6.90 292 SF6 i 20 6.71 170 SF7 ______-43 6.50 132 SP8 -280 6.5 350 -36 6.8 453 .1 34 7.101 428 -TP9A i-113 6.68 55.5 .1 6 4 85 6.80 289 TP9O -125 ~~6.60 285 -89 6.82 187 -79 7.30 192 PlO ~~~-806.80 37 4 -5 .7 49 -65 7.00 15 SF12 -40 7.02 452 15 690 390 1 32 7.00 130 IPFI3M -8I 6.64 294 105 6.50 64 ~~13R-73 6.84 250 -15 690 295 -96 I7.00 150 vSF1 <-80 6.38 320 -161 6.77 249 14 6.60 285 SF16 -1 24 7.01 20 .131 7.09 6 -96 6.90 260 - SF18-202 7.31 231~~...... 695 276 58 .9 20 SF19 <-80 6.89 28 5 -85 6.83 531 -177 7.00 411 SF20 <-80 7.19 195 -65 6.80 282 -142 .10 20 SP21 i 7.16 270 -47 6.83 321 -80 7.10 272 TP22M ilS5 6.90 248 42 6.81 27 6 134 6.90 230 TP22B -80 7.23 183 .115 7.09 195 .126 7.40 196 SP23 -183 7.1 6 188 .134 7.00i 249 -145 7.30 225 SF24 -261 7.04 235 -31 6.72i 243 -82 7.20 220 SP25 25 6.92 1200 -45 6.84i 249 -80 7.20 160 SP26 -226 7.26 223 -121 70111 253 -93 7.50 11 8 SF27 .27-5827 . 710 167 7.05 85 SF28 ~~~ ~~756.68 484A____ SF29 -1 25 17.001 222 SF3) ...... -84 7.00 185 SP32 .______133 7.00 262 SF34 _____-58 7.30 220 SP35 ______-29 7.40 394 SF37 -62 7.20 400 SP38 .86 7.35 25 SF39 -22 7.40 205 SP40 4 1 7.05 293 SF41 ______-11~~~~~~I87.25 330 SF42 -135 7.40 220 SFP43 1 -128 7.35 195 SF44 -116 7.20 234 SP45 -132 7.80 193 UWRLMWO8 .50 6.70 325 -108 6.90 47 6 -94 6.80 444 GFO2 -52 6.80 197 GFO8 -91 6.80 2855 GPI -73 6.80 1 60 GF16 ______~~~~~~~~~~7.00 ~~-109241 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~4-51 Final Report 12/95 4.3.3.7 Alkalinity Alkalinity is a measure of the buffering capacity of an aquifer system. The total alkalinity of a system represents the system's potential to neutralize acids. This is important because volatile fatty acids are primary by-products of the anaerobic biodegradation processes. Many microorganisms are sensitive to environmental conditions such as pH, and as such, adequate buffer capacity in the system is necessary to avoid inhibition of microbial reactions. Results of alkalinity measurements made at Site 45/57 during the May and September, 1994, and July, 1995, sampling events are shown in Table 4-18. These data show that alkalinity values ranged from a low of 50 to a high of over 450 mg/L as 00003. These results, coupled to those for pH measurements collected at the same time and also summarized in Table 4-18 show that the system at Site 45/57 is adequately buffered. Ground water pH at the site was maintained between 6.2 and 7.9, within the range of pH 6 to 8 that is generally suggested to be supportive of unhindered microbial activity. 4.3.3.8. Temperature Many biological and chemical reactions show a significant temperature dependence, with reaction rates found to generally decrease with decreasing temperature. Temperature also affects the solubility, and hence the bioavailability, of both contaminants and nutrients (electron acceptors) within the aquifer system. Results of ground water temperature measurements collected at the field site are presented in Table 4-19, and show a wide temperature range from 1.5 to more than 14C. Ground water temperatures observed at the site in early spring are quite low, however, recent studies conducted by Battelle, at Eielson and in laboratory experiments with Eielson soil incubated at various operating temperatures, have indicated that psychrophilic organisms acclimated to low ground water and soil temperatures may have optimal activity at temperatures below I10CC, and may actually be inhibited at higher temperatures. Based on observed electron acceptor and redox conditions, the low-ground water temperatures at Site 45/57 would not be expected to result in significant inhibition to the microbial community acclimated to these soil and aquifer conditions. Final Report 12/95 Table 4-19. Ground water temperature in monitoring wells and sampling probes from Site 45/57 observed from November, 1993, to July, 1995. 1 11-93 05-94 09-94 07-95 Location Temperature Temperature Temperature Temperature 0 Designation ( C1 ______loci J§Uc.. 45 MWO1 _ __ _ _ 5.0 io ______ 45 MW02 __ _ _ _ 3.0 7.5 _ _ _ _ _ 45 MWO31 ______2 8.0 _ _ _ _ _ 4ASM O __04___ 20 8.&_ __ _ 45M06 2.5 7.5 45 MWO7 _____ 405.1 45 MWOB 20 6.0 SPI SP2 5.0 3.0 62 ______ TP3M 7.0 1.5 10.1 ______ TP3B 5.0 ______7.2 ______ SP4 6.0 2.0 9.2 ______ SP5 8.5 5.0 11.9 ______ 5P6 5.0 3o.0______...... 0 ...... 1..... SP8 4.0 25 8E..5...... TP9S TP9M8.0 40 ~~~~~ ~~~12.5_ _ _ _ _ TP9B 7.5 4.5 8.0 ______ spic 5.0 3ao lOnD_ _ _ _ _ SP12 6.0 3ai ionD_ _ _ _ _ TP13S _ _ _ 3__o ______0______ TP13M 6.0 IL _____ 12.0 :~a~....TP13B 7.0.....-2 9.0 12.0 SPI5 5.0 1.2 8.3 ion SPId6 7.0 3.1 10.6 12.0 SPI8 5.0 20 10.2 SP19 6.0 20 8. SP20 4.0 3ao 7.5 ______ SP21 6.0 3ao 11.5 ______ TP22S __ __ TP22M 4.5 4.8 ao ______ TP22B 4.0 4.5 6.0 ______ SP23 ______2 88 14.0 SP24 5.0 20 8.2 5P255.5 20 ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~9.114Z...... SP26 6.0 25 8.8 SP27 ______ SP28 I ______ UWRLMW8 ___ __ 8.5 G P2 ______ G P4 ______ G P8 ______12.0 G M 5 ______12.0 K>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~ Final Report( 12/95 4.4 BIOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION OF CONTAMINANTS Microorganisms obtain energy for cell production and maintenance by catalyzing the transfer of electrons between electron donors and electron acceptors. Electron donors, including natural organic carbon and some contaminants such as BTEX, consist of reduced forms of carbon, representing energy sources for microbial growth and reproduction. Electron acceptors are compounds or elements that exist in an oxidized state, allowing energy flow to take place from the electron donors to the microorganisms. Since TOE is a relatively oxidized compound, it is not thermo- dynamically favorable for microorganisms to use it as an electron donor. It can, however, be used as an electron acceptor in the degradation of other primary substrates, a process known as reductive dehalogenation. 4.4.1 Reductive Dehalogenatlon The process of reductive dlehalogenation has been shown to result in the degradation of TCE to environmentally acceptable products such as ethylene (Freedman and Gossett, 1989: de Bruin et aL., 1992; DiStefano et al., 1992), ethane (de Bruin et al, 1992) and 002 in the laboratory. Mohn and Tiedje (1992) provide a review of microbial reductive dlehalogenation research. Many studies however, have reported the accumulation of products such as DOE and vinyl chloride, which also pose a threat to human health and the environment. DiStafano et al. (1991) provide a summary of the literature in this area of research, and McCarty (1994) has presented a recent summary of the current state of knowledge regarding' anaerobic transformations of chlorihated solvents in contaminated ground water systems. Some evidence to support the contention that anaerobic dechlorination is taking place at Site 45/57 can be seen in Figures 4-1 7 and 4-18 from data collected in May and September, 1994. The data from September, 1994, is particularly revealing in that it clearly shows an ethylene plume downgradient from a DOE plume, which is downgradient from the main TOE plume. This progression is expected if biological transformation of TOE is taking place, and once again suggests the biological nature of TOE plume attenuation taking place at Site 45/57. 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~4-54 Y -n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I to Broadway C ,-I (CD £10 (D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( -n Ln (A n r+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i or CD '40 0 C D 0 -1 ~~~x~~Ix o QQ)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C (D cc Q2 Inic o co 8 - n+ T/W NO. 3 (D Lx~~~~~~~~~cc a Cxa7P (I) x i M~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I D-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a -nC 3'o (D~ (0 m 1 Ii ni x(Un* 3CfD Ln0 ifn (D (Dl CnD (D~ (~~~n( 0~~~~~~~~~~0C (D :~~~~~~~CD a -, B C0 CD- - :3 ,j00~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (D~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~e( Ln m Division~~ St 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ n~~~~~-f Final Report 12/95 With additional sampling locations placed in July, 1995, more definitive confirmation of dechlorination reactions taking place near the Site 45/57 TCE plume source area was obtained. Parent compound TCE and intermediate product (cis- and trans-DOE, vinyl chloride, and ethylene) concentrations were collected at locations within 10, 20 and 30 mn downgradient of the source area and as indicated in Figure 4-19, provide much more substantive demonstration of TOE dechlorination than was possible from the earlier data sets. Figure 4-19 clearly shows co-located TOE, cis-DOE, vinyl chloride and ethylene plumes centered less than 25 m downgradient of the main TOE source area near 45MW08 and GPO8. In addition, the remnants of a TOE source with residual cis- and trans-DOE plumes is also evident downgradient of SP39. Figures 4-20 through 4-23 show the individual contours for cis-DOF, trans-DOE, vinyl chloride and ethylene from which Figure 4-19 was generated. These near-source plumes were not detectable using the sampling grid initially installed at Site 45/57, and confirm the rapid and essentially complete anaerobic dlechlorination reactions taking place in highly localized portions of the aquifer below the site. 4.4.1.1 Competing Electron Acceptors There appears to be several factors which can inhibit complete dehalogenation in the environment including the presence of competing electron acceptors, the lack of available substrate that serves as electron donor for these dehalogenation reactions, and unfavorable temperature conditions. The presence of electron acceptors such as oxygen, nitrate, sulfate, and solid phase iron and manganese serve as alternative electron acceptors that seem to inhibit organisms which are capable of using chlorinated solvents in reductive dehalogenation reactions. Conflicting reports regarding the effects of various electron acceptors, both in the field and the laboratory, suggest that inhibition of dehalogenation varies under different biological and chemical conditions. In general, however, the available evidence suggests that oxygen (Enzien et aL, 1994); sulfate and nitrate (Kdstner, 1991) inhibit reductive dehalogenation to some 4-57 Final Report 12/95 0 ww 0 LOUU) U- C LO ) 'D ~ ~ 11) LU a-~0~~ C: __j (D LO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3( 0 c ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-C)L -,q~~~~l)20 U) -~~~ C~E U)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l x C~~~~~~~~C U)~~~~~~~~~~U LO LU ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a) 4-58 ) 0) ¾.~mu U- Final Report 12/95 r Ltn F LX) 0, a E~~~~~~~~~~~~~ It.~ ~ o -4 ~it -< U >< I Z 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 u ~ ~x e LU 0) 00~~~~~ C~~~~~~ U)~~~~)_ C) 0~ 0 C)~~~ 00 r~~ U~~~~~U7 C)~~~C o 0~~~~~0 (I) j,~~~~~~4-90) Final Report 12/95 U- a NCO < fE -NI LU 0~~~U O a- (Oh~ T U) .Mo U- - <0(111 4405 V - Ii I a z C)~~~~~~~L OU~~~~~o~ ~ ~~ ~ K -~~~~~~ P.00~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 4406 44-4 ~~~~0 *000 CD, g~~~~~~~~~~~~~)U '0~~~~~~~~~SC) 440~~~~~~~ E) 4-0 Final Report 12/95 LO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E 4 0' LO Q~~. 4Ir Q- Cr -0 C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- C PI > Et ~~~~~C ~~~~~~~E P-~~~~~~~~~ U)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C COO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C C D~~~~~~~~~~~C Cr ~~~~~~~~~~o~C 0 LO~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C? 4-61~- Final Report 12/95 - C 0 0D- ) U u.> LZ >o" *( co LU o. LU 0~~~~Cr Ln ~~~~~~~E NN CIO C U) E~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a - P~~~~~~~~~~6~ ~ ~ ~ CD 0) 0) C~~~~~~~~Ce 0~~~~~~ a) 01 Q4~~~~~~~~~4~ ~ Cl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ xC Cr -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C P. 14~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 V) FnL~~~~~~~~ ) U) -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- L 4-62 0)o Final Report 12/95 extent (Mohn and Tiedje, 1992). These findings suggest that anaerobic dechlorination will not be a major transformation route until the more preferred electron acceptors are exhausted. Under aquifer environments devoid of oxygen, nitrate, and with low levels of sulfate (i.e., under highly reducing conditions) anaerobic dechlorination reactions may be possible. Based on the results of electron acceptor data collected by the UWRL during the course of this field study (see Section 4.3.3), the potential for inhibition of anaerobic dechlorination by primary electron acceptors is minimal. This contention is based on the observation that evidence of anaerobic dechlorination appears in areas of the site which appear devoid of oxygen, nitrate, and sulfate, and in which dissolved iron concentrations are elevated. Once these preferred electron acceptors have been utilized, it appears that anaerobic dechlorination can proceed unhindered at Site 45/57. 4.4.1.2 Substrate Availability In order for TCE to act as an electron acceptor, a suitable electron donor must also be present. Numerous organic substrates including methane (Enzien et al., 1994), ethanol, acetate, lactate (Paviostathis and Zhuang, 1993; de Bruin et al., 1992; Gibson and Sewell, 1992), methanol, glucose (Freedman and Gossett, 1989), and propionate, crotoncite, -and butyrate (Gibson and Sewell, 1992) have been used by researchers to stimulate reductive dehalogenation in the laboratory.-- Fiorenza et al. (1994) reported reductive dehalogenation of PCE and TCE at a manufacturing plant in Ontario, Canada, using organic contaminants, such as naphtha components and volatile fatty acids, as electron donors. The problem with natural reductive dehalogenation is that the pool of electron donor rarely occurs in the environment in the quantities necessary to achieve complete dehalogenation. Due to the inefficiency of electron transfer as much as 150 times the estimated reducing equivalents requirement may be necessary to sustain dehalogenation. Ground water data collected from the original sampling network installed at Site 45/57 suggested that the supply of electron donor compound may be a limiting factor in the rate of intrinsic attenuation of TCE due to t he low level of fuel related contaminant and low background COD levels (< 40 mg/L) that were observed at the site. Subsequent near-source analysis 4-63 Final R~eport 12/95 possible using the sampling locations installed in July, 1995, have shown that elevated levels of TPH and BTEX components co-exist with the TOE plume (see Figures 4-16 and 4-19). With these additional ground water data, electron donor limitations to reductive dechlorination appear to be less significant than originally thought. Figure 4-24 shows the near-source COD contour plot generated from data collected in July, 1995. This contour plot was generated from data shown in Table 4-20 and overlaps the TOE and degradation product contours shown in Figure 4-19. This oxidizable organic -matter within the TOE plume reaches a high of 87 mg/L, and is generally found at concentrations above 25 mg/L, ensuring that. reducing conditions necessary for reductive dlechlorination do persist downgradient from the source area at Site 45/57. 4.4.1.3 Temperature TOE has been shown to degrade in the laboratory at temperatures ranging from 10 to 3500 (de Bruin et al., 1992; Freedman and Gossett, 1989). de Bruin et al. (1992) concluded that lowering the temperature in their fixed-bed column from 20 to 1000 had only a temporary effect on the kinetics of dlehalogenation. Dehalogenation activity of poly- chlorinated biphenyls has been observed at temperatures ranging frbm 5 to 5000. With maximum dehalogenation rates at 30 to 4300 (Kohring et al., 1989). Although these results suggest that dehalogenatIon is possible at low temperatures, is likely that the rate of dlehalogenation may be generally reduced in these low temperature habitats (Mohn and Tiedje, 1992). As suggested in Section 4.3.3.8, however, some evidence is also available indicating that microbial community acclimation to low temperature environments occurs over time, producing rates which do not follow the typical van't Hoff relation with temperature. Field data from this study indicate that despite low temperature conditions existing throughout Site 45/57 ample evidence for both hydrocarbon degradation and TOE dehalogenation exists, indicating that temperature appears not to be an issue for the support microbial degradation mechanisms there. 4-64 Final ReportN 12/95 ~Q LI) E LIOQ (/2 'E- t u-nE 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. OU- U-1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- ~uO- 0 0) 0~ *0 0)O U0) 0) 0) (N - _~~~~~~~~C)- C4 4-65 m~~~~~~~~~~~4 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-20. COD concentration in ground water samples collected by the UWRL in monitoring wells and sampling probes from Site 45/57 in July, 1995. Location COD Location COD Designation (mg/L) - Designation (mng/L) SP1 16.5 GPO2 10.9 SP2 SP16 192 _ __ _ _ SF18 SF19 3D 5 ______ SF20 SF21 13.7 ______ TP22M ~ 10.9 ______ SP23 10.9 ______ SP24 SF25 SF30 33.3 ______ SF31 SP33 22.1______ SP34 SF37 SF38 SF39 SF40 SP41 SP42 10.9 ______ SP43 SF44 SF45 16.5 ______ 4-66 Final Report 12/95 4.4.2 Oxidative Transformations Some chlorinated aliphatics such as TOE have been shown to degrade by a process labeled co-metabolism, or, more specifically, co-oxidation. The process of co-oxidation involves the enzyme catalyzed oxidation of a primary substrate which supports microbial growth, along with the fortuitous oxidation of compounds such as TOE. This is possible due to the lack of specificity of the enzymes responsible for oxidation of the primary substrate, and in some cases because of similarities in molecular structure of this primary substrate and the contaminant of interestc- Compounds such as methane, propane, toluene,'phenol, and ammonia have been shown to support the degradation of chlorinated aliphatics through co-oxidation mechanisms. The methane co-oxidation pathway has been studied extensively by many researchers. This reaction is catalyzed by methane oxidizing bacteria which produce the enzyme methane monooxygenase (MMO) under aerobic conditions. The presence of a hydrocarbon plume co-located with the TOE plume at Site 45/57 suggests the potential for co-oxidation of TOE. However, Fan and Scow (1993) reported that while the degradation of TOE occurred in the presence of toluene, the degradation of 1 g of TOE required approximately 33 g of toluene. Given this ratio, and the fact that these co-oxidation reactions require oxygen as the terminal electron acceptor, it would not appear that there is' sufficient oxygen, nor specific hydrocarbon species present, for the co-oxidation of the TOE to be a significant loss mechanism at Site 45/57. 4.5 Mass Calculations Total. mass calculations were performed for all available data sets, including data collected by Harding Lawson Associates (HLA) in 1989, and Pacific Northwest Laboratories (PNL) in 1992. Mass calculations were used to estimate the loss of TOE mass over time, and to compare these apparent loss values with observed increases in the mass of by-products during these same time periods. Mass estimates were also used to correlate observed decreases in electron donor and electron acceptor associated with the hydrocarbon plume. 4-67 Final Report 12/95 In order to determine the total volume of contaminated ground water for use in mass balance estimates, the area represented by each sampling -point was estimated by the method of Thiessen polygons. described below. The thickness of the contaminated zone was assu med to be .3 m, while its porosity was assumed to be 38% for all calculations. 4..1. Thiessen Podygonehd The iThiessen polygon method was developed in the fieldz of hydrology for use in estimating areas associated with point rainfall measuremenis from rain gages. The Thiessen method assumes that the concentration -.measured at, a given -sampling point is equal out toda distance halfway to Thesmplig poits~lcate-nexiv to ii in aik~directions.,The relative weights 4ecz~)xrepresentedtv-yeaoch-samroiinq pc~nwaesdeermninecl by the- z:2~~onsrJ~ciot.n'-fc2t~iessr.:oiro etwa,-rk,,Ah-elbour~daries.Of-whiocnar w~-,jotrcndby-4-he~petrenidic-ular bisectcrs-oittlines -conn)ieclint. adjaceni 'Points (Cho etal.. 1988]. Appendix G provides a summrny with examrples of the eppliccAion of the Thiessen poiygon method for around water piurne mass esfimnates. Figure 4-25 shows an example of a Thiessen polygon network forihe-May. 1994, data set collected at Site 45/57. The outer "boundarv of I he Thiessen polygon network is estimated based on the outermost well locations. It isimportant to be consistent with -boundary definition if mass calculations for different sampling events are 'o-be compared. Figure 4-26 shows the outer boundlary for the PNL data setwhile Figure 4-25 indicates the outer boundary used for all UWRL/USU sampling events. The PNL. boundary was used to compare TCE mass in the area as determined by PNL sampling in 1992 with TCE mass determined from the UWRL sampling events that occutred in the same area fromn 1993 through 1995. COnce areas -associated with each sampling poin+ are dleterminedl, a thickness ofhcontarnination must be estimated so thalccntaminated volume and total mass calculations can be carried out. A precise estimate of this thickness is only important if "absolute' masses are desired. Without an estimation of contaminant thickness, mass per unii thickness (M/L) comparisons would result in trends identical to those of "absolute" mass. In the case of Site 45/57, the actual thickness of contamination is 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~4-68. Final Report 12/95 N .2~~~~~~~~UO / 0 U') C- .(DKO- IU c/) w~~~~~~~~~~c a.~~0) UJO) U0 ~~~~~~~~U, X ~ Dc x~~~~~~~~ x~~~~~~~~ CC E ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a)a 0-~~~~~~I 4-69~~~~~~~~~. Finai Report 12/95 _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__ _~ ~ L) a. LA co -a ~ ( ~ aXC ~ < u U~~~~~~~ONM/1 a) 0 CL~~~~ -J D U~~~~~~~~~~~~~j E~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~U CL E~~~~~~~~~~ v~~~ 0) CL VI c CD~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c 00) C~~~C 0~~~~ -fl ~ nH~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ln u~~~c a) 0 0 1 a) ~ H no I______~~~~u0. a LO~~~~0- ID~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a 0) 4-70 Final Report 12/95 unknown, however, a thickness of 3 mn (the approximate the depth of the deepest sampling points installed by the UWRL) was assumed. This thickness was used throughout the data reduction and analysis process for both the UWRL and PNL data sets. 4.5.2 Center of Mass Calculations In addition to estimating the total mass of a compound within the dissolved plume at Site 45/57 at any given point in time, the representative center point of the combined plume mass can also be calculated. This representative mass center istermed the centroid of the mass, and is calculated by taking the first moment of inertia of the-mass at each sampling point within the contaminant plume about selected X and Y axes, and calculating the X, Y coordinates for the total plume mass that yields a total moment of inertia equivalent to that of the sum of the individual sampling points. Mathematically this can be expressed as follows for the center of mass coordinates, X and Y,respectively: n ,X (jmas. n='as 1 (4-12) n 'Pl y.(mass. n (4-13) ~(mass where xi, yj the x and y coordinates for sampling( point i, and massi = the estimated plume mass associated with sampling point i. Note that the denominator of each equation is the total mass of a contaminant estimated to be in the dissolved plume using the Thiessen area method. These center of mass (CoM) calculations are useful in tracking the movement of contaminants, reactants and products within the contaminant plume over time. They can be used to assess the status of the plume, i.e., whether it is growing (CaM moving downgradient from thd 4-71 Final Report 12/95 source), is stabie (stationary CaM), or is receding (CaM moving toward the source area). They can also be used to estimate constituent migration velocities during plume development so that effective retardation factors and plume attenuation can be estimated based on known aquifer pore water velocities. CoM calculations were carried out for all contaminants, TEAs, and products of interest at Site 45/57. Results of both total mass and CoM calculations are summarized in detail below. 4.5.3 Results of Mass Calculations Table 4-21 shows the results of mass calculations for both the PNL and UWRL boundaries as determined by the Thiessen Polygon Method. Raw data and CoM and total mass calculations for samples collected during this study are located in Appendix H. Only results from mass calculations within the same boundary and using the same general density of sampling points should be compared in the determination of changes in overall mass over time. This is the case because a specific estimate of dissolved plume mass depends upon the volume of the aquifer that is assumed to be represented by individual sampling points. In addition, it is ) ~~most correct to compare data collected at comparable times of the year (for example, the PNL fall 1992 sampling event occurring with the UWRL September, 1994, sampling event; or the May, 1994, and July, 1995, UWRL sampling events) due to the effect of seasonal ground watdr tdble elevation fluctuations on observed dissolved contaminant concentrations. The higher density of ground water sampling points neart4he source area at Site 45/57, made possible in the July, 1995, sampling event resulted in the detection of near-source contaminated areas not identified in earlier sampling events. These high concentrations identified only in the July, 1995, sampling event led to higher estimated mass values for virtually all contaminants within the PNL and UWRL boundaries at the end of the study compared to levels estimated for 1992 through 1994. Because of a lack of near-source data for previous sampling events, additional dissolved contaminant mass estimates for the PNL and UWRL boundaries were made using a consistent set of sampling locations available during the period from May, 1994, through July, 1995. These results are summarized in Table 4-22 (raw data located in Appendix H), and differ significantly from those in Table 4-21, particularly for the July, 1995. sampling event. These differences are due to differences in areas 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~4-72 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-21. Results of contaminant mass calculations for PNL and UJWRL sampling events at EAFB Site 45/57, Fail 1992 to July, 1995. Mass units are kg of each compound. All sampling points were used in mass estimate. ______PNL Plume Boundar Area Compound Fall 92 05-4 094 07-95 TCE 67.4 35.9 23.0 49.7 cis-DCE 1.3 0.37 0.51 0.61 trans-DOE 0.89 0.07' 0.49 0.19 Vinyl Chloride na na na - Ethylene nano - BTEX na 1. 3.3 12.2 Benzene 0.29 0.09 0.10 2.30 Toluene na 1.3 3.0 8.8 ______UWRL Plume Boundary Area Compound 05-94 09-94 07-95 TOE 42.3 19.4 74.2 cis-DCE 0.69 0.68 1.20 trans-DOE 0.08 0.1 0.43 Vinyl Chloride na na 0.16 Ethylene no 0.01 0.14 BTEX 2.3 2. 64.2 Benzene 0.05 0.10 5.7 Toluene 1.6 2.4 24.7 no =data not available; - mass not estimated for this compound. Concentrations of DOE isomers for May, 1994, were estimated from GC/MS analyses 4-73. Final Report 12/95 Table 4-22. Results of contaminant mass calculations for UWRL sampling events at EAFB Site 45/57, May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. Mass units are kg of each compound. ______PNL Plume Boundary Area Compound 05-94 09-94 07-95 TCE 38.3 27.5 23.0 cis-DCE 0.50 0.63 0.51 trans-DCE 0.06 0.10 0.03 Vinyl Chloride na na - Ethylene n I - - BTEX 1.6 3.2 3.3 Benzene 0.13 0.11 0.82 Toluene 1.3 2.9 1.7 ______UWRL Plume Boundary Area Compound 05-94 09-94 07-95 TOE 40.1 24.7 33.1 cis-DCE 0.59 0.57 0.67 trans-DCE 0.09 0.32 0.15- Vinyl Chloride na na 0.05 Ethylene nafl 0.02 0.04 BTEX 2.2 2.8 1.6 Benzene 0.14 0.13 0.19 Toluene 1.7 2.5 1.2 na data not available: - mass not estimated for this compound. Concentrations of DCE isomers for May, 1994, were estimated from GC/MS analyses 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~4-74 * A ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport and volumes 12/95 assigned to each sampling point used in these estimates. The entire sampling network (Table 4-21) provides the most accurate summary of the actual mass of contaminant remaining throughout the site as of July, 1?95, while data summarized in Table 4-22 using a consistent sampling grid provide the most representative comparison of changes in contaminant mass at the site over time. Based on dissolved mass results shown in Table 4-22 using a consistent sampling grid, 7 kg of TOE mass have been lost in the year separating the May, 1994 and July, 1995, sampling events. The change is even greater (more than 15 kg) using the estimate based on the PNL plume Slight boundary. changes in the intermediate products of the anaerobic dechlorination of TOE were shown to have occurred based on results for both boundary areas, however, they were not quantitatively recovered in the contaminant plume based on the mass of TOE that apparently transformed was during this sampling period. The total BTEX and toluene components of the plume within the UWRL boundary were shown decrease, to while benzene mass increased slightly during the same sampling period. A much lower mass of the dissolved products from the anaerobic dechlorination of TCE was observed in the May and September, 1994, sampling events than was expected based on the apparent TOE lbss.- The July, 1995, sampling points were installed within 10, 20 and 30 m of the source area at Site 45/57 in an attempt to improve observations of TOE degradation that appears to be rapidly taking place near the source area. As indicated above, all of the expected intermediate products TOE of degradation, including cis- and trans-DOE, vinyl chloride and were ethylene observed near the source area in the appropriate spatial distribution and in greater abundance than was observed in previous events. sampling Table 4-21 indicates, however, that the total mass of intermediate these compounds remains low relative to the magnitude of TOE loss that appears to have taken place at the site over time based on all sampling points located within the PNL boundary (Table 4-21 ATOE mass = 17.7 kg), or based on the consistent sampling grid results summarized Table 4-22 in (PNL boundary ATCE mass = 15.3 kg, UWRL boundary ATOE mass = 7.0 kg). With the installation of the additional sampling locations in 1995, July, yielding improved sampling sensitivity, and from the results total of the mass calculations summarized above, it appears that intermediate 4-75 Final Report 7) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 products formed from TCE dechlorination (DCE, vinyl chloride and ethylene) are being assimilated within the aquifer more rapidly than they are being generated from TCE degradation. This contention will be elaborated upon in the discussion of site-specific modeling results presented in Section 5 of this report. 4.5.4 Center of Mass Results A summary CoM calculations for select compounds of interest at Site 45/57 over the period from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid is presented in Table 4-23. The CoM coordinates presented in Table 4-23 are shown in units associated with the EAFB basewide coordinate system. Table 4-24 shows a further summary of the data in terms of the absolute change in coordinates of the CoM, i.e., distance traveled in the North and East directions, between sampling events and since May, 1994, for each constituent of interest. These CoM trajectories are shown graphically in Figures 4-27 through 4-33. Contaminant mass and mass center trends when evaluated together 5 ~~can be used as indicators of intrinsic bioremediation taking place at a given field site. Changes in mass and mass center values over time can be interpreted as follows: Contaminant Centrold of Mass Mass Interpretation Increasing Moving Downgradient Continuous source; unstable plume; contaminant migration Constant Moving Downgradient Finite source; plume migration: minimal natural attenuation Constant Stdble Continuous source; stable plume; contaminant attenuation Decreasing Moving Downgradient Finite source; plume migration; contaminant attenuation Decreasing Moving Upgrodient Finite source; plume attenuation; rapid contaminant attenuation; optimal intrinsic bioremediation 4-76 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-23. CaM resuits for select compounds from UWRL sampling events at EAFB Site 45/57, May. 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. 05-94 Center of Mass Coord-inates North East Mass Compound (f q (ft) (g TCE 228,810 386,447 40-.1 cDCE 229,144 386.343 0.59 tDCE 229 148 386,242 0.09 Benzene 228,721 386,316 0.14 Toluene 228,789 386,447 1.7 BTEX 228,807 386,428 2.2 09-94 Center of Mass Coordinates North East Mass Compound_ (f t) Jfj (kg TCE 228,885 386,443 24.7 cDCE 229,350 386,348 0.57 tDCE 229,928 386,211 0.32 Ethylene 229,220 386,410 0.02 Benzene 228,676 386,343 0.13 Toluene 228.762 386,423 2.5 BTEX 228,764 386,421 2.8 07-95 Center of MassCoriae North East Mass Corn ound (ft) 2Q1... (kg)L TCE 228,809 386,448 33.1 cDCE 229,185 386,372 0.67 tDCE 230,070 386,268 0.15 Ethylene 229,055 386,417 0.04 Vinyl Chloride 228,804 386,499 0.05 Benzene 228,850 386,414 0.19 Toluene 228,766 386,452 1.2 BTEX 228,793 386,442 1.6 4-77 Final Report ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 Table 4-24. Contaminant travel distance calculations for UWRL sampling events from May, 1994, to July, 1995, at EAFB Site 45/57, based on results using a consistent sampling grid over time. 5/94 to 9/94 A Center of Moss Coordinates Compound North (ft) East (ft) TCE 75 -3 cDCE 206 5 tDCE 780 -31 Benzene -45 27 Toluene -27 -23 BTEX -42 -7 9/94 to 7/95 A Center of Mass Coordinates Cornpound NorhftA) East (ft) ICE -76 5 cDCE -165 25 tDCE 142 56 Ethylene -164 7 Benzene 174 71 Toluene 3 29 BTEX 28 22 5/94 to 7/95 A Center of Mass Coordinates Compound North (ft) East Ifti ICE 0 2 cDCE 41 30 tDCE 922 25 Benzene 129 98 Tlouene -23 5 BTEX -14 15 ) ~~~~~~~~~~~4-78 Final Report 12/95 TCE Center of Moss Movement, Site 4S/57 229200. 0 229150.4- 229100 MWOB S~229050 0 S229000 0 t22895D 0 2 228900 9/9: 24.7 kg 228850 7/95: 33.1 kg 5/94; 4.1kg 386050 386'100 386'150 386'200 386250 386300 386350 386400 386450 386'500 East Coordinate (tt) Figure 4-27. Center of mass trajectory for TCE for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. cls-DCE Center ofMoss Movement. Sfte 45/57 229400 9/94: 0.57 kg 229300 22920 ~~~~~~~~~~~a0 45-1 0 0 7/95; 0.67 kg c 22910O MW0B 5/94: 0.59 kg '2 80 U 22900D 0 228900 22880 228700 -05- 386050 386100) 386150 386200 386250 386300 386'350 386'400 386'450 386'500 East Coordinate (Bt) Figure 4-28. Center of mass trajectory for cis-DCE for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. K ~~~~~~~~~~~~4-79 7) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 trans-DCE Center of Mass Movement, Site 4S/S7 230200. 23000, 9/9; 032 g y A 7/95;0.15kg 229800 $? 229600 0 C b 229400,4- 0 z MWO80 229000 0 5/94: 0.09kg 228800 a 228600 4- 386050 386100 386150 386200 386250 386300 386350 386400 386450 386500 East Coordinate (fi) Figure 4-29. Center of mass trajectory for trans-DCE for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. k~mene Center of Mass Movement. Site 45/57 229200 45-1 229100 0~~~~ PO 228900 U ~~~~~~~~~~~7/95:0.19 kg ZS228800 22870 ~~~~~~5/94:0.14kg 0 0 228700. 14 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~45-8 2286001k - - 386050 386100 386150 386200 386250 386300 386350 386400 386450 386500 East Coordinate (ft) Figure 4-30. Center of mass trajectory for benzene for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. -9 ~~~~~~~~~~~4-80 Final Report 12/95 229200. Toluene Center of Mans Movernent. Site 45/5.7 0 229150 45-1 229100 229050 0 - ~~MWOB 229000 ~2 228950 0 .c228900 z 228850 228800 5/4 1.7 kg 228750 9/94: 2.5 kg d a 7/95 1.2 kg 2287001 0 45-8 386050 386100 386150 386200 386250 386300 386350 386400 386450 386500 East Coordinate (ff) Figure 4-31. Center of mass trajectory for toluene for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. BlEX Center of Moss Movemeont. Site 4S/S7 229200, 0 229150.4- 229 100 229050 0 - ~~MWOB 229000 228950 0 a4. 228900 0 Z 228850 228800 5194; 2.2 kg 7/95 16g 22875 9/94; 2.8 kg 22870~ 0 45-8 386050 386100 386150 386200 386250 386300 386350 386400 386~450 386500 East Coordinate (tt) Figure 4-32. Center of mass trajectory for BTEX for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. 4-81 Final Report 12/95 Ethylene Center of Mass Movement, Site 4S/57 229300. 229200 9/94; 0.02 kg 0 4 ~-229100 MWO8\4 1 C ~~~~07/95, 0.04 kg b- 229000 0 ZO228900 228800 2287W 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~045-8 386050 386100 386150 386200 386250 386300 386350 386400 386450 386500 East Coordinate (ff) Figure 4-33. Center of mass trajectory for ethylene for samples collected from Site 45/57 from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. As indicated in Table 4-24 and shown graphically in the CoM trajectory provided in Figure 4-27, it appears that the source of TOE contamination at Site 45/57 is finite in nature. No net downgrodient migration -was observed for the TOE plume from May, 1994, to July, 1995, and there appears to be significant reductions in the TOE mass, suggesting contaminant attenuation within the aquifer at the site. The mass of cis- DOE, the main biodegradation product of the anaerobic dechloriination of TOE, remained essentially constant in the plume, ranging from 0.57 to 0.67 kg, while its mass center moved slightly downgradient over time. The mass of the trans-DOE isomer was more variable, ranging from 0.09 to 0.32 kg, and its mass center appeared to move more than 900 feet during the course of the study. These DOE isomers are degradation products resulting from the anaerobic dechlorination of TOE, and as such, should be generated downgradient from the center of the TOE plume. Their downgradient position with respect to the TOE plume, and their low mass relative to the observed mass of TOE lost provides additional support for the contention that anaerobic dechlorination of TOE, and subsequent degradation of its intermediate products, istaking place at Site 45/57. 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~4-82 Final Report 12/95 Tables 4-23 and 4-24 indicate that the overall BTEX plume appears to be representative of a finite source which is contained within the aquifer. Its CoM moved slightly upgradient, and the overall dissolved mass of BTEX in the contaminant plume decreased from 2.2 kg to 1.6 kg from May, 1994, to July, 1995, using a consistent sampling grid over time. Toluene followed this trend, however, benzene mass was shown to be persistent and its CaM was observed to move dlowngradient over time (Figure 4-30). This apparent migration of benzene suggests that on-going, routine ground water monitoring should be carried out to develop additional information regarding the long-term stability of the newly (July, 1995) identified BTEX plume just downgradient of the TOE source area; The near- source monitoring points installed in July, 1995, provide an effective sampling network for such a monitoring program. 4.6 Expressed Aquifer Assimilative Capacity The data and discussions presented above provide some indication that the biologically mediated containment of BTEX compounds is taking place through aerobic and anaerobic pathways. Much stronger evidence exists for the anaerobic dechlorination of TCE at the site under natural aquifer conditions. The assimilative capacity for BTEX components was described earlier in this section, and is summarized below in Table 4- 25. As indicated in Table 4-25, there is sufficient terminal 6ledtran acceptor in the form of oxygen, nitrate, and sulfate, and expressed as dissolved iron, manganese, and methane to assimilate more than 16,500 gg/L of total TPH and BTEX components. Since the maximum observed BTEX concentration at Site 45/57 has been approximately 8,470 gg/L, it is apparent that there is an abundance of available and expressed TEAs which can be used to produce the intrinsic assimilation of BTEX components that is evident at this site. There are, however, other non- BTEX electron donors in the form of TPH which place an additional demand on these electron acceptors. A maximum dissolved purge and trap TPH concentration observed during the study was in SP29 (40,532 gg/L), within the TOE source area at the site. The purge and trap analysis used for TPH determinations was certainly influenced by the high levels of chlorinated hydrocarbons that exist along with non-chlorinated hydrocarbons in the plume as both would be measured using the flame ionization detector that is part of the k) ~~~~~~~~~~~4583 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-25. Expressed assimilative capacity of the aquifer system at EAFB Site 45/57 based on UWRL field sampling from November, 1993, to July, 1995. ASSIMILATIVE CAPACITY ELECTRON ACCEPTOR/PROCESS (gg BTEX/TPH/L) Dissolved Oxygen 1,1 50 Nitrate -8,400 Iron/Manganese 870 Sulfate 6,060 Methanogenesis 24 TOTAL ASSIMILATIVE CAPACITY 16,504 HIGHEST OBSERVED BTEX CONCENTRATION 8,470 HIGHEST OBSERVED TPH CONCENTRATION 48,545 method. These chlorinated hydrocarbons do not exert an electron acceptor demand as under anaerobic conditions they themselves serve as electron acceptors during dechlorination reactions. The concentration of non-chlroinated hydrocarbon that must be assimilated within the reactor, then is some value between the maximum BTEX concentration of 8,470 gag/L and the maximum TPH concentration observed of 48,545 gg/L. Table 4-26 summarizes the total mass of contaminants and electron acceptors along with the BTEX/TPH equivalent mass of the TEAs within the entire UWRL plume. These estimates were developed as a check on the magnitude of the attenuation capacity contained within the entire contaminant plume. As indicated in Table 4-26, an electron acceptor capacity nearly 10 times greater than the entire TPH pool exists throughout the aquifer below Site 45/57. This result suggests that the non-chlorinated hydrocarbon assimilative capacity of the aquifer isadequate at Site 45/57 to provide contaminant attenuation within the plume defined by the UWRL sampling grid. ITOE assimilation is also suggested from the available field data based on reducing conditions in the aquifer that could support dechlorination reactions: the production of DOE, vinyl chloride and ethylene in the appropriate spatial distribution downgradient from the source area; and the apparently highly attenuated TOE plume of decreasing mass that exists at the site. Center of mass and mass balance considerations using a 4-84 Final Report 12/95 Table 4-26. Total mass of electron donor and electron acceptors and TEA assimilative capacity of the aquifer system at EAFB Site 45/57 based on UWRL field sampling in July, 1995. ELECTRON DONOR Mass (kg) TPH (P&T) 396 Benzene 5.7 Toluene 24.7 Ethylbenzene 0.60 p-Xylene 33.2 BTEX 64.2 - BTEX/TPH Equivalent ELECTRON ACCEPTORS Mass (kg) Mass (kg) Dissolved Oxygen 185 56.0 Nitrate -1,692 1,581 Dissolved Iron 1,805 78.1 Dissolved Manganese 554 48.6 Sulfate 7,757 1,567.1 Dissolved Methn . . TOTAL ASSIMILATIVE CAPACITY 3,341 consistent sampling grid over the entire time period of the study Verified that TOE attenuation is taking place, and suggests that the intermediate anaerobic dechlorination products of TOE are themselves rapidly transformed in the aquifer at Site 45/57. Additional support for the contention that TOE is analerobically degrading at Site 45/57 is provided through an extensive modeling effort that isthe subject of Section 5 of this document. N) ~~~~~~~~~~~4-85 Final Report 12/95 SECTION 5 GROUND WATER MODELING Si1 GENERAL OVERVIEW AND MODEL DESCRIPTION - The degradation rates of contaminants (BTEX and chlorinated solvent constituents) of concern in the Site 45/57 plume at EAFB were independently estimated using a ground water fate and transport model describing the advection, dispersion and degradation of dissolved compounds that takes place within an aquifer system. The modeling effort carried out in this study had three fundamental objectives: 1) to provide independent verification and support of apparent ground water plume containment (intrinsic remediation) observed Site 45/57; 2) to allow K; ~~the evaluation of long-term plume behavior under an intrinsic remediation management approach applied at Site 45/57; 3) to evaluate the impact on long-term plume behavior and plume life-time under source r emoval conditions at Site 45/57; and 4) to guide the development of a long-term monitoring plan. An analytical solution for the advection-dispersion equation, with degradation, was applied, along with site-specific physical/chemical input parameters, in these modeling activities. Equation 5.1 is the form of the advection-dlispersion-reaction equation (ADRE) which describes contaminant transport in three dimensions. The first three terms of this equation describe contaminant dispersion in the x, y, and z directions, the fourth term describes contaminant advection with the moving ground water, while the last term on the left side of Equation 5.1 is a generic kinetic term used to simulate processes which result in the degradation of the contaminant during migration. a 2C Xa2C a2? C a K> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5-1 Final Report 12/95 Domenico (1987) used heuristic modifications of an extended pulse solution to the ADRE to arrive at a solution which incorporates decoy, while avoiding numerical integration. This solution was developed to allow model calibration with field determined values of ground water velocity and of the spatial distribution of a contaminant of interest. The analytical solution proposed by Domenico (1987) for the ADRE given in Equation 5.1 for a continuous source is provided in Equation 5.2: C(x' ,yz'tI( CoIexpi( IY- ( 1 L) 1(aerfc 1/2 2 \/\LXLL) + ,i (aLvr)Vr Lq j -'erf (z + Z) -erf (z- Z) 52 \ 2(a x) [/22(arx) 1/2 , 2(a2/) 2(azx) where C(x,y,z,t) = concentration at point (x,y,z) and time (I), M L-3; Co= initial concentration, M L-3; yr = retarded ground water velocity = v/R, L T-1; vx= ground water velocity, L T-1; R = contaminant retardation factor, unitless; X = first order decay constant, T-1; czL = dispersivity in x direction (longitudinal), L; am = dispersivity in y direction (transverse), L; az = dispersivity in z direction (vertical), L: Y =source dimension in y direction, L; and Z = source dimension'in z direction, L. This solution assumes a constant, plane source perpendicular to the direction of ground water flow; that ground water velocity is one- dimensional, i.e., no vertical flow occurs within the flow field; that linear, reversible, instantaneous equilibrium takes place between the sorbed and dissolved phases; and finally, that decay of the total mass of contaminant (dissolved and sorbed) occurs in the system. The following sections describe in detail the required model input parameters, how parameter values specific to Site 45/57 were measured or estimated, how the model was calibrated using measured site data, and how the model was used to accomplish the objectives listed above for the modeling effort. 5-2 Final Report 12/95 5.2 MODEL INPUT Based on data presented in Chapters 3 and 4, the conceptual model for this site includes a shallow unconfined aquifer made up of coarse gravely to medium sands. The selection of the model solution presented in Equation 5.2 was made since no vertical migration of dissolved confaminahts is indicated from field measured ground water elevation data collected from Site 45/57. In addition, no residual free product was identified in any field sampling activities reported by PNL nor conducted by the UIWRL. Because of a lack of definition of a specific source, and the apparent diffuse nature of the area generating the observed ground water plume at Site 45/57, the assumption of a plane source perpendicular to ground water flow was thought to be warranted. The magnitude of the source dimensions were chosen through model calibration efforts as discussed below. 5.2.1 Hydraulic Properties Hydraulic and chemical properties contaminants affecting the transport of within the subsurface, and which are incorporated into the multidimensional transport model given in Equation 5.2 include aquifer pore wafer velocity and dispersivity, and contaminant retardation..- The following sections describe methods used in the determination of these parameters for input into the modeling effort at Site 45/57. 5.2.1.1 Pore water velocity The ground water table maps presented for Site 45/57 in Figures 3-1 though 3-4 over the period of November, 1993, to July, 1995, indicate that the general direction of ground water flow has not changed over time, nor has the observed hydraulic gradient across the site of approximately 0.00 13 ft/ft. Aquifer pore water velocity was calculated based on measured values of hydraulic gradient and hydraulic conductivity and estimated values of total aquifer porosity using Darcy's Law (Equation 5.3). 5-3 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~Final Report( 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 KdH eedL (5.3) where V- = mean adveclive ground water velocity or seepage velocity, L/time; K = hydraulic conductivity, L/time; dH/dL = hydraulic gradient, L/L, = 0.001 3 ft/ft for Site 45/57: and Ge = effective porosity, unitless, = 0.025 for Site 45/57. A mean hydraulic conductivity was estimated at 45_-ft/day based on results of slug tests conducted in selected wells at Site 45/57 in September, 1994, and July, 1995 (Section 3.3.2). Total aquifer porosity was assumed to be 38%, while effective porosity was assumed to be 25% based on previously reported values for Source Area SS 57 (Droppo et al., 1989, from USAF, 1993). Using these input data, pore water velocity at Site 45/57 is estimated to be approximately 0.23 fl/day (0.07 in/day). 5.2.1.2 Dispersivity Transverse dispersivity was determined from model calibration described in Section 5.3 using ground water TCE concentration data measured in July, 1995. The calibrated value Of aXT Was found to be 0.53 m. A longitudinal dispersivity of 2.12 mn (four time (XT) was used based on a longitudinal to transverse dispersivity ratio suggested by Domenico (1 987). Vertical dispersivity was assumed the be negligible (0.001 m) in order to simplify the model since the vertical distribution of contamination as indicated by multi-level sampling probe data did not suggest significant vertical dispersion at Site 45/57. 5.2.2 Sorption Coefficient/Retardation Factor The term retardation factor defines the reduction in contaminant velocity in an aquifer due to its sorption to aquifer solids. It isthe factor by which pore water velocity is reduced to estimate contaminant velocity in ground water systems. The retardation factor is a function of the soil/water partition coefficient (Kd), the soil bulk density, Pb. and the effective porosity as defined by: 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~5-4 Final Report 12/95 R =1+b Kd (5.4) where R=retardation factor, unitless; Pb =soil bulk density, M L-3; Kd= soil/water partition coefficient, L3 M-1. The soil bulk density at Site 45/57 was assumed to be 1.6 g/CM 3 based on previously reported values (USAF, 1992c, from USAF, 1993). Kd can be estimated based on measured values of contaminant ground water concentrations in equilibrium with corresponding contaminant soil concentrations, or can be calculated using empirical relationships reported in the literature that were developed from laboratory studies. Since both ground water and soil concentration data were available for TOE from Site 45/57, its Kd value was estimated from these data using Equation 5.5. d- [soil] Kd[aqueous] (5.5) where [soil] = concentration in the soil phase, M M- 1; [aqueous]= concentration in the aqueous phase, M [f3. Table 5-1 shows the measured soil and ground water TOE concentrations and the resulting Kd values estimated from these data using Equation 5.5. These results indicated Kd values for TCE ranging from 0.46 to 1.7 based on field measurements collected by PNL and the UWRL from 1992 to 1994. Equations 5.6 and 5.7 are examples of empirical relationships which can be used to estimate Kd. Equation 5.6 was developed by Mouvet et al. (1993) for TOE sorption onto marl, sandstone, and loamy and sandy soils with low organic carbon content (fraction of organic carbon in the soil, fc= 0.1 to 0.5%). Using the average f0c from SB 9 of 0.32%, Equation 5.6 predicts a Kd = 0.37 (R=3.4) in Site 45/57 soils. 5-5 Final Report 12/95 Table 5-1. Results of TOE Kd determinations. [soil] [aqueous] Kd Sample ID (mg/kg) (mg/L) (L/kg) R 45MW08 7.65* 7.2 1.06 7.8 (PNL data) 45MW08 3.3 7.2 0.46 3.9 (PNL data-A) 45MW08 12 7.2 1.70 11.9 (PNL dlata-B) SB 9ITP 9 0.5 469 **1.06 7.8 (UWRL/USU data) *Average of two samples collected at different depths (A and B) (USAF, 1992), **Average of samples above detection limit, November, 1993, data, ***Average of middle and deep point, May, 1994, data. Kd =147 fcc - 0.10 (5.6) log (Kd) = 0.72 log (Kow) + log (fc) + 0.49 (5.7) where K 0~w = octanol/water partition coefficient = 263 for TOE, 72 for cis- DOE, and 123 for trans-DOE. Equation 5.7 was reported by Schwarzenbach and Westall (1981) based on 13 neutral organic compounds and a variety of natural solids with fcc values between 0.004 and 5.8%. This equation was used with the average f0c of 0.32% from SB 9 to estimate Rvalues for cis- and trans-DOE in Site 45/57 soil of 2.1 and 2.6, respectively. The TOE Kd values predicted from the published property-property correlation equation, Equation 5.6, of 0.37 is comparable to the range of values estimated from measured soil and ground water concentration data (0.46 to 1.7) presented in Table 5-1, supporting the validity of these independent estimation methods for use in estimating a TOE retardation factor for contaminant transport modeling at Site 45/57. 5-6 Final Report 12/95 Based on the Kd values for TOE found above, its retardation factor at Site 45/57 was estimated to be between 3.4 and 11.9 using Equation 5.4. The retardation factor at Site 45/57 was also estimated using spatial data along with estimated travel time (time since release) to specific monitoring locations. These calculations were carried out by evaluating the distance between the source (45MW08) and a dlowngradient monitoring well not yet contaminated with TOE from the source area (45MW09), selecting a plume life, or time since the plume began to develop, and then calculating the TOE velocity necessory to reach the downgradient point within that time period. The retardation factor for TOE is determined based on this velocity divided into the estimated pore water velocity of 0.23 ft/day. A summary of these calculations for Site 45/57 isshown in Table 5-2. Table 5.-2. Retardation values estimated using spatial TOE ground water data measured at Site 45/57, 1993 to 1995. Calculated Travel Travel Time (yr) Parameter Distance (ff) 20 30 40 TOE velocity 584 0.08 0.053 0.04 (ft/day) TOE retardation 2.9 4.3 -5.8 factor Source well = 45MW08, downgradient well = 45MW09 Once again, these results confirm those presented in Table 5-1, suggesting that the TOE retardation factor at Site 45/57 appears to be in the range of 2.9 to 11.9. A smaller, more conservative range of R values from 3 to 6 was used in model calibiation analyses conducted in this study and summarized below. 5-7 Final Report ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 5.3 MODEL CALIBRATION Domenico (1987) describes the procedures for calibration of the model presented in Equation 5.2 based on contaminant concentration and aquifer hydraulic properties measured in the field. Pairs of measured concentration data are used to converge on values of aquifer transverse dispersivity and source dimension which are unique solutions to Equation 5.2. These calibrated values are then used to estimate a contaminant degradation rate and initial contaminant concentration which describe the temporal and spatial distribution of contaminant observed at the site. Both statistical and visual methods were used to select a number of model input values which best matched TOE ground water concentrations observed throughout Site 45/57. Model parameters that were varied to fit the measured TCE ground water data included: TOE retardation factor, initial source strength, and elapsed time since release. Model parameters that were held constant during all calibration and model simulation runs included the aquifer pore water velocity (0.23 ft/d), and longitudinal and vertical dispersivity values (4 aT and 0.001 m, respectively). With a range of calibrated values generated from field ground water data available from the site, final values were selected to produce the best fit of observed field data for the TOE plume centerline concentrations observed at the site since 1992, as well -as to produce a total plume TOE mass which matched the integrated mass data for TOE observed in July, 1995. 5.3.1 Model Calibration Procedures The assumptions made in the calibration procedure along with the steps followed for model calibration and the resultant calibration output are discussed in the following sections. The following steps were used in the model calibration procedure: 1. Values of Y and QT were estimated using measured ground water concentration values from the July, 1995, data set. ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~5-8 Final Report 12/95 2- Hydraulic properties, contaminant velocity, and time since the contaminant release were set constant at the following values: at = 4 aT, az = 0.001 M; Vr = 0.005 to 0.07 m/d; and t = 20 to 40 yr. 3. The source vertical dimension, Z, and the simulated plume elevation, z, were set constant at the following values: Z = 3 m, z = 1 M. 4. Values for X/vr and C. were calculated from the results of the calibration effort for Y and aT. S. Visual fit of the predicted centerline concentration distribution to observed field data from July, 1995 was then used to select the values of Xand Co most descriptive of the distribution of TOE ground water concentrations at the site. 6.. Once the X and Co values were identified which produced an optimized fit of the July, 1995, data, a check was made on the match between the observed dissolved TOE mass and that predicted from model calibrated data from the July, 1995, sampling event. 7. Based on a X = 0 versus the calibrated X degradation rate, the TOE mass degraded, and the equivalent cis- and trans-DCE mass produced as degradation products were then estimated. This calculated intermediate product mass was compared to cis- and trans-DOE mass observed in field measurements to assess the quality of the mass balance generated from the measured field data. &. Finally, the effects of source removal on the lifetime of the plume and the maximum plume travel distance were assessed using the site-specific, field-calibrated model. Details of these procedures are provided below. 5.3.1.1 Determination of Y and ar values Y and aq were determined with data collected during the July. 1995, sampling event using a sampling grid that was designed specifically for the model calibration procedure. The calibration procedure calls for two points which are approximately the same distance from the source in the longitudinal direction, and at different distances from the centerline in the Kj ~~~~~~~~~~~~5-9 Final Report 12/95 transverse direction. The ratio of these two concentrations may be expressed as follows: C(x,I'y 1. tI) _ erf (y1) C(x 2, y2, tI) erf (y2 ) (5.8) where erf(yi) is described as follows: erf(y) = erf ____- enr05 (5.9) erf[ j [IT I - An iterative solution was used to determine values of Y and (XT which satisfied the ratio given in Equation 5.8. Unique values for Y and (XT that describe the transport characteristics of the aquifer below Site 45/57 were identified by the intersection of two or more of these Y versus £4 curves generated from different pairs of ground water sampling points located throughout the site. Results of these calculations are provided below in Section 5.4. 5.3.1.2 Hydraulic properties The hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer were held constant throughout the simulations. Vertical spreading of -the plume was neglected based on measured vertical contaminant concentration data. As per recommendations by Domenico (1987), the value for aL was assumed to be 4 times aT. TCE ground water velocity at Site 45/57 was estimated to be between 0.005 and 0.7 mn/d, with a mean value of 0.03 mn/d. This range and mean value were used for model calibration. 5.3.1.3 Source dimensions With low values of vertical dispersivity, the model is not sensitive to the value of the source dimension, Z, nor the vertical coordinate, z, for plume concentration predictions. The Z source dimension was assumed to be 3 -I ~~~~~~~~~~~5-10 Final Report 12/95 m (approximately the depth of known contamination based on soil and ground water samples collected from 1992 to 1994). The value of the z coordinate was chosen to be 1 m, representing the average depth of the UWRL sampling points installed at Site 45/57. The Z source dimension and the z coordinate remained constant during all of the model simulations. 5.3.1.4 Determination Of X/Vr The determination Of X/'vr requires two sampling points at different distances along the centerline of the plume where it is-relatively certain that steady-state conditions have been achieved. The concentration ratio, N, of these two points is given by Equation 5.1 0. C 1 erf (y 2) exp N (5.- C2 erf (y 1) exp 2 where exp jP isdescribed as: expo = I + vL L] (5.11) Substituting from Equation 5.1 1, and simplifying, Equation 5.1 0 may be written as follows: ]2 _ a InN In N (5.12) yr L[ (X] -X2j (X1 X2) Equation 5.12 may then be solved directly for XL/xr. Therefore, knowing the pore water velocity and contaminant retardation factor, the resultant contaminant velocity can be used to estimate its degradation rate based on field-determined ground water concentration data. -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~Final Report 12/95 5.3.1.5 Determination of G. The value for initial source concentration isdifficult to determine due to the lack of specific information regarding the source of TOE contamination at Site 45/57. The major source of TOE contamination appears to be near 45M WO8, north of Building 1206 (Fire Station). Ground water samples collected by PNL in 1992, included TOE at concentrations as high as 52 mg/L near the apparent source in ground probe 45GP08. while UWRL sampling of 45GP08 in July, 1-995, indicated a higher concentration at 90.8 mg/L. 45MW08 was also sampled by PNL in 1992, and by UWRL/USU in May and September, 1994, and July, 1995. TOE concentrations in 45MW08 ranged from 2.6 to 7.2 mg/L in all of these sampling events. Along with these measured values near the source area, the source concentration Co, may also be determined using the parameters obtained from the previous calibration steps, and the assumed value of axL of four times aTr. Equation 5.13 shows the equation for the source concentration for a plume at steady-state using the modeling approach described above: 00 = 4xyt)(5.13) exp j3. {erf (y) } erf (z.)}- where erf(zi) isdescribed by the expression given in Equation 5.14: erf (z.= erfj 0.5l-erf[ 0.5 (5.14) 5 I [~2 (a zxi) j2 (a z xi)~ 5.3.1.6 Time since contaminant release The simulation time, t, used in the fate and transport model represents the cumulative amount of time that the continuous source has existed. Based on the operational history of Site 45/57, time was varied from 20 ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~5-12 Final Report 12/95 years (7,300 days) to 40 years (14,600 days) when evaluating the visual fit of the predicted data to observed ground water concentrations during the model calibration effort. 5.3.2 Predicted Mass Estimation Changes in mass, given different input parameters, were calculated by integration of the predicted dissolved TOE concentration over the total plume area. The dissolved TOE concentration was assumed to be constant in the vertical direction throughout the 3 mn contaminated thickness of the aquifer. The mass of contaminant in a -two-dimensional flow field (Equation 5.15) was used to calculate total plume mass by multiplying it by a 3 m aquifer thickness. Mass in xy plane =fjJ C(x, y, t) Gdx dy (5.15) where C(x,y,t) = dissolved contaminant concentration at point (x,y) at time t, M L-3; and 8 total porosity, unitless. In making mass estimates from predicted TOE ground water concentrations, the fate and transport model uses a numerical approximation (Equation 5.16) of Equation 5.15 as follows: Approximated mass in xy plane =XC(x, y, t) 8 Ax Ay (5.16) where C(xi,y 1,t) = concentration at point (xj,y;) and time t, M L-3;.AX= change in x coordinate (longitudinal), L; and Ay = change in y coordinate (transverse), L. The sampling grid interval used for this approximation consisted of rectangular areas, less than 10 m long in the longitudinal direction and less than 5 m long in the transverse direction, depending on the Y source dimension. Mass estimation was used to determine the mass of TCE by-products that would be present in the plume given a specified TOE degradation rate and cumulative time since contaminant release. The mass of TOE that was degraded was computed as the difference between total .2 ~~~~~~~~~~~5-13 Final Report 12/95 dissolved TCE ground water mass with a degradation rate, X, equal to 0, and the calculated dissolved TCE mass in the plume under a given set of transport and non-zero degradation rate conditions. The resulting mass of by-product was calculated using the stoichiometry of DCE, VC, and ethylene production and the molecular weights of these compounds as given in Equations 5.17 to 5.20. Mas PrdceE TCEsDegraded (96.9 g/gmol DCE (517 Mass PrdceCEMs 131.4 g/grjol TCE.7 Mass DCE Produced = Mass TCE Degraded (0.737) (5.18) Mass vcProduced = Mass TCE Degraded (0.476) (5.19) Mass EtyeeProduced = MQss5TCE Degraded (0.213) (5.20) 5.3.3 Source Removal Simulation The effects of source removal were simulated by superirhp6sing calibrated model results for both a "positive" and "negative" plume. The 'negative'' concentration plume has input parameters identical to those of the "positive' plume with two exceptions: 1) the initial concentration for the "negative" plume is input as a negative value, Co, (source removal) = - CO; and, 2) the time used for the "negative' plume is input as the time since source removal (At). The time used for the 'positive" plume simulation is then increased by the time since the source was removed, i.e., T+At. Once the "positive" and "negative" plumes are generated, the summation of the nodal values from each results in a synthesized plume that responds to the elimination of contaminant flux from the source area at time At since source removal took place. 5-14 Final Report 12/95 5.4 MODEL RESULTS The following section presents the results of each step of the calibration procedure along with the evaluation of total dissolved plume mass, TOE mass degradation predictions, intermediate product mass balance calculations, source lifetime estimates, and the evaluation of the impact of source removal on long-term TOE plume behavior. Data from the July, 1995, sampling event were used for model calibration as it is the most complete data set with respect to defining the spatial distribution of dissolve TOE within the contaminated area below Site 45/57. 5.4.1 Results of Y and aq Calibration Values of Y and aT were determined from the iterative solution of Equation 5.8 for all appropriate pairs of sampling points within 106 m of the apparent source area at GPO8. Figure 5-1 shows these results for each possible pair of sampling points. Each curve in Figure 5-1 represents all Y and UT values that resulted in the observed concentration distribution between a respective pair of monitoring points. The intersection of two or more of these curves defines a unique set of Y and Ur values that describes the measured concentration distribution at Site 45/57. The raw data used for the generation of Figure 5-1 are provided in Appendix 1.- Figure 5-1 shows that five unique sets of Y and aT values exist for the spatially distributed TOE data observed at Site 45/57 in July, 1995. Table 5- 3 lists each of these values and the pairs of sampling points that generated them. As Table 5-3 indicates, the range of results Y and aT was relatively narrow. The results of Sampling Point Set 1 were chosen as the most representative of field conditions due to the number of sampling point pairs producing unique values. The results of Sampling Point Set 5 were also used to examine the sensitivity of other model parameters to the extreme value of Y. 5.4.2 Results Of X/vr Calibration Results of X/vr calibration efforts are shown in Table 5-4 below based on previous results for Y and aT for the Sampling Point Set 1 identified in Table 5-15 Final Report 12/95 Sampling Point Pair 10 ~29-30 " 32-33 -- 33-34 U, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~----39-38 a. 39-40 _ _ _...... 30-31 a)j 0.1 - ;t35-36 0.01 32-34 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Y Source Dimension (in) 38____40__ Figure 5-1. Graphical output of Equation 5.8 solution for Y and at values for TCE ground water data collected in July, 1995, from various sampling point pairs. Table 5-3. Results of Y and aT calibration runs. Sampling Y aXT Contributing Samplingf Point Set (in) (in) Point Pairs 1 22.5 0.53 32-34 36-37 29-30 30-3 1 2 20 0.65 29-30 30-3 1 38-40 3 16.5 0.7 36-37 38-40 4 14 1 30-31 38-39 5 12.5 0.74 38-40 32-34 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~5-16 Final Report 12/95 Table 5-4. Results of X/vr calibration runs using results from Table 5-3 for Sampling Point Set 1. Input Sampling X/vr Mean Upper Cit Lower ClI Points (li/ft) (lI d) (li/d) (li/d) GPO8 &SP30 0.150 0.0060 0.0015 0.017 GP08 & SP33 0.102 0.0041 0.0010 0.011 GPO8 &GP1 6 0.105 0.0042 0.0011 0.012 GPO8 &SP36 0.125 0.0050 0.0013 0.014 SP30 & SP33 0.051 0.0020 0.0005 0.006 SP30 & SP36 0.114 0.0046 0.0011 0.013 SP30 & GP 16 0.064 0.0026 0.0006 0.007 SF33 & SP36 0.157 0.0063 0.0016 0.017 SP33 &GP16 0.143 0.0057 0.0014 0.016 SP36 &GP1 6 0.159 0.0064 0.0016 0.017 tCl = 95% confidence intervals about the mean value 5-3, and contaminant velocity, v~,values that ranged from 0.01 to 0.11I mid, with a mean of 0.03 mid as described above. Table 5-4 shows that the mean value of the degradation rate ranged from 0.0020 to 0.00641d. In order to determine the sensitivity of X/vr calibration to the input data determined in the first calibration step, X/vr was estimated with Y and ar values generated using Sampling Point Set 5 as given in Table 5-3. These results are shown in Table 5-5. Table 5-5 shows that the mean value of the degradation rate calibration varied between 0.0014 to 0.0064id using the parameters determined in Sampling Point Set 5. Comparison of Tables 5-4 and Table 5-5 shows that the degradation rate calibration is relatively insensitive to the parameters determined in the first calibration stein, and that the TCE degradation rates obtained using either data Sampling Point Set are statistically equivalent based on overlapping 95% confidence limits. Due to this fact, the calibration values for the TCE degradation rate resulting from Sampling Point Set I were used in the predictive modeling that follows. 2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~5-17 Final Report 12/95 Table 5-5. Results of V/vr calibration runs using results from Table 5-3 for Sampling Point Set 5. Input Sampling X/Vr Mean Upper CIt Lower Cl Points (l /ft) (1Id) (1/d) (1/d) GPO8& SP30 0.140 0.0056 0.0014 0.015 GPOB & SP33 0.089 0.0036 0.0009 0.010 GPO8 &GPl 6 0.117 0.0047 0.0012 0.013 GP08 & SP36 0.092 0.0037 0.0009 -0.010 SF30 & SF33 0.036 0.0014 0.0004 0.004 SP30& SP36 0.107 0.0043 0.0011 0.012 SF30 & GPl16 0.050 0.0020 0.0005 0.006 SP33 &SP36 0.1 58 0.0063 0.0016 0.017 SP33 &GP]16 0.138 0.0055 0.0014 0.015 SP36 &GP]16 0.160 0.0064 0.0016 0.018 t~l = 95% confidence intervals about the mean value. 5.4.3 Results of Co Calibration The results of the Co calibration effort are shown in Table 5-6. These values rely on the Y source dimension of 22.5 m and the transverse dispersivity aT = 0.53 m determined from a previous calibration step (Table 5-3), and the following additional dispersivity and source dimension values used in model simulations: longitudinal dispersivity, aL = 4 aXT =.2.16 m; vertical dispersivity, cxz = 0.00 1 m; Z source dimension = 3 m; and z depth= i M. Table 5-6 shows that values ranging from 33,394 to 267,712 ppb were determined in the Co calibration step. Values from the last three pairs of sampling points were well above the highest field-determined TCE concentration of 90,800 ppb, and likely resulted from the use of pairs in which one or both points violated the steady-state assumption associated with this calibration step. Therefore, only those values ranging from 33,394 to 96,242 ppb were used in further predictive modeling efforts. 5-18 Final Report 12/95 Table 5-6. Results of C., calibration runs using results from Table 5-3 for Sampling Point Set 1. Input Sampling c Points (gg/L)) GPO8 &SP30 91,979 GPO8 &SP33 92,791 GPO & GP16 96,242 GPO8 &SP36 93,134 - SP3O & SP33 33,394 - 5P30 & SF36 68,525 SP30 &GP16 39,101 SP33 & SP36 256,438 SP33 &GP16 192,899 SP36 &GP1 6 267,712 The sensitivity of C. to Y and aM values was assessed using Sampling Point Set 5 input data given in Table 5-3 as was done with the X/vr calibration step. Table 5-7 shows the results of Co, calibration using Sampling Point Set 5 values for Y (12.5 m) and or (0.74 in). Once again. inspection of Tables 5-6 and 5-7 shows that calibrated values for Co are insensitive to the values used from the first calibration step, and Co values determined from Sampling Point Set 1 were used for further predictive modeling. 5.4.4 Results of Visual Screening Visual screening was used to make the final determination as to which combination of all calibration results best fit the data obtained during the July, 1995, field sampling event. Figure 5-2 shows the model results obtained from each combination of X and Co input parameters, along with field data collected by PNL in 1992 and by the UWRL from 1993 through 1995. Although the curves shown are for the mean value of the contaminant velocity, and hence the mean degradation rate, the curves 5-19 Final Report 12/95 Table 5-7. Results of Co calibration runs using results from Table 5-3 for Sampling Point Set 5. Input Sampling C Points (gig/L) GPO8 &SP30 91,859 GPOB & SF33 92,667 GPO8 &GP16 96,140 GPO8 &SP36 93,012 SF30 & SP33 33,143 - SP30& SP36 71,941 SP30& GP16 39,131 SP33 &SP36 296,268 SP33 &GP1 6 210,373 SP36 &GP1 6 317,921 -ODRat~ - ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 52 Final Report 12/95 for the upper and, lower confidence limit- degradation values are nearly identical. The raw data for the predicted:upper and lower-confidence interval curves,-as well as the data for-the predicted concentrations along the centerline are. provided in Appendix J. ' Based on theresul)tsishown in-Figure.5-2, the mean values of LI.and Co whichapears -rovide the best fit..the observed tield daota-were Joundl. lo be 0.0026/d and 39, 101 ixg/Lrrespectively. -The~results of the model simulation~with these input parameters are shown-irrvFigure.5'3 The range - of degradatfion~rates -for this simulationjis 0.0006 to 0.0070td. 7= - - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~DqgeftonRts% S ~~~~~~~~~~PNL::~ UWRL4u½j W-b X Q M W6 IM 120 14? 16 -1:ishnee owgmrof scot I.ai) Figure 5-3. Graphical output of model results for best fit curve to field determined TICE ground water data collected by PNL in 1992. and the UWIRL from 1993 to 1995. Input data values for X and Co are 0.0026/d and 39,1 01 gg/L, respectively. K) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~5-21 Final Report 12/95 Figure 5-3 shows that the input parameters determined from the calibration procedure result in a predicted concentration profile which closely matches the observed field data, particularly just downgradient of the source area. Although all of the combinations of X and Co were used in subsequent modeling efforts, the simulation shown in Figure 5-3 appears to best fit the observed data, and is referred to as the "preferred input combination" in the remainder of the text. 5.4.5 Results of Total Mass Calibration Table 5-8 shows the results of model predictions of dissolved TOE mass for the range of input parameters determined in the calibration procedure using the numerical approximation scheme presented in Equation 5.16. The predicted dissolved TOE mass ranged between 17 and 28 kg. The grid used in the mass calculation was 85 to 235 m long in the longitudinal direction and 66 to 90 m long in the transverse direction. The grid spacing interval was approximately 1 to 2.5 m in the longitudinal direction and 1.8 to 2.5 m in the transverse direction. These dimensions were determined based on the predicted plume footprint for a given simulation scenario. These predicted mass results are significantly different than the observed TOE mass in the PNL boundary (49.7 kg from Table 4-20) based on field-measured ground water concentrations collected in July, 1995. which was. This difference is due to the much larger area contained within the PNL boundary as compared to that used for the determination of the model-predicted mass. To verify that the calibrated model could indeed predict the observed mass within the contaminant plume, two additional Thiessen boundaries were imposed at the site. The dimensions of these boundaries correspond to those of the plumes generated from the model scenarios listed in Table 5-8. Figure 5-4 shows these model boundaries superimposed on the July, 1995, Thiessen areas. Using the model boundaries shown in Figure 5-4, the field-measured dissolved plume mass was estimated from the Thiessen areas to be approximately 18 and 19 kg using the small and larger boundaries, respectively. This dissolved TOE mass closely matches the mass associated with the preferred input combination, and supports the validity and representativeness of the calibrated modeling results for Site 45/57. 5-22 Final Report 12/95 Table 5-8. Predicted dissolved TOE mass for range of input values forX and Co,. Co x Mass (gg/L) (l /d) (kg) - 0.0015 20 91,979 0.0060 20 0.0170 19 0.0010 28 92,791 0.0041 27 0.01 10 28 0.0011 26 93,134 0.0042 27 0.0120 26 0.0013 23 96,242 0.0050 24 0.0140 24 0.0005 19 33,394 0.0020 19 0.0056 18 0.0011 19 68,525 0.0046 18 0.0130 18 0.0006 19 39,101 0.0026 17 0.0070 18 ( ' ~~~~~~~~~~~5-23 Final Report 9~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~29 Figure 5-4. July, 1995, Thiessen areas at Site 45/57 showing model boundaries used to verify model predictions for dissolved plume TCE mass. ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~5-24 Final Report 12/95 5.4.6 Results of Degraded TOE Mass Predictions The degraded TOE mass predicted from model calculations is the difference between the predicted mass of TOE in the dissolved plume With no degradation, i.e., X = Old, and the predicted mass with a specific value of a model calibrated X. For example, the simulation for X = Old and Co = 39,101 gg/L resulted in a predicted dissolved TOE plume mass of 439 kg, while the simulation for X = 0.0026/d resulted in a predicted mass of 17 kg (Table 5-8), for a total TOE mass degraded of 422 kg (Table 5-9) during the 40 year life of the source and resultant plume. Table 5-9%shows the results of model predictions of total TOE mass degraded for the range of X and C. input values determined in the calibration procedure. Figure 5-5 shows the predicted concentrations along the the plume centerline for the X = Old scenario, along with the measured TOE ground water data from both PNL and UWRL sampling efforts, and the calibrated centerline concentration predicted for the preferred input combination. From inspection of Figure 5-5 it is evident that the no degradation scenario does not fit the TOE ground water data observed at Site 45/57 from 1992 through 1995. Based on a predicted mass of TOE degraded over the 40 year simulation period of from approximately 45 to 2,500 kg, the expected total mass of DOE produced through dechlorination is approximately 30 to 1,800 kg using the stoichiometric relationship described in Equation 5.18. This total DOE mass is distributed between the soil and ground water phases based on DOE's distribution coefficients and resultant aquifer retardation factors. The Kd values for cis-DCE and trans-DOE were estimated to be 0.21 L/kg and 0.31 L/kg, respectively, using Equation 5.7. The retardation factors resulting from these Kd values were 2.1 and 2.6, respectively, using Equation 5.4. The conversion from total mass to dissolved ground water mass can be given by Equation 5.21 as: dissolved R (.1 where MdissoNved = dissolved mass, M; and Mtot.i = total mass, M. 5-25 Final Report 12/95 Table 5-9. Predicted total TCE mass degraded for range of input values for X and Co. Mass Co Degraded- (ggIL) (lI d) (kg) 0.0015 152 91,979 0.0060 1,013 0.0170 2,392 0.0010 146 92,791 0.0041 1,015 0.01 10 2,404 0.0011 148 93,134 0.0042 1,019 0.0120 2,415 0.0013 157 96,242 0.0050 1,057 0.0140 2,499 0.0005 44 33,394 0.0020 356 0.0056 857 0.0011 109 68,525 0.0046 752 0.0130 1,778 0.0006 54 39,101 0.0026 422 0.0070 1,007 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~5-26 Final Report 12/95 Figure 5-5. GraphicalOutput of model results for zero degradation iorate~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o.e water data by collectedPNL in 1992, and f he UWRL from 1993 t 2o195 ar also shown. ~ ~ ~ * MRI~H~t BaeI nEuain522 h rdcedms fdisleAC ra g iM~sp4omes d f o 1 5 t 5 k a e nt e a p r nt d g a a i n o 5 t Fopaigure5-5 GraphicaleoutputdofmodeltresultxfortzeroDderadationtrat vleandprfereaipu combiassetionsenarios Fiel dentaiermitine The ground ranged frome 11.5 tsocit857thaqifrkgld basedthpaetdgradtoundo on 45ator over thnenetimatedo40 yeasrlietieodhesucat Site 45/57inJl,19. Asalaon 5.47 ntemeiatPodut assBaanc Clcuaton Final Report 12/95 Table 5-10. Results of mass balance calculations for TOE degradation and DOE intermediate product formation based on ground water concentration data observed at Site 45/57 in July, 1995.. Predicted TOE Expected Total Observed Total Mass Mass Degraded DOE Mass cis-DOE, trans-DOE, (kg) Produced (kg) R = 2.1 (kg) R = 2.6 (kg) 44 to 2,499 30 to 1,800 1.3 0.50 of vinyl, chloride and ethylene was also detected in the July, 1995, sampling event. Since these compounds have been shown to be daughter products of reductive TOE dlechlorination, their detection is significant relative to evidence of TOE degradation. Vinyl chloride and ethylene levels at the site were low, however, being equivalent to only 0.34 and 0.66 kg of degraded TOE, respectively. It is evident then, that their inclusion with the DOE isomers has no overall effect on the closure of the mass balance. Table 5-10 shows that the mass of TOE degradation by-products is much less than that predicted based on estimated TOE degrdddtion which has apparently occurred over time at the site. This. could be due to either "gaps' in the monitoring system, particularly near the source area, or due to further, rapid degradation of the by-products formed from TOE dlechlorination. With the installation of extensive sampling locations near the source area of Site 45/57 in July, 1995, it appears that the lack of high concentrations of TOE degradation by-products is not due to an'inability to locate and detect them. The July, 1995, sampling event provides conclusive evidence that TOE degradation by-products are not accumulating at the site. The small amounts of dissolved vinyl chloride and ethylene observed during the July, 1995, sampling event suggest that conversion of the DOE isomers to VC and ethylene is occurring at Site 45/57. Since VC and ethylene are rapidly degraded in aerobic environments, they would not be expected to persist once in contact with oxidizing environments either 5-28 Final Report 12/95 within the aquifer or in the unsaturated zone. Investigation of the "near source" area, i.e., within 10 to 30 m of 45MW08, provided by the July, 1995, sampling data resolved this issue of "missing' degradation product mass in the Site 45/57 plume, suggesting that indeed, these transformation products are being assimilated within the aquifer and unsaturated zone once they are produced from TOE dechlorination reactions. 5.4.8 Results of Source Lifetime Predictions The lifetime of the source that remains at Site 45/57, based on the current mass flux rate of TOE out of the source and apparent TOE degradation within the plume, was estimated in order to determine whether source removal would significantly reduce the time required for site clean-up. The total moss of contamination in the source area was estimated, along with the mass flux of TOE out of the source, so that source lifetime calculations could be made. The total mass in the source area, assuming that no non-aqueous phase liquid exists within the source area, is described by rearrangement 6f Equation 5.21 as: - Mdissolved .(.2 The mass flux out of the source area is given by Fquation 5.23: Flux Rate = q A C (5.23) 1 where Flux Rate =mass flux, M T-; q = Darcian flux (pore water velocity x porosity), L V1; A =cross sectional area, L2; and C = source area dissolved concentration, M L-3. Once the total mass in the source and mass flux out of the source are known, the source lifetime can be estimated as follows: SourceLifetime total(5.24 Souce ifeime= Flux Rate (.4 K ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5-29 Final Report ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 When Equations 5.22 through 5.24 are combined, a simplified equation for the predicted remaining source lifetime results. Equation 5.25 clearly illustrates the assumption of this method that the source is dissolved contaminant in equilibrium with aquifer solids. Source Lifetime- disle CV-RGL L (5.25) qAC vO0A C v60A C .Ytr R where L), = source length in the direction of groundwater flow, L. The total mass of TOE in the source area was estimated by assuming a source area length of 15 m in the direction of ground water flow (half the distance between downgradient, contaminated sampling points, and upgradienf, uncontaminated monitoring locations in the UWRL monitoring network), and contaminant velocities ranging from 0.005 to 0.07 m/d, with a mean contaminant velocity of 0.04 m/d. Using Equation 5.25, the source lifetime is predicted to range from 0.6 to 8.2 years, with a mean estimated lifetime of 1.9 years. The results of Equation 5.25 imply that the source will exhaust itself in less than 10 years, and perhaps as little as 1 year, based on the source configuration and source area concentration assumptions stated. above. The assumption of a dissolved source in equilibrium with aquifer solids is critical to the validity of this source lifetime estimation procedure. If the TOE is present in either the unsaturated zone, the capillary fringe, or present as residual saturation (i.e., small globules trapped in aquifer pores) the predicted source lifetime could increase significantly. Since, however, no evidence of contamination in these forms exists based on historical information and soil core and ground water data collected in this study, these calculations should provide reasonable initial estimates of the potential source lifetime at Site 45/57. The source lifetime estimate can be used to determine the potential effectiveness of such active remediation strategies as source removal on the overall length of time required for aquifer restoration. A comparison of the projected source lifetime versus the time required for plume assimilation once the source is removed provides necessary information regarding the applicability of source removal at Site 45/57. The effects of 5-30 Final Report 12/95 source removal on the projected total lifetime of the TCE plume underlying Site 45/57, accounting for the source lifetime, are discussed below. 5.4.9 Results of a Source Removal Scenario As indicated above, source removal was simulated by superimposing the results of the calibrated model using the input parameters C0 and T + At and the results of the model with CO (source removal) = -C,, and T(source removal) = At. This was accomplished by adding the predicted concentration from each scenario for each node. Table 5-1 1 shows the results of the source removal simulations for all of the input parameters determined in the model calibration. Table 5-1 1 shows that the time required for the maximum concentration to drop below 5 gg/L varied widely (1 to 40 years) based on the contaminant velocity, and hence the range of degradation rates that were found to provide model calibration to observed field data. However, the range of required times for aquifer restoration given a specific contaminant velocity was small. For example, at the mean contaminant velocity of 0.04 mn/d, which produces the mean degradation rate for each Co scenario, the range of required aquifer clean-up times was between 2 to 10 years. Table 5-1 1 also shows the predicted source lifetime estimated in the previous section. This is shown to illustrate the relationship between source lifetime and plume lifetime which is based on the dependence of both parameters on contaminant velocity. This relation~ship shows that in general, source removal would be expected to teduce the average time for aquifer restoration by at most 12 to 30 percent, and by a maximum of 40 percent under maximum contaminant velocity conditions when the total aquifer restoration time is projected to be only 2 years. Table 5-1 1 also shows the distance the maximum concentration travels and the maximum extent of the TOE contamination above 5 gg/L as predicted by model simulations using the range of Co and X values generated from model calibration. It is noteworthy that unlike the time estimates, these values were relatively constant for all contaminant velocities. The preferred input combination resulted in a TOE plume that would exhaust itself in 5 to 8 years after source removal, at which time the 5-31 Final Report 12/95 Table 5-1 1. Results of source removal simulations using the range of C. and K values generated from model calibration to Site 45/57 field data. Time for Distance Plume Source co X Cma~x <5 ktg/L to Peak Length Lifetime (gg/L) (lI d) (lI d) (in) (in) (yr) 0.0015 l0 tolS5 70 110 4.1 91,979 0.0060 3 to 5 70 120 1.0 0.0170 1 to 2 80 120- 0.4 0.0010 20 to 25 100 160 4.1 92,791 0.0041 5 to 6 100 160 1.0 0.0110 2 to 3 90 160 0.4 0.0011 20 to 25 80 160 4.1 93,134 0.0042 5 to 6 100 160 1.0 0.0120 1 to 2 90 150 0.4 0.0013 15 to 20 70 130 4.1 96,242 0.0050 4 to 5 80 140 1.0 0.0140 1 to 2 100 130 0.4 0.0005 30 to 40 160 280 4.1 33,394 0.0020 8 to 10 160 280 1.0 0.0056 3 to 4 180 270 0.4 0.0011 15to 20 80 150 4.1 68,525 0.0046 4 to 5 80 140 1.0 0.0130 1to 2 100 140 0.4' 0.0006 30 to 35 140 240 4.1 39,101 0.0026 5to 8 130 220- 1.0 0.0070 2 to 3 140 230 0.4 maximum TOE concentration would occur 130 in from the former source. In addition, TCE contamination would be found a maximum distance of 220 m downgradient from the former source area. Figures 5-6 and 5-7 graphically show this TOE plume centerline concentration response 3, 5 and 8 years following complete source removal at Site 45/57. A plan view of the plume at time t = 0, 3 and 7 years following complete source removal using the preferred input combination are presented in Figures 5- 8 through 5-1 0, respectively. 5-32 Final Report 12/95 Fiue56 rpia otu fmdlrslt fpu ecneWn conentatonsfo prferedinptcmiaio cnio3 n er F~~olwn opet orermvl 25 Figre -. Gahclotu fmde eut fpu ecnel cocntainsfrprfredipt o biain c nri easfllwn Ia ~ cmleesucermvl ------5--- Final Report 12/95 CL V 2 ~0 0 C) LO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. uj ~ U,-d 0-~~~~~~~~~ 0 ~CL ~ ~ ~~. d 0 ) 0 r) U - 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~U, n. Cr)~~~~~~~~~~~~ 75 00 M Li LO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0' ~~~~0~ ~ ~ - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~U- )~~~~~~~~~C *- a 00 Lu) at) U)~~~~~~ U)~~~~~~~~~~ * 2~~~~~~~~~~~E WOa co -Uc) ~~~ ~~~~~~~2; 4 00) It) a. ~~~~~~~~~-CD- C-, ~ fl~~ ~~~~~~ a- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~L- 6E U,~~~~~~~~~~ Final Report 12/95 *0 a) 0 C)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CC C CI4 E0~~~~~4 u 2 E <~ C-D U) C)~~~~~C CD ~~~~~~~~~-Li- e),~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 0-< OI) at LI)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L S ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ C;a- 0' 5-35~~~~~~~ 0) Final Report 12/95 a) oaa C4 -E E - a) < 0E 2~~~~~~C Cl, In - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~a) tO L..~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (N -u 0U, 0) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V a-~~~~~~~~~~~~a N 2 0 0R S~ ~~ '0 C-~~~~~~~~~~~C C -~-3 Final Report 12/95 The plume plane view plots graphically show the effect of source area depletion or removal, i.e., the movement of an ever shrinking contaminant plume downgradient from the former source area over time. At At = 7 years, i.e., 7 years after source removal, the TOE plume centerline concentration is still predicted to be above its MCL of 5 gg/L, with the plume center of mass having moved approximately 130 mn downgradient from 45MW08. TOE centerline concentrations are projected to drop below the MCL at At = 8 years. At At =8 years, the maximum centerline concentration is projected to equal 3.5 RigIL at a distance of approximately 130 m downgradient from the source. Ihis result, along with the estimate of remaining source lifetime, suggests that source removal alone would be expected to reduce the lifetime of the TCE plume by only approximately 1 year, or 12.5 percent (Table 5-1 1), indicating that source removal, though expensive and problematic to implement, would not be an effective approach for expediting remediation of the ground water plume at Site 45/57. 5.4. 10 Hydrocarbon Degradation Rate Assessment As indicated in Section 4, a concentrated hydrocarbon plume was discovered immediately north of the TCE source area when near-source monitoring points were installed at Site 45/57 in July, 1995. This plume appears to be highly localized and appears to have a longitudinal extent of less than 90 m. Since this plume was not detected prior to the July sampling event, only limited model calibration to the July data could be carried out. The aquifer hydraulic characteristics and source area dimensions defined through the comprehensive TOE model calibration effort described above were used as input for the hydrocarbon modeling. These parameters included the mean values for aquifer dispersivity (aXL = 0.53 m, cxr = 2.16 m, az = 0.001 in), ground water velocity (v = 0.07 m/d) and source dimensions (Z = 3 m and z = 1 in). Using these input values and calculated retardation factors for the hydrocarbon contaminants of interest, the ADRE solution shown in Equation 5.2 was solved by substitution until the predicted centerline concentrations matched the field-measured data collected at Site 45/57 in July, 1995. Table 5-12 is a summary of the measured centerline contaminant concentration data to which the model was calibrated. K ~~~~~~~~~~~~5-37 Final Report 12/95 Table 5-12. Hydrocarbon centerline concentration data measured at Site 45/57 in July, 1995, used for model calibration. Units are gg/L. Values in parentheses indicate downgradient distance from source well. SP29 SP32 SP35 SP38 Compound (0 m) (11Im) (28 m) (89 m} Benzene 1,062 517 2.8 0.49 Toluene 5,874 1,051 5.3 0.66 Ethylbenzene 193 110 1.0 0.0 p-Xylene 1,341 682 2.3 - 0.0 1,3-Dimethylpentane 1,953 176 5.3 0.15 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 132 57.5 1.4 0.36 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 318 123 0.78 0.27 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene 216 123 0.0 0.0 A number of simulations were run using different time intervals since the contaminant release in an attempt to fit the measured centerline data. it became apparent from this effort that in order to fit the model to the field data, a short modeling time duration was necessary. The optimal time since contaminant release for modeling purposes appears to be 3 years, suggesting that this release is relatively recent. Using this simulation timne, the model fitting effort resulted -in estimated contaminant degradation rates that are summarized in Table 5-13. A graphical summary of these final calibration results are presented in Figures 5-1 i to 5-18. Results presented in Table 5-13 indicate that of the BTEX compounds, only benzene and toluene show degradation rates greater than zero. Tracer compounds (1,3-dimethylpentane and the trimethylbenzene isomers) were quantified in the July, 1995 sampling event and of the two compound displaying significant degradation, their rates were 40 to 85 percent lower than those of benzene and toluene. Overall these results indicate that a recent hydrocarbon release has occurred north of the TCE source area, and that degradation is indicated for both benzene and toluene under natural aquifer conditions. Because of the apparently shodt time since contaminant release, those compound with high retardation factors, R greater than 3, have apparently not yet .9 ~~~~~~~~~~~5-38 Final Report 12/95 Table 5-13. Hydrocarbon degradation rates generated from model calibration for the July, 1995, data collected at Site 45/57. Degradation Rate Compound (lI d) Benzene 0.0025 Toluene 0.0037 Ethylbenzene 0.0 p-Xylene 0.0 1,3-Dimethylpentane 0.0015 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 0.00055 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.0 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene 0.0 1.200 Simulation Parameters: o-.. 1,000 Degradation rate = O.0025/d, 800 ~~~~~~~R2.2, t3yr C C DO0 2~~~~~~~~~oo * ~~~~~~~Field Measured Dat 40- ~~~~ 400 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~Predicted Dt 0, 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Distance Downgradient of Source Area (tt) Figure 5-1 1. Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for benzene data collected July, 1995. 5-39 Final Report 12/95 6,000 Simulation Parameters: SZ 5,000 Degradation rate =O.00371d. -4,000Rz2t= r 2 =a3,000 * Hield Measured Data ~2,000 \- -- Predicted Data =0 b0 1.000 4 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Distance Downgradient of Source Area (It) Figure 5-12. Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for toluene data collected July, 1995. 200 180 Simulation Parameters: t160 '~Degradation rate = Old. ~~~ 140 ~~~~~R=6.9 t=3 yr oC 120 " ______120 (Dio 00 Field Measured Data CC80 U60~ ----- Predicted Doat CC 6 OUo 40 .c 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Distance Downgrodient of Source Area (ft) Figure 5-13. Graphical output of mode! results of plume centerline concentrations for ethylbenzene data collected July, 1995. 5-40 Final Report 12/95 S-1.200 LSimulation Parameters: o t ~~~~~~~Degradation rate = Old, cm _ 0 R 7.0, t 3yr 8600 * Field Measured Data 600 Cu 400Predicted Data c 400 >L- 200 I 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 150 200 Distance Downgradient of Source Area (ft) Figure 5-14. Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for p-xylene data collected July, 1995. n-a 2.000 1,80 Simulation Parameters: .3-~1600 Degradation rater= 0.001 5/d, C. a'65 1,200 ______C1,000 * Field Measure7d Data >5C 800 z 600 Predicted Data .E6 400 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Distance Downgradient of Source Area (ff) Figure 5-15. Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for 1.3-dimethylpentane data collected July, 1995. 5-41 Final Report 12/95 *~~~~~~~Simulation 140 Parameters: 30 12 Degradation rate = 0.00055/d, C100 I R 6.1, t3yr 80 * Field Measured Data -u60 -o ----- Predicted Data 0(J40 I ES 20 0 20 .40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Distance Downgradient of Source Area (ft) Figure 5-16. Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene data collected July, 1995. ~' 350 2~~~ ~~~ 300 Simulation Parameters: o A Degradation rate = Old, 0C-25 I R=7.4, t=3yr 50 S200 I *~~~~~~~~~~~~Field Measured Data 3150 .Q 4 -- Predicted Dot 405 C' 0' . 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Distance Downgradient of Source Area (ft) Figure 5-17. Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene data collected July, 1995. 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~5-42 Final Report 12/95 c 250 0 I ~ ~~~~~~SimulationParameters: O - 200 ,, Degradation rate = Old, o C R6.8.t=3 yr N a 150 ______*Field Measured Data] $. 100 0 U ~~~~~~~~~~~-----Predicted Data 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Distance Downgradient of Source Area (ft) Figure 5-18. Graphical output of model results of plume centerline concentrations for 1,2,3-trimn-ethylbenzene data collected July, 1995. reached steady-state conditions. Both benzene and toluene appear to have reached steady-state, and intrinsic remediation process appear to be assimilating these compounds within 100 m of the source area. - The zero degradation rates indicated for ethylbenzene and p-xylene could be problematic, however, both compounds have not been detected above their maximum contaminant levels of 700 and 10,000 gg/L, respectively, and they should therefore not currently be considered a risk to the ground water resource. As indicated above, it is suggested that this area of the site be routinely monitored in the future to verify and update benzene and toluene assimilation reactions taking place below the site. K ~~~~~~~~~~~~5-43 Final Report () ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 SECTION 6 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES This section presents a review of ground wafer remedial alternatives for Site 45/57 that were developed in the OUs 3, 4 and 5 RILFS document (USAF, 1994b), and compares these alternatives with the detailed evaluation of intrinsic remediation described in this report. The intent of the comparison is to determine if intrinsic remediaition is an appropriate and cast-effective plume management approach far Site 45/57. 6.1 REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA The evaLuation criteria used to identify the most appropriate remedial alternative for sail and ground water contamination at Site 45/57 were adapted from those recommended by the USEPA for selection of remedies for Superfund sites (OSWER Directive 9902.3). The criteria used included: (1) long-term effectiveness and permanence, (2) technical and administrative implementability, and (3) relative cost. 6.1.1 Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence Each remedial technology or remedial alternative (combination of remedial technologies, including institutional controls) was analyzed to determine how effectively each would minimize ground water plume expansion and reduce plume concentrations at Site 45/57. The expected technical effectiveness for each technology was based an case studies conducted under similar circumstances. The ability to minimize potential threats to human health, the environment, and facility operation were also considered. Potential exposure pathways at Site 45/57 have been described in previous reports (HLA, 1989). Future exposures were considered in the evaluation of permanence, along with the ability of the technology to reduce overall contaminant mass and to reduce contaminant toxicity. The time required for implementation and until protection is achieved was estimated as was the long-term reliability of each technology. The assessment of potential failure(s), and the k ~~impact(s) of such failure(s) on the effectiveness of the remedial approach was also carried out as part of this technology evaluation. 6-1 Final Report 12/95 6.1.2 Implementability The technical implementability of each remedial alternative was evaluated in terms of technical feasibility and state-of-the-practice. Difficulties in implementation were weighed against potential benefits of mass and toxicity reduction. Requirements relating to long-term operations, including monitoring and institutional controls, are described. Details on administrative feasibility in terms of the likelihood of public acceptance and the ability to obtain necessary approvals are also discussed. 6.1.3 Cost The total costs of each alternative, including that for intrinsic remediation, were estimated using present worth analysis based on data presented in the OUs 3, 4 and 5 RI/FS document (USAF, 1994b). This allows comparison of the relative cost of the alternatives on an equal basis. Capital costs, operating costs, and the long-term cast of site monitoring and institutional controls were considered. An annual inflation factor of 5%was applied in the calculations of present value of future activities for all alternatives 6.2 Factors Affecting Alternative Development. Several factors were considered during the identification and screening of remedial alternatives for soil and ground water contamination at Site 45/57. Factors considered included: the objectives of the intrinsic remediation study: contaminant, soil and ground water properties; depth and extent of contamination; present and future land use; and potential exposure pathways. This section briefly describes each of these parameters and how they were used to evaluate potential remedial alternatives for the site. 6.2.1 Objectives of Intrinsic Remediafion Study The objective of the intrinsic remediation study was to determine if indigenous microorganisms are actively degrading TCE and hydrocarbon components, and effectively containing the TOE and hydrocarbon plumes under natural conditions found within the aquifer at Site 45/57. This study was conducted to accumulate evidence that allows the 9 ~~unequivocal determination that intrinsic remediation is taking place at a 6-2 Final Report *1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 rate and to an extent that adoption of this plume management approach would be considered protective of public health and the environment. Because the study is focused on quantifying natural processes taking place within the saturated zone, and because it appears that the mass of contaminant at Site 45/57 is primarily associated with the capillary fringe and saturated zones, not the vadlose zone, specific technologies applicable to these aquifer regions were the primary focus of this evaluation. 6.2.2 Contaminant Properties The primary contaminant of interest at Site 45/57 is TOE, with the localized BTEX plume being of secondary importance to the overall selection of a remedial alternative. The source of the contamination is not well defined, and could consist of globules of free phase TOE trapped in the saturated and/or capillary fringe as residual saturation, although soil and ground water data from the site suggest only sorbed TOE remains at the site. The physicochernical properties of TOE limit the effectiveness of many remedial technologies if it is found as free phase product at a site. The physicochemical properties of a compound play a significant role in assessing its distribution and fate within the environment, as well as the risk it poses to both human and ecosystem receptors. When evaludting the properties of any given compound, it is important to remember that most of the information available is for compounds in their pure form. Many contaminated sites contain solutions of one or more regulated contaminants along with a variety of other organic compounds. The properties of solutions containing the compounds of interest may be significantly different than those of pure compounds they contain. 6.2.2.1 Properties affecting TOE mobility The EPA publication "Subsurface Contamination Reference Guide" provides a summary of the important physicochemical properties which play a role in the fate and transport of contaminants. The following is a brief summary of these properties, with examples given for the compound TOE. Table 6-1 lists the physicochemical properties of the chlorinated hydrocarbon compounds of interest at Site 45/57. 6-3 Final Report 12/95 Table 6-1. Physicochemical properties of chlorinated hydrocarbon compounds of interest at EAFB Site 45/57. ...... M iig.. Aqueous- i: -Vapor --- Point Pressure Compound (0C) (mg/L) i (mm Hg) PCE -22(5). 150(1)141 .....CPE ...... -..87[5) 1000 11- 5...... cis-DCE...... 8 [5l...... 30oNI) ...... 200f5). ..vc.....V ..... 57(5) .. . 1100(i) 2 0 ( 1,,I-TCA ?324¶...?Q ) o 1,12-TCA .. -...3615)_ 45005)...... 1812)...... ...... Dynam ic ...... constant..... Denity ....V.. iscosity . cornpound (atm-m3/molI (/cm3) (c PCE 2.27E-2(1)-_ _.. ... 1.625(1) ...... 0.89(1)...... TCE 8&92E-3(1) -J 1421 cis-DCE...... 7::15E ...4 )0....1) VC 6t5E.1(.1) 0.9121 (2) no 1,1, I TCA 2.76E-3(1)j .. 1.325(1).3 088(] ..12TCAL 1.17E-3{6)* 1.4434)012. Compound (cs) Log Kow i Log Koc .PCE 3.4111...... 2.....)...... TCE 03~?iP. 2• 11.) 2...... 1...... cis-DCE 0.364(...... 11 ...... no....6---...... 09 1 ...... 1,,I4CA 0.647(8) ?.4N1 ) ...... 2.18(1). 1,1,2-TCA ... _M0.824.. (8) ...... _2.17 3)_1.75 7)_.. *mneasured at 2500 Table references: 1. Arthur D. Little, Inc. (1985); 2. USGS (1989); 3. USEPA (1988); 4. Sax and Lewvis (1987); 5. Verschueren (1 983: 6. USEPA (1986); and 7. USEPA (1990). 6-4 Final Report 12/95 Melting point-- .The melting point of a compound indicates the physical state of a pure compound at a given temperatures. TOE would likely be found at temperatures above its melting point in most natural environments and therefore would exist in a liquid phase. This liquid phase is likely to be relatively mobile as a dense, non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL). Water solubility- Water solubility governs the extent to which a contaminant will partition into the aqueous phase. More soluble contaminants would be expected to migrate with ground water further in the subsurface than less soluble compounds. TOE has a high aqueous solubility, suggesting a high potential for migration. Vapor pressure-- The vapor pressure of a compound indicates the extent to which it will volatilize. The tendency of a compound to volatilize rises proportionately with its vapor pressure. As can be seen from Table 6-1, TOE has a low vapor pressure compared to compounds such as vinyl chloride. Its vapor pressure is, however, high enough that TOE is considered a volatile compound and will be found in the vapor phase under certain conditions. Henry's Law Constant-- Henry's Law Constant indicates the extent to which a compound will volatilize from an aqueous solution. The Henry's Law Constant is directly proportional to the vapor pressure of the compound and inversely proportional to ifs water solubility. The larger a compound's Henry's Law Constant, the greater will be its tendency to volatilize from an aqueous solution. Since TOE has a relatively low Henry's Law Constant, a greater proportion of its mass would be expected to remain in the aqueous phase than for compounds such as vinyl chloride. Density- The density of a compound indicates its mass per unit volume for a pure material, isa critical parameter in determining whether it is heavier or lighter than water, and greatly affects how the pure compound migrates within the soil following its release into the environment. The density of water is approximately 1 g/CM 3 while that of TOE is 1.46 g/CM 3. Since the density of TOE is greater than that of water it is considered a DNAPL. It will tend to migrate vertically under the influence of gravity in an aquifer K ~~~system if it isreleased as a pure liquid. 6-5 Final Report 12/95 Dynamic viscosity- Dynamic viscosity indicates the ease With which a compound will flow in its pure form. The mobility of the compound in a pure form is inversely proportional to its dynamic viscosity. The dynamic viscosity of ICE is 0.57 centipoise (cp), which, compared to the dynamic viscosity of water (I cp), indicates that pure liquid TOE will flow more slowly than water. Kinematic viscosity-- The kinematic viscosity of a compound takes into account the density of the compound and indicates the ease with which a pufe compound will percolate through the subsurface. Kinematic viscosity is especially important with regard to DNAPLs. In general, the lower the kinematic viscosity of a fluid, the mare likely that fluid is to migrate vertically in the subsurface. The kinematic viscosity of TOE is0.39 centistokes (cs) compare to a kinematic viscosity of 1 cs for water, indicating that pure TOE would tend to freely migrate vertically through the subsurface. Octanol/Water partition coefficient (Kow)- The octanol/water partition coefficient is a measure of the extent to which a contaminant partitions between octanol and water. The Kow indicates the extent to which a compound will sorb to aquifer solids, particularly organic matter. The log Kow of TOE is approximately 2.42, this indicates that TOE is likely to associate with non-polar organic compounds as opposed to waler, reducing its migration rate in an aquifer system significantly (by a factor of 3 to 6 as indicated in Section 5 of-this report) as compared to the pare water velocity. 6.2.2.2 Properties affecting toxicity The nature and extent of health hazards associated-with exposure to chlorinated hydrocarbons depends on their physical and chemical properties as well as their toxicologic properties and the actual pattern of exposure (Ayres and Taylor, 1989; Ballantyne and Sullivan, 1992). A chemical's physical and chemical properties affecting its toxicity are similar to those previously discussed with respect to mobility. Vapor pressure, boiling point, specific gravity (or density), evaporation rate, vapor density and flash point have been identified as important properties indicating,the potential toxicity of a compound and its route(s) of exposure (Ayres and Taylor, 1989). 6-6 Final Report 12/95 The nature and magnitude of a toxic effect once exposure has occurred is affected by the body's metabolism of the toxin and the presence of protective mechanisms (Ballantyne and Sullivan, 1992). Ballantyne and Taylor (1992) detail the mechanisms of metabolism and protective systems known to occur in the human body. 6.2.2.3 Properties affecting transformations The ability of a contaminant to be transformed in the environment depends on properties of both the contaminant and the-environment. Both chemical and biological transformations may be affected by these properties. Chemical transformation may be affected by properties such as the physical structure of the contaminant, temperature, pH, soil mineral content and soil organic matter content. Biological transformations may be affected by properties such as the physical structure of the contaminant, the presence of appropriate electron acceptors, the presence of suitable nutrients, temperature, pH and the availability of substrates. 6.2.2.4 Observations on Mobility Chlorinated hydrocarbons tend to be relatively mobile in the saturated zone due to their relatively high water solubility, the fact that small amounts of these compounds in solution do not significantly increase the density of ground water, and the fact that they are uncharged, non-polar molecules. (Feenstra and Cherry, 1988). If a chlorinated hydrocarbon is released into the ground water at a concentration above its water solubility, it will tend to migrate vertically as a DNAPL. Schwille (1988) stated that the downward migration of a IDNAPL is not significantly affected by horizontal groundwater flow. Hence, a IDNAPL will migrate vertically in the subsurface until it encounters a low permeability layer, at which time it will continue to move in a downward direction with the slope of this confining layer. This migration will continue until the volume of the DNAPL has been exhausted by the retention of a residual saturation phase within the aquifer material (Huling and Weaver, 1991). 6-7 Final Report 12/95 Based on historical soil and ground water data, and observations made during this study, it does not appear that significant amounts of DNAPL were released at the source area at Site 45/57. All available evidence developed from the site data suggests that the plume has been generated from sorbed contaminant or residual saturation in soils in the capillary fringe and shallow saturated zone. 6.2.3 Site-Specific Conditions Two general areas of site-specific conditions were considered in identifying remedial approaches applicable to Site 45/57 for this EE/CA. The first is the physical/chemical characteristics of the site which influence the general appropriateness and applicability of a given remedial alternative, while the second relates to the projected future land uses and potential exposure pathways for the contaminants at the site. Each of these site-specific characteristics are briefly reviewed below as they relate to remedial alternative selection at Site 45/57. 6.2.3.1 Site physical/chemical characteristics Site geology and hydrogeology have a profound affect on the bulk transport of contaminants as well as fluids that are used as part of a remedial technology, i.e., flow of air in a soil vacuum extractidn or bioventing system, recovery rates of ground water well in a pump and treat system, etc. Hydraulic conductivity is a dominant aquifer parameter affecting fluid movement in the subsurface. Slug tests conducted by the UWRL Research Team and by others indicate that the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer underlying Site 45/57 is quite high, being indicative of fine to medium sands with an average value of 45 ft/d. This high hydraulic conductivity is coupled with low hydraulic gradients of only 0.0013 ft/ft across the site making the overall aquifer pore water velocity only 0.23 ft/d. This low pore water velocity has resulted in a contaminant plume with a very small aerial extent and significant natural plume attenuation as indicated in Sections 4 and 5 above. The high hydraulic conductivity measured at Site 45/57 would be expected to enhance the effectiveness of active remedial technologies as fluid flow and movement that could be produced under imposed, high hydraulic gradients would be expected to be significant. With high ground water and soil gas flow rates that could be produced at the site, significant mass movement and rhiass transfer rates could be produced, 6-8 Final Report 12/95 increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of these active remediation techniques above that which could be expected in soil environments with much lower soil conductivities. These high flowrates would require large treatment systems for collected soil gas and ground water, however, making such active systems potentially cost prohibitive. Site aquifer chemical characteristics were detailed as part of this field demonstration and as indicated in Section 4. a significant excess of electron acceptor appears to be available throughout the aquifer for use in the intrinsic remediation of the mass of hydrocarbon c-ontamination that exists at the site. In addition, the oxidation/reduction stale of the aquifer near the apparent source area of TOCE contamination has been documented to favor sulfate reduction and methanogenesis, providing evidence that reductive dechlorination of TOE is also favorable under existing aquifer conditions. This evidence along wiith documented aquifer sorption and ground water transport conditions, and supporting ground water modeling provided in Section 5 suggest the feasibility of an intrinsic remediation plume management approach at Site 45/57. 6.2.3.2 Future land use and potential exposure pathways An exposure assessment identifies the human and ecological receptors that could potentially come into contact with contamination existing'at U site, and the potential exposure routes through which these receptors might be impacted. To have a completed exposure pathway all of the components. I.e., coniaminant source; exposure pathway, and potential receptor, must exist. If,any of the components are missing; the exposure pathway is incomplete and the risk associated with a contaminant release is eliminated. The effectiveness of any remedial alternative with~ respect to risk reduction, then, depends on its effectiveness in eliminating one or more of the -exposure pathway components so that the overall risk from existing contamination iswithin acceptable limits. Assumptions regarding current and future land use at a site form the basis for conducting a representative risk analysis and exposure assessment. Current use at Site 45/57 consists of office and fire station facilities, with additional office spaCe, hangar buildings and maintenance facilities located to the northeast and northwest of the source area. The shallow ground water plume currently lies primarily under open fields between the source area end Building 11183, but is projected to move downgradieni under this building and to the north toward Buildings 11 76 6-9 Final Report 12/95 and 3130 as the source dissipates in the future. The shallow ground water is not currently used for any municipal or industrial purposes, and the site is more than 1 mile west of one of the operating Base water supply wells. Under present land use assumptions potential receptors include both military and civilian workers assigned to work areas in and around Buildings 1176, 1183, 1206, and 3130. Based on the analysis presented in the risk assessment for this site (USAF, 1994b), the important potential routes of exposure are ingestion of, dermal contact with, and inhalation during use of contaminated ground water. However, with the shallow ground water currently not being used for any purpose, this exposure route would be minimal unless contaminated soil and ground water are removed from below the site during construction, excavation or remedial activities. Additional exposures due to recreational use of athletic fields between the fire station Building 1206 and Building 1183 via the soil gas or direct contact with surface soils is considered minimal because of the greater than 5 ft depth to ground water and because of low soil gas concentrations and minimal surface soil contamination even in the source area near 45MW08. Future land use assumptions do not indicate changes in current land use patterns in the long-term, suggesting that current potential receptors will not change in the future. As long as the shallow ground water iSnot used for future municipal or industrial purposes current potential exposure routes should also be the same in the future. The risk assessment carried out as padt of RI/ES for OUs 3, 4 dnd 5 (USAF, 1994b) did consider a future residential use for Site 45/57 as the most conservative risk assessment approach, however, and results from this risk assessment evaluation are summarized in Table 6-2. These findings suggest increased, unacceptable risk from future residential occupation of the site, and institutional controls applied in the source and impacted areas of Site 45/57 should be implemented so that current land use patterns and exposure scenarios are maintained during the life of remedial activities at the site. 6.2.3.3 Remediation goals for shallow soil and ground water Remedial action goals are target, media-specific clean-up levels developed from the findings of the risk assessment process and from an analysis of appropriate regulatory limits for specific contaminants in soil and ground water. The primary contaminants of concern at Site WP45 include TCE. benzene, and lead in ground water above drinking water 6-10 Final Report 12/95 Table 6-2. Summary of cancer risk and Hazard Index estimates for EAFB Site 45/57 from RIIFS for OUs 3, 4 and 5 (USAF, 1994b). Site WP45 Receptor ______~Current Worker IFuture Worker IFuture Resident Hazard Cancer Hazard Cancer Hazard Exposure Pathway Index Risk Index Risk Index Ingestion of ground water <1.OE-08 * 5.50E-06 1.90E-05 * Inhalation during ground water use <1.OE-08 * 8.50E-05 * 1.4OE-04 Inhalation of contaminants from sail c1.OE-08 * 6.20E-07 * .JOE-06 Summatc.ion'for the exposure pathways ___ 6.40E-07 9.I1OE-05 ___ 1.60E-04 ___ *Mt gie in the tables provided With the risk assessment. Site SS57 Rceptor ______Curren Worker Future Worker Future Resident Hazard Cancer Hazard Cancer Hazard Exposure Pathway - Index Risk Index Risk Index Ingestion of ground water <1.OE-08 <0.01 5.,50E-06 0.1 1.90E-04 0.27 Inhalation during ground water use <1.OE-08 <0.01I 5.50E-04 1.2 9.30E-04 1.7 Inhalation at contaminants from soil standards, while at Site SS57 contaminants requiring remediation included fuel components in impacted soils and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and 1.2-dichloroethane in ground water. Of these contaminants identified in the RI/FS (USAF, 1994b), lead at Site WP45 was not included in the scope of this project, and 1.2-dichloroethane was not detected in soil or ground water collected during the study. What remains of concern at Site 45/57 are specific BTEX components and TCF in impacted soil and ground water. Alternative soil clean-up levels and ground water MCLs for the specific compound of concern at Site 45/57 are summarized in Table 6-3. Based on comparison of these values with soil and ground water results from this study and previous soil and ground water investigations at the site, only TOE soil concentrations, and benzene, toluene and TOCE concentrations in impacted ground water in the immediate vicinity of 45MW08 near the TOE source area are above these regulatory action limits. Specific remediation goals at Site 45/57 then include the prevention human exposure to potentially hazardous levels of contaminants, iLe, benzene, toluene and TOE, in shallow ground water, through the 6-11 Final Report 12/95 Table 6-3. Summary of alternative clean-up levels for soils and contaminant drinking water MOLs appropriate for EAFB Site 45/57 (USAF, 1994b). Alternative Driinking Soil Clean-Up, Water MCL Comp ound Level (mg/kg~ Jg.. TCqE 0.4 . 5 Benzene 0.1 5 .Tolupene 79 1,000 Ethylbenzene ...... 140 700 Xylenes 760 10.000..... reduction of these contaminant levels to below their respective MCL values, and minimizing human exposure to impacted soils within the source area near 45MW08. Again, based on the extent and magnitude of media impact, the primary focus of remedial activities should be the containment and control of TOE in the shallow aquifer below the site. 6.3 SUMMARY OF REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY SCREENING A number of remedial technologies were identified, screened-and evaluated for implementation at Site 45/57 for the containment and remediation of impacted soils and ground water (USAF, 19?Ab). A range of technologies including the no action alternative, a containment alternative, a treatment alternative, and an alternative eliminating a long- term site requirement was considered in the RI/FS document (USAF, 1994b). This suite of technologies was screened based on their effectiveness, implemnentability and relative cost, resulting in a final list of alternatives that was subjected to a more detailed evaluation process. Table 6-4 summarizes the shodt-list of technologies developed for Site 45/57 in the RI/FS document plus the intrinsic remediation plume management approach evaluated in this study, rating each against the criteria established for remedial actions in the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The shodi-list of appropriate remedial technologies from the OUs 3, 4 and 5 RI/FS included the No-Action alternative required by the NCP, Bioventing for source area impacted soil remediation, a Containment option, and Excavation and off-site treatment of source area soils and control of contaminated ground water. Each of these alternatives is 6512 Final Report 12/95 Table 6-4. Summary of remedial alternatives appropriate for EAFB Site 45/57 and their achievement of various NCP goals (USAF, 1994b). ______No Intrinsic Cditedia Action Biovent Contain Excavate Remediation Overall orotection of Humon Health and the Environment X 0 0 6 0 Compliance with ARARs x o a ___ a Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence x o o e ______Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume through Treatment )C 0 0 0 Short-Term Effectiveness X 0 0 ____ 0 Implemen lability S 0 0 x0 Cost S 0 0 X 0 Legond: S Best o Good o Poor X Worst described, along with the intrinsic remediotion option, in more detail in the next section with regard to how each would be implemented at Site 45/57. 6.4 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES Detailed descriptions of the four short-listed remedial alternatives identified for Site 45/57 was presented in the OUs 3, 4 and 5 RI/FS (USAF, 1994b) and are summarized in this section. The descriptions identify the technologies, describe the process options, and present assumptions that provide the basis for the individual and comparative analyses presented in the RI/FS. Information on the assumptions and calculation~s used in the development of the alternatives is provided in the RI/FS, and the reader is referred to this document for more details. The No Action alternative is chosen to represent the baseline risk without corrective action as required by the NCP. The other three alternatives provide a range of controls with verifying time frames to achieve the remedial goals identified in Table 6-3. All of the alternatives that were discussed in the RI/FS were stated to require long-term management of the site due to uncertainties that exist regarding the exact nature and extent of contaminated soils within the source area. 6.4.1 Alternative 1 - No Action Alternative (USAF, 1994b) Evaluation of the No Action alternative is required by the MOP to K ~~provide a baseline against which other alternatives can be compared. Under the No Action alternative, no remedial measures would be 6-13 Final Report 12/95 implemented at Site 45/57. The No Action alternative would not achieve the remedial action objectives for Site 45/57 within 30 years. Trichioroethylene-contaminated soils would continue to act as a contaminant source to ground waler from the area of the old maintenance shop-off the northeast corner of Building 1206, and BTEX- contaminated soils would continue to release contaminants to the ground water from beneath the site. Accordingly, the time required to meet the MCLs for TOE in ground water without any source control or ground water remedial action was estimated to be 90 years or greater for TOE, depending on the extent of the contaminant source. Initial estimates were provided in the RI/FS for the BTEX ground water plume exceeding MOLs for greater than 40 years. The estimated lifetimes for both the TCE and hydrocarbon plumes should be modified downward based on model calibration and long-term plume predictions carried out in this study which show natural assimilation of these compounds within the aquifer system below Site 45/57. 6.4.2 Alternative 2 - Source Control Through SVE and Bioventing (USAF, 1994b) This alternative focuses on reducing the contaminant source area through vapor extraction and bioventing. The TOE-contaminated soils in the source area located near the old maintenance shop on the northea~t corner of fire station (Building 1206) would be addressed through soil vapor extraction. The BTEX-contaminated sails beneath the-site would be addressed through bioventing. Ground water contaminants would be allowed to attenuate naturally over lime. Institutional controls would be provided to reduce potential risks from the use of contaminated ground water. The movement of contaminants in ground water at Site 45/57 would be monitored. Soil vapor extraction (SVE) would be used to reduce the concentrations of TOE in the subsurface soils in the area of the old maintenance shop off the northeast corner of the fire station. This area is the suspected source of the TOE contamination found in the wells downgradient from this area. Conceptually, the SVE system was designed to use five vertical extraction wells on an approximately 60-ft spacing to remove contaminated soil vapor from the assumed 120- by 120-ft target source area. Extracted soil vapor would be treated using vapor-phase 9 ~~carbon prior 'to discharge. The area is currently planted in grass and 6-14 Final Report 12/95 would not be capped as part of the operation. The system would not be extensively weatherized, and due to weather restrictions, the system may operate only about 6 months per year. Drill cuttings from -the installation of the extraction wells would be tested for TOE levels and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. For purposes of the FS cost estimate, it was assumed that the cuttings would be disposed as hazardous waste at an off-site hazardous waste disposal facility. Based on assumed contaminant concentrations and expected contaminant removal rates, it was estimated that the SVE system would have to operate in this area for 1 to 3 years (6 months per year) to- meet the soil clean-up levels for TOE and related compounds. Bioventing would be used to address the BTEX concentrations present in subsurface soils beneath the site. The original area of suspected hydrocarbon contamination west of the fire station was not detected during this study, however, the localized hydrocarbon plume identified in the July, 1995, sampling event could be considered for remediation using this technology. Conceptually, the bioventing system would use 20 vertical injection swells on approximately 50-ft centers to provide oxygen to the assumed 200- by 250-ft contaminated zone to enhance in-situ biodegradation. The target area is paved and no additional capping is planned for this remedial action. No extraction wells would be used as part of the bioventing system, and no attempt would be made to caiitufie the injected air for treatment. The system was expected to operate year- round. Drill cuttings from the installation of the injection wells would be sent to an existing on-site compost facility or landfarm for treatment. It was estimated that the bioventing system would have to operate year round in this area for 2 to 4 years to meet the soil clean-up goals for BTEX compounds. Institutional controls would be used to prevent Icurrent, and limit future exposure to contaminated ground water. Because ground water contamination is limited to the upper portion of the aquifer, base regulations would be modified to prohibit the use of ground water from portions of the aquifer shallower than 100 ft. Existing and new wells screened in the shallow portion of the aquifer Would be locked to prevent unauthorized use. The effectiveness of institutional controls is based on the assumption that the federal government will retain control of the Base for as long as institutional controls are necessary. 6-15 Final Report 12/95 Base Emergency Fire Well C islocated downgradient of the two source areas identified at Site 45/57. Due to its screened zone, it is unlikely to be affected by the shallow contaminant plumes. However, Base restriction preventing the use of this well for drinking water supply would be enacted as part of this alternative. No separate action would be taken to reduce contaminant concentrations in ground water or restore the affected portion of the aquifer to its beneficial use as a drinking water supply. The TOE and BTEX plumes in the shallow ground water would continue to move to the north in the general direction of ground water flow. Existing monitoring wells would be used to track its migration. The natural attenuation of the cobtaminants in ground water would benefit from the remedial activities designed to address the contaminant source and the MCLs would likely be met more quickly under this alternative than the No Action Alternative. However, the preliminary estimate of the time required to reduce contaminant concentrations in ground water to below MCLs was in the range of 40 to 100 years or more. It should be noted that the appropriateness of this remedial alternative is now under question based on soil and ground water data collected as. part of this study that indicate only a limited source area that is primarily located in the capillary fringe and in shallow soils below the ground V.'at&r table. The effectiveness of vadose zone treatment for the removal of contaminant mass within the source area at Site 45157 is highly questionable based on results found from the field investigations conducted as part of this study. 6.4.3 Alternative 3 - Vapor Extraction and Ground Water Containment (USAF, 1994b) This remedial alternative focuses on reducing contaminant sources in soils through SVE while providing containment of contaminated ground water at the source area using limited ground water extraction. Extracted ground water would be treated prior to discharge into Garrison Slough. Institutional controls would be provided to reduce potential risks from the use of contaminated ground water. The movement of contaminants in ground water at Site 45/57 would be monitored over time. SVE would be used to address both the TOE-contaminated soils in the area of the old maintenance shop off the northeast corner of the fireK 6-16 Final Report 12/95 station and BTEX-contaminated soils beneath the site. Conceptually, the SVE system for TCE removal isidentical to that presented for Alternative 2 above. Drill cuttings from the installation of the extraction wells would be handled as described above for Alternative 2. It is estimated that this portion of the SVE system would have to operate for 1 to 3 years (6 months per year) to meet the soil clean-up levels for TCE and related compounds. SVE would also be used to address BTEX contamination present in subsurface soils beneath the site in this alternative. Conceptually, the system for BTEX removal -would use 20 vertical vapor extraction wells on approximately 50-ft centers to address the assumed 200- by 250-ft contaminated zone. Extracted soil vapor would be treated using vapor-phase carbon prior to discharge. The target area for BTEX removal is paved and no additional capping is planned for this remedial action. Drill cuttings from the installation of the extraction wells would be sent to an existing on-site compost facility or landfarm for treatment, It was estimated that the SVE system would have to operate in this area for 1 to 3 years (6 months per year) to meet the soil clean-up goals for BTEX compounds. Ground water extraction would be used to capture and contain the contaminant plumes near the source areas. A single extraction well would be installed at the dlowngradient edge of the plume to extrabt ground water at the rate necessary to prevent further migration of the contaminants from Site 45/57. Based on modeling provided in the RI/FS, an extraction rate of 40 gpm would be needed to contain the plume. The extracted ground water would be treated using an air stripper to remove the volatile organic components (VOCs) and activated carbon to remove semnivolatile compounds from the extracted water. Air stripper off-gas would be discharged without treatment because emission rates will not result in maximum ground concentrations that exceed permissible exposure limits (PELs) for the compounds of concern. Treated groundwater would be discharged to Garrison Slough. Due to high dissolved metals levels found in the ground water at EAFB, metals removal may be necessary prior to treating the water for VOCs. Treafability studies were recommended to evaluate iron fouling problems and determine if the sludge generated by dissolved metals removal would be a hazardous waste. If the sludge was not a hazardous waste, it would be dlewatered and disposed of on-site. If it was a hazardous waste, K ~~it would be packaged and shipped off-site in accordance with RORA 6-17 Final Report 12/95 regulations. For purposes of the FS cost estimate, it was assumed that the sludge is not a hazardous waste. Based on modeling projections, the ground water extraction and treatment system proposed under this alternative would need to operate for between 30 and 100 years before achieving MCLs. Year-round operation was assumed. Again, the appropriateness of this remedial alternative is under question as it was for Alternative 2 based on a limited extent of the source area, and the location of contamination in the capillary fringe and shallow soils below the ground water table. In addition, dlowngradient ground water extraction at accelerated rates tends to disrupt the equilibrium established under natural aquifer conditions, often resulting in the undesirable spreading of contamination between the source area and the dlowngradient extraction well. 6.4.4 Alternative 4 -Removal Alternative (USAF, 1994b) This removal alternative focuses on reducing the contaminant source through the excavation and treatment of contaminated soils, and the extraction and treatment of contaminated ground water. Institutional controls would be provided to prevent current, and limit future expbsuffe to contaminated ground water during the period of extraction and treatment. Up to 15,600 yd3 of contaminated soil would be excavated from the two suspected source locations at Site 45/57 under this alternative. TCE- contaminated soils from the area of the old maintenance shop (estimated to be 3,700 yd3) Would be shipped out of Alaska to the lower 48 states for treatment and disposal as a hazardous waste. The BTEX- contaminated soils from beneath the site (estimated to be 11,900 yc13) would be treated on Base using composting or landfarming. The treated soils would then be used as unrestricted fill on the Base. Soil excavation would be conducted in the summer. Contaminated soils would be removed from the ground surface to the top of the saturated zone. Because most of the contaminated soil is located beneath the water table, not all of the contaminated soils would be removed as part of this alternative. No attempt would be made to ) ~~excavate saturated zone soils. Clean soils would be segregated from 6-18 Final Report ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 contaminated soils using a field screening technique. The excavated area would then be backfilled with clean material. The excavation and treatment of the contaminated soil at Site 45/57 was expected to take one summer to complete. Ground water extraction would be implemented to optimize pumping rates and pore volume exchandes to speed aquifer restoration. The extraction network for this alternative would consist of two extraction wells with a combined extraction rate of approximately 60 gpm. The locations of these wells and their projected capture zones were identified in the RI/FS. Preliminary calculations indicated that the specified extraction program would result in the complete exchange of four pore volumes of ground water per year . The extracted ground water would be treated using an air stripper to remove the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and activated carbon to remove semnivolatile compounds from the extracted water as per the discussion for Alternative 3. Concerns regarding elevated dissolved metals levels were express in this alternative as they were for Alternative 3, with possible hazardous waste sludges generated in the metals removal process. Based on modeling projections, the groundwater extraction and treatment system proposed under this alternative was expected to operate for 30 and 60 years. Year-round operation was assumed. institutional controls would be used to prevent exposure to ground water until MOLs are achieved. 6.4.5 Alternative 5 - Intrinsic Remediation This alternative focuses on the application of findings of this study to the TOE and BTEX contaminant plumes existing at Site 45/57. As indicated in Section 4, the BTEX plume is highly attenuated near the source of hydrocarbon contamination, and TOE contaminated ground water is the primary concern in this remedial alternative. In addition, based on recent site investigation and monitoring efforts described in this report, the TOE- and BTEX-contaminated soils located in the vadose zone at the site do not appear to be extensive and cause little impact to the ground water. Consequently, this alternative does not consider contaminated soil removal nor treatment. Ground water contaminants would be allowed to attenuate naturally over time under this option, with institutional controls provided to reduce 6-19 Final Report 12/95 potential risks from the use of contaminated ground water. The movement of contaminants in ground water at Site 45/57 would be monitored over time based on the Long-Term Monitoring Plan (LMP) presented in Section 7, and continual up-dating of contaminant fate and transport modeling and contaminant degradation and transport rates would be an integral padt of this alternative. Because ground water contamination is limited to the upper portion of the aquifer, base regulations would be modified as described in Alternative 2 to prohibit the use of ground water from portions of the aquifer shallower than 100 ft. Existing and new wells screened in the shallow portion of the aquifer would be locked to prevent unauthorized use. The effectiveness of institutional controls is based on the assumption that the federal government will retain control of the Base for as long as 'institutional controls are necessary. Base Emergency Fire Well C is located dlowngradient of the two source areas identified at Site 45/57. Due to its screened zone, it is unlikely to be affected by the shallow contaminant plumes. However, Base restriction preventing the use of this well for drinking water supply would be enacted as part of this alternative as was proposed for Alternative 2. No separate action would be taken to reduce contaminlaht concentrations in ground water or restore the affected portion of the aquifer to its beneficial use as a drinking water supply. Rather, natural processes, demonstrated in this study to be effectively containing, attenuating and destroying dissolved TCE and benzene and toluene in the contaminant plumes, would be monitored over time to ensure that these intrinsic processes continued to provide natural remediation of the impacted aquifer at the site. A number of existing monitoring wells would be used to track the migration of these contaminant plumes. As indicated in the LMP, four additional monitoring wells would be added at the site to provide up-gradient and Point-of-Compliance monitoring capabilities over time. As described in the protocol developed in this document, continual plume monitoring and contaminant fate and transport modeling would be carried out over the duration of the plume under this alternative, requiring much more site management and oversight than in the No Action Alternative. Based on results presented in Section 5, the preliminary estimate of the time required to reduce contaminant concentrations in ground water to below MCLs based on mean aquifer and site conditions isapproximately 5 to 8 years. 6-20 Final Report 12/95 6.5 EVALUATION OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES A qualitative comparison of the five remedial alternatives evaluated for Site 45/57 was presented in Table 6-4 based on how well each alternative met the various goals of the MOP. The five remedial technologies are discussed together in more detail below as they relate to the general NCP goals of effectiveness, implementabiiity and cost. 6.5.1 Effectiveness As indicated in Table 6-4 and from the discussion of the various alternatives presented above, the No Action alternative was identified in the RI/FS as providing the least effectiveness in terms of protection of human health and the environment, compliance with ARARs, long- and short-term permanence, and reduction in toxicity, mobility and/or the volume of contaminant through some treatment action. This No Action alternative inherently involves Intrinsic Remediation, but lacks the crucial aspect of continual site monitoring and site conceptual model refinement that is an essential part of an Intrinsic Remediation plume management approach. Both the SVE/Bioventing and Containment options were considered marginal in terms of effectiveness due to their lack of pro- active plume treatment, but again inherently involve some form of Intrinsic Remediation. Their effectiveness in terms of source control and removal-is put into question based on the site investigation data gathered in this project. In addition, ground water pumping can potentialiy disrupt steady-state conditions which have been shown to have developed for TOE within the aquifer based on plume monitoring and modeling conducted in this study, supporting the contention that the effectiveness of these alternatives is marginal. The Removal option is considered in the RI/FS to be the best alternative in terms of the effectiveness criterion. This option, however, suffers from the same problems as that of Alternative 3 in terms of disruption of plume steady-state conditions and inadvertent spreading of contaminant mass due to ground water pumping. The Intrinsic Remnediation alternative was generally considered to provide the best or good achievement of the effectiveness criterion based on the on-going plume containment and contaminant destruction that isevident from the findings of this study. It was given a poor rating for short-term effectiveness based on the longest projected timeframe for reaching TOE MCLs throughout the plume of 40 years. However, with K. ~~institutional controls and continuance of existing land use practices, this 6-21 Final Report 12/95 timneframe should not compromise human health or environmental quality. Again, the generally positive ratings for effectiveness are assigned to this alternative based on the findings of this study and continual plume monitoring and assessment activities that are central to this plume management approach. 6.5.2 Implemnentability The implemnentability criterion focuses primarily on engineering constraints and technical limitations to the application of a given technology at a given site under existing site constraints. As indicated in Table 6-4, the No Action alternative is easy to implement as it requires no action. The Bioventing and Containment alternatives were considered poor in terms of implemnentability based on extensive requirements for air extraction/injection system and ground water recovery and treatment system installation, construction and operation. The Removal alternative was considered worst for implemnentability because of the disruption to existing site uses, subsurface utilities, etc., caused by the extensive excavation activities involved in this remedial action. The Intrinsic Remediation alternative was given a best rating for implemnentability as it requires few technically challenging activities in order for it to be implemented at Site 45/57. This alternative only recfuires the installation of four additional, standard construction ground water monitoring wells, and the continual routine sampling and -data analysis activities that were conducted as part of this field study. 6.5.3 Cost Finally, the cost of each remedial alternative has been qualitatively summarized in Table 6-4, indicating that the least-cost alternatives of No Action and Intrinsic Remnediation achieved a Best rating, while the Bioventing alternative was assigned a good rating, Containment was assigned a Poor rating, and the Removal option was considered the worst of all alternatives considered in terms of required costs for implementation. Quantitatively the estimated Present Worth of each alternative is summarized in Table 6-5. The costs assigned to the Intrinsic Remediation alternative were based on similar unit costs presented in the RI/FS (USAF, ) 994b)~1 for the other remedial alternatives. 6-22 ( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 Table 6-5. Comparison of estimated present worth of remedial alternatives evaluated for EAFB Site 45/57 (USAF, 1994b}. NO IIINRNI IACTION I BIOVE'NT I CONTAIN IEXCAVATE IREMEDIATION Total Capital Cost 0 $660,000 $1,900,000 $12oo,00000 $27,225 Total Present Worth (5%for 30 years) 0 $1,200,000 $5,600,000 $16,000,000 $181,921 Years to Achieve Remedial Goals 30 to 300 1 30 to 3Q0 30 to 300 3'0 to 60 - 5 to 8 6.6 RECOMMENDED REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE Based on the qualitative evaluation presented in Table 6-4, and the quantitative cost comparison for the remedial alternatives considered for Site 45/57 presented in Table 6-5, it is recommended that to best meet the goals of effectiveness, implementability and cost identified in the NOP, the. Intrinsic Remediation alternative detailed in this study should be implemented at Site 45/57. Based on monitoring and modeling results of this two and one-half year field study, aggressive source removal in the vadose zone is projected to have little impact on the overall duration of the TOCE plume at the site. In addition, the risk posed by the contaminant plume is low under the existing land use, and both the shodt- and long- term effectiveness of more aggressive attempts at ground water plume recovery and treatment are in doubt as indicated in the estimated ltime for achievement of remedial goals identified in Table 6-5. From the existing evidence that intrinsic remediation is indeed leading to the containment and destruction of TCE and benzene and toluene within the plume at Site 45/57, it appears that the excessive costs and uncertainty associated with implementation of Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 at Site 45/57 are not justified. 6-23 Final Report 12/95 SECTION 7 LONG-TERM MONITORING PLAN 7.1 OVERVIEW A lang-term monitoring (LTM) plan must be developed to meet the requirements for intrinsic remnediation with long-term monitoring, the preferred remedial alternative for Site 45/57. This component of the preferred remedial alternative for Site 45/57 is used to: assess site conditions over time, confirm the effectiveness of the naturally occurring processes that function to remove contaminant mass, monitor ground water conditions to ensure minimal contaminant migration, and provide an on-going evaluation of the need for additional remedial action. The LTM plan consists of identifying the location of two ground water monitoring networks to: demonstrate attainment of remnediation goals, and verify predictions of the ADRE model presented in Section 5 for TOE migration at Site 45/57. Plume migration should be monitored over time to verify that intrinsic remnediation is occurring at rates sufficient to protect potential receptors and to verify that contamination above the Federal MOL will not migrate off site. If the data collected under this LTM program indicate that naturally occurring processes are not protecting human health and the environment, contingency controls to augment intrinsic remediation will be necessary. 7.2 MONITORING NETWORKS Two sets of wells would be installed at Site 45/57 as padt of the intrinsic remediation plume management alternative. The first set, the LTM wells, consists of a transect of plume centerline wells composed of a proposed well located upgradient of the TOE source area at monitoring point SP 16, three existing wells (45MW01, 45MW03, and 45MW08) located within the observed TOE plume, and two additional monitoring wells located near 7-1 Final Report 12/95 the TOE source area at sampling locations SP33 and SP36 that were installed in July, 1995. These proposed locations are indicated in Figure 7- 1. Each proposed monitoring well should have a 5 ft screen extending downward from the top of the historical high water table. These wells are used to verify the functioning of intrinsic remediation process and the predictions of the modeling effort described in this report. The second required set of monitoring wells consists of a transect of three wells perpendicular to the direction of plume migration, approximately 250 ft (75 m) downgradient from monitoring well 45MW04 centered at the approximate location of TP3 established in the current study as indicated in Figure 7-1. This transect establishes the point-of- compliance (P00) for this site. The purpose of the P00 wells is to verify that no TOE exceeding the federal MOL (5 jgg/L) migrates beyond the area under institutional control. These monitoring wells should also have 5 ft screens extending downward from the top of the historical high water table. Samples collected from both the LTM and P00 wells should be analyzed fbr the analytes listed in Table 7-1. 7.2.1 Long-Term Monitoring Wells The proposed long-term monitoring well grid will be used to monitor the effectiveness of intrinsic remediation and to verify modeling predictions concerning source and plume contaminant mass removal, presented in Section 5 of this report The proposed upgradient well will be used to monitor conditions upgradient of the existing plume, and will provide information regarding the availability of microbial respiratory electron acceptors, growth substrates, and other physical and chemical conditions that may affect microbial activity within the contaminant plume. The existing monitoring wells provide' a history of chemical and physical conditions which have occurred over time, and will provide on-going information regarding continuing changes in TOE and its degradation products at Site 45/57 while intrinsic remediation proceeds. The two additional, near-source monitoring wells that are to be installed at the site are to be used to track the predicted degradation and downgradient migration of the TOE plume over time so that the long-term modeling presented in this report can be verified and updated as necessary. 7-2 Final Report ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 (D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~U < >ga a E 0: En a0 E~u c~CE E. E I 0 toE 0~~~~~ - w n L 6 .- CL 0~a. <~~~~~~e C-o '0 2 O , C)"' to U,a. ~~~~Cooa U, 0) C~~~~~~0 '~~~~~~~~~~~' U~~~~~~~~~ 0) C to ~~~~~~~~~0 - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0) C..~~~~~~~~~~~~C 0 (D P) 0) -J~~~~~~~~~~~ + 7~7- Finai Report 12/95 0~~~~~~ - 0V LO~ ~ ~ oA ? ?0 . C- - E~U ~U 0, QL)0 E .. 0 E C0 C S.0 0 tQ) E. V COC-') 0 rE,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~v 0 00~~~~~~~~ E u u I dt uE 5WUE b u U0~~~~~~~~~ oC) a)-u E k ,A C ~ LL ~ ~ ~ CC U t: ~~~0 0C 0 m t E ~~~~~0:.0 A? 0 no , 0 - di S 0E 'EIY 2v ;2 oE u oa O8 , 0 aZ5 2Z 0 2 'E '5u VBo .? 0 0 0 Ž>Y~O~ 0a 0~ŽOL o C ____ ~~0 0 0~ to 01c E E ~~~~~~~~~0 Et r~~~~~~~ E ~~0 0 .C a 2 E ~ ~ 000 0 0~U _j u C~~~~~~~~~~~~,~ ~ ~ a << N 3a . : 0 C> "0 < 0 5 O E 00 7-4 Final Report 12/95 0 E~as C) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 0V C) LoU 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ..jQ O~~~e) 0~~~ - 0 D~ 0 Ct ~~~~~~~~~E,~~8 4) U U E 0 0 o' 0~~~~'E ; -- E C W~~D o U 4Q9 C E I > E g < -5 C)~~CC ~~4 4C C ~~~0 -o~~~~~~ t Ct < 8)E -- !.g 0 uS -CC. ~~~~~~~82 _~~~ *1~~~~~ ~~;;E;2C ~~~~ c, oonaiE 7;a0 DvM' x0 0s0 gE 6~~~~~~ . CQ 0 2 0)u0 ~ a) B IIA 0 H 22u Eo 0~~~~~~~~~~~~x~QoaaCz a 6V,6.R 20 u~~~~ - ,E C - ~~~~~C S ~~~~00 TlSr.22 '1 C~~~~~~~~ I~~~~aE u - 2 E K 0 0 0~~~7- Final Report 12/95 7.2.2. Point-of-Compliance Wells The three proposed POC monitoring wells would be installed approximately 41 0 ft (125 m) downgradient of the leading edge of the 5 ggIL TOE isoconcentration contour predicted from the fate and transport modeling 7 years after source dissipation, some 8 years from now. Figure 7-1 shows the locations of these proposed wells. This location represents 5 years of ground water travel time from 45MWOI at the mean ground water velocity of 0.23 ft/day. Model results indicate that the contaminant plume will not migrate beyond 45MWOI at concentrations-above 5 V±g/L, so these POC wells provide ample warning of unexpected contaminant migration to ensure protection of human health and environmental protection, as well as compliance with site specifib remediation goals during the course of long-term monitoring at the site. 7.3 GROUND WATER SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS Because of the relatively rapid changes predicted for the TOE plume based on model calibration to the near-source field data collected in ) ~July, 1995, it is recommended that the LTM and P00 wells be sampled and analyzed annually to biannually for the anticipated 8 to 10 year lifetime of the plume. This monitoring will allow verification that natural processes are effectively reducing contaminant mass and mobility; iLe., assuring that intrinsic remediation can achieve the remediation goals for the site. It is recommended that monitoring be more frequent (e.g., annually) initially and then be less frequent (e.g., once in 2 years) when more confidence is gained that remediation goals are being met. Analyses to be performed are described in Table 7-1. A specific sampling and analysis plan should be prepared for each sampling event to allow for necessary modifications and refinements to sampling and analysis protocol as improved monitoring and analysis procedures become available. In addition, routine updating of contaminant transport and degradation modeling should take place using all available site monitoring data to improve the conceptual model of TOE degradation and migration taking place below Site 45/57. >9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~7-6 Final Report 12/95 7.4 HYDROCARBON PLUME MONITORING As indicated in Section 5 of this report, the hydrocarbon plume downgradient of the TOE source area was not located until near-source monitoring points were installed at the site in July, 1995. Because of this, only limited data exist regarding the. intrinsic remnediation of hydrocarbons associated with this localized plume. The modeling that was possible using the July data indicated that degradation of benzene and toluene appeared to be taking place, but that ethylbenzene and p-xylene did not appear to be degrading under natural site conditions.- Once again, the measured concentrations of these latter two compounds were below their MCLs, indicating that they do not pose a ground water risk at Site 45/57. The significant point of the modeling effort was that measured field data suggested that the release has occurred recently, i.e., approximately 3 years in the past, and consequently steady-state conditions appears not to have been reached for a ethylbenzene, p- xylene and the tracer compounds used in this study. It appears prudent then to consider monitoring in the immediate vicinity of the apparent source of hydrocarbon release, near SP29, annually for several years to verify that steady-state conditions have been reached for this hydrocarbon plume. Because of the highly localized nature of this plume it is further recommended that the near-soburce monitoring network installed in July, 1995, as padt of this study be used for monitoring of this hydrocarbon plume. An appropriate monitoring grid would consist of SP29, SP3O. SF32, SF33, SP35, and TP9. These points could be monitored annually and samples should be analyzed for a subset. of parameters listed in Table 7-1 including: DO, pH, redox, nitrate, sulfate and specific aromatic hydrocarbons including BTEX, and the tracer compounds used in this study. As indicated above for the LTM wells, the points included in this sampling network would be used primarily for an assessment of hydrocarbon contaminant migration, and verification of modeling results presented in Section 5 so that verification of intrinsic remediation can be confirmed for benzene and toluene at this site. 7-7 () ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport SECTION 8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report presents the results of an EE/CA conducted Water by the Utah Research Laboratory at Utah State University to potential determine the for the use of intrinsic remediatiaon as a ground water management plume approach for fuel and solvent ground water contamination at Site 45/57, Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska. Previous site investigations by PNL, and four sampling events conducted by the UWRL over the period from November, 1993, to July, 1995, verified that residual phase trichloroethylene (TCE) is the main soil and ground water contaminant at the site. The main emphasis of the report was to quantify the efficacy of intrinsic remnediation for the management and elimination of the risk posed to both human receptors and the environment by the contamination source identified at this site. This evaluation of intrinsic rernediation taking place at included Site 45/57 the development of a protocol for intrinsic remediation evaluation that can be implemented at Elelson AFB and other DoD sites contaminated with petroleum and solvent releases from abandoned USTs or other sources. The protocol involves the comprehensive ground delineation of water contaminant plumes using networks of small ground diameter water sampling points used to augment conventional water ground monitoring wells; the estimation of contaminant mass center and mass migration using a Thiessen area approach; the use stoichiometry of appropriate for the verification of biodegradation through the tracking of terminal electron acceptors and/or appropriate intermediate terminal end products and formed in biodegradation reactions; and the use fate and of transport modeling to provide additional support observation for the of attenuation of contaminant plumes and for the prediction of long-term plume behavior with or w~ithout source removal at a site. K a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-1 Final Report 12/95 Site characterization activities in support of this intrinsic remediation evaluation included collection and analysis of soil core samples, the installation of one conventional ground water monitoring well and 45 single and multi-level, surface-driven gravel-point monitoring probes, and the sampling of newly installed and existing ground water monitoring points located throughout Site 45/57. Site-specific data were used to simulate the fate and transport of BTEX components and TOE and its breakdown products with a 3-dimensional advection/dispersion ground water transport model- which includes sorption and degradation. The inteht of the use of this transport model was to develop a field-data calibrated model that could be used to assess the future magnitude and spatial distribution of the dissolved contaminant plume, and to assess the possible impact of the plume on downgradient receptors over the expected lifetime of the contaminant source with and without implementation of source removal at the site. The applicability of intrinsic remediation with long-term monitoring was evaluated as a remedial alternative for Site 45/57 along with more conventional site remnediation techniques including soil vapor extraction and bioventing, source area containment, and source area excavation, all of which were included in the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Reports prepared for Eielson's Operable Units (OUs) 3, 4 and 5 (USAF, 1994a~b).- Based on the approach described above, and the data and analyses that were carried out using the protocol developed in this study, the following conclusions can be reached: 1. Existing soil and ground water data available from Site 45/57 suggest that ho significant volumes of DNAPL remain there. Ground water and soil concentration, results obtained by the UWRL Research team and from previous studies indicate the TOE source area is localized near monitoring well 45MW08/GPO8. In addition, a highly localized BTEX/hydrocarbon plume was found slightly north of this area at the site, although its extent and downgradient migration was much more limited than that of the TOE plume. 2. Based on the aquifer theoretical assimilative capacity and the extent of dissolved ground water plume migration, TOE isthe contaminant 8-2K Final Report 12/95 of primary concern at Site 45/57. An aquifer assimilative capacity nearly 10 times that of the total dissolved TPH plume mass exists throughout the entire plume area of the site suggesting that intrinsic remediation will lead to the continued reduction in hydrocarbon and BTEX mass currently existing at the site. Modeling results indicated, however, that the hydrocarbon plume is the result of a release as recent as 3 years in the past, and some of the less water soluble hydrocarbon contaminants investigated in this study have not yet reached steady-state. 3. Site aquifer ORP conditions are highly reduced near the TOE source area and sulfate reduction and methanogenesis has been observed throughout the site. These conditions would support the anaerobic dlechlorination of TOE making it possible for the attenuation of the TOE plume via anaerobic mechanisms existing at Site 45/57. 4. Additional evidence for the on-going anaerobic dlechlorination of TOE is available in the form of measurable levels of intermediate TOE degradation products (cis- and trans-DOE, vinyl chloride and ethylene). In addition, their relative location within the aquifer downgradient from the TOE source area supports a biological pathway for TOE degradation. 5. Low ground water gradients below Site. 45/57 have lead to low ground water velocities, on the order of 0.23 ft/d. With TOE retardation factors estimated to be between 3 and 6, significant contaminant plume residence times and low contaminant mobility exist within the aquifer at Site 45/57. 6. Fate and transport model calibration efforts using the most recent UWRL generated ground water plume data collected in July, 1995, resulted in a mean calibrated TOE degradation rate of 0.0026/d, with an initial TOE source concentration of 39, 101 gg/L. Model calibration resulted in the following additional model parameters: a source area dimension perpendicular to ground water flow = 22.5 m, and a transverse dispersivity = 0.53 m. Additional field ground water data suggested that the extent of the source area in the direction of ground water flow was approximately 15 m. 7. Analysis of the total mass of TOE measured within the contaminant plume beneath the site, and the mass of TCE that should exist there if no 8-3 Final Report 12/95 degradation had taken place suggests that from 44 to nearly 2,500 kg of TOE appears to have been assimilated over the time since the release. By comparing this degraded TOE mass with the mass of TOE degradation products (cis- and trans-DOE, vinyl chloride and ethylene) detected below the site (less than 3 kg) it is apparent that rapid assimilation of TOE dlechlorination products isalso occurring at Site 45/57. 8. Based on an estimated flux rate of contaminant into the dissolved plume from the source area, a total source area lifetime due to natural dissolution was estimated to range from approximately 0z.4 to 4 years, with a mean duration of only 1 year. 9. Based on the calibrated fate and transport model, once residual phase source dissolution is complete it was predicted to take approximately 5 to 8 years for the resultant contaminant plume to reach the TOE MCL level of 5 jgI/L everywhere throughout the site using the mean degradation rate estimated for the site. During this 8 year lifetime the net plume migration distance was predicted to be less than 250 m. 10. Based on the predicted plume migration results, along with the estimate of the remaining source lifetime, and the fact that physical source removal would be expected to reduce the lifetime of the TOE plume by only approximately 12.5 percent, source removal would not be recommended for Site 45/57 due to its expense and the difficulty in its implementation. 11.The analysis of remedial alternatives applicable at Site 45/57 indicated that despite intrinsic remediation being the least costly alternative, it is as protective of human health and the environment as other, more active remediation alternatives. It does require, however, the implementation of a long-term monitoring program to verify that intrinsic remediaition and plume attenuation continue at the site. 12. Because the highly localized BTEX plume was not discovered until near-source sampling points were installed at the site in July, 1995, long- term monitoring data for this plume are not available. Further, because ethylbenzene, p-xylene and the tracer compounds used in this study did not appear to have reached steady-state conditions within the ground water system, on-going monitoring of this plume is recommended using .9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~8-4 Final Report 12/95 the near-source sampling grid installed during this study. Data collected from this monitoring network would be used to verify steady-state plume conditions, and validate the modeling results that were generated with the limited data collected in this study. The following recommendations are provided for the implementation of the proposed intrinsic remediation plume management approach at Site 45/57: 1. Because of the limited affect of source removal on the projected TOE source lifetime, and its lack of effectiveness in expediting remediation of the ground water plume at Site 45/57, source removal at the site is not recommended. 2- A long-term monitoring approach is recommended which incorporates three existing monitoring wells along with the installation of one upgradient and two near-source monitoring wells for long-term plume monitoring, plus three downgradient, point-of-compliance wells. A long- term monitoring schedule for the sampling of these nine monitoring wells of once every 1 to 2 years is proposed for implementation at Site 45/57. 3. Each sampling event isrecommended to include analysis of aquifer water quality parameters affecting intrinsic remediation (pH. -D0, temperature, alkalinity), ORP as an indication of reducing conditions within the aquifer, additional terminal electron acceptor composition (nitrate, sulfate, dissolved iron and manganese), specific hydrocarbon analysis (TPH, specific aromatic constituents), specific chlorinated hydrocarbon species (TOE, DOE, vinyl chloride), and dissolved gases indicative of dominant metabolism and intermediate product formation (methane and ethylene). .4. Based on this proposed monitoring routine, an evaluation of the original findings of this study in terms of contaminant migration and attenuation rates, and an on-going verification of model calibration results should be carried out to validate and refine the intrinsic remediation plume management approach recommended in this study. 8-5 Final Report 12/95 SECTION 9 REFERENCES Anderson, G. S. 1970. Hydrologic Reconnaissance of the Tanana Basin, Central Alaska. Hydrological Investigation Atlas HA-319, U.S. Geological Survey. Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1985. The Installation Restoration Program Toxicity Guide. Arthur D. Uitile, Inc., Acorn Park, Cambridge, MA. vols 1.2,3,4 Ayres, P.H., and Taylor, W.D. 1989. Solvents. In: A.W. Hayes (ed.) Principles and Methods of Toxicology, Second Edition Ch. 4. Raven Press, Ltd., New York. Ballantyne, B., and Sullivan, J.B3. Basic Principles of Toxicology. In J.B. Sullivan, Jr., and Krieger, G.R. (edsj) Hazardous Materiials Toxicology, Clinical Principles of Environmental Health Oh. 2. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore MD. Barceloux, D.G. 1992. Halogenated Solvents. In J.B. Sullivan, Jr., and Kriieger, G.R. (eds.) Hazardous Materials Toxicology, Clinical Principles of Environmental Health Ch. 64. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore MD. Bouwer, H. 1978. Groundwater hydrology. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, NY. Chow, V.T, Maidment, D.R. and Mays, L.W. 1988. Applied Hydrology. McGraw Hill, New York. CH2M-Hill. 1982. Installation Restoration Program Records Search, Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska. 9-1 Final Report( 12/95 DiStefano, T. D., Gossett, J.M. and Zinder, S. H. 1991. Reductive Dechlorination of High Concentrations of Tetrachioroethene to Ethene by an Anaerobic Enrichment Culture in the Absence of Methanogenesis. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 57(8) :2287-92. DiStefano, T.D., Gossett, J.M. and Zinder, S. H. 1992. Hydrogen as an Electron Donor for Dechlorination of Tetrachloroethene by an Anaerobic Mixed Culture. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 58(11) 3622-29. de Bruin, W. P., Kotterman, J. J., Posthumas, M. A., Schraa, G, and Zehnder A. J. B. 1992. Complete Biological Reductive Transformation of Tetrachioroethene to Ethane. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 58(6): 1996-2000. Domenico, P.A. 1987. An analytical model for multidimensional transport of decaying contaminant species. J. Hydrology 91:49-58. Drever, J. I. 1988. The geochemistry of natural waters. Second edition. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. pp 288. Enzien, M. V., Picardal. F., Hazen, T.C. Arnold, R.G. and Fliermans, C.B; 1994. Reductive Dechlorination of Trichloroethylene and Tetrachloroethylene under Aerobic Conditions in a Sediment Column. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 60(6) :2200-04. Fan, S.and Scow, K.M. 1993. Biodegradation of Trichloroethylene and Toluene by Indigenous Microbial Populations in Soil. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 59(6): 1911-1918. Feennstra, S.and Cherry, J.A. 1988. Subsurface Contamination by Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (DNAPL) Chemicals. Presented at the International Groundwater Symposium, by International Association of Hydrogeologists, Halifax, Nova Scotia, 1-5 May. Freeze, R.A. and Cherry, K.A. 1979. Groundwater. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. 9-2 Final Report 12/95 Fiorenza, S., Hockman, E.L., Szojka, S., Woeller, R.M., and Wigger, J.W. 1994. Natural Anaerobic Degradation of Chlorinated Solvents at a Canadian Manufacturing Plant. In: Hinchee, R.E., Leeson, A., Semprini, L., and Ong, S.K (eds). Bioremediation of Chlorinated and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Compounds. Lewis Publishers, Boco Raton. Freedman D. L. and Gossett J. M. 1989. Biological Reductive Dechlorination of Tetrachloroet hylene and Trichloroefthyiene to Ethylene under Methanogenic Conditions. Applied anid Environmental Microbiology 55(9):21 44-51. Gibson, S.A. and Sewell, G. W. 1992. Stimulation of Reductive Dechlorination of Tetrachloroethene in Anaerobic Aquifer Microcosms by Addition of Shodt-Chain Organic Acids or Alcohols. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 58(4)1392-3. Harding, Lawson and Associates. 1989-1990. RI/FS Stage 4. Vol. III Huling S.G. and Weaver, J.W. 1991. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquids. EPA154014-91 -002. Kdstner, M. 1991. Reductive Dechlorination of Tri- and Tetrachloroethylenes Depends of Transition from Aerobic to Anaerobic Conditions. Applied and Environmental Mic-robiology 57(7) :2039-46. Kemblowski, M. W., and Kline, C. L. 1988. An automated numerical evaluation of slug test data. Ground Water July-August:435-438. Kohring, G. W., Rogers, J. E., and Wiegel, J. 1989. Anaerobic biodegradation of 2,4-dichlorophenol in freshwater lake sediments at different temperatures. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 55(2) :348-353. Kruseman, 0. P.and de Ridder, N. A. 1989. Analysis and evaluation of pumping test data - second edition. International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement, Publication 47. Den Hague, the Netherlands. 9-3 Final Report 12/95 Lindberg, R.D., and D. D. Runnels. 1984. Groundwater redox reactions: an analysis of equilibrium state applied to Eh measurements and geochemnical modeling. Science 225:925-927, McCarty, P.L. 1994. An Overview of Anaerobic Transformation of Chlorinated Solvents. Presented at the U.S. EPA Symposium on Intrinsic Bioremediation of Ground Water, Denver, CO (August 30 to September 1). Mohn, W. W. and Tiedje J. M. 1992. Microbial Reductive Dehalogenation. Microbiological Reviews 56(3):482-507. Mouvet C., Barberis, D., and Bourg, A.C.M. 1993. Adsorption isotherms of tri- and tetrachloroethylene by various natural solids. Journal of Hydrology 149:163-182. Nelson, 0. L., 1978. Hydrological Information for Land-Use Planning, Fairbanks Vicinity, Alaska. Open File Report 78-959, U.S. Geological Survey, Anchorage, Alaska. Pavlostathis, S.G., and Zhuang, P. 1993. Reductive Dechlorination of Chloroalkenes in Microcosms Developed with a Field Contaminated Soil. Chemosphere 27(5) :585-95. Pewe, T. L. 1975. QUaternary Geology of Alaska. Professional Paper 835, U.S. Geological Survey. Pewe, T. L., 1982. Geological Hazards of the Fairbanks Area, Alaska. Special Report 15, Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, College, Alaska. PNL (Pacific Northwest Laboratories). 1993a. Automatic Water-Level Measurements, Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, September 1991 - August 1992. Prepared for U.S.A.F. Eielson Air Force Base Environmental restoration Program, Fairbanks, AK. PNL. 1993b. OU-3, 4, and 5 Management Plan, Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska. Prepared for U.S.A.F. Eielson Air Force Base Environmental restoration Program, Fairbanks, AK. 9-4 Final Report 12/95 Sax, I. R.Lewis, Sr. 1987. Hawley's Condensed Chemical Directory. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. New York. Schwarzenbach, R.P. and Westall, J. 1981. Transport of nonpolar organic compounds from surface water to groundwater. Laboratory sorption studies. Environmental Science and Technology 15(1 1):1360-1367. Schwille, F. 1988. Dense Chlorinated Solvents in Porbus and Fractured Media. Lewis Publishers, Inc. Chelsea, MI. USAF. 1993. OUs 3, 4, 5 Draft RI Report. Eielson AFB, Alaska. USAF. 1994a. OUs 3, 4, 5 RI Report - Vol. 1. Eielson AFB, Alaska. USAF. 1994b. Operable Units 3, 4, and 5 Feasibility Study - Revised Draft. Eielson AFB, Alaska. U.S. EPA. 1986a. RCRA ground-water monitoring: technical enforcement guidance document (TEGD). Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C. OSWER-9950.1 USEPA. 1986b. Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. Office of Solid Waste and, Emergency Response. USEPA 540/1-86/060. USEPA. 1988. Soil Transport and Fate Database. Prepared by the Dept. of Civil and Environ. Engr., Utah State Univ., Logan, UT for the R.S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada. OK, US Environmental Protection Agency. USEPA. 1990. Basics of Pump-and-Treat Ground-Water Remediation Technology. Prepared by GeoTrans, Inc. for the US Environmental Protection Agency. USEPA/600/8-90/003., USEPA. 1990. Subsurface Contamination Reference Guide. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. EPA/540/2-90/01 1. USGS. 1989. Properties and Hazards of 108 Selected Substances. US Geological Survey, Open-File Report 89-491. 9-5 Final Report 12/95 UWRL. 1994a. Treatment study test design for "Field Test and Evaluation of Natural Attenuation in Cold Regions," Contract No. F41 624-93-C- 8042, submitted to AFCEE/EST, Brooks AEB, TX. 25 June. UWRL. 1994b. Addendum to the Health and Safety Plan (HSP) for the UWRL/USU operations at EAFB, Alaska, i to 15 May, 1994, submitted to AFCEE/ERT, Brooks AFB, TX, Contract No. F41 624-93-C-8042, CDRL- A002-0 1. UWRL. 1994c. Addendum to the Health and Safety Plan (HSP) for the UWRL/USU operations at EAFB, Alaska, 7 to 16 September, 1994, submitted to AFCEE/ERT, Brooks AFB, TX, Contract No. F41 624-93-C- 8042, CDRL-A002-01. UWRL. 1995. Addendum to the Health and Safety Plan (HSP) for the UWRL/USU operations at EAFB, Alaska, 28 June to 8 July, 1995, submitted to AFCEE/ERT, Brooks AFB, TX, Contract No. F41 624-93-C- 8042, CDRL-A002-01. Verschueren, K. 1983. Handbook of Environmental Data on Organic Chemicals. Van Norstrand Reinhold Co. New York, 2nd. ad. Wiedemeier, T.H., Downey, D.C., Wilson, J.T., Kampbell, D.H., Miller, R.N.,- and Hansen, J.E. 1994. Technical Protocol for Implementing the Intrinsic Remediation with Long-Term Monitoring Option for Natural Attenuation of Dissolved-Phase Fuel Contamination in Ground Water. 9-6 Final Report 12/95 Appendix A: Site 45/57 soil core textural characteristics from sieve analysis by the Soils Testing Laboratory, USU, and-direct observation by the UWRL EQL A-I Final Repodt 12/95 Core 45-8 Core 45-9 Depth (tI) Layer Texture (Physical) Depth (ftj Layer Texture (Physical) "1 ~~~clayey silt fine silt/cloy (dark) 4 fine silt 4 fine silt/cloy light) 5 fine sand/silt S 6 clayey silt 6 7 fine sand/sit7 clayeysilt gravely sand 88 fine sand/silt 9 9 10 gravely fine sand I10 medium sand 11 ~~~~sandy gravel gravely sand 12 medium sand 1 13 gravely sand 13iu sn medium sand 14 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~14 gravely sand gravely sand 15 medium sand 15 medium sand 1 6 ~ ~~~gravelycoarse sand 6snygoe medium sand medium sand 17 17 gravely sand gravely sand 18 medium sand 18 medium sand gravely coarse sand 19 19 gravely sand medium sand 20 gravely sand 20 21 21 gravely fine sand/silt L.EGEND gravely fine sand medium sand gravely sand coarsesand fine sand/silt ~sandy gravel dark organic silt Figure A-i. Site 45/57 soil core textural characteristics from direct 9 ~~~observation inUWRL EQL.( A-2 Final Report 12/95 SitB~jC. (.410f. 4&-9 C, SMtbSW%Bpm DPth L.", I rT., Depth Larr Tcdu 3~~d OW5% It~~~.) 3tndy loan 00% pm.) :YŽ:: W~LltUg. 3" =~~~~% B~~~4 ~L.. CltY% gS..) 42 .y lan(.l pM) Sw~~d (AZT. pwJ 3~~~~Ut(O% p.4'. L w... d Q.% ut) MtC"3% p.~) ~~ ~~ O7~~% pm) S~~Sedy IC" (MP% pm. 4 Nwdy I..(0.9% pa.) 4 "(47 paw. 12 8~~~5aM (66.% pm.) 12 . 1::4s3ud (04%.paw. It 1: .y3.(7%rv - ~~~~~~~~~~~128aM (1003X gi.) 14 1 33d(^V is 16.:j~ .nn.. It W. (BiS. p.'. 17 12 S" .9f. S..J17 4t S:X SaMW -37. pew.)V- is 13 S" 09A% VM4 1is- is Seed 08.3% p..'. 15 S" MA%VJ ~ ~ ~ eM63 . Figure A-2. Site 45/57 soil core textural characteristics from sieve analysis conducted by the Sails Testing Laboratory. Utah State University. K' ~~~~~~~~~~A-3 ( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 Appendix B. Results and data reduction programn for slug tests conducted at Site 45/57, EAFB in September, 1994, and July, 1995r K ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~B-i Final Report 12/95 Appendix B-i. Slug test data collected from Monitoriing Well 45MW08 at EAFB, Site 45/57 in September, 1994.. 45MW08 45MW08 45MW08 Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 ______W ater W ater ______W ater tILsL.Depth (ft) t(s) Depth (ft) t (s) Depth (ft) 0.000.19 0.00 0.21 ~~~0.00 0.20 0.05 10.18 0.05 0.19 0.05- 0.18 0.10 110.16 0.10 0.18 0.10 0.16 0.15 10.16 0.15 0.17 0.15 0.17 0.20 0:17 0.20 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.25 0.16 0.25 0.18 0.25 0.16 0.30 10.15 0.30 0.16 0.30 0.16 0.35 10.16 0.35 0.17 0.35 0.16 0.40 10.15 0.40 0.16 0.40 0.16 0145 10.15 0.65 0.15 0.45 0.15 0.50 I0.15 0.70 0.14 0.60 0.14 0.55 0.15 1.00 0.13 0.95 0.13 0.60 I0.14 1.35 0.12 1.15 0.12 0.80 a0.13 1.70 0.11 1.45 0.11 1.10 0.12 2.10 0.1 1.85 0.1 1.45 10.11 3.15 0.08 2.05 I0.09 1.85 0.1 4.30 10.07 2.45 0.0C8 2.20 10.09 5.05 0.06 3.15 0.07 26 0.08 6.30 0.05 3.70 0.06 32 0.07 7.65 0.04 4.45 0.05 3.75 I 0.06 10.60 0.03 5.40 0.04 4.50 1 0.05 14.05 0.02 6.40 0.03 5.35 0.04 24.40 0.01 8.25 0.02 6.35 0.03 24.55 0.005 10.20 0.01 8.25 0.02143 005 1070.01240 0.2 21.90 0.005 ______ 24.25 0.002 ______ B-2 -> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 Appendix B-2. Slug test data collected from Monitoring Well UWRLMWS at EAFB, Site 45/57 in September, 1994. UWRLMW8 F-r URMw6 lest I Ts watetI I Iwater IW.ter I__ Water MlDeth Ittl I tIl5 Depth (It) tis) Det l ii Depth MI1 0.0 0.34 1 38.0 0.12 0.0 0.26 0.0 0.38 0.5 0.34 39.0 0.1.S2 0.2 0.6Qj .37 1.0 0.32 1 40.0 _ 0.12 0.4A .6 .& 0...Q6. 1.5 0.32 1 41.0 0.1 0.6 0.26 * 0-31r 42.u El- r -n 3.5j .3 1~ 44L.0 .1 122 0.25 12 0.36 4.0 0.30 45.0 0.10 1.4 0.25 , 0.36- 4.5 0.29 46.5 0,10 1.6 0.25 1.6 0.35 1 5.0 0.29 1 A85 09 L8 MA4 LL M g&5 0.28 50.0 0.09 2.0 0.!24 2.0 6.0n .09 2r 024 2r 7.5 0.27 157.0 0.08 2.8 0.23 2.8 .. U&.. 8.0 0.26 159.5 0.08 3.0 023.3 8...i 0.26 162.0 0.08 3.2 0.23 3.2 0.33 9.0 0.26 t64.5 0.07 3.4 0.23 3.4 0.33 Ms $. o-.o r5.=zr r 11.0 0.24 E87.0 0.04 7.0 0.2) 04.2 11.5 0.24 97.0 0.04 9. 019 4. 0.33 12.0 0.2L 10.0 0..S&3 Jj 0.18 4. 033 13.0 0 .2 .4 0.03 17.0 0.16 S0 0.32 i50 0.22 20 Ov2 rv 0-12 - 03 15.0 0.22 j.?jflf 0.02 27.0 9012 6- 0.3 16.0 0.j 142.0 flQ2 32-OM .iO 6i2 ffi 18.5 0.21 . 147.0 0.0 3A.4 cm9 03 19. .1162. W 0 0.S0. 3.0ZA Q...IC9 = .. ~ r r.ir - -V 42.0 -0,07 22.5 0.10.! . 192. 77_L.0 0.02 16.2 O.j.1 230 0.9112. 0 0l9 M ZA-M __0 ______1 19. 020 122- - Sin... 0.0 2 3.8 0.11 20.0 0.17 922.01. .01 3 § .10 20.5 0 DO ~~~~A 6.2 26.5_ P..0 I__ 107.0 0Q.02 36.2 0.07 2.0L 0..2 - - 12.0 jw2 .1 285 Q3 .- - 122.0 0.00 662 ...06... 4Z.9- w117.0 0. 612 i§.A 35.0 0,14 - - 6142 0.01 3600A - i.'E 0.00 B-3 Final Report ( 12/95 Appendix B-3. QuickBasic program for slug test data reduction and conductivity estimates. 'QuickBasic Program to perform permeability estimates based on 'Kemblowski & Klein (1988) for well slug tests. DIM t(1 10), yo(l 10), y(l 10) Niter=25 epsi =.0 1 INPUT "Enter name of input file:", infile$ OPEN infile$ FOR INPUT AS #I INPUT 'Enter name of output file:",outfil$ OPEN outfil$ FOR OUTPUT AS #2 'initial value of K: K= 100 ft/day OR LESS K=2 K =K/864001 INPUT #1, m PRINT "number of points:",m FOR YY = 1 TO 2000:N EXT YY: I A Pause. FOR i = 1 TO m INPUT # 1, t(i), yo(i) PRINT i, t(i), yo(i) NEXTi FOR index = 1 TO S INPUT # 1, D PRINT "D = ", D yoy=oYOM n0O EstimateDepths: n =n+ 1 KoD = - KID PRINT "index =",index:PRINT "n ",n, "KID = ,KoD:!Report FOR i= 1 TO m y(i) = yO*EXP(KoD*t(i)) NEXTi B-4 ( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 'Calculate correction & error Mum = O:Den = O:E = 0 FOR i = 1 TO m Num = Num + (yo(i) - y(i))*y(i)*t(i) Den = Den + y(i)*y(i)*t(i)*t(i) E =E + (yo(i)-y(i))A2 NEXTi sigma = SQR(E/(m-1)) 'PRINT "Num =', Numn," Den = ,Den PRINT "E = I.,E, " sigma =', sigma IFABS(sigma) B-5 Final Report 12/95 Appendix B-4. Summary results far slug test data reduction and conductivity estimates. Table B-i. Values of D for Blelson AFB wells, Site 45/57. Well rc fftl rwfftl Lefftl Lwlftl Le/rw A B C ASMWO8 0.166 0.375 10.00 8.52 26.67 2.30 0.40 2.00 UWRLMWS 0.083 0.25 5.00 2.80 20.00 2.20 0.40 1.90 Well full H=40 ft H =50ft H = O00ft H =200ft H = 5O0tt H= 1000 ft H=10.000 ft 45MW08 0.001555 0.002729 0.002707 0.002645 0.002590 0.002523 0.002475 0.002330 UWRLMWB 0.000603 0.001035 0.001028 0.001006 0.000986 0.000961 0.000942 0.000886 Variables defined in Kemblowski and Klein (1988). Table B-2. Permeability values determined at Site 45/57 EAFB, AK. Values were estimated using the algorithm from Kemblowskii and Klein (1988), for the slug test analysis of Bouwer and Rice (see Bouwer, 1978). Permeability is in ft/day. fully Aquifer depth ( Well Test No. penetrating H=40 ft H=50 ft H =100ff H=200 ft H =O00ft H 1,000 ff H 10,00O ft 45MW08 I 48.1 83.4 82.7 80.8 79.2 77.1 75.7 71.2 2 46.4 80.4 79.8 77.9 76.3 74.3 72.9 68.6 3 52.6 91.1 90.4 88.3 86.5 84.1 82.6 77.8 Average 49.0 85.0 84.3 82.4 80.6 78.5 77.1 72.5 UWRLMW8 1 1.5 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.7 2 1.7 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.9 3 1.8 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.1 Average 1.6 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.1 1:.9 ()The aquifer depth is not known. Values of K were calculated for aquifer depths (H) between 40 and I10.000 ft. as well as for a fully-penetrating well. B-6 Final Report 0. ~~~~~~~~12/95 0.c . 'OUd 'O N N N; ( (N CNN N N U ~ ~ ~ ~ N'O -O- O-- O- - - 0 '--00-00-- 0 - ~~ ~ ~ ~ - -' 0 0' 0 Co -O- - -N - - o LLI "888-8-ON N -(NC00 - - 000000cc-.- -- -88- a- I66oococooocdooo Odd U -0 C) 066ddEOcoo coo. co 0 L()~~6000000060000d - NN C> 006w 666obcc oo6666 <-¶--0.00 0000)'OU, E N CN N~~~rflr~~ N N N N~ C)3 E E~~~~~~~- Final Report '1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 (D C~~~~~~C 4-~~~~~Q -D . 1P-C r~ w -i CiC 6~ c 0 ~ C 0) - C) >0) LO 00 © U------ (I -~~~~~~~~~~~ DO) 0) C B-8 Final Report 12/95 Appendix C. Soil core % organic carbon, and soil nutriient content data for samples collected at Site 45/57, EAFB in November, 1993. Final Report 12/95 M ~~~~Come59 Cor.454 .1-.2 Deph Ijye * %Opic Cwfn Deph L~yw I% Orjpric Crin 2 0.91 l.RiiiM0.61 1 >1.0 ~ ~ ~~~~30.7 5 ~~~~~40.695 6 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~6 ...... ~~ 4 0.28 7 7 :.....C ...... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ * / 0.2B 88 ~ 6 0.28 6 0.21 *0.3 9 ...... 9. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... IC I.C0 ...... ~ ~ ~0.38 ~~~~~8 it 2 11 9 0.15 7 0.19 ...... 12 '... 8 0.13 .12 :-10 0.21 13.. 13 ...... ~~ ~~~~~120.22 14 ::14 2::3 0.14 is v. 9 0.22 15 144KK ...... 10 9.13 is <.10 16 16 .16 0.13 11 0.a .... 17 12 •10 17 17 0.13 14 <.10 19 0.13 19 19 .. 0.17 15 0.11 ...... 20 ~~~21 0.13 22 029 Figure C-1. Site 45/57 soil % organic carbon content results for the Soils Testing Laboratory. Utah State University. 9 0~~~~~~~~~-2 Final Report 12/95 K ~~~~cm4S-9 Coe4-8 41 Dep5:550o~th Layer U PIK Depth Layer N PIN 2-3 ~$:~~75-100 1 2.8.83 1~, 3-4100-125 4 ~ ~ ~~~~~~24.1,74 4 :::.:.:::::....:..: 2 1.7, >4 >12S 3::::*k143 7 .wsnn...... 4 2479 *. . 5 1249 '~~~~~~t3~1.2 85 6 6 ...... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 'f 4 1485 8 8 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... 6 1.2,8S 6 1.6,53 7 1.3,8 ...... 9 9...... 11 ~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~119 144 7 NSNS 12 8 .S,42 12 ~ 10 14L43 ...... 14,4 13 13...... A>122.6,61 14 14 .. :... 13 1.44a is ...... ~~~~~~~~~ ... .. 10. 1.5,42 15 1.8,53 16 ..... 16 16 1.6,45 11 NSNS 18 12 1.6,46 17 17 2.15? ...... 14 12,42 ;..w~~~~~... . 19 .3,49 19 1:..2...... 41 151.6,46~~~~~~~0 .64 Figure C-2. Site 45/57 soil nutrient (Pand K) conten t results, mg/kg soil. from the Soils Testing Laboratory, Utah State University. K ~~~~~~~~~~C-3 Final Report 12/95 N03-N %TKN ~~~Care4S-9 Con 45 ...... l Depth Layer 4 N0S-N,%ITh Depth Layer h N0-,fC 1 .5,4 ...... 1 .702 1.25-1.50 M 0,0 4 :.v..*~::: 2 .7.01 4 2 .S,.01 1. 5-1.75S sO 1.7 5-2.0 70 5 .6401 ..... 3 S.O1S 7t 6 5~~~ 6 ~~~~~5,.01S 6 .9,.01 7 .4~01 9 ~~~~~~~~~~9 10 10 ...... S .7,015 11 11~~~~~~~~..... 9 .6401 7 .6NS ..... 12...... 54112 ..... 10 .7..015 ...... 12 6c01 15 ...... 9 I 1 4 0 17 12 .5,...l.17...... 7 Sc0 18 ...... 12 ,~ 14S ~ ~ ~ 4 ...... 19 .A< 0 1 19 ...... >1 ...... 20 4 0 .. . :...... 1...1...... 9 .. .7<0120... 21 4<01 16 6~~~~~~~~~~~~~f 11c01.S Figure0-3.Site 45/57. soil niroe.cntn.(0.Nan.KN.esltmgk and%. rspectivey, from he Soil Tetn Labraor.ta.Sat University. 5'-O 1 .... 7 5,. 9 0-4 K~~~~~~~~~~...... Final Report 1 ~~~~~~~12/95 Appendix D-1. Site 45/57 soil purge and trap specific com~pound collected November, 1993. data K ~~~~~~~~~~~~D-1 Final Report Eielson AfB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 PT Sail 3784 S4-931Sample Date Mass Concentration SB 45-9-3-1 11/2/93 Compound Compound Mass (ng (g/gdr wI)bpRne Cocnrtn (g n-Hexane ~~294 2.4 (g/dr ) 2 ,4-Dimnethl~ypentae PT PTSoil 3785 Soil 3785 ~~~~~~~~~~SB45-9-3-2 ~~~~~~~~~~SampleDate Mass 11/2/93 Concentration Compound Cmound (g)(Ig/ drywt)bpRne Mass Concentration 2, - -imethlpnane (g (g/drw) 2 4 1040.6C-6 ~ -Dimedy~pentane 161 30.8 0.92 C-6 0.18 Benzene 61.1 to C-7 466 2.7 0.35 C-7 to n-H-eptane 3390.19 C-s 365 2.1 C-S Toluene 32.7 to c-9 153 0.88 0.19 C-9 n-Octane 63.0 to C-ID 139 0.80 0.36 C-10 to p-Xylene 29.1 C-Il 18 1.0 0.17 CI oC1 n-Nonane ~~49.8 0.29 3 . n-Decane C-12 to C-13 65.9 0.38 84.0 - 0.48 n-Butylbenzene C-13 to C-14 0.0 42.6 0.24 0.0 n-Undecane C-14 to C-Is 0.0 23.7 0.14 0.0 ni-Dodecane >C-15 0.0 0.0 68.8 0.40 PT PT Soil 3786 Soil 3786 ~~~~~~~SB45-9-3-3 ~~~~~~~~~~SampleDate Mass 11/2/93 Concentration compound Comp0~_ound ( )(gg/g Mass Concentration dry wt) _bp !Rane(g 2 n-DHethlpnane 161.0 / r t 2 D-2 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data129 PT Soil 3787 58 45-95..1 ~~~~Sample Date PT Soil 3787 SB 45-9-4.5-1 ~~~11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Co mpound (ng)0 (i g gd y w )b n-Hexane 830 ~~~3.7 a gng) (g /g dryw t) 2 4 cC6136 0.61 , -Dimethylpentane 259 1.2 C-6 to C-7 1,339 6.0 Benzene 38.1 0.17 C-7 to C-8 795 3.6 n-H-eptane 65.9 0.29 C-S to C-9 131 0.58 Toluene 169 0.76 C-9 to C-iC 104 0.46 n-Octane 86.6 0.39 C-10 to C-1l 146 0.65 p-Xyiene 24.5 0.11 C-11 to C-12 207- 0.93 n-Nonane 39.5 0.18 C-12 to C-13 61.3 0.27 n-Decane 52.0 0.23 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 29.4 0.13 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 n-Undecane 94.2 0.42 >C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Doclecane 50.2 0.22 PT Soil 3788 Sample Date SB 45-9-4.5-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound_(ng (ggdyw)pRae (ng). (gg/gdrywt) n-Hexane 155 0.97 2 Sample PT Sail 3789 Date SB 45-9-4.5-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Comp~:ound ~ (n) (g/g drywt) bpRne (n ) (ggdr wt) n-I-exane 4530.19 D-3 Final Report ElesonAEBSoi Secific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data12 5 FIT Soil 3787 SB 45-9-45q1 Mass Concentration Sample Date C~Ompound (ng) ~~~(~~~~n~~Compound 11/2/93 n-Hex~ane (g /gr wt) Mass 830 b ag n) g/Concentration 2 3C-7 r t ~4-Dinethy~entane 259 26 0.6 1.2 C-6 Benzene 381i to C-7 1,339 0610 n-Heptane 0.17 C-7 65.9 to C-S 79 3.6 0.29 C-S Toluene 169 to C-9 131 0.58 n-Octane 0.76 C-9 86.6 to C-lU 104 0.46 P-Xylene 0.39 C-J0 24.5 0.11 to C-il 146 0.465 n-Nonane 3950.18 C-lt -2 2Z0.93 n-Decane C-12 52.0 0.23 to C-i2 61.3 0.27 n-Butylbenzene C-12 to C-14 29.4 0.13 01.0 0.07 n-tUndecane -C-13 to C-is 94.2 0.42 0.0 0.0 ni-Dodecane C>4 oC-15 0.0 50.2 0.22>C1 0.0 .00 PT Soil 3788 Sample Date Mass Concentration SB 45-9-4.5-2 Comoud 11/2/93 ompound(n ln~~~~~~~) (Mg/g dry n-HeXane wt) Compoundbp Rne Mass Concentration 155 0.97 (n)( g/ d wt 2, 4-Dimethylpentane _C__0. 12.5 0.08 0.0~(~ t Benzene C-6 to C-? 2.4 0.02 23214 n-Heptane C-? to C-8 19.9 0.12 378 2.4 Toluene 105 C-8 to C-9 75.7 n-Octane 0.66 C- 0.47 37.6 0.23 oCl 5~0.47 Effiylbenzene C-9 to C-lI 1.2 0.01 92.0 0.57 P-Xylene C-10 to C-12 12.2 0.08 1203 0.64 n-Nonane C-12 to C-12 29.2 0.18 69.4 0.643 n-Decane C-12 to C-14 36.2 0.23 09.04 0.03 n-Butylben~zene C-14 to C-is 28.5 0.11 0.0 - 0.0 n-Undecane C>4t C-i5 0.0 49.1 0.31 0.0 n-Dodecane C1 . 56.8 0.35 . PT Sail 3789 SB 45-9-4.5-3 Mass Sa1/2/93t Compound ( Concentration g ( g/g dry wt) Copond Mss Cocn9ato bpoRange (ng) Con/gndryatio n-Hexane 4530.19 Benzene D-3 Final Report Elelson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 125 PT Soil 3790 Sample Date SB 45-9-6-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Compound (n) (ggdywt) Concentration bpRne (g '/ r t) Benzene 17.5 0.08 C-6 to C-7 102 0.47 n-Heptane 19.0 0.09 C-7 to C-S 48.3 0.23 Toluene 12.0 0.06 C-s to C-9 14.8 0.07 p-Xylene 5.6 0.03 C-9 to C-10 24.8 0.12 n-Decane 19.6 0.09 C-10 to C-1i 73.3 0.34 n-Butylbenzene 22.9 0.11 C-11 to C-i2 321 1.5 n-Undecane 68.2 0.32 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 n-Dodecane 105 0.49 C-13 to C-i4 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-i5 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 PT Soil 3791 Sample Date 58 45-9-6-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (g g/ r wt) bpRange (ng (g/ r t) n-Hexane32.4 0.37 .c~~~~C-6108.2 Toluene 12.6 0.14 C-6 to C-7 69.7 07 n-Nonane 3.9 0.04 C-7 to C-S 46.7 0.53 n-Decane 8.2 0.09 C-S to C-9 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 16.2 0.18 C-9 to C-1b 12.9 0.15 n-Undecane 16.7 0.19 C-1b to C-11 26.2 0.30 n-Dodecane 24.0 0.27 C-1i to C-12 31.5 0.36 C-12 to C-13 29.3 0.33 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 PT Soil 3792 Sample Date SB 45-9-6-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Compound Mass Concentration (ng) _(gg/ drywt) ~ bp Rang~e n-Hxne3.8 (n) (g / r t) 0.14 D-4 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point p&T Data 125 PT Soil 3793 Sample Date SB 45-9-7.5-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (n) (ggdyw)bp Range (ng) ( /g dry wt) n-Hexane 32.2 0.17 C-9.2 0.05 Berizene 3.2 0.02 C-6 to C-7 99.3 0.53 n-Decane 4.6 0.02 C-7 to C-8 11.5 0.06 n-Undecane 6.9 0.04 C-s to C-9 0.0 0.00 n-Dodecane 8.3 0.04 C-9 to C-10 3.6 0.02 C-10 to C-i1 4.1 0.02 C-il to C-12 8.9 0.05 C-12 to C-13 10.1 0.05 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 PT Soil 3794 Sample Date SB 45-9-7.5-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (n) (g/dr wt) bpERange (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 20.8 0.06 <0-6b 7.9 0.02 Benzene 2.7 0.01 C-6 to C-7 88.0 0.27 p-Xylene 2.1 0.01 C-7 to C-S 6.5 0.02 n-Decane 3.3 0.01 C-8 to C-9 2.6 0.01 n-Undecane 13.1 0.04 C-9 to C-10 2.9 0.01 n-Dodecarne 5.9 0.02 C-10 to C-lI 2.9 0.,01 C-il to C-12 17.0 0.05 C-12 to C-13 7.2 0.02 C-i3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-i5 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 PT Soil 3795 Sample Date SB 45-9-7.5-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) [qg/g dry wt) bpRange .(ng) ( ggdry n-Hexane 18.4 wt) 0.05 D-5 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 125 Sample Date PT Soil 3797 SB 45-9-9-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jag/g dry wt) bp Range__ (ng,) (gL/g dry wt) n-Hexane 17.7 0.04 Sample Date PT Soil Blank Blank 12/31/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (pgg/g dry wt) p-Xylene 0.9 3.48E-03 Sample PT Soil Blank Date . Blank 12/31/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (i9g/gdry wt) bpR ngce (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) Benzene 10.0 0.04 D-6 Final Report Eielson AFB Sail Specific Compound and Boiling Point ?&T Data 12/95 PT Soil 3796 Trip Blankc 12/31/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (pg/g dry wt) n-Hexane, 12.9 0.06 C-14 to C-15 0.0 - 00 >C-15 0.0 0.0 D-7 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 Sample Date PT Soil Blank Blank 1/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) &4g/gdry wt) bp Range (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) Benzene 13.6 0.05 Sample Date Yr Soil 3799 58 45-9-10.5-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (i'g/g dry wt) bp Range. (ng) (pg/gdry wt) Benzene 10.1 0.02 Sample Date Pr Soil 3800 SB 45-9-10.5-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound nrgg (pgg/gdry wt) bpRang5e (ng) (jig/gdry wt) riHexane Co57 3.1 - D-8 Final Report Eielson AfB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 Sample Date PT Soil 3801 SB 45-9410.5-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) bpRang (ng) (Mg/g dry -vt) n-H-exane 1,235 9.5 Sample Date PT Soil 3802 SB 45-9-12-i 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt) bpRange (ng) -(gg/gdry wt) n-Hexane 1,023 5.1 Sample Date PT Soil 3803 SB 45-9-12-2 11 /2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/gdry wt) bpRange (ng) (gg/gdry wt) n-H-exane 1,156 3.4 D-9 Final Report Eielson AFE Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data129 Sample Date P75Soil38D4 SB 45-9-12-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 998 4.8 p-Xylene 38.1 0.18 C-12 to C.13 0.0 -0.0 n-Propylbenzene 6.6 0.03 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 7.3 0.03 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 18.5 0.09 >C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Undecane 3.6 0.02 Sample Date PT Soil 3805 SB 45-9-13.5-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jtg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (gg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 915 4.4 ri-Propylbnzee 6.6 0.03 C-14 to C-15 0.0 - 0.0 n-Decane 12.2 0.06 >C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 4.1 0.02 n-Undecane 5.2 0.02 Sample Date PT Soil 3806 SB 45-9-13.5-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (;g/g dry wt) bpRange (ng) (&&g/gdry wt) n-Hexane 1,580 4.6 D-10 Final Report Elelson APE Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 PT Soil 3807 SB 45-9-13.5-3 Samp2/Da3 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) ( /gdyt)bp Range (g g/ r t n-Hexane 1,271 3.9 2 4 PT Soil 3808 Sample Date SB 45-9-15-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Otglg dry in) bp Range (ng) (Mg/g dry -t) n-Heane. 2.057 12.4 2 PT Soil 3809 Sample Date SE 45-9-15-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration COMp~ound (nig) (gg/g dry wwt) bpRangIe (nig) (Ag/g dry wt) n-H-exane 1,271 7.3 D-1 1 Final Report Fielson APB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 Sample Date PT Soil 3810 SB 45-9-15-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (lig/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,872 4.0 p-Xylene 81.6 0.18 C-12 to C-13 0.0 _ 0.0 n-Propylberuzene 85 0.02 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 13.3 0.03 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbernzere 11.3 0.02 >C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Un~decane 10.1 0.02 Sample Date PT Soil 3811 Sb 45-9-16.5-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (i'g/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (Mggg dry wt) n-H-exane 1,570 8.5 Sample Date PT Soil 3812 SB 45-9-16.5-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (g'g/g dry wt) bpRanmge (ng) (g±g/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,528 5.7 D-12 Final Report Bielson AFB Sol Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 Sample Date PT SoiI 3813 SB 45-9-16.5-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gig/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (i'g/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,387 10.2 Sample Date PT Soil 3814 SB, 45-9.18-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Qig/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) C(ig/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,692 5.8 n-Propylbenzene 11.9 0.04 C-14 to C-i5 0.0 - 0.0 n-Decane 17.1 0.06 >C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 5.8 0.02 n-Undecane 5.2 0.02 Sample Date PT Soil 3815 SB 45-9-18-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (ug/gdry wt) n-Hexane 12338 4.1 D-13 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Bodling Point P&T Data 12/95 Sample Date P'TSoil 3816 SB 45-9-18-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (i'g/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (pg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,164 2.0 cC-6 92.3 0.16 2,4-Dimnethylpentane 287 0.49 C-6 to C-7 1,368 2.4 Benzene 14.0 0.02 C-7 to C-8 224 0.39 n-Heptane 19.8 0.03 C-s to C-9 123 0.21 Toluene 68.8 0.12 C-9 to C-10 20.6 0.04 n-Octane 13.4 0.02 C-10 to C-il 22.9 0.04 Ethylbenzene 42.5 0.07 C-11 to C-12 -0.0 0.0 p-Xylene 50.7 0.09 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 10.3 0.02 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-i5 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 D-1 4 Final Report EiesoSil AFpeifi Cmpondand Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 PT Soil Blank Blank 11/8/934 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (p'g/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (ug/g dry wt) Benzerne 7.5 0.06 PT Soil 4176 SB45-8-16.5'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jag/g dry wt) bpRage (ng) (gtg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 15.9 0.04 cC- 0.0 0.0 Benzene 6.8 0.02 C-6 to C-7 45.0 0.1 C-7 to C-B 4.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-10 2.1 0.0 C-10 to C-11 0.0 0.0 C-11 to C-12 0.0 0.0 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~to C-13 ~ ~~~0.0 ~ ~~~C-120.0 C-13 to C-i4 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 FT Soil 4177 S5345-8-19.5-1 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Qig/g dry wt) bpRage (ng) (gg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 2,177 10.8 cC- 118 0.6 2,4-Dimethylpentane 605 3.0 C-6 to C-7 2,707 13.5 Benzene 53.3 0.27 C-7 to C-B 442 2.2 n-Heptane 61.8 0.31 C-B to C-9 304 1.5 Toluerne 133 0.66 C-9 to C-10 116 0.6 n-Octane 29.7 0.15 C-l0 to C-li1 62.6 0.3 Ethylbenzene 95.9 0.48 C-11 to C-12 43.0 0.2 p-Xylene 129 0.64 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 Nonane 18.0 0.09 .C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Propyibenzene 21.3 0.11 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Decanie 27.3 0.14 >C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Buthlbenzene 11.2 0.06 Undecane 21.1 0.10 Naphthelene 36.6 0.18 D-15 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 PT Soil 4178 SB45-8-19.5-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (lt gig dry wt) n-Hexane 1A497 7.4 PT Soil 4179 SB45-8-13.5'-l 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gLg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (gg/g dry wt) n-H-exane 664 2.2 PT Soil 4180 5845-8-18'-l 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound . (ng) (igg/gdry wt) bp Range (ng) (pgl/gdry wt) n-Hexane 40,936 199 D-1 6 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data129 PT Soil 4182 S845-8-18'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (stg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (pg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 2,233 7.7- PT Soil 4184 SB45-8-19.5-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/ g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (pig/g dry wt) n-Hexane 2,224 6.8 D-1 7 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data129 PT Soil 4189 SB45-8I6.5-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (ig/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (litgig dry wt) n-Hexane 1,064 4.3 cC61,179 4.8 2,4-Dimethiylpentane 196 0.79 C-6 to C-7 1,140 4.6 Benzene 0.75 0.00 C-7 to C-S 128 0.52 Toluene 62.8 0.25 C-S to C-9 123 0.50 n-Octane 9.0 0.04 C-9 to C-10 60.6 0.24 Bthylbenzene 40.3 0.16 C-10 to C-11 36.3 0.15 p-Xylene 55.3 0.22 C-11 to C-12 6.7 0.0 Norume 6.4 0.03 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 n-Propylbernzene 11.8 0.05 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 13.7 0.06 C-14 to C-IS -0.0 0.0 n-Buthlbenzene 7.7 0.03 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Undecane 5.2 0.02 D-1 8 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data12 5 PT Soil Blank Blank 1/21/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (iig/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (iig/g dry wt) Benzene 14.2 0.06 FT Soil 4191 SB45-8-13.5'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pgglg dry wt) bp Range (ng) (pg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,355 3.6 Pr Soil 4192 SB454-1-0.5'-2 11/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (vg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 3,342 13.7 D-19 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 PT Soil 4193 SB 45-8-9'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jgg/g dry wt) bp Range (zig) (Mggg dry wt) n-Hexane 2,157 14.6 PT Soil 4194 58 45-8-4.5'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (zig) (ug/g dry wt) bp Range (zig) (pg/g dry wt) ni-Hexane 1,136 8.5 PT Soil 4195 SB 45-8-13.5-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (zig) (j.g/g dry wt) bp Range (nig) (g~g/g dry wt) ni-Hexane 1,800 7.0 D-20 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 129 PT Soil 4196 SB 45-8-10.54- 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (iig/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 2,969 10.4 cC-6 186 0.65 2,4-Dimethylpentane 774 2.7 C-6 to C-7 3,603 12.6 Benzene 39.8 0.14 C-7 to C-S 403 1.4 n-Heptane 34.0 0.12 C-S to C-9 286 1.0 Toluene 136 0.48 C49 to C-la 86.7 0.30 n-Octane 25.8 0.09 C-10 to C-lI 37.8 0.13 Ethylbenzene 88.8 0.31 C-11 to C-12 51.3 0.18 p-Xylene 121 0.42 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 n-Nonarne 16.6 0.06 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Propytbenzene 16.4 0.06 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 28.8 0.10 >C-15 TO 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 10.3 0.04 n-Undecane 14.1 0.05 Naphthelene 76.9 0.27 PT Soil 4197 SB 45-8-7.5-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mig/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) Qgg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,412 8.9 FT Soil 4198 Trip Blank 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) .(igg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) QAg/g dry Wt) n-Hexane 3,000 13.7 D-21 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 PT Soil Blank Blank 1/21/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) &jig/gdry wt) bp Rag (ng) 4tg/g dy wt) n~-Hexane 4.6 0.02 cC-6e 0.00. Benzene 13.2 0.06 C-6 to C-7 142 0.65 rn-Decane 0.63 0.00 C-7 to C-8 8.4 0.04 n-Undecane 0.84 0.00 C-S to C-9 0.0 0.0 n-Dodecane 0.58 0.00 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-1b to C-lI 0.56 0.00 C-11 to C-12 1.1 0.00 C-12 to C-13 0.71 0.00 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-i5 -0.0 0.0 >C-1S 0.0 0.0 PT Soil 4199 SB 45-8-16.5-1 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Comnpound (ng) 01gg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) Otiglg dry wt) n-Hexane 1,114 4.9 Pr Soil 4200 SB 45-8-12'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (j~g/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (igg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 993 3.2 .CC.6 68.5 0.22 2,4-Dimethylpentane 197 0.64 C-6 to C-7 1,178 3.8 Benzene 11.2 0.04 C-7 to C-S 147 0.47 n-Heptane 8.9 0.03 C-8 to C-9 182 0.59 Toluene 66.9 0.22 C-9 to C.10 48.3 0.16 n-Octane 19.2 0.06 C-iC to C-Il 24.1 0.08 Bthylbenzene 57.9 0.19 C-1i to C-12 21.9 0.07 p-Xylene 80.0 0.26 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 n-Propylbenzene 10.7 0.03 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 26.8 0.09 C-I4 to C-I5 0.0 0.0 n-Undecane 16.9 0.05 >C-15 0.0 0.0 D-22 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 PT Soil 4201 SB 45-8-9'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (g~g/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (gglg dry wt) n-Hexane 969 5.0 PT Soil 4202 SB 45-8-75'-1 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jiigig dry wt) bp Range (ng) (i'g/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,773 10.2 PT Soil 4203 SB 45-8-45-1 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt) bp R~ange (ng) (igg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,289 13.5 D-23 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 PT Soil 4204 SB45-8-15'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (gg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 942 2.4 PT Soil 4205 SB45-8-12'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gig/g dry wt) bp R~ange (ng) Gi.g/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,201 6.8 PT Soil 4206 SB45-8-7.5'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (4g/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (jMg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 4,539 11.4 D-24 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data12 5 FT Soil 4207 SB4S-8-6-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pgg/g dry wt) bp Rage (ng) (pg/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,030 6.2 .CC 17.9 0.11 2,4-Dimethylpentane 193 1.2 C-6 to C-7 1,189 7.2 Benzene 11.2 0.07 C-7 to C-8 123 0.75 n-Heptane 8.9 0.05 C-8 to C-s 128 0.78 Toluene 60.3 0.37 C-s to C-10 50.0 0.30 Ethylbenzene 45.6 0.28 C-1b to C-11 24.4 0.15 p-Xylene 60.0 0.36 C-11 to C-12 8.9 0.05 n-Nonane 9.3 0.06 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 n-Propylbenzene 9.7 0.06 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Decarne 17.0 0.10 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 3.9 0.02 >C-15 0.0 0.0 n-tjndecane 6.9 0.04 FT Soil 4208 SB45-8-3'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/g dry wt) bp Ranige (ng) G'ig/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,036 9.9 FT Soil 4209 SB45-8-6'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (uig/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,156 9.1 D-25 Final Report Eielson AEB Sail Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 PT Soil 4210 SB45-8-3'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentrabion Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jltg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (i'g/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,100 7.7 n-Decane 16.9 0.12 C-14 to C-IS _ 0.0 0.0 n-Undecane 10.9 0.08 >C-1S 0.0 0.0 PT Soil 4211 S345-8-12'-I 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (jgg/g dry wt) n-H-exane 1,267 5.8 P'T Soil Blank Blank 1/22/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (pg/g dry wt) Benzene 14.7 0.07 D-26 Final Report Eielson AFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 1/5 PT Soil 4212 SB4S-8-15'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (&tg/gdry wt) bp Rage (ng (~t gigdrwt n7Hxae 2,956 10.3 <-124 0.43 t 2,4-Dimethylpentane 743 2.6 C-6 to C-7 3,551 12.3 Benzene 67.6 0.23 C-7 to C-8 405 1.4 n-Heptane 54.3 0.19 C-8 to C-9 501 1.7 Toluene 159.6 0.55 C-9 to C-jo 171 0.59 n-Octane 45.6 0.16 C-10 to C-il 100 0.35 Ethylbenzene 160 0.55 C-11 to C-12 199 0.69 p-Xylene 212 0.74 C-12 to C-13 26.0 0.09 n-Nonane 33.4 0.12 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Propylbenzene 35.0 0.12 C-14 to C-i5 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 47.2 0.16 >C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 24.0 0.08 n-Undecrane 26.3 0.09 Naphthelene 85.0 0.30 n-Dodecane 21.3 0.07 FT Soil 4213 SB4S-8-i5'-l 11 /8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jiglg dry wt) bp Range (ngAjg/g dywt n-Hexane 1,402 4.5 PT Soil 4214 SB45-8-10.5-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gig/g dry wt) bp Range (rig) (j'g/g dyWt) n-Hexane 1,308 4.1 cC,-6 0.0 0.0 2,4-Dlinethylpentane 305 0.94 C-6 to C-7 1,620 5.0 Benzene 14.0 0.04 C-7 to C-8 195 0.60 n-Heptane 14.7 0.05 C-8 to C-9 182 0.56 Toluene 90.9 0.28 C-9 to C-10 76.2 0.24 n-Octane 14.9 0.05 C-IC to C-il 46.4 0.14 Ethylbenzene 61.1 0.19 C-Il to C-12 32.5 0.10 p-Xylene 79.3 0.25 C-12 to C-13 9.4 0.0 n-Nonane 11.4 0.04 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Propylbenzene 22.0 0.07 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 ri-Decane 20.7 0.06 >C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 9.2 0.03 n-Undecane 5.3 .0.02 Naphthelene 24.1 0.07 n-Dodecane 7700 D-27 Final Report N ~~~~~~~~~~EielsonAFB Soil Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 Sample Date PT Soil 4215 SB 45-8-9'-I 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (pg/g dry wt) n-H-exane 2,935 17.2 D-28 Fi nal Report Eielson AFB Sail Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data 12/95 FIT Soil 4216 SB4S-8-6-1 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) &'g/g dry wt) bpRage (ng) (g~g/g dry wt) n-Hexane 1,018 10.3 cC6 .0 0.0 2,4-Dimnethylpentane 191 1.9 C-6 to C-7 1,191 12.0 Benzene 0.08 0.60 C-7 to C-S 156 1.6 n-Heptane 9.2 0.09 C-S to C-9 157 1.6 Toluene 81.0 0.82 C-9 to C-10 60.8 0.61 n-Octane 13.1 0.13 C-10 to C-Il 44.2 0.45 Ethylbenzene 51.6 0.52 C-1I to C-12 102 1.0 p>-Xylene 69.2 0.70 C-12 to C-is 41.2 0.41 n-Propylbenzene 18.9 0.19 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 23.5 0.24 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 6.8 0.07 >C015 0.0 0.0 Undecane 16.2 0.16 Naphthelene 50.1 0.51 n-Dodecane 33.7 0.34 PT Soil 4217 SB45-8-3'-l 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/g dry wt) bp Range (ng) (pig/g dry wt) n-Hexane 3,777 37.2 D-29 Final Report( 12/95 Appendix 0-2. Site 45/57 soil soxhlef extraction, semivolatile compound data specific collected November, 1993. D-30 Final Report Eielson AF Specific Compound and Boiling point Split Data 12/95 Soxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Soxhiet Soil 3966 SB45-9-3'-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Compound Mass Concentration (ng) AM/. ryw.-bIage n1-P enadecane 9. (g-A'/ dyw. 2.7 bCp0. . C- to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-ID 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C- Il 0.0 . C-11 to C-12 0.0 - 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 . C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 992.7 Soxhlet Soil 3967 SB45-9-3'-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Compound (ng) (g/g Mass Concentration dry wt. bpRngtng) NOCOMPUINI)S IDENTIIFIED ( ggdyw. <06p 0.0n0. Soxhlet Sail 3968 Mass S4--t 129 Concentration Compoud9Mass Compound (ng) (g /gdr Concenratio w-.)- bopoRung d Mngass NOCOM~ouM~s IDENTIFIED docnrytwo) bp 60. . C-9 to C-iD 0.0 0.0 C-I0 to C-il 0.0 0.0 C-Il1 to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-i3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C014 to C-la 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 D-31 Finai Report Eielson AFB Specifc Compound and Boiling Point Split D)ata 1/ Soxhiet Extinction Soil Samples So~dilet Soil 39W9 SB45-9-4.5A- 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (ug/g dry wt.) bp Range (r'g) (,ug/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified C-11 to C-12 0.0 -0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-IS to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 . >C-15 1.7 0.96 Soxbjet Soj 3971) SB45-9-45-2 11/2/93 MA"s Concentration. Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (ug/g drv wt.) bp Range (rig) (~/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified cC-6 0.0 0.0 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C-7to C-8 0.0 . C-a to C-9 0.0 . C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-b0 to C-li 0.00. C-il to 0-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.O C-I3 to C.14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 11.6 6.0 >C-1S 1.9 09 Soxhiet Soil 3971 SB4S5-9-45'-3 11/2/93 mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (fig/g dry wt.) bp Range (rig) (uxg/gdry wt.) No Compounds Idenithed D-32 Final Report K> H~~~~~~~~~ielson AFB Specific Compound and-Boiling point Split Data129 Soxhiet Extraction Soil Samples SOxhiet Sofl 3972 SB45-96-64 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Compound (ng) Concentration O'g/g dry wt) bp NO Com~poundslIdentified Range (ng) (pugig dry wt) D-33 Final Report Eielson AFB specific Compound and Bailing Point Split Data129 Saxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Soxhlet Soil 3973 SB45-9-6'-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (g/ ~drwt.,) NO COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIED Saxhiet Sail 3974 SB45-9-6'-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) -bp Range .(ng) (gg/gdry wt.) NO COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIED Soxhlet Sail 3975 SB45-9-7.5-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/gdry wt.) bpRange (ng)aL / dyw. NO COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIED D-34 Final Report EielsonAFB S' ~ Eelon FB pecific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data ~~~~12/95 ~~~~~~< ~~~~~~~~~Soxhiet Extraction Soil Samples Soxhlet Soil 3976 SB45-9-7.5'-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jAglg dry wt.) bp Range (n) (ggdywt.) NO COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIED C-IC to C-lI 0.0 - 0.0 C-11 to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Soxhlet Soil 3977 SB45-9-7.5-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (i'g/gdry wt.) bp Range (rig Iggdyw. NO COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIED <06 0.0 0. Soxhlet Soil 3978 SB45-9-9'-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/gdry wt.) bpRange (nig (gig/gdry wt.) NO COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIED D-35 Final Report Eielson AEB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data .12/95 Soxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Soxhlet Soil 3979 SB45-9-10.5'-l 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (agg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) NO COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIED (Aggdyw. >C-15 0.0 0.0 Soxhlet Soil 3979 Spike SB45-9-10.5-1 Spike 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Comnpound (g JggdyW. bpRange (ng) -(Ag/gdry wt.)) n-Tridecane 87.8 44.2 Soxhlet Soil 3979 Spike SB45-9-10.5'-l Spike Dup 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) bpRange (ng) (ggL/Lgdr wt.) n-Tindecane 61.0 30.7 cC-6 0.0 0.0 n-Tetradecane 26.9 13.5 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 n-Pentadecane 29.0 14.6 C-? to C-S 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C-11 0.0 0.0 C-11 to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-la 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 21.1 10.6 C-14 to C-is 87.6 44.1 .9 ~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~33.6 ~ 16.90~~~~~~~~~~~>C-15 D-36 Final Report Fielson APE Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data129 Soxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Soxhlet Soil 3980 SB45-9-1o.5-i 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (igg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (Mg/gdry wt.) NO COM4POUTNDS IDENTIFID D-37 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AMB Specific Compound and boiling Point Split Data( Soxhiet Extraction Soil Samples Soxhiet Soil 3981 SB 45-9-105-3 1112193 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Cpug/g diy wt.) bp Range (rig) (pg/g dry wt.) n-Pentadlecane 9.3 4.8 Soxhlet Sodl 3982 SB 45-9-12'-l 11/2/93 Mass Concerntration Compound Mixss Concentration Compund Cg) (pg/g dry wrt) pRnge (rig) (p gig dry wt.) oCompuns Detected UCS.U 0.0 f ~~~~~~~~~~to C-7 ~ ~~~~~~~C-60.0 0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 0.0 0a C-9toC-10 0.0 0.0 C-l0toC-11 0.0 0.0 C-11 to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12toC-13 0.0 ao0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 ~;C-15 0.0 0.0 Soxhlet Sodl 3983 S8 45-9-12X-2 11/2/93 Masw Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (Ni) (pg/g drywt.) bp Range (rig) (pg/gdry. wt.) n-Pentadecane 5S7 3.0 D-38 Final Report Elelson AfB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data129 Soxhiet Extraction Soil Samples Soxhiet Soil 3984 SB4S-9-12'-3 11/2/93 Mass Concelntraion Compound Masn Concentration Compound (rig) (.ug/g dry wt.) bp Range (rig) (uig/g dry wt.) n-Pentadecane 1.0 0.60 Sso,dde Soi 3955B45-9-135-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (pg I& dy wt.) bp Range (rig) ujg/g ri-Pentadecane dry wt.) 6.8 327 Soxhlet Soil 3986 SB 45-9-13.S-2 U /2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (OM) (uj/ge dry wt.) bp Range (rig) (ug/g dry wt.) NO compounds Detected cC6043 0.0 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-S to C-9 0.0 0 C-9 to C-iD 0.0 0.0 C-Ia to C-Il 0.0 . C-1i to C-12 04) 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-IS to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-i5 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.D D-39 Final Report Eielson APE Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data129 SoxhIet Fxtracaion Sodl Samples Soxhiet Soil 3987 SB 45-9135-3 11/2/93 Mass Concentration. Camp amid Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (jig/ gdry wt.) -bpRange (rig) (ug/g dry wvt.) n-Pentadecane 0.6 0.29 Soxhlet Soil 3988 SB45-9-15'-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compoimd mass Concentration Compound (rig) (puglg dry wt.) bp Ra~ng (rig) (uig/g dry wt.) n-Pentadecmne BA8 5.0 <0-6 0.0 0.0 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-? to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C-Il 0.0 0.0 C-11 to C-12 O.0 0.0. C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-i3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 -. >C-15 83 5.1 Soxhl1et Soil3989 SB 45-9.15t.2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (;,g/g dry wt.) bp Pange (rig) (pg/g dry wt-) No Compounds Detected D-40 Final Report 12/95 ~~N~~~) Th~~~Blsn AF Specfc Compound and Boiling Point Split Data Soxfdlet Extraction Soil Samples Soxhlet Soil 3990 SB 4S-9-15s-3 1112193 Mans Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (pg/g dry wt.) bp Range (r') (ugig/ dry wt.) n-Tetradecane 0.58 0.26 Soxtdiet Soil 3991 SB 45-9-165-1 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentnation Compound (nit) (usg/gdzy wt.) bp Range (rig) (;tglg dry wt.) INo Compounds Detected Soxhlet Soil 3992 SB45-9-165'-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (pig/gd~rywt.) bp Range ri-Pentadecane (rig) (p/ yw. 7.0 3.5 CC- 0.0 0. 3S D-41 Final Report 12/95 Eielson APE Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data Soxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Soxhlet Soil 3993 SB 45-9-165'-3 11 /2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (ug/g dry wt.) bp Range (zig) (ug/g dry wt.) n,-Pentadecane 2A 1.3 Soxhiet Soil 3994 SB 45-9-18W-I 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Conoenfration. Compound (rig) (;sg/g dry wt.) bp Range (rwg) (gig Ig dry wt.) No Compounds Detected C-13 toC-14 0.0 - 0.0 C-14 to C.15 0.0 0.0 >C-I5 0.0 0.0 Soxhnlet SWi3995 SB 45--9-lS'-2 11/2/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (ig/g dry wt.) bp Range (nig) (jig/g dzywt.) No Compounds Identified D-42 Final Report N B~~~~~~~~~ielsaziAFBS Spedfic Compound and Boiling Point Split Data 12/95 Soxhiet Extraction Soil Samples Soxh~let Soil 3996 SB 45-9-I8t-3 11/2/93 Mms Concentration Compound Mass Concerntration, Compound (rig) (.ug/g dry wt.) bp Range (rig) (pIg/g dry wt.) ri-Pentadecane 19.9 837 cC-6 0.0 0.0 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7?to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C-Il 0.0 0.0 C-11 to C-12 0.0 - 0.0 C-12 to C-13 04) 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 04) 0.0 >C-15 20.8 9.1 Soxhlet Soil 3997 SB 45-8-.Y- 11 /8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (ugigg dry wt.) bp Range (nig) (ptg/g dry wt.) n-Pentadecajne 65.6 41.5 Blank Blank 11/8/93 Mass Conceniration Compound Mass Concentration Compound .(zig) (pg/gdry wt.) bp Range (rig) (gsg/gdry wt.) ni-Tetradecane 0.50 0.14 cC-6 0.0 0.0 zi-Pentadecane 12.0 3.3 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C-li 0.0 0.0 C-11 to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 050 0.14 K ~~~~~ 2.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>C-is 6.1 D-43 Final Report Sielsn AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data 12/95 Soxhiet Extraction Sol Samxples Soxhlet Soil 3998 SB 45-S8-3-3 11/8/93 Mass Conoentraton Compound Mass Concentration Comoud (rig) (jug/g dry wvt.) bp Range (ng) .(pg/g dry wvt.) mk-Pentaeae 4.3 2.6 Soxhiet Soil 3999 S6454-8S3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Comp ound Mass Concentration Compound (nig) (pg/g r wt.) bp Range (ng) (ug/gdry wt.) n-Pentadecane IA 0.8 Sxlt Soil 400 SB45-8&45-I 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (pg/gdry wt.) bpRange (nig) (stg/g dry wt.) ni-Tetradecane 427 23 D-44 Final Report Ezelon AEFB SPecdlicCCompound and Boiding Point split Data 12/95 SO~detExtactonSoil Samples Blank Blank 11 /8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rug) (ug/g div MO- bp Range (rig) (u1g/g dry wt.) NO C-ompounds Detected c C-6 0.0 ~0.0 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 04) C-8 to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-l0 to C-f1 0.0 0.0 C-11 to C-12 0.0 - 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Soxhlet Soil 4001 S3 45-&4.5t.3 11/8193 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentrttion Comnpound (DRg) (ug/g drv wt.) bip Range (rig) (gigig dry wt.) NO C-ompounds Identified .CC-6 01) 0.0 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C- 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-iD to C-li 0.0 g.0 C-il to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-IS to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-i5 2.8 1.5 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Soxilet Soil 4002 SB 45"-8- 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concenratniion Compound (rig (ug/g drywt.) bp Range (rig) NO CoMpounds Ideni~fied (ug/g dy wt.) D-45 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Paint Split Data 12/95 Soxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Soxhlet Soil 4004 SB 4548-6-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (.sg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (,ug/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified Soxhlet Soil 4005 SB 45-8-7S-1 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Cpug/g dry wt.) bp Range (rig) (ssg/gdry wt.) No Compounds Identified D-46 Final Report Eielson A" SPecific Compound andi Bofiiig point Sht Dta ~ 12/95 Soxhlet Exfracffon Soil Samples So~reIt Soil 4006 SB45-8-7S-2 111pl8D9t ~AawConcentrationCompound Mass Corncntrntjo Compound(rig) u/gdry wt.) bp Range (rig) (g/&1g dry wt.) ri-Pentadecan 6.7 4.2 Sample Date Sokhxlet Soil 4007 Nf" Cnonrtin S45-8-7.53 11/8/93 CompundCompMassAa ConcentritionCnwuAas Compound (rig) (pIg/gdry wt) bp Range No Comour ~Identified (ri) (ug/g dry wt) c-60.00. C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-iC 0.g 0.0 C-in to C-li 0.0 0.0 C-i to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12to C-13 0.0 Off- C-iS3to C-14 0.0 0 C-14toC-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date Sohxlet Sail 40D8 M58ocntain S45--9'-1 11/8/93 Compound Mass Conafrado NMa Corncntration (,us/gwt.)bp dry ni-Perrtadecane ~ 7.85.0 Range (ri) (ug8/gdry wt.) cC-6 0.0 0. C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-S to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-l0 0.0 0.0 C-i0 to C-il 0.0 0.0 C-lit0oC-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 7.8 . D-47 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data Soxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Sample Date Sohxlet Soil 4009 SB 45-8-9'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified C-10 to C-fl 0.0 . 0.0 C-1l to C-12 0.0 - 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date Sohxlet Soil 4010 SB 45-8-9'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified C-1O to C-11 0.0 0.10 - C-11 to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 -0.0 C-14 to C-i5 4.8 3.1 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date Sohxlet Soil 4011 SB 45-8-10.5-1 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (i'g/gdry wt.) bp Range (ng) (jig/gdry wt.) No Compounds Identified D-48 Final Report Eielson APE Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data129 Soxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Sample Soxhidet Date Soil Blank Blank 2/12/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (±/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified Sohxlet Soil 4012 ~~~~~~~~~~SampleDate Sohxlet Soil 4012 ~~~~~~~~SB45-8-10.5-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) ('gig dry wt.) bpRne (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified Sample Date Soxhiet Soil 4013 SB 45-8-10.5'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/gdry wt.)bpRneng (iggdyw) No Compounds Identified D-49 Final Report Eielson AEB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data12 5 Soxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Sohxlet Soil 4014 SB 45-8-12'-l 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) O'g/gdr w t.) No Compounds Identified Sohxlet Soil 4015 SB 45-8-12'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (i'g/gdry wt.) bp Range (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified Sohxlet Soil Blank Blank 2/12/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/gdry wt.) bpRange (ng) (g/ dry wt.) No Compounds Identified D-50 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data 12/95 Soxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Sohxlet Sail 4016 SB 45-8-12'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (ig/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (pg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified C-11 to C-12 0.0 - 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 6.3 1.3 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sohxlet Soil 4017 SB 45-8-13.5'-11/89 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (pg/gdry wt.) No Compounds Identified Sohxlet Soil 4018 58 45-8-13.5-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/gdry wt.) bp Range (ng) (gg/gdry wt.) No Compounds Identified D-51 Final Report Eielson APE Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data 12/95 7) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~SaxhletExtraction Sail Samples Sohxlet Sail 4019 SB 45-8-13.5-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wAt.)_ bp Range (ng) Cgg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified Sahxlet Soil 4020 SB 45-8-1iS1 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Q'g/g dry wt.L) bp Range (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified C-13 to C-14 0.0 - 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 6.3 1.1 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sohxlet Soil 4021 SB 45-8-15-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Qig/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (g1g/g dry wt-) No Compounds Identified D-52 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Paint Split Data 12/95 Soxhiet Extraction Soil Samples Sohxlet Soil 4022 SB 45-8-15'-3 - 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) -bp Range (ng) (4g/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified Sohxlet Soil 4023 SB 45-8-16.5-l 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (ugg/gdry wt.) No Compounds Identified Sohxlet Sail 4024 SB 45-8-16.5'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (pg/gdry wt.) .No Compounds Identified D-53 Final Report Eielson AEB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data 12/95 Soxhlet Extraction Soil Samples Sohxlet Soil 4025 SB 45-8-16.5'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (piglg dry wt.)_ bp Range (ng) (i'g/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified Sohxlet Soil 4026 SB 45-8-18'-l 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified Sohxlet Soil 4027 SB 45-8-18'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (p1g/g dry wt-) bp Range (ng) (i'g/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified D-54 Final Report Eielson MEB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data 12/95 Soxhl~et Extraction Soil Samples Solixet Soil 4028 SB 45-8-18'-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (zig) (uig/gdrywt.) bp Range (nig) (uig/gdrywt.) rim-Tetradecane 18.2 2.5 C-1l to C-12 0.0 _ 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 61.5 8.5 >C-15 30.1 - 4.2 Soirdet Soi 4029 SB 45-8&195!t1 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mms Concentration Compound (rig) (gsglgdrywt.) bp Range (rig) (ytg/g dy wt.) ni-Tetradecane 27.1 6.5 SohixIet Soil 4030 SB45-8-19S'-2 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (.ug/g diywt.) bp Range (rig) (pg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified D-55 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data( Soxhlet Extraction Sail Samples Sohxlet Sail 4031 SB 45-8-195'-3 11/8193 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/g dry wt.) bp Range _(ng) (gg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified C-I1 to C-12 0.0 -0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 6.4 1.1 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sohxlet Sail 4031 Spike SB 45-8-19.5'-3 '11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (i'g/g dry wt.) bp Range _(ng (gg/g dry wt.) No Compounds Identified Sohxlet Sail 4031-Spike dup SB 45-8-19.5-3 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) bp Range (ng) (gg/g dry wt.) Na Compounds Identified D-56 Final Report 12/95 Appendix D-3. Site 45/57 soil gas sample specific compound data collected May, 1994. D-57 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Bailing Point Split Data125 Vapor Probe Samples( Canister 5310 45157 VP01 5/12/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ngj (vg/L) bp Range (ng) (sL No compounds detected Canister 5311 45/57 VP02 5/12/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (Mg / Li n-Heptane 1.4 0.31 C-12 to C-13 0.00 - 0.00 C-13 to C-i4 C-14 to C-15 >C-15 Tedlar Bag 5315 45/57 VPO3 5/12/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mig/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) 2-Methylpentane 1.4 0.28 D-58 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data129 Vapor Probe Samples Canister 5312 45/57 VP04 5/12/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (g/L) bp Range (ng) (gL No compounds detected Canister 5313 45/57 VPO5 5/13/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bpRange (ng) (gg/L) No sample available Tedlar Bag 5320 45/57 VPO6 5/13/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (.tg/LJ bpRange (ngj (gg/L) No compounds detected D-59 Final Report 12/95 Elelson AFB Specific Compound and Roiling Point Split Data Vapor Probe Samples Tedlar Bag 5316 45/57 VP07 5/13/94 Moss Concentration Compound Moss Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) (gig/L) 2-Methylbutane 109 21.8 Canister 5314 45/57 TP 13S 5/13/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ngj (pg/U) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) n-Heptane 0.72 0.16 Canister 5309 Ambient Air 5/12/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) fgig/L) bp Range (ng) (igg/L) 1.2.3-Tnimethylbenzene 0.92 0.21 <0-6 0.00 0.00 C-6 to C-7 0.00 0.00 C-7ito C-8 0.00 0.00 C-8 to 0-9 0.99 0.22 C-9 to C-10 0.00 0.00 0-l0 to C-1I 0.00 0.00 C-I I to C-12 0.88 0.20 C-12 toC-13 0.00 0.00 C-13 to 0-14 C-14 to C-i5 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>C-15 D-60 Final Report 12/95 Appendix D-4. Site 45/57 soil gas sample specific compound data collected July, 1995. K) ~~~~~~~~~~~D-61 Final Report ) ~~~~~~Elelson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data 12/95 Vapor Probe Samples Canister 7750 45/57 SP36 Date Sampled Injection Vol (mL): 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range Ing) (gg/L) 2-Methylbutane 26.0 12.7 ,Canister 7751 45/57 VPOS Date Sampled Injection Vol (mL): 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound Ing) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) No compounds detected Canister 7752 Atmospheric Background Dote Sampled Injection Vol (mL): 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) n-Decane 4.1 0.91 D-62 Final Report Elelson AEB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data 12/95 Vapor Probe Samples Canister 7753 45/57 TP22S Date Sampled Injection Vol (mL): 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound Moss Concentration Compound Ing) (gg/L) bp Range Ing) (p.g/L) 2-Methylpentane 4.3 0.96 Canister 7754 45/57 TP9S Date Sampled Injection Vol (mL): 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound Ing) (pg/LU bp Range (ngj (gg/L) n-Decane 7.6 3.4 Canister 7760 45/57 VP05 Date Sampled Injection Vol (mL): 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound Ing) (pg/U) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) Toluene 51.3 11.1 D-63 Final Report Ejelson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data 12/95 Vapor Probe Samples Canister 7761 45/57 VP06 Date Sampled Injection Vol (mL): 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pig/L) bp Range Ing) (pg/L) Toluene 15.5 3.7 Canister 7765 45/57 TPlI3S Date Sampled Injection Vol (mL): 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound Ing) (gig/L) bp Range Ing) (pg/L) n-Decane 4.9 1.1 Canister 7766 45/57 TP3S Date Sampled Injection Vol (mL): 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range Ing) (pgg/L) Toluene 0.02 06.0O1 D-64 Final Report Elelson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point Split Data 12/95 Vapor Probe Samples Canister 7767 45/57 VP02 Date Sampled Injection Vol (mLU: 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gag/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) n-Decane 2.8 0.63 Canister 7768 45/57 VPO1 Date Sampled Injection Vol (mL): 5.0 7/8/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ngj (lag/LI 2-Methylbutane 16.4 4.6 D-65 Final Report 12/95 Appendix E: Site 45/57 ground waler monitoring well and gravel point chlorinated solvent specific compound data for samples collected at Site 45/57 from May, 1993, to July, 1995 Final Report ( 12/95 Appendix E-1. Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point chlorinated solvent specific compound data collected May, 1994. E-1 Final Report 12/95 Eielson APE Natural Attenuation Study, Site # 45/57 Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID 45/57-SPI 45/57-SP2 45/57-SP4 45/57-SP5 45/57-SP6 MOL LUWRL LoA# 5068 5144 5168 5169 5064 _____ Collection Date: 5/9/94 5/10194 5/10/94 5/10/94 5/9/94 _____ Analysis Date 5/20/94 5/24/94 5/25/94 5/25/94 5/20/94 ____ Dilution Factor 1 1 1 I ______ Compound Namne Conc. (;Lg/L) Conc. (g&/) Cone. (ga/) Conc. (gg/L) Conc. Con. ix/L Trichlonofluoromedhane ND 1.1 ND ND 1 8.7 3.5 1,1-Diehloroethyloeri ND ND ND ND ND 1Ii Methylene Chloride 19 8.8 ND BQL 23 1.6 l,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 2i8 Tricloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 0.43 Tetuichloromedhane ND ND ND ND ND 2.3 1,2-Dichloropropanle ND ND ND ND ND 1.1 Trichlorotthylene ND ND 1.6 B2L ND 0.65 1.12.-Trichloroedhae ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 2.6 Tetrachloroethylerie ND ND ND ND ND 2.7 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 1,2-Dichlorobonzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.2 trins-1.2-Dichloroethenoe______ cis-1.2-Dichloroethmec _ _8__ _ _ 2___ E_ 3.7 E ______ 1.1,1-Trichloroethane I I______I______ Field MD 45/57-SPl 45/57-SPIO 45/57-SP12 45/57-SP15 45/57-3PI6 MQL UWRL Log# 5174 5059 5057 5054 5155 ~~j~ Samiple Date 5/10/94 599/94 5/9/94 5/9/94 5/10/94 ____ Analysis Date 5/26/94 5/20/94 5120/94 5/19/94 5/25/94 ____ Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 _____ Compound Namec Conc. fttg/L) Conc. (gg/L) Cone. (Mg/) Cone. (M&g/ onc~(Ijg/ Cone. (& Trichlorofluoromnethane ND 6.3 1 SQL BOL ND 3.5 141-Dichloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND 1.5 Mothylone Chloride 2.0 24 .23 21 B 1.6 1,1-Dichloroethan ND ND ND ND ND 2.8 Triclorormethane ND ND ND N$ND 0.43 Tenachlorornehane ND ND ND ND ND 2.3 I1.2-Dichloroproparne ND ND ND ND ND 1.1 Trichloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND 0.65 1,12.-Tdichloroethane ND ND I ND ND I ND 21) Dibromnochilormmetbhn ND ND ND ND ND 2.6 Tetrachloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND 2.7 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 1.2-Dichlorobenzne ND ND ND ND ND 2.2 mnnts-1.2-Dichloroethenc 0.94 E ______ cis- I1,2-Dichloroethene 1.9 E ______1.2 E ______ 1.1.1 -Trichl or etIn ______I______ND-No peak detected: BQL-Below quantiation limit, E-Estinmted result. E-2 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site # 45/57 Ground Water and Gravel Ponit Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field MD 45/57-SPI8 45/57-SPI8 45/57-SP>19 45/57-SP20 45/57-SP2I MQL UWRL Log# 5042- 5043* 5050 5031 5172 Collection Date 5/9/94 5/9/94 5/9/94 5/9/94 5/10/94 Analysis Date 5/19/94 5/19/94 5/19/94 5/18/94 5/26/94 ______Dilution Factor I I I I______I______ Compound Name Cone. (iig/L) Cone. (iig/L) Conc. (ig/L) Conc. (gg/L) Cone. (pwaL) Coc (gL Trichlorofluorornethane BOL BQL ND ND ND 3.5 1,l-Dichloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND 1.5 Methylene Chloride 24 22 12 BQL BQ 1.6 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 2.8 Tricloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 0.43 Tetrachloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 2.3 I1.2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 1.1 Trichlorcethylene ND ND ND ND 550 0.65 1.1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND NDl 2.1 Dibromnochloromethmae ND ND ND ND ND 2.6 Tetrachlonoethylene ND ND ND ND ND 2.7 Chlomobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 I1.2-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND 3.6 ND 2.2 trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene ______2.1 E cis-I ,2-Dichloroethene, 0.78 0.75 ______2.4 E 13 BE ______ L1l,1-Trichloroethane I ______I_ _ _ I______ Field ID 45/57-SP21 45/57-SP23 45/57-S1>24 45157-SP25 45157-S P26 MQL UWRL Log# 5172R 5033 5045 5028 5037 Sample Date 5/10/94 5/9/94 5/9/94 5/9/94 5/9/94 Analysis Date 5/i27/94 5/18/4 5/19/94 5/18/94 5/18/94 Dilution Factor 10 I 1 I______ Compound Name Conc. (jig/I.) Conc. 0±g/) Cone. (pig/I.) Cone. (4aL) Conc. (gg/L) Cosns~ (g&Ž Trichlorofluormrnuhane ND BOL 22 .AQL... 3*5 I1*1-Dichloroethylene _____ ND ND ND NDl 1.5 Methylene Chloride ND 24 32 21 1.6 lIl-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND 2.8 Triclomomethane ND ND ND ND 0.43 Teiniehloromethane ND ND ND ND 2.3 1,2-Dichloroproparte ND ND ND ND 1.1 Trichlorocthylene 520 ND ND ND ND 0.65 1.1.2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND 2.1 Dibromochloronmetharne ND ND ND ND 2.6 Tetrachlorcethylene ND ND ND ND 2.7 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND 2.1 1.2-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND 2.2 trars-I .2-Dichloroethene ______ cis-1,2-Dichlomoethene ______2.8£E 2.3£E______ 1,1,1-T richlor e h n ______ND-No peak detected; BQL-Below quanttation limit, B-Estimated reSUIl *Sample 5042 and 5043 are replicates of samnple 5041. E-3 Final Report 12/95 Eielson APE Natural Attenuation Study, Site # 45/57 Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID 45/57TP3M 45/574TP9M 45/57-TP9B 45/57-TP9B 45/57W113M MQ4L tJWRL Log# 5167 5175 5176 5176R 5156 Collection Date 5/10/94 5/10/94 5/10/94 5/10/94 5/10/94 _____ Analysis Dare 5125194 5/26/94 5/26/94 5/27/94 5125/94 Dilution Factor I 1 1 20 1 _____ Compound Name Conc. (IiigL) Conc. (gg/L) Conc. (gg/U) Cn.ss(sJL) Conc.OWgL) Conc. (gI~zL) Trichloroflumrmethane ND I QL BQL ____ ND 3.5 1.1-Dichloroethylene ND ND ND _____ ND 1.5 methylene Chloride BQL 3.2 3.1 ND 1.6 1,J-Dichloroethane ND ND BQL - ND 2.8 Triclorornethane ND ND ND ND 0.4 Tetnchlormrnfhane ND ND ND ND 2.3 l,2-Dichloropropan ND ND ND _____ ND 1.1 Trichloroe~thylene 2.1 3.1 770 1100 270 0.7 l,l,2-TrichJLr2-e&=ae ND ND ND _____ ND 2.1 Dibrornochlorornethane ND I ND ND _ __ ND 2.6 Tetrachloroethylene ND ND ND _____ ND 2.7 Chlorobenzee ND ND ND ND 2.1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND _____ ND 22 _ _ _ _ _ trns-1,2-Dichloroethene _ _ _ _ _ 0.765E______ _ dis-l1.2-Dichloroeth~efl _ _ _ 18 H ______ 1,1.I-Thchloroethane ______ Field ID- 45/57-WriSm 45/57-TP13B 45/57-TP22M 45/57-TP22B ______MOL IJWRL Log# 5156R 5157 5147 5151 ______Sarnple Date 5/10/94 5/10194 5/10/94 5/10/94 ______Analysis Date 5/26194 M5/294 5124/94 5/24/94 _ __ Dilution Factor 2 1 1 1 _____ Compound Namne Cone. (41iL) Conc.(pua on g/L)Cone..WlL) a )s Cone. (gaL) Cone. . Trichlorofluoromneuthne _____ ND ND 1 6.7 ____ 1. 1.1-Dichloroethylene _____ ND ND ND Methylene Chloride B____QL B2L I11 1.6 . 1.1-Dichlofoethane _____ ND ND ND ____ . Tricloromnethane _____ ND ND ND ____ ____ . Tetrachloromethanme ___ ND ND ND 1,.2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ______. Trichloroethylerfe 210 150 ND 4.3 ______0.7 2.1 1,l.2-TrichloroethnC ___e__ ND ND ND Dibromnoctlorwinedthae ND ND ND I_____26 Tetchloroethylenle ___ ND ND ND27 2.1 Chiorobeezene _____ ND ND ND 2.2 Il.2-Dichlorbnze~ne ______ND ND ND ______ trns. Il2-Dichlorvethene ______ _ _ _ _ _ cis-1.2-Dichloroethene ______2.55E_ _ _ I1.,13-Thchloroethalne ______i i_____ ND-No Peak deteced; BQL-Below quantitation limit,E2-Estimnated =UIIL E-4 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site # 45/57 Ground Water and Monitoring Well Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID) 45-MWO2 45/57-MWO31 45/57-MW/04 45-MWO4 45/57-MWO6 M2L UWRPL Log# 5171 5035 5052 5170 5072 _____ Collection Date 5/10/94 5/9/94 5/9194 5/10/94 5/9/94 _____ Analysis Date 5/25/94 511 &94 5/19/94 5/25/94 5/20/94 _____ DilutionFactor I I I I I ____ Compound Namne Conc. (gig/L) Conc. (pg/L) Conc. (pigL) Conc. (jig/L) Conc. (Ig~/L)Ss i 2 Tiichlorofluoromethane ND I ND BOL ND BOL35 l.I-Dichloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND 1.5 Methylene Chloride BOL BQL 20 3.5 25 1.6 1,1-D~ichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 2.8 TricloroMethae ND ND ND ND ND 0.43 Tetrachloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 2.3 1.2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 1.1 Trichloroethylene 3.3 BQL 2.2 3.1 ND 0.65 1.1.2-Trichliorvthane ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 Dibrainochlorometane ND ND ND ND ND 2.6 Tetrachloroethylene ND ND I ND ND ND 2.7 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 1.2-Dichloro enne ND ND ND ND ND 2.2 tras-1.2-Dichlotoethene 3.5 HE____ cis-1 .2-Dichloroethene 3.8 E 3.2 E 1.7 E 1.4 E _____ 1,l.1-Trichloroethanle ______ Field ID45-MWO7 45-MWO8 45-MWO8 45-MW08 45-MWOB 2QL tTWRL Log# 5166 51590 5160* 5159R 516CR _____ K.. ~~~Sample Date 5/10194 5/10/94 5/10t94 5/10094 5/10/94 ______Analysis Date 5/25/94 5/25/94 Sf25194 5/27/94 5/Z7/94 _ __ Dilution Factor I 1 1 20 20 _____ Compound Namne Conc Ig/)C. ( (haL) Conc. (pLulL) .1-Trichloroeth Cone. (jtg/L) Cn.21&&L) Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND I ___3.5 1,1-Dichloroethylene ND BQL BOL 1.5 1.6 Methylene Chloride 3.1 BQL BQL _ ___ 1,1-Dicbhloroethane ND BQL BQL _____2.8 0.43 Triclorvmethane ND 27 28 ______Tetnichlormnetharic ND ND ND _____ 2.3 ______1.1 1,2-Dichloroproparne ND ND ND ______Trichloroethylene 16 1700 1600 5600 I 4900 0.65 2.1 1.1.2-TdichLoroethane ND ND ND ______2.6 Dibroinochloromethane ND ND ND _ ___ Tetmicloroethylene ND ND ND 2.7 2.1 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND _____ 1.2-Dichlorobeiizene ND ND ND 2.2 tras-1.2-Dichlozneth~ete ______cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 2.5 E 8.9 E 8.7 E ______1,1,I-Trichloroethime 1_____ 33 E 33 E ______ND-No peaik detected; BQL- Below quantitation limit. E-Estimated result Sample 5159 anid 5160 are replicates of sample 5158. E-5 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site # 45/57 Ground Water and Monitoring Well Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data _ M__ Field ID tIWRL-MW8 ______L______UW RL og# 5173 ______ ______Collection Date 5/10/94 ______Analysis Date 5/24194 ______Dilution Factor _I______ Compound Narne Conc. (ggzIL) Cn.(t)&i/) oc(on. (Conc. Conc. (pgg/L) Jgf _ _ _ _ _ 3.5 Trichlorofluoromethane ND I ______1.5 l,.1Dichloroethylene ND ______1.6 Methylene Chloride NDl ______2.8 I1.1-Dichloroethane ND ______0.43 Tricloromethane NDl ______2.3 Tetrachloromnethane ND______I1.2-Dichlopropmafle ND 1.1 ____ 0.65 Trichioroethylene ND ______2.1 1l.l2-Trichloroethane ND ______Dibrornochloromethanle ND _____2.6 ______277 Tetrachloroethyltfne ND______2.1 Chlorobenzene ND ______ _ _ _ _ _ 2.2 - 1.2-Dichlorobenzene ND ______ ______trn -1 ,2-Dichloroetherne ______cis- I1.2-Dichloroethene I______ 1,1,1-Trichloroetfafe ______ Field ID ______MQL UW RL L,09______Sample Date ______Analysis Date ______Dilution Factor ______ Compound Namne Coc.6wl. Cnc(L) Conc. (wtL) Conc. (POL) Conc. ("X) Conc. 9a) 3.5 Trichlorofluoronaethafle ______1.5__ l,l-Dichloroethylene ______1.6 Methylene Chloride ______ ______2.8 1,1-Dichloroethane ______ _ _ _ _ _ 0.43 Triclorornethanr______2.3 Tetrachloromethane ______1.1 I1,2-Dichloropropane ______0.65 Trichloroethylene ______ _ 2.1l 1,1 .2-Trichloroethane ______26 Dibromochloromethane ______2.7 Tetrachlaroethylene ______2.1 Chlorobenzenc _____ I1.2-Dichloroberzene _____2.2 ______tans-I1,2-Dichloroctlene ______ ______cis-1 .2-Dichloroethene ______1,1.1 .Trjchloroethane _ _ _ _ I______ND-No peak detected: BQL- Below quantitittion hiumi. E-6 Final Report 12/ 95 Eielson AFB Natural Attenuation Study. Site # 45/57 Trip and Equipment Blank Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID Pump Eqpt B1k Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank M2L LTWRL Log 5048 5070 5187 5330 5331 _____ Collection Date 5/9/94 5/9/94 5/10/94 5/13/94 5/13/94 Analysis Date 5/19194 5/20/94 5/24/94 5/24/94 5/24/94 Dilution Factor I 1 I 1 1 _____ Compound Name _ Conc. (lul.L) Cn.(Conc. ( ong(agL Cu.(ii) Conc. (gWtL) Conc (ggL2. Trichlorofluoronmethane BQL I BOL ND ND ND 3.5 I .l-Dichloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND 1.5 Merhylene Chloride 23 21 SQQ L BQ§L 1.6 1,l-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 2.8 Triclorornethane ND ND ND ND ND 0.43 Tetrachloromethtale ND ND ND ND ND 2.3 1.2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 1.1 Tricbloroethvlene ND ND ND ND ND 0.65 1.1.2-Trichiloroedmae ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 Dibromiochloromethae ND ND ND ND ND 2.6 Teuwloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND 2.7 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 I1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.2 mfl-1.2-Dichloroethene ______ cis-I1,2-Dicfflorvethene ______ _ _ _ _ _ 1.1,1-T rieb oreh ne ______ ______MQL mield ID Trip Blank ______LJWRL Log# 5332 _____ Sample Date 5/13/94 _____ Analysis Date 5/24/94 ______Dilution Factor 1I______ Compound Name Cn."JjLj Con. ($VL Conc. (p/L) Conc. CuConc (" L 3.5 Tuichlorofluormetedne ND ______1.5 1.1-Dichloroethylene ND ______1.6 Methylene Chloride BQL ____ 1.1-Dichloroethane ND ______28 0.43 Triclomomethane ND ______Tuc~hlowamethane ND 2.3 ______1.1 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ______ ______0.65 Trichloroethylene ND ______I_ _ . 1,1.2-Tuichlorcethane ND ______ ______2.6 Dibromochloromethant ND______2.7 Teunhio eth lenc ND ______Chlorobenzene ND _____ 2.1 1.2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.2 truns-I.2-Dichloroetbene ______cis-I1.2-Dichloroethmee ______11,1.1Trichloroethane I______ND-No peak detected: SQL-Below quintitation limits. E-7 Final Report 12/95 Appendix E-2. Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point chlorinated solvent specific compound data collected September, 1994. Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site # 45/57 Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID 45/57-TP9B 45/57-TP9B 45/57-TP9B 45/57-.TP9M 45/57-SP'21 MQL - UWRL Log# 5615 5615-R 5615-R 5617 5619 Collection Date 9n1/94 9n1/94 9n1/94 9n1794 9n1/94 ______Analysis Date 9112/94 9/28/94 9/28/94 9/12/94 9/12/94 Dilution Factor I 2 20 1 1______ Compound Name Cone. fligtL) Cone. (gg/L) Conc. (gg/L) Cone. (4~g/L) Cone. (ag/L) Conc. (gg/L) 1,1-Dichloroethylene BQL* BQL 1.5 Methylene Chloride 22 ______17 16 1.6 trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene BQL ______BQL 14.3 2.0 1 ,1-Dichloroethane 3.5 _____ B_____QL BQL 2.8 ci s-1 2-Dichloroethene I18 BQL 14 2.1 Trnclorornethane 13 ______0.81 0.58 0.43 1,l1, I-Trichloroethane _ ____ 6.3 ND 2.6 Trichloroethylene ______1,429 35 0.65 1,1 2-Trichloroethane BQL _ ___ ND BQL 2.1 Tetrachloroethylene BQL ______ND BQL 2.7 Chlorobenzene BQL ______ND ND 2.1 Field ID 45/57-SP21 45/51-SP21 45/57-SI'8 45/57-TP13B Trip Blank MQL UWRL Log# 5619-R 5619-R 5621 5623 5625 ______Sample Date 9n1794 9n1/94 9n1/94 9M794 9M794 ______Analysis Date 9/28/94 9/28/94 9/12/94 9/13/94 9/12/94 ______Dilution Factor 1 2.5 1 1 1 ______ Compound Name Cone. (Mg/L) ICone. (p4g/L) Cone. (gig/L) Cone. (jag/L) Cone. (gg/L) Cone. (ggIL) 1,1-Dichloroethylene BQL B______BQL BQL 1.5 Methylene Chloride ______16 19 13 1.6 trans- 1.2-Dichloroethene ______BQL____k ND NDl 2.0 1,1-Dichloroethane 2 B______QL ND 2.8 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene SQBL ND 2.1 Tricloromethane BOL BQL BOL 0.43 1,1, 1-Trichloroethane BQL _ ___ ND ND ND 2.6 Trichloroethylene ______503 2.2 3 9 SQ .5 1.1 2-Tri chloroethane ______ND BQL N . Teuwahioroethylene ______ND SQL N . Chlorobenzene ______ND ND N . ND-No peak detected; BQL-Below quantitation limit. *MQL is 2X higher for the compound with 2X dilution. E-9 Final Report 12/9 5 Eielson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site # 45/57 Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID 45/57-SP24 45/57-SPI9 45/57-SP20 45/57-SP25 Trip Blank MQL UWRL Log #5627 5633 5636 5638 5640 ______ Collection Date 9fl/94 9M794 9/7/94 9/7/94 9/7/94 ______Analysis Date 9/13/94 9/13/94 9/14/94 9/13/94 9/12/94 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 I I______ Compound Name Cone. (gg/L) Cone. (p.ig/L) Cone. (gg/L) Cone. Q'Lg/L) Cone. t(ig/L) Conce (gg/L) 1,1-Dichloroethylene QLND BQ BQL BQL 1.5 Methylene Chloride 27* 8.3 19 26 . 18 1.6 trans-l1,2-Dichloroethene SL BQlL ND ND 2.0 1,1-Dichloroethane BQQQL~L BQL BQL 2.8 cis-l1,2-Dichloroethene 2.2 QL2.3 BQL ND 2.1 Tricloromethane ND BQL BOL BQL BOL 0.43 1,1.I-Tnichloroerhane ND ND ND ND ND 2.6 Trichloroethylene BQL BQL B9L BQL BQL 0.65 1,1,2-Tricbloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 Tetrachloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND 2.7 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 Field ID 45/57-SP23 45/57-SPI8 45/57-SP26 45157-SP25 45/57-SP23 MQL ___ WR______Log_____ 5642 5672 5673 5674 5675 SampleDate9//94 9/8/94 9/8/94 9/8/94 9/8/94 ____ Analysis Date 9/14/94 9/14/94 9/14/94 9/14/94 9/15/94 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 I Cornound Name Cone. (ijz/L) Cone. (uig/L) Cone. (ltg/L) Cone. (ig/L) Cone. (gg/L) Cone. (rag/L) 1,1-Dichloroethylene BQQBLL9 BQL BQL 1.5 Methylene Chloride 24 13 17 10 11 1.6 trans-l1,2-Dichloroethene QLND ND ND ND 2.0 1.1-Dichloroethane BQLSQB2 QL ND 2.8 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene 2.2 SQL B2L SQL ND 2.1 Tricloromethane BQQ L LBQL BQL BOL 0.43 1,1,lI-Trichloroerhane ND ND ND ND ND 2.6 Thechloroethylene BQL ND ND ND ND 0.65 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 Tetrachloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND 2.7 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 ND-No peak detected; SQL-Below quantitation limit. *The result is obtained from the data re-analyzed on 9/23/94. E-10 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site # 45/57 Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID 45/57-TP22M 45/57-TP22B Trip Blank 45/57-TP3B 45/57-SP2 MOL UWRL Log 5676 5677 5680 5681 5682 _ ____ Collection Date 9/8/94 9/8/94 9/8/94 9/8/94 9/8/94 _ ____ Analysis Date 9/15/94 95/4 9/15/94 9/15/94 9/16/94 ______ Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 _____ Compound Name Conc. (uig/L) Cone. (ig/L) Cone. (jgg/L) Cone. (gg/L) Cone. (gg/L Cone. (4g/L) 1,l-Dichloroethylene BQL BS BQ gp BQ 1.5 Methylene Chloride 16 12 15 12 -12 1.6 trants-1.2-Dichiloroethene BQL BQL ND 6.1 BQL 2.0 1.1-Dicbloroethane BQL BQL BQL BQL BQL 2.8 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene BQL 2.7 ND 3.2 BQL 2.1 Tricloronmethane BQL SQL BQL BQL BOL 0.43 1.1.1l-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND 2.6 Trichloroethylene 6.1 7.5 NDl 4.2 NDl 0.65 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 Tetrachloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND 2.7 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND BQL 2.1 Field ED 45/57-SP2 Trip Blank Trip Blank 45/57-SP5S 45/57-SP4 MQL UWRL Log# 5682-R 5683 5684 5685 5686 _ ____ Sample Date 9/8/94 9/8/94 9/8/94 9/8/94 9/8/94 _ ____ Analysis Date 9/29/94 9/16/94 9/16/94 9/16/94 9/16/94 _ ____ Dilution Factor I 1 1 1 1 Compound Name Cone. (ug/L) Cone. (gIrgL) Conc. (p.Lg/L) Cone. (gg/L) Cone. (gg/L) Conc. (l.±g1L) 1,1I-Dichloroethylene ND BQL B9L SQL BQL 1.5 Methylene Chloride 14, 13 13 13 1.6 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ______ND ND 4.1 BQL 2.0 1.1-Dichioroethane ND ND BQL SQL 2.8 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene ______ND ND 4.1 BQL 2.1 Tricloromethan _ ___ ND 1.4 BQL BQL 0.43 1,1, I-Trichloroethane ND ND ND) ND ND 2.6 Trichloroethylene _ ____ ND ND 1.0 1.1 0.65 1,1,2-Trichloroeth ane _ ___ ND ND ND ± :ND 2.1 Tetrachloroethylene _ ___ ND ND ND ND 2.7 Chlorobenzene ______ND ND ND ND 2.1 ND-No peak detected; SQL-Below quantitation limit. E-I 1 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site # 45/57 Ground Water and Gravel Paint Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field lID 45/57-SPI6 45/57-SPIO 45/57-Sr7 Field Blank 45MW08 MQL UWRL Log# 5687 5761 5762 5763 5764 ______ Collection Date 9/8/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 _ ___ Analysis Date 9/16/94 9/19/94 9/19/94 9/ 19/9-4 9/19/94 _____ Dilution Factor 1 1 I 1 I ______ Compound Name Conc. (jig/L-) Conc. QJ4g/L) Cone. (Lta/I-) Cone. (jixg/L) Conc. (jig/I-) Cone. (jig/I-) 1.1-Dichloroethylene BQL BQL BQL SQL 1.5 Methylene Chloride 12 11 13 12 13 1.6 trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene BQL ND QL . ND BQL 2.0 1,1-Dichloroethane BQL SQL BQL BQL BQL 2.8 cis-l1,2-Dichloroethene BQL ND BQ Nfl 6.6 2.1 Tricloronmethane BQL BQL BQL 1.1 17 0.43 1,1, I-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND 2.6 Trichloroethylene BQL ND ND ND . 0.65 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND NDSL2.1 Tetrachloroethylene ND ND ND NDSL2.7 Chlorobenzene ND BQL BQLSQSL2. Field lID 45MWOB 45MW08 45MW07 Trip Blank 45MVWOI MQL UW~RL Log #5764-R 5764-R 5765 5766 5767 ______ Sample Dare 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 ______ Analysis Date 9t28/94 9/28/94 9/19/94 9/19/94 9/19/94 ______ Dilution Factor 1 20 1 I I ______ Compound Name Cone. (jig/I-) Cone. (jLg/L-) Conc. (gg/L) Cone. (jig/I-) Cone. (pg/L) Cone. (jig/I-) 1,1-Dichloroethylene BQL BO_____~L BQL _ ___ 1.5 Methylene Chloride .23 ______20 19 15 1.6 trans- 1.2-Dichloroethene BQ BQL______ND 49 2.0 1,1-Dichloroethane BQ BQL_____~ ND BQL 2.8 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 4.6 3.3 ND 29 2.1 Tricloromethane 14 BQL SQL 0.80 0.43 1. 1,lI-Trichloroethane 33 _____ ND ND _____ 2.6 Trichloroethylene ______2,610 3.0 BQL ______0.65 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 2.5 B ND BSQL 2. Tetrachloroethylene SQL ND ND ND 2.1 Chlorobenzene BQL ND ND SBQL 2.1 ND-No peak detected; BQL--Selow quantitation limit. *No surrogates were spiked into the sample. E-1 2 Final Report 12/95 Elelson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site #45/57 Ground Water and Gravel Paint Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID 45MWOI 45MW02 45MW09 45MW031 45MW06 MQL UW'RLLog# 5767-R 5768 5769 5770 5771 Collection Date 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 _ ____ Analysis Date 9/28/94 9/19/94 9/20/94 9/20/94 9/20/94 Dilution Factor 2 1 1 1 I ______ Compound Name Cone. (iig/L) Conc. (jtig/) Conc. (lig/L) Conc. (ig/L) Conc. (gg/L) Cone. (±gy/L) I .I1-Dichloroethylene BQL- BQL BQ BQL BQL 1.5 Methylene Chloride ______13 16 19 21 1.6 trans-l1,2-Dichloroethene _ ____ 3.2 17 BQL BQL 2.0 1,1-Dichloroethane B____QL BQL BQL BQL 2.8 cis- 1.2-Dichloroethene ______3.7 8.2 SQL BQL 2.1 Tricloromethane B_____QL 1.0 0.92 BQL 0.43 1,1, 1-Trichloroethane BQL- ND ND ND NDl 2.6 Trichloroethylene 266 4.6 25 1.6 BQL 0.65 1,1,2-Trichloroeth ane _ ___ ND ND ND BQL 2.1 Tetrachloroethylene ______ND ND ND BQL 2.7 Chlorobenzene B_____QL ND ND BQL 2.1 Field ID) 45NMW4 UWRLMWS Trip Blank Field Blank Field Blank MQL UWlRL Log #5772 5773 5774 5775 5776 _____ Sample Date 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 9/9/94 ______Analysis Date 9/21/94 9/21/94 9/20/94 9/20/94 9/20/94 ______Dilution Factor 1 I I I 1 Compound Namne Cone. (iig/L) Conc. (gg/L) Cone. (~ij/L) Cone. (uag/L) Conc. (Qig/L) Conc. (pg/L) 1,1-Dichloroethylene BQL B QL BQ BQL BQL 1.5 Methylene Chloride 21 23 18 17 20 1.6 trans-I1,2-Dichloroethene BQL BQL ND ND ND 2.0 1,1-Dichloroethane BQL BQL ND ND NDl 2.8 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene 3.0 BQL ND ND ND 2.1 Tniclorornethane BQL SQL BQL 0.92 0.87 0.43 1,1, 1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 2.6 Trichloroethylene 6.3 SQL * QL SQL ND 0.65 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND2.1 Tetrachloroethylene ND ND ND ND ND2.7 Chlcrobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.1 ND-No peak detected; BQL-Below quantitation limnit. *MQLs are 2X higher. E-1 3 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site #45/57 Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field TD Field Blank 45/57-SP27 45/57-SP28 ______MQL UWRL Log# 5876 5877 5878 ______ Collection Date 9/14/94 9/14/94 9/14/94 ______ Analysis Date 9/21/94 9/21/94 9121/94 ______Dilution Factor 1 1 I Compound Name Conc. (4±g/L) Conc. (j~iR/L) Conc. (iag/) Conc. (pgg/L) 1,I-Dichloroethylene BQL BQL BQL ______1.5 Methylene Chloride 19 16 18 ______1.6 trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 8.9 BL2.0 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ______2.8 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 4.3 BQL ______2.1 Tricloromethane 1.0 BA9L BQL ____ 0.43 1,1.1I-Trichloroeth ane ND ND ND ____ 2.6 Trichloroethylene ND 4.8 ND ______0.65 1,1.2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND 2.1 Tetrachloroethylene ND ND ND ______2.7 Chlorobenzene ND NTD ND ______2.1 Field ID ______MQL UWRL Log Sample Date Analysis Date ______ DilutionFactor ______ Compound______Name______Conc. (a~g/L) 1,1-Dichloroethylene ______1.5 MethyleneChloride 161 trans-1,2_____Dichl___roethene__ _2.0 II-D i______hloro______than______2.8 cis- I1.2-Dichloroethene ______2.1 Tricloromethane ______0.43 1,1I,1I -Trichloroethane ______2.6 Trichloroethylene ______0.65 l,1,2 -Trich loroethane ______2. Tetrachloroethylene ______2. Chlorobenzene ______2.1 ND-No peak detected; BQL-Helow quantitation limit. E-14 ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FinalReport 12/95 Appendix E-3. Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel paint chlorinated solvent specific compound data collected July, 1995. )~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-1 Final Report Elelson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site 45/57 12/95 Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID SPI SP2 TP33B SP4 SPS MOL UWRL Log# 76268 7598 7615 7620 7631 _ ___ Analysis Date 8/8/95 1 8/8/95 8(5/95 8/8/5 8/8/95 _____ Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 ______ Cornpound Name Cone (ug) IConc (up/UL Cone (ug/L) Cone (ug/L) Cone (ug/LI' Cone (up/U) 1,1-Dichloroethene SQL BQSL SOL BQL SQL 2 Methylene Chloride 88.01 1 79.5 94.07 566.02 80.9 2.1 trans-1,2-Dichioroethene ND SOL 2.76 ND SOL 1.4 1,1-Diehloroethane ND ND SQL ND SOL 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene ND SQL 1.83 SQL 1.8 0.9 Trichloromethane SQL SQL SQL SQL S. 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane SOL SQL SQL ND ND 1.8 Trichioroethene SQL SQL 3.03 SQL SL 1.9 1.1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene 50L BOL SQL ND I ND 2.4 Chlorobenzene ND NDODN ND 2.5 yinyl Chloride ND ND) ND ND ND 0.5 Field ID 5P7 SP8 SPB-R TPSS TP9B MOL UWRL Lao# 7408 7646 7646 7282 7282 _____ Analysis Date 8/11/95 8/8/95 8/11/95 7/27/95 7/29/95 _____ Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 100 Compound Name Cone (ug/U) Cone u/L Cone (ug/U) Conc (ug/LI Conc (ug/t) Cone (ug/LI 1,1-Dichloroethene ND SQL ND SQL ____ 2 Methylene chloride 65.36 58.48 56.93 108.13 ______2.1 trans-i 2-Dichloroethene ND SQL SQL BOL 1.4 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND 1.59 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene ND SQL SQL 14.57 0.9 Trilchloromethane SQL SQL SQL SQL 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane SQL ND ND SQL 1.8 Tnichloroethene SQL SQL SQL ______830.9 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene SOL SQL ND SQL 12.4 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride ND ND ND 0.5 Field ID TP9M SPlO SP2 TP MOL LIWRL Log# 7355 71-20 7-125 77 Analysis Date 7/23/95 8/1 0/95 8/3/95 7/24/9 Diluton Factor 1 1 1 1 Compound Name Cone (ug/U oe u) Cone (ug/L) Conc (un/L) Cone (up/U) 1,1-Diehloroethene SQL ND ND SQL 2 Methylene Chloride 130 10.6 98.27 145.57 ______2.1 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND NDSQL ND 1.4 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND 1.5 c's- 1,2-Dichloroethene ND QLND SQL -0.9 Trichloromethane 8.49 SQL SQL SQL 1.2 1i1l-Trichloroethane SQL SL ND SQL 1.8 Trichloroethene 12.27 SQL SQL 3--2.76 ____ 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND _ __ 1.8 Tetrachloroethene SQL NDON SQL 2.4 Chlorobenzene ND NDND ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride ND ND ND NO . ND =No peak detected. SQL =Below Quanthtatlo ii ______ Page E-1 6 Final Report Elelson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site 45/57129 Ground Water and Grovel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID j TP13B T P13B-R 8P1m j 6P18 SP18-R MQL UWRL Log#0 7232 7582 7163 I 7002 7002 Analysis Date 7/27/95 8/3/95 8/10/95 a8/8/5 8/1 1/95 Dilution Factor j 1 1 1 1 1 Compound Name Conc (ug/t) Conc (ug&L)I Cone (ugAL4 Conc (ugtL) Cone (ug/L) Conc (ugIL) 1,1-Dichloroethene j SQL SOL SOL ND ND 2 Methylene Chloride 1 87.46 99.36 90.07 117 101.51 2.1 trans-1,2-Diehloroethene NDL SQL SQL ND SQL 1.4 1,1-Dichloroethane SQL SQL SQL NO ND 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene I SOL SQL 1.53 ND SQL 0.9 Trichloromethanre I SOL SQL SQL ND SQL 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane I SQL SQL SQL ND ND 1.8 Trichloroethene 49.41 56.9 SQL SQL SOL 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene SQL SOL I SQL SQL SQL 2.4 Chlorobenzene ND ND I ND ND ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride j ND ND I ND j ND 0.5 Field ID MgB SP20 SP20-R SP21 TP22M MOIL L)WRL Log #7130 7006 7006 j 7689 7572 Analysis Date 8/8/95 I8/5/95 I8/11/95 8/1/95 8/5/95 Dilution Factor 1 I 1 1 1 1 _____ Compound Name Cant (ug/L) Cone (ug/L-) Cone (unt-) Conc (ug/L) Cant (ug/L) Cone (ug/L1) li,-Dichloroethene SQL ND ND SQL ND 2 Methylene Chloride 9.86 688.31 716.74 91.62 61.52 2.1 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene SQL ND ND 2.19 ND 1.4 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND SQL ND 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene SQL ND ND 14.02 ND 0.9 Trichioromethane ND 44.71 39.59 SQL SQL 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane SQL ND ND SQL SQL 1.8, Trichloroethene SQL SQL SQL 225.45 SQL 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND SQL ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene BQL ND NO SQL SQL 2.4 Chlorobenzene, ND ND ND ND ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride ND ND ND ND 0.5 Field ID TP22M-R TP22B SP23 SP24 SP25 MQL LIWRL Log# 7572 7577 7018 7110 7019 Analysis Dale 8/11/195 8/11/95 8/6/95 8/5/95 8/8/95 Dilution Factor I 1 1 1 1 Compound Name I Cane (ug/t) Cone (uag/n Conc (ugLL) Cone (ugAL) Cone (ug/L) Conc (ug/t) 1i1-Dichloroethene ND ND SQL SQL SQL 2 Methylene Chloride 66.23 69.53 111.38 121.63 141.44 2.1 trans-i 2-Dichlaroethene ND SQL - SQL I SOL ND 1.4 1,1-Dichloroethane ND SQL - ND ND ND 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 1.86 2,11 1.84 SQL 0.9 Trichloromethane SQL SQL BQL SQL SQL 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND SQL ND SQL SQL 1.8 Trichloroethene SQL - 4.35 SQL SQL SQL 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene ND SQL ND SOL SQL 2.4 Chlarobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride ND ND ND ND 0.5 ND =No peak detected, SQL =Below quantitation limit ______ Page E-17 Final Report Blelson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site 45/57 12/95 Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID SP26 SP27 'SP29 SP30 SP30 MOL UWRL Log# 7115 7636 7235 7169 7169 _ ___ Analysis Date 816/95 8/5/95 7/29/95 7/24/95 8/3/95 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 100 _____ Compound Name Conc (ug/L) Cone (ug/t) Conc (ug/L) Conc (ugIL) Conc (ug/L) Cone (ug/IL) 1,-Dichloroethene BOL BQL SQL 6.05 2 Methylenie Chloride 129.29 97.5 241.9 93.25 2.1 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.33 ND 5.86 1.4 1il-Dichioroethane ND BQL 32.29 36.22 ____ 1.5 cis- 1,2-Diebloroethene ND 2.08 52.22 40.58 ______0.9 Trichloromethane BQL BQL 229.47 71.24 - 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane BQL BQL 2.33 72.96 1.8 Trichloroethene BQL 2.54 73.16 17200 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND 1.8 Tetrarhioroethene BQL- BQL ND 2.83 2.4 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride ND I ND SQL 0 98 0.5 Field ID SP31 SP32 SP33 ~P-33 SP34 MQL UWRL Log# 7259 7231 7207 7207 7245 Analysis Date 8/6195 7/27/95 7/27/95 7/27/95 8/3/5 _____ Dilution Factor 1I_____ 100 1 Compound Name [Co nc (ug/li Conc (uaA) Cone(ug/A4 Cone(ug ConIL) (uWL)Coec A 1,1-Dichloroethene BQL 6.26 4.97 BQL 2 Methylene Chloride [126.64 200.5 144.73 ____ 112.08 2,1 trans-i 2-Dichloroethene [ BOL ND 11.14 SLB______1.4 ilI-Dichloroethane 1.99 6.26 31.18 BQL 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene 2.39 12.7 44.77 2.34 0.9 Trichloromethane BatL 42.82 29.96 SQL 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane BQL SQL 7.64 ____ SOL 1.8 Trichloroethene 85.09 33.98 1 9839.8 1 23.89 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene BQL ND BQL SQL- 2.4 Chloroberizene ND ND ND _____ ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride ND ND 0.77 ND 0.5 Field ID SP35 SP36 5P38 SP37 SP38 MQL LPWRL Log #7240 7607 7607 7250 7382 _____ Analysis Date -7/29/95 8//9 8/6/5 8/195 8395 _____ Dilution Factor 1 1 100 1 1 Compound Name Cone (UgA)Cnqu/L) Con (ug/L)e Co (ug/L)iic Cone (ugk.) Cone (uo/A 1,1-Dichloroethene BQL BQL SQL BOL 2 Methylene Chloride 96.07 95.28 142,1-4 1512.1 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene SQL SQL BOIL SQL 1.4 1,1-Dichloroethane BOQL 3.28 SQIL BOL 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene 2.53 7.12 1.59 1.13 0.9 Trichloromethane BQL 17.59 Bat. BQL 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane SQL 2.36 BQL BQL 1.8 Trichloroethene 23.07 838 ~ 21.13 1-4.67 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND NDB ___ D N-D 1.8 Terachiroethene BQL BOQL SLB______BQL 2.4 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride ND , ND ND I ND 0.5 ND No peak detected, SQL Below guantftation limit ______ Page E-18 Final Report Eielson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site 45/57129 Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID SP38-R SP39 - SP40 8P41 SP42 MOIL UWRL Log #7382 7354 7278 7387 7413 Analysis Date 8/3195 8/1/9 7/29/95 8/1/95 8/1/95 Dilution Factor 1.25 1 1 1 1 Compound Name Conc (ugfL) Cone (ug/L.) Cone (ug/.) Cone (ugft.) Cone (ug/L.) Conc (ug/L) Il-Dichloroethene SQL SQL SQL BQL SQL 2 Methylene chloride 97.66 158.81 132.02 97.85 85.99 2.1 trans-1 2-Dichloroethene SOL SQL SQL 3.62 SQL 1,4 1,1-Dichloroethane SOL SOL SOL SOL SQL 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene SQL 6.76 2.21 29.12 7.05 0.9 Trichloromethane SQL SOL SOL SQL BQJ-. 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane SQL SQL BQL SQL SQL 1.8 Trichloroethene 13.19 106.36 30.55 34.21 152.38 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethene ND ND SOL ND ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene SQL SQL SQL SOL SOL 2.4 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.5 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND 0.5 Field ID SP43 SP44 SP45 GPO2 GPO4 MQL UWRL Log# 7418 7435 7440 7255 7274 Analysis Date 8/1/95 8/1/95 7/29/95 7/29/95 7/29/95 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Compound Name Cone (ugIL) -Conec(ugli-) Conec(ugh.) Conec(ug/L-) Cn u/. oeu 1i1-Dichloroethene SQL SQL SQL SOL SQL 2 Methylene Chloride 118.58 123.89 77.15 98.42 117.66 2.1 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 6.12 6.28 2.75 BQL BQL 1.4 1,1-Dichloroethane SOL SOL SOL SQL SQL 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dirhioroethene 8.59 8.53 2.79 4.6 5.6 0.9 Trichloromethane SQL SQL SQL SQL 23.43 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroathane SOL SOL SQL SOL SQL 1.8, Trichloroethene 32.89 52.52 16.84 351.29 76.21 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane SQL SQL ND SQL ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene SOL SOL SQL SQL SQL 2.4 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride ND ND ND ND ND 0.5 Field ID GPOB GPO8 GP15 GP15 GP16 MQL UWRL Log# 7190 7190 7105 7105 7202 Analysis Date 7/26/95 7/27/95 7/23/95 7/24/95 7/26/95 Dilution Factor 1 500 1 10 I1 Compound Name Cone (ug/L) Cone (ug/t) Cone (ug/.) Cone tug/U) Cone (ug/L) Cone (ug/L) 1,1-Diehloroethene 22.1 ND 2.8 2 Methylene Chloride 167.15 151.5 106.15 2.1 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND SQL 1.86 1.4 1,1-Dichloroethane 23.49 SQL 19.54 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene 113.73 3.05 32.77 0.9 Trichloromethane 385.61 SQL 130.31 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 917.6 7.63 61.38 1.8 Trichloroethene ______90760 393.96 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene BQL' SQL SQL 2.4 Chlorobenzen NDND ND 2.5 Vinyl chloride NDOND ND ND 0.5 ND = No peak detected, SQL Below quantitation limit ) ~~~~MQLis lOX higher for compound with lOX dilution ______ Page E-19 Final Report Elelson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site 45/57129 Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID GPIe 45MWO1 45MW02 45MW03 45MW)4 MOL UWRL Log #7202 7651 7656 7684 7704 _____ Analysis Date 7127/95 8/3/95 8/3/95 8/11/95 8/5/95 Dilution Factor '100 1 1 1 1 Compound Name Cone (ugM4 Cone (ug/L) Cone (ugAL) Cone (ugIL oe uI) Cone (ug/L) 1,1-Dichloroethene BQL BQL BQL BQL 2 Methylene Chloride ______93.14 77.57 69.23 90.33 2.1 trans-I 2-Dichloroethene 38.03 SQL '10.57 BQL 1.4 1.1-Dichloroethane BQL BQL BQL BQL 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene 25.72 3.09 21.07 1.64 0.9 Trichloromethane SQL BatL BQL BQL 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane SOL BQL BOL SQL 1.8 Trichloroethene 7585 97.54 6.8 65.93 3.69 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane BQL ND BQL ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene BOL BQL BQL BQL 2.4 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND 2.6 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND j ND 0.5 Field ID 45MWD6 45MWD7 45MW08 45MWO8 45MW09 MQL LIWRL Log #7593 7707 7712 7712 7641 Analysis Date 815/95 8/3/5 8/3/95 8//9 8/11/95 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 100 1 _____ Compound Name Cone (ugtL) Cone (ugAL) Cone (ug/L) Cone (ugh..) Conc (ug/L) -Cone (ug/L 1,1-Dichloroethene BQL SQL BOL SOL 2 Methylene Chlonde 80.6 89.54 109.14 65.35 2.1 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene SQL BQL BQL 6.29 1.4 1il-Dichloroethane ND BQL 5.36 ND 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene SQL 1.21 14.8 6.09 0.9 Trichloromethane SQL BQL 51.97 BQL 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane BQL BQL 58.78 SQL. 1.8 Trichloroethene BQL SQL 3290.1 30.14 1,9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND 1,8 Tetrachloroethene BQL BQL BQL SQL 2.4 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride ND ND ND ND 0.5 Field ID UWRL-8 Trip Elk. Trip Bi. TrpEk. Field Stk. MQL LJWRL Log# 7661 7737 7301 7168 7371 ____ Analysis Dale [ 8/8/95 8/10/95 8/10/95 8/10/95 8110195 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 compound Name Cone (ug/_.) Conc (ugh..) Conec(ugh..) Conec(uwIL) Cone(ugIL)Coe 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND BQL SQL 2 Methylene chloride 68.68 38.38 41.09 109.36 55.66 2.1 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 1.4 1,1-Diehloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 1.5 cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 0.9 Trichloromethane ND BQL SQL BQL SQL 1.2 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND BQL BQL SQL 1.8 Trichloroethene SQL SQL SQL SQL SQL 1.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 1.8 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND SQL 2.4 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 2.5 Vinyl Chloride ND ND ND ND ND0. !ND =No peak detected, SQL Below puantitation limit _____ Page E-20 Ainal Report 12/95 Elelson AFB Natural Attenuation Study, Site 45/57 ) ~~~~Ground Water and Gravel Point Chlorinated Solvent Specific Compound Data Field ID Field BIk.-R Trip B1k. MQL UWRILLog 7371 7738 Analysis Date 8/100195 8/10195 ______Dilution Factor 1 1 Compound Name Cone (ug/L) Cone (ug/L) Cone (ug/L) _____ 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND 2 Methylene Chloride 61.36 33.2 2.1 _____ trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 1.4 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND 1.6 _____ cis- 1,2-Dichioroethene ND ND 0.9 ____ T~rieoromethane SQL ND 1.2 _____ 1,1,1-Trichloroethane SOL SQL ______Trichloroethene SQLS L 1.9 ______1,1,2-Triehloroethane NDND 1.8 ______Tetrachloroethene ND SQL 2.4 ______Clobnzene ND ND 2.5 ViylChoride ND 0.5 IND =No peak detected, SQL =Below quantitation lii1______ Page E-21 Final Report 12/95 Appendix F: Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point hydrocarbon purge & trap analyses specific compound data for samples collected at Site 45/57 from May, 1993, to July, 1995 Final Report 12/95 Appendix F-i. Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point hydrocabon purge & trap analyses specific compound data collected November, 1993. F-i1 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Daba P.T. Sample Date 3711 45/57-SPI 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) @jg/L) bp Range (ng) (9g/L) Toluene 14.1 2.8 <-b0.0 0.0 Ethylbenzene 4.6 0.93 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 p-Xylene 9.4 1.9 C-7 to C-8 30.7 6.1 n-Decane 3.5 0.70 C-8 to C-9 19.9 4.0 C-9 to C-10 2.9 -0.59 C-Ib to C-1I 14.9 3.0 C-11 to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 t6 C-i4 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date P.T. 3712 45/57-S12 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (1g/L) bp Range (ng) n-Hexane JgL 43.8 8.8 Sample Date P.T. 3714 45/57-TF3M 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (ltg/L) bpRange (ng) fug/TL) 2,4-Dimethylpentane 2.6 0.52 F-2 Final R'bport 12/95 Eielson AfB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&t Water Data Sample Date F.T. 3715 45/57-TP3B 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) (pig/L) Benzene 1.0 0.20 cC-6 0.0 0.0 Toluene 7.5 1.5 C-6 to C-7 3.5 0.69 p-Xylene 8.5 1.7 C-7 to C-8 32.9 6.6 n-Propylbenzene 2-7 0.54 C-8 to C-9 8.8 1.8 C-9 to C-1b 9.8 -2.0 C-IC to C-lI 0.0 0.0 C-1l to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-l2 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date P.T. 3928 45/57-SP4 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) @jg/L) bp Range (ng) 4ig/L) n-Heptane 51.9 10.4 cC-6 0.0 0.0 )Toluene 64.8 13.0 C06 to CO7 63.8 12.8 Naphthvalene 84.9 17.0 C-7 to C81020.1 C-B to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-b0 0.0 0.0 C-la to C-11 0.0 0.0 C-1l to C-12 85.1 17.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date P.T. 3929 45/57-SP5 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gig/L) bp Range (ng) OWgL) n-Hexane 4.1 0.81 cC-6 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 4.1 0.82 C-6 to C-7 3.7 0.75 C-7 to C-B 19.3 3.9 C-8 to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-la 0.0 0.0 C-b0 to C-lI 3.9 0.79 C-Il to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-3 Final Report 17 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data Sample Date P.T. 3930 45/57-SP6 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) (MgIL) Benzene 4.0 0.80 Sample Date P.T. 3931 45/57-SP7 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (j1g/L) bp Range (ng) (jig/L) Toluene 2.9 0.57 C-10 to C-Il 2.8 -0.6 C-11 to C-12 17.7 3.5 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date JPhT. 3932 45/57-SP8 11/8/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) &gg/L) bp Rage (rig) O±g/1.) Benzene 6.1 1.2 cC-6 0.0 0.0 Toluene 9.6 1.9 C-6 to C-7 7.0 1.4 p-XYlene 9.3 1.9 C-7 to C-8 47.9 9.6 n-Propylbenzene 6.2 1.2 C4 to 009 17.0 3.4 n-Decane 3.1 0.62 C-9 to C-iC 12.6 2.5 n-Undecane 3.6 0.72 C-l0 to C-li 12.0 2.4 C-Il to C-12 3.7 0.7 C-i2 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-4to C-1S 0.0 0.0 >C-IS 0.0 0.0 F-4 Final Report 12/ 95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&rT Water Daba Sample Date P.T. 3718 45/57-TP9M 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Rtange (rig) (jLg/L) 2-Methylpentax'e 3.8 0.75 cC-6 3.7 0.74 ni-Heptane 5.2 1.0 C-6 to CO7 0.0 0.0 Toluene 95.2 19.0 C-7 to C-s 114 22.8 n-Octane 8.7 1.7 C-s to C-9 10.4 - 2.1 n-Nonane 2.1 0.42 C-9 to C-10 3.1 0.62 C-iO to C-il 0.0 0.0 C-li to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-iS to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date PRT. 3713 45/57-TP9B 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound mas Concentration Compound (rig) (jitg/L) bp Range (rig) (jig/L) 2-Methylpentane 44.8 9.0 .cC-6 43.9 8.8 2,4-Dimethylpentane 80.4 16.1 C-6 to C-7 139 27.9 Benizene 58.7 11.7 C-7 to C-S 97.8 19.6 C-S to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-iC 0.0 0.0 C-la to C-1l 0.0 0.0 C-li to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-i3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date P.T. 3850 45/57-SP10 11/6/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (rig) (jtg/L) Benzene 7.0 1I4 Fielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data Sample Date P.T. 3851 45/57-SP12 11/6/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Oig IL) bp Range (ng) (ggIL) Benzene 7.2 1.4 Sample Date P.T. 3720 45/57-TP13M 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (ug/L) bp Range (ng) (gILg/) 2,4-Dmiethylpentane 31.9 6.4 C-1l to C-12 0.0 - 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 >C-I5 0.0 0.0 Sample Date P.T. 3856 45/57-TP3B 11/6/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound(ng) (pg/lU) ~~~~~~~~bFRange (ng) (yg/LU) 2 -Methylpentane 198 39.7 cC-6 263 52.6 2, 4-Dimethylpentane 1,515 303 C-6 to C-7 8,796 1,759 Benzene 2,202 440 C-? to C48 16,730 3,346 Toluene 6,733 1,347 C-S to C-9 1,768 354 n-Octane 131 26.2 C-9 to C-10 447 89.4 Ethylbenzene 65.9 13.2 C-la to C-lI 77.8 15.6 p-Xylene 83.7 16.7 C-li to C012 6.5 1.3 ri-Nonane 112 22.5 -C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 28.4 5.7 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 20.9 4.2 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 n-Dodecane 3.4 0.7 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-6 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data Sample Date P.T. 3721 45/57-SP15 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) OWgL) bp Range (ng) (j'g/L) 2-Methylpentane 14.5 2.9 Sample Date P.T. 3852 45/57-SP16 11/6/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (4ggL) bp Range (ng) (I'g/L) Benzene4.6 0.92 n-Undecane 2.9 0.58 C-10 to C-li 18.3 -3.7 Naphthalene 7.9 1.6 C-l1 to C-12 12.5 2-5 n-Dodecane 4.8 1.0 C-l2 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date P.T. 3854 45/57-SP19 11/6/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Comipound (ng) (Mig/L) bp Range (ng) (G'g/L) 2-Metiylpentane 19.5 3.9 F-7 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Bailing Point P&T Water Data Date Sampled P.T. 3853 45/57 SPI8 11/9/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) @~g/L) n-Hexane 15.4 3.1 Date Sampled P.T. 3853 SPlIKE 45/57 SPl8Spk 11/9/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (txg/L) Benzene 1,103 221 n-Butylbenzene 8.4 1.7 C-12 to C-13 0.0 -0.0 n-Undecane 6.2 1.2 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 Naphthalene 606 121 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-8 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data Sample Date P.T. 3854-2 45/57-5P19 Dup 11/6/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) G11g/L) hp Range (ng) (0±g/L) 2-Methylpentane 24.7 4.9 Sample Date P.T. 3855 45/57-SP20 11/6/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (JIS/L) bp R~ange (ng) (j~g/L) n-Heptane 6.5 1.3 n-Undecane 84.7 16.9 C-12 to C-13 0.0 - 0.0 Naphthalene 101 20.2 C-13 to C-i4 0.0 0.0 n-Dodecane, 86.6 17.3 C-14 to C-1S 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date P5.T4188 45/57-SP21 11/11/93 Mass Concentration Compound mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (rig) (Igg/L) 2-Methylpentane 48.4 9.7 .cC-6 73.4 i4t7 ni-Hexane 57.9 11.6 C06 to C-? 653 131 2~4-Dimethylpentane 41.1 8.2 C-? to C-S 573 115 Benzene 343 68.6 C-8 to C-9 524 105 n-Heptane 10.2 2.0 C-9 to C-la 167 33.4 Tolumne 202 40.3 C-10 to C-1l 28.7 5.7 n-Octane 16.4 3.3 C-11 to C-12 21.0 4.2 Ethylbenzene 52.8 10.6 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 p-Xylene 271 54.2 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Nonane 24.5 4.9 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 n-Propylbenzene 39.9 tO0 >C415 0.0 0.0 n-Decane, 29.8 6.0 n-Dociecane 21.9 4.4 F-9 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data Sample Date P.T. 3717 45/57-TF22M 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (ggIL) bp Range (ng) (j.'g/L) n-Heptane 3.2 0.65 .cC-6 0.0 0.0 n-Octane 1.1 0.22 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 Ethylbenzene 0.74 0.15 C-7 to C-8 56.6 11.3 p-Xylene 0.84 0.17 C-8 to C-9 2.6 0.5 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C-li 0.0 0.0 C-11 to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date P.T. 3717 SPIKE 45/57-TF22M 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) OWgL) 2-Methylpentane 273 54.6 CC-6 267 53.5 n-Hexane 24.9 5.0 C-6 to C-7 1,252 250 Benzene 774 155 C-7 to C-S 1,002 200 Toluene 812 162 C-8 to C-9 2,590 518 Ethylbenzene 823 165 C-9 to C-10 777 155 p-Xylene ass 172 C-10 to C-lI 15.4 -3.1 n-Propylbenzene 13.5 2.7 C-Il to C-12 620 124 n-Decane 16.1 3.2 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 n-Undecane 4.8 1.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 Naphthalene 614 123 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date ?.T. 3716 45/57-TTP22B 11/7/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jg/L) bp Range (ng) (tig/L) Benzene 7.1 1.4 cC-6 23.0 4.6 n-Heptane 3.1 0.62 C-6 to C-7 26.0 5.2 Toluene 21.5 4.3 C-7 to C-8 32.4 6.5 Ethylbenzene 7.5 1.5 C-S to C-S 24.3 4.9 ni-Decane 7.3 1.5 C-9 to C-tO 7.6 1.5 n-Undecane 115 23.0 C-10 to C-li 113 22.7 C-il to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-i3 0.0 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-10 Final Report 12/95 Eielson APB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data Sample Date P.T. 4181 45/57-SP23 11/11/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (j'g/L) bp Range (ng) (g~g/L) 2-Methylpentane 15.6 3.1 p-Xylene 23.8 4.8 C-10 to C-Il 115 -22.9 n-Propylbenzene 36.5 7.3 C-Il to C-12 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 92.3 18.5 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 n-Butylbenzene 24.6 4.9 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 - ~~~~~~~~~~~~C-14to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Date P.T. 4183 45/57 SP 24 11/11/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (ggIL) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 2-Methylpentane 0.43 0.09 cC-6 1.7 0.3 n-Hexane 1.9 0.38 C-6 to C.-7 98.1 19.6 2,4-Dimethylpentane 19.9 4.0 C-? to C-8 562 112 Benzene 62.2 12.4 C-S to C-9 614 123 Toluene 214 42.8 C-9 to C-10 112 22.5 Ethylbenzenc 58.0 11.6 C-ID to C-li 98.4 19.7 p-Xylene 326 65.3 C-1I to C-12 0.0 0.Q n-Nonane 20.0 4.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 n-Propylbenzene 18.2 3.6 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 95.7 19.1 C.14 to C015 0.0 -0.0 n-Butylbenzene 0.85 0.17 >C-1S 0.0 0.0 Sample Date P.T. 4186-1 45/57-SP26 11/11/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (RgIL) bp Range (ng) (AgIL) 2-Methylpentane 41.5 8.3 CC-6 40.6 8.1 n-Hexane 97.9 19.6 C-6 to C-7 322 64.3 2,4-Dimethylpentane 76.5 15.3 C-? to C-8 413 82.5 Benzene 67.3 13.5 C-8 to C-9 721 1I4 n-Heptane 21.2 4.2 C-9 to C-1b 168 33.5 Toluene 226 45.2 C-b0 to C-li 225 45.0 n-Octane 20.2 4.0 C-Il to C-12 121 24.2 Ethyibenzene 71.9 14.4 C-12 to C-13 49.0 9.8 p-Xylene 439 87.9 C-IS to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Nonane 11.3 2.3 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 n-Propylbenzene 52.8 10.6 >C-15 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 102 20.3 n-Butylbenzene 52.9 10.6 n-Undecane 24.6 4.9 ~~-~ Naphdhaene 21.0 4.2 n-Dodecane 10.9 2.2 F-i I Final Report 12/95 ) ~~~~~~~Eielson.AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Daba Sample Date 45/57-SP26 Dup 11/11/93 P.T. 4186-2 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration (ng) (jg/L) bp Range (ng) (sIgiL) Compound 831.7 Sample Date F.T. 4187 45/57-SP25 11/11/93 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) OWgL) ) 2-Methylpentane 13.4 2.7 F-i12 Final Report 12/95 Appendix F-2. Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point hydrocabon purge & trap analyses specific compound data collected May, 1994. F-13 Final Report 12/95 - ~~~~~~Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log #4932 -Equipment Blank Small Tubing, Pump 2 5/6/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (rig) (jig/L) 2-Methylperitane 11.3 2.3 Sample Name Sample Date Log #4933 Equipment Blank Bailer 5/6/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (pgg/L) bp Range (nig) (pig/L) Toluene 6.2 1.2 Sample Name Sample Date Log #4935 45/57 TP3M 5/6/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (uig/L) bp Range (rig) (pg/L) 2-Methylpentane 1.7 0.34 F-i 4 Final Report 12/95 Elelson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log # 4936 45/57 SPA 5/6/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (xiglL) bp Rkange (ng) OMg/L) n-Decane 106 - 21.2 Sample Name Sample Date Log #4937 45/57 SP5 5/6/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Comp ound (ng) (jig/L) bp Rang (ng (s"g/L) 2-Methylpentane 2.8 0.56 .cC-6e 2.18 0.5 n-Decane 108 21.6 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-S 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 201.0 40.2 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~to C-11 ~~~~90.7 ~ ~~~C-la18.1 C-11 to C-12 80.0 16.0 C-li to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 o.o 0.0. >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #4938 45/57 SP2 5/6/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (jIg/L) bp.Range (ng) ("g/L) 2-Methyipentane 2.2 0.44 cC63. 0.60 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzenle 1.1 0.21 C-6 to C-7 16A4 3.3 n-Decane 108 21.6 C-7 to C-S 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 203 40.6 C-9 to C-la 1.1 0.23 C-Ia to C-1l 90.9 18.2 C-li to C-12 75.7 15.1 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-is to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-i 5 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log 4$4943 45/57 45MW02 5/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (nig) (4g/L) ni-Decane 102 20.4 Sample Name Sample Date Log 4$944 45/57 SP21 5/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (rig) (pig/L)Y 2-Methylpentane 14.5 2.9 Sample Name Sample Date Log # 4945 45/57 SPS 5/7/94 Mass Concentation Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (4.g/L) lip Range (rig) &'g/L) 2-f-M-ethyipentan-e 1.6 0.32 F-i 6 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log # 4946 45/57 TP9B 5/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pgg/L) bp Range (ng) (l~g/L) 2-Methylpentane 235 47.0 .cC-6 308 61-5 n-Hexane 30.1 6.0 C06 to C-7 2,308 462 2,4-Dimethylpentane 560 112 C-7 to C-8 119 23.9 Benzene 19.0 3.8 C-8 to C-9 251 50.3 Toluene 30.8 6.2 C-9 to C-10 7.4 1.5 Ethylbenzene 13.7 2.7 C-iC to C-li 122 24.5 1,2,4-Trunethylbenzene 7.0 1.4 C-11 to C-12 102 20.4 n-Decane 121 24.2 C-12 to C-13 0.0 - 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log # 4947 45/57TP9M 5 /7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (9g/L) bp Range (ng) (pig/L) 2-Methy'lpentane 2.8 0.55 .cC-6 2.8 0.55 p-Xylene 1.2 0.23 C-6 to C-7 10.6 2.1 n-Decane 107 21.4 C-7 to C-S 0.0 0.0 Naphthalene 5.0 1.0 C-S to C-9 221 44.3 C-9 to C010 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C-li 89.8 18.0 C-li to C-12 85.6 17.1 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-1S 0.0 0.0 >0-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log 4948 45/57UWRLMW8 5/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Massn Concentration Compound (ng) ("xg/L) bp R~ange (ng) (gg9/L) Tolene 0.60 0.1 cC-6 0.0 0. 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.82 0.16 C-6 to CO7 2.4 0O48 n-Decane 113 22.6 C-7 to C-S 0.76 0.15 C-S to C-9 235 46.9 C-9 to C-iC 0.87 0.17 C-10 to C-li 95.0 19.0 C-11 to C-12 96.2 19.2 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-is to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-i5 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-17 Final Report 12/95 - ~~~~~~Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Paint P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log # 4949 45/57 45MW09 5/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (Mig/L) Toluene 1.2 0.24 C-12 to C-13 0.0 - 0.0 C-IS to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #4950 45/57TP13M 5/7/94 Mas Concentratbon Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) (jig/L) Toluene 60.4 12.1 Sample Name Sample Date Log#4951 Trip Blank 5/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gig/L) bp Range (ng) (iig/L) 1,2,4-Trimnethylbenzene 1.0 0.20 F-18 Final Report 12/95 EBelson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log 4)50M7 45/S7SP25 3/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (zig) (ug/L) bp Range (zig) (ag/L) Toluene 0.66 0.13 C-1Il to C-12 24.2 - 4.8 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-f4 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #302 45/57MWOI 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pug/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) n-Decane 34.7 6.9 Sample Name Sample Date Log#5030 45/57 SP20 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (i~g/L) bp Range (zig) (ug/L) 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzen 14.8 3.0 n-Undecane 17.3 3.5 C-10 to C-Il 119 .23.9 zi-Dodecane 76.1 15.2 C-Il to C-12 292 58.3 C-12 to C-13 76.1 15.2 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-I5 0.0 0.0 >C-IS 0.0 0.0 F-19 Final Report (Th ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 Eielson APH Water Specific Compound and Bailing Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log #5032 45/57 SF23 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (nig) GAg/L) bp Range (rig) (ipg/L) 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.64 0.13 C-1l to C-12 29.2 - 5.8 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-i5 0.0 0.0 >C-iS 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5034 45/57 MWO31 5/9/94 Mas Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (nig) (jig/L) bp R~ange (rig) (uAg/L) 2-Methylpentane 6.1 1.2 Sample Name Sample Date Log VtSOS 45/57 SF18 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (M~g/L) bp Range (rig) (j~g/L) 2-Methylpentane 21.2 4.2 F-20 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date DDW Spiked DDW Spiked 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentmaton Compound (ng) (;ig/L) bp Range (ng) QgL Benzene 1,917 383 Sample Name Sample Date Log * 5039 45/57 SPISSplk. 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (p~g/L) bp Range (ng) 4±ig/L) Benzene 1,904 381 F-2 1 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log,# 5040 45/57 SF18 Spk. dup 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/L) bp Range (ng) Oag/L) Blenene 1,859 372 Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5036 45/57 SF26 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 1,2,4Trimethylbenzene 2.8 0.57 >C-15 0.0 - 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5044 45/57 SF24 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (jzg/L) 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.5 0.11 F-22 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log It5046 Big Pump Eqipment Blank 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (I'g/L) bp Range (ng) (Igg/L) ri-Hexane 2.4 0.47 Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5047 Small Pump Eqipment Blank 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound mas Concentration Compound (ng) (pig/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) n-Decane 39.2 7.8 Sample Name Sample Date DDW Blank DDW Blank 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Oig/L) bp Range (ng9) (I±g/L) n-Decane 37.4 7.5 F-23 Final Report 12/95 Bielson AfB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&rT Data Sample Name Sample Date LogESO549 45/57 SF19 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/k) bp Range (zig) 4±g/L) 2-Methylpentane 75.6 15.1 C.6 75.6 15.1 Toluene 28.6 5.7 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 p-Xylene 115 22.9 C-7 to C-S 36.4 7.3 1,Z4-Trbmethylbenzene 21.9 4.4 C-8 to 0-9 252 50.4 zi-Decane 37.0 7.4 C-9 to C-1O 23.3 4.7 C-10 to C-1 l 31.1 6.2 C-l I to C-12 25.2 - 5.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date LogE 5051 45/57 MWD4 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound mas Concentration Compound (zig) (pig/L) bp Range (zig) (I~gIL) zi-Heptane 103 20.6 >C-15 0.0 - 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log#5053 45/57SPIS 5/9/94 mms Concntistion Compound mas Concetration Compound (zig) (ug/L) bp Range (zig) Qig/L) ni-Decane 44.7 8.9 .cC-6 0.0 0.0 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 56.9 11A C-9 to C-b 0.0 0.0 C-I0 to C-II 37.5 7.5 C-1Il to C-12 32.4 6.5 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS5 0.0 0.0 >-C-15 0.0 0.0 F-24 Final Report ~~~~~~~~~~N) ~~~~~~~~~~12 /9 5 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Log 53061 Date 45/57 SP6 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rIg (R'g/L) bpRne n~(./L n-Heptene37.4 7.3 c~~~ ~ ~~~0.0 Toluene 7.6 ~ ~ 0.0~~~~C-6 1.5 C-6 to C-7 1.s n-Decane 48.0 0.30 9.6 C-7 to C-8 36&974 C-8 to C-9 62.8 12.6 C-9 toC-10 0.0 0.0 C-I0toC-II 40.4 -. C-1Il to C-12 30A 6.1 C-12 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 C-Is to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 >C-15~ 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Log #306 Sample Date 45/57 SP6 dup-I 3/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (ggq/L) bpRne (ng pgL 2-Methylpentane 0.81 0.16 cC6 .8 01 n-Heptane 25.2 3.0 C-6 to C-7 0.0 n-Decane 48.2 0.0 9.6 C-Zto C.8 i8&437 ( ~~~~~~~C-9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C-8to71.7 1. C-9 to C-Ia 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C-1l 40.5 8.1 C-1Il to C-12 382 7.6. C-12 to C-I3 0.0 0.0 C-Is3toC-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-I3 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Log #5063 Sample Date 45/57 SP6 dup-2 5/9/94 Maws Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound ~ ~(ng) (ftg/L) bp Rane (0ig) (gg/L) n-Heptane 43.5 8.7 cC600 0.0 Toluene 9.8 2.0 C-6 to C-? 1.7 0.3 ri-Decane 47.9 9.6 C-? to C-8 44.1 8.8 C-8 to C-9 72.8 14.6 C-9 to C-JO0 0.0 0.0 C-I to C-Il 40.3 8.1 C-1Il to C-12 33.6 6.7 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-I3 0.0 0.0 F-25 Final Report -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&rT Data Sample Name Sample Date Log # O6 7 45/57YSPI 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (itg/L) bp Range (ng) (jgg/L) Ethylbenzene 0.8 0.16 cC-6 0.0 0.0 p-Xylene 96.8 19.4 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 1,2,4-rnmethylbenzeone 18.1 3.6 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 49.6 9.9 C-S to C-9 232 46.4 C-9 to C-I0 20.6 4.1 C-IC to C-Il 41.6 8.3 C-IlI to C-12 34.4 6.9 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-1 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date DDW Blank DDW Blank 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compouind Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (ggS/L) bp Range (zig) (pgIL) n-Decane 141 28.2 >C-I5 0.0 - 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Method Blank Method Blank 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compouind Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gig/L) bp Range (ng) (gtg/L) No wmnpouds detected <0-6 0.0 0.0 0-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-S 0.0 0.0 C-S to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-IC 0.0 0.0 C-l 0to C-1 0.0 0.0 C-1I Ito C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-26 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Log # 5069 Sample Date Trip Blank 5/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (4g/L) bp Range (ng) (4g/L) n-Decane 5U.7 10.9 cC-6i ~ 0.0 0.0 C-ti to C-7 6.5 1.3 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-S to C-9 81.5 16.3 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-la to C-il 46.0 9.2 C-li to C-12 40.5 8.1 C-12 to Cr13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15~ 0.0 0.0 Sample NAme Log #5071 Sample Date 45/57MW06 5/9/94 Om ~~~Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Cn o g m) p o u n (d u~~~~~~ g(/ L) bp Ra n g e n-Dan 5431< ~~~( n )( & g L ) C-6i 0.0 0.0 0.6 to C-? 1.6 0.31 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-S to C-9 76.9 15.4 C-9 to C-1b 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C-1I 45.7 9.1 C-11 to C-12 34.4 6.9 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0. >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-27 Final Report 12/95 Eielson APE Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5148 45/57 TP22B 5/10/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/L) ½ Rage (ng) (jzg/L) Toluene 15.7 3.1 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5149 45/57 TP22B dup-I 5/10/94 Mass Concentration .Compound mas Concentration Compound (ng) (jsg/L) bp Range (rig) (vg/L) 2,4-Dimnethylpentane 26.4 5.3 F-28 Final Report 12/95 -~~~~~ ~Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Manic Sample Date L~ogE# 5149 45/57 TP22B Spk. 5/10/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pig/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) Benzene 1,861 37 Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5150 45/57 TP22B Spk. dup 5/10/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jzg/L) bp Rag ng (Mg/L) Eenzene 1,88 378 <-6 2,9 9 Toluene 1,746 349 C-6 to C-7 4,586 917 Ethylbenzene 1,815 363 C-7 to C-S 2,221 444 P-Xylene 1,895 379 C-8 to C-9 6,419 1,284 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1,664 333 C-9 to C-10 1,776 355 n-Decane 83.5 16.7 C-i to C-li 70.2 14.0 Naphffialene 2,035 407 C-11 to C-12 1,237 247 C-12 to C-is 0.0 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0. >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-29 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log #5252 Equipment Blank Small Bailer 5/11/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jug/L) bp Range (ng) (Ag/L) 2-MethylpenWtane 154 30.8 Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5253 Equipment Blank La&rge Bailer 5/11/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration (iig/L) Compound (ng) (11g/L) bp Range (nkg) p-Xylene 2.8 0.56 .cC-6 1.9 0.38 n-Decae 88.8 17.8 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-B to C-9 136 27.3 C-9 to C-la 0.66 0.13 C-I0toC-11 74.6 14.9 C-li to C-12 66.2 13.2 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 - 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5254 Trip Blank 5/11/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (sig/L) bp Range (ng) (4tg/L) Toluene 0.43 0.09 cC-6 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 90.7 18.1 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.55 0.11 C-8 to C-9 135.2 27.0 C-9 to C-10 1.3 0.27 C-10 to C-Il 76.2 15.2 C-il to C-12 69.8 14.0 C-12 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 C-i3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-30 Final Report 12/95 Appendix F-3. Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel point hydrocabon purge & trap analyses specific compound data collected September, 1994. F-31 Final Report 12/95 P&T Data -. ~~~~~Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point Sample Name Sample Date Log #5614 45/57TP9B 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Ixg/L) bp Range (ng) (u~g/L) 2-Methylpentane 335 67.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5616 45/57 TP9M 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concenitration Compound (ng) (kg/L) tipRage (Ion) (1±g/L) n-Decane 48.3 9.7 C6 0.0 0.0 C-6 to C-7 43.1 8.6 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 24.8 5.0 C-9 to C-I0 0.0 0.0 C-IC to C-li 41.6 8.3 C-I1 to C-12 58.9 11.8 C-12 to C-I3 0.0 0.0. C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >.C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log4 5618 45/57 SF21 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concenttration Compound (rig) (jig/L) tip Rage (ng) (nLg/L) 2-Methylpentane 2.5 0.50 cC- 10.3 2.1 n-Hexane 26.6 5.3 C-6 to C-7 25.3 5.1 Benzene 2.8 0.55 C-7 to C-S 764 153 Toluene 2.7 0.55 C-B to C-9 25.8 5.2 ni-Decane 49.6 9.9 C-9 to C-I0 0.0 0.0 C-IC to C-li 42.7 8.5 C-li to C-12 60.3 12.1 C-12 to C-I3 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-32 Final Report 12/95 Eielson APE Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5620 45/57 SP08 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jltg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 2,4-Dimnethylpentane 5.0 1.0 cC-6 5.5 1.I Benzene 4.8 1.0 C-6 to C-7 13.6 2.7 Toluene 1.4 0.28 C-7 to C-8 2.0 0.40 p-Xylene 2.2 0.43 C-S to C-9 30.0 6.0 n-Decane 49.2 9.8 C-9 to C-1b 0.0 0.0 C-b to C-li 42.4 8.5 C-1l to C-12 73.9 14.8 C-12 to C-13 0.0 - 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-i5 0.0 0.0 >C-l5 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5622 45/57 TP3B 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) C;Lg/L) bp Rtange (ng) &Ig/L) 2,41Dumethylpentne 388 77.7 .cC-6 0.0 0.0 Toluene 1,967 393 C-6 to C-? 2,913 583 n-Decane 47.5 9.5 C-7 to C-S 3,658 732 C-8 to C-9 82.4 16.5 C-9 to C-I0 723 1.5 C-l0 to C-lI 54. 10.8 C-il to C-12 60.4 12.1 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is o-o 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5624 45/57 Trip Blank 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Rage (ng) (lig/L) n-Decane 4.5.2 9.0 c-63.0 0.6 C-6 to C-? 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 00 C-8 to C-s 2539 5.2 C-S to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-b0 to C-Il 39.0 7.8 C-li to C-12 60.0 12.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-i3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-33 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log 415626 45/57 SP24 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (iig/L) bp Range (ng) (jgIL) n-Decane 47.7 9.5 Sample Name Sample Date Log 45628 45/57 SF07 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Ojig/L) bp Range (ng) (ggIL) Benzene 1.0 0.2 Sample Name Sample Date Log 45629 45/57 SF19 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (qg/L) bp Rtange (ng) (gILg/) 2-Methylpentane 18.5 3.71 cC-6i 21.6 4.3 n-Hexane ii1 0.22 C-ti to C-7 10.8 2.2 Benzene 6.5 1.30 C-7 to C-S 28.6 5.? n-Decane, 49.6 9.91 C-S to C09 28.5 5.7 C-9 to C-la 0.0 0.0 C-l0 to C-1l 42.7 8.5 C-il to C-12 60.8 12.2 C-12 to C-is 0.0 0.0 C-is to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0a.o 0.0 F-34 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5630 spike-I 45/57 SP19 Spike 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (rig) (lpg/L) 2-Met1hylpentane 28.6 5.7 Sample Name Sample Date Log 445631 spike-2 45/57 SF19 Spike Duplicate 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (nig) (its/L) bp Range (rig) @jg/L) 2-Methylpentane 17.1 3.4 cC-6 2,176 435 2,4-Dimethylpentane 5.5 1.1 C-6 to C-? 4,498 900) Benzene 1,756 351 C-7 to C-8 2,286 457 Toluene 1,588 318 C-8 to C-9 6,479 1296 Ethylbenizene 12710 342 C-9 to C-lO0 1,804 361 p-Xylene 1,776 355 C-I0 to C-11 60.3 12.1 1,2,4-Trimetlhylbenzene 1,631 326 C-11 to C-12 1,235 247 n-Decane 70.0 14.0 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 Naphthalene 2,288 458 C-I13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-35 Final Report 12/95 Eielson, AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log * 5635 45/57 SF20 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (iig/L) bpRage (ng) (I4g/L) n-Decane 48.0 9.6 cC- 0.0 0.0 C-6 to C-7 2.0 0.39 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 28.5 5.7 C-9 to C-1O 0.0 0.0 C-1O to C-li 41.4 8.3 C-11 to C-12 82.2 16.4 C-12 to C-13 0.0 - 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5637 45/57 SP25 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) - (99g/L) bp Rtange (ng) (yg/L) n-Decane 51. 1.3 .C-6 5.9 1.2 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 3.4 0.68 C-S to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-la to C-li 44.4 8.9 C-11 to C-12 59.2 11.8 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-fl to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-i5 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log V 5639 45/57 Trip Blank 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (Iyg) (Mg/L) bp Range (ng) (sig/L) n-Decane 47.4 9.5 cC-6 5.9 1.2 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 2.7 0.5 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-la to C-Al 40.8 8. C-1l to C-12 59.3 11.9 C-12 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-36 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Maine Sample Date Log # 5641 45/57 SP23 9/7/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) OI~g/L) bp Range (ng) (pig/L) Benzene 1.1 0.21 cC69.9 2.0 n-Decane 51.1 10.2 C-6 to C-7 4.8 0.96 C-7 to C-S 0.0 0.0 C-S to C-9 25.9 5.2 C-9 to C-w0 an 0.0 C-10 to C-il 44.1 8.8 C-11 to C-12 60.7 12.1 C-12 to C-I3 0.0 - 0.0 C-I3 to C-i4 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-I5 an0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5657 45/57 SF18 9/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) ('ig/L) 2-Methylpentane 56.7 11.3 Sample Name Sample Date Log# 5658 45/57 SF26 9/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) C'~g/L) bp Rane (zig) (jig/L) n-Octane 1.5 0.30 F-37 Final Report 12/95 Eielson APBS Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log #5659 45/57 SP15 9/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (x/)bp.Rne(g)(gL 0.56 2-Methylpentane 2.8 0.55 .C62.83 0.0 n-Decane 50.9 10.2 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 n-Undecarte 1.0 0.21 C-7 to C-8 0.0 C-S to C-9 26.0 5.2 C-9 to C-iC 0.0 0.0 C-iC to C-11 43.9 8.8 C-li to C-12 53.8 10.8 C-12 to C-i3 0.0 - 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5660 45/57 SF12 9/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentation OSx/L) Compound (ng) (ug/l.) bp Range (ng) Toluee 0.70 0.4 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5661 45/57 TF22M 9/8/94 Mass Concentration Compoutd Mass Concentrabion QIg0./L) Compound (ng) &gs/L) bp Range (ng) n-Decane 47. 9.6 F-38 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log #5662 45/57 TP22B 9/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (nig) (jug/L) bp Rtange (ng) (Rg/L) 2-Methylpentane 1.5 0.31 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5666 45/57 TP3B 9/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (stg/L) bp R~ange (rig) (jig/L) Toluene 3.3 0.67 F-39 Final Report 12/95 Ejelson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date tLog # 5663 spike-l 45/57 TP22B Spike 9/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (gzg/L) 2-Methylpentane 4.7 0.94 cC-6 2,213 443 2,4-Dir.ethylpentone 6.4 1.3 C-6 to C-7 4,577 915 Benzene . 1,728 346 C-7 to C-8 2,304 461 Toluene 1,622 324 C-8 to C-9 6,437 1,287 Ethylbenzene 1,702 3-40 C-9 to C-JO 1,806 361 p-Xylene 1,755 351 C-10 to C-1Il 58.4 11.7 1,2,4-Trixnethylbenzene 1,637 327 C-1 1 to C-12 1,279 256 n-Decane 67.7 13.5 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 Naphthalene 2,370 474 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C.]4 to C-15 0.0 0.0 >C-1S 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5S664 spike-2 45/57 TP22B Spike Duplicate 9/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) (ixg/L) 2-Methylpentane 2.9 0.57 cC-6 2,191 438 *2,4-Dirnethylpentane 14 2.9 C-6 to C-7 4,674 935 Benzene 1,763 353 C-? to C-8 2,360 472 Toluene 1,658 332 C-8 to C-9 6,511 1,302 Ethylbenzene 12723 345 C-9 to C-IC 1,804 361 p-Xylene 12778 356 C-la0 to C-] l 59.1 -11.8 1,2A4-Trimiethylbenzene 1,635 327 C-lI1 to C-12 1,227 245 n-Dec~ane, 68.6 13.7 C-12 to CA13 0.0 0.0 Naphthalene 2,275 455 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-I5 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-40 Final Report 12/95 Eielson APB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log #5667 45/57 SP02 9/8/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (iig/L) -bp Rtange (ng) (isg/L) n-Decane 49.? 9.9 Sample Name Sample Date Lo#5668 45/57 blank, Pield Lab 9/8/94 Mass Conc~entration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp R~ange (rig) (iig/L) no compounds identified 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date LogE 5669 45/57 SP05 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) (jitg/L) n-Hexane 1.7 0.34 cC-6 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 46.3 9.3 C-6 to C-7 2.8 0.55 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-S to C-9 26.1 5.2 CO9 to C-iC 0.30 0.06 C-1b to C-Il 39.9 8.0 C-Il to C-12 88&9 17.8 C-12 to C-I3 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-4 1 Final Report 12/95 EBelson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Paint P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date L~og # 5670 45/57 SP04 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (ipg/L) bp Rne (ng) (igg/L) n-Decane 47.2 9.4 cC-6 0.0 0.0 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 4.3 0.85 C-9 to C-IC 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C-11 40.7 8.1 C-11 to C-12 52.8 10.6 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-i5 0.0 0.0 >C-1S 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5671 45/57 SP16 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound In') (jLg/L) bp R~ange (ng) (;IgIL) n-Decane 46.1 9.2 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5720 45/ 57 SF10 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compund (ng) (j~g/L) bp Range (ng) (jLg/L) n-Deane ~~~46.0 9.2 F-42 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5721 45/57 Field Lab Blank 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (ptg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) n-Decane 50.4 10.1 cC_6 0.0 0.0 C-6i to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-B to 0-9 24.8 5.0 C-9 to C-iO 0.0 0.0 C-la to C-li 44.2 8.8 C-Il to C-12 53.2 10.6 C-12 to C-13 0.0 - 0.0 C-i3 to C-i4 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-is o.o o.o >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5722 45/57 45MW08 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Rage (ng) @gg/L) 2-Methylpentane 407 81.4 cC-6 504 101 n-Hexane 0.90 0.18 C-6i to C-7 7,623 1,525 2,4-Dimethylpentane 1,431 286 C-7 to C-8 1,900 380 Benzene 7.1 1.4, C-B to C-9 239 47.9 Toluene 1,004 201 C-9 to C-10 93.4 18.7 n-Octane 7.9 1.6 C-1b to C-1l 176 35.1 Ethylbenzene 16.6 3.3 C-1l to C-12 218 43.7 p-Xylene 41.8 8.4 C-12 to C-i3 0.0 0.0 1,3_5-Trbnethylbenzene 59.4 11.9 C-is to C-14 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 40.0 8.0 C-14 to C-15 0.0 0.0 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene 79.9 16.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5723 45/57 45MW07 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound - Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jtg/L) bp Range (ng) (jig/L) 2,4-Dimnethylpentane 1.5 0.29 F-43 Final Report 12/9 5 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5724 45/57 Trip Blank 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) (igy/L) Naphhlee1.7 0.33 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5725 45/57 45MWOI 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compoand Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Rtange (ng (9g/L) 2-Methylpentane Ml 22.8 .cC-6 114 22.9 n-Hexane 69.1 13.8 C-6 to C-7 708 142 2,4-Dimethylpentarie 9.2 1.8 C-7 to C-S 31.3 6.3 Toluene 22.1 4.4 C-S to C-9 0.0 0.0 n-Decane 3.5 0.69 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 n-Undecane 1.3 0.26 C-b to C-Il 3.0 0.60 C-li to C-fl 4.1 0.82 C-12 to C-is 0.0 0.0 C-I3 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5726 45/5745MW02 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Gig/L) bp Rage (ng) (gg/L) 2-Methylpentane ~ 2.9 0.58 F-44 Final Report 12/95 -. B~~~~~ielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log # 5727 45/57 45MW09 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) ip Range (ng) (;Mg/L) 2-Methylpentane 26.5 5.3 cC630.1 6.0 n-Hexane 8.8 1.8 C-6 to C-7 8.4 1.7 Toluene 0.75 0.15 C-7 to C-8 30.7 6.1 n-Decane 1.9 0.37 C-S to C-9 2.7 0.53 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-I0 to C-Il 1.6 0.32 C-1Il to C-12 3.5 0.70 C-12 to C-Is 0.0 - 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log# 5728 45/57 45MW031 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Rage (ng) (pg/L) Toluene 0.85 0.17 cC!6 3.3 0.67 n-Decane 0.94 0.19 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 1.2 0.24 C-B to C-9 1.0 0.20 C-9 to C-Ia 0.0 0.0 C-1b to C-lI 0.81 0.16 C-I1 to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-12 to C-is o.o 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-Is 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Log 45729 45/57 45MW06 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compournd Ing (ggL) bi Rage (ng) (,,g/L) Toluene 0.70 0.14 c- .001 n-Decane 26.6 5.3 C-6 to C-7 2.9 0.57 1,2,3~-Triethylbenzene 0.64 0.13 C-7 to C-S 1.0 0.20 C-S to C-9 1.6 0.32 C-S to C-Ia 0.0 0.0 C-I0 to C-Il 23.6 4.7 C-11 to C-12 1.6 0.32 C-12 to C-is 0.0 0.0 C-IS to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-15 0.0 0.0 F-45 Finai Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date L~og #5730 45/57 45MW04 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (xig/L) bp Range (nig) (pg/L) 2-Methylpentane 5.4 1.1 cC-6 BS 1.7 ni-Hexane 4.9 0.99 C-6 to C-7 200 40.0 Toluene 54.3 10.9 C-7 to C-8 78.6 15.7 n-Decane 1.1 0.21 C-8 to C-9 3.5 0.70 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-l0toC-11 0.93 0.19 C-1 I to C-12 0.0 0.0 C-fl2to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-U4 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >-C-1S 0.0 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date Long #5731 45/57UWRLMW8 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (rig) (g~g/L) No compounds identified 0.0 Sample Name Sample Date L~og #5732 45/57 Trip Blank 9/9/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (AgiL) bp Range (ng) (Asg/L) ri-Propylbenizene 0.74 0.15 .cC-6 0.74 0.15 n-Decane 2.5 0.50 C-6 to C-7 0.0 0.0 C-7 to C-8 0.0 0.0 C-8 to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-IC0 0.95 0.19 C-I0toC-II 2.2 0.43 C-1Il to C-12 29.0 5.8 C-12 to C-13 0.0 0.0 C-13 to C-14 0.0 0.0 C-14 to C-IS 0.0 0.0 >C-1S 0.0 0.0 F-46 Final Report 1 2/9 5 Ejelson AFB Water Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Data Sample Name Sample Date Log #5872 45 /57 SP27 9/14/94 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) O4g/L) bp Range (ng) (pig/L) 2-Methylbutane 2.5 1.3 Sample Name Sample Date Log #5873 45/57 SP28 9/14/94 Mass Concentrabion Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jgg/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) 2-Methylbutane 2.2 1.1 F-4 7 Final Report 12/95 Appendix F-4. Site 45/57 ground water monitoring well and gravel paint hydrocabon purge & trap analyses specific compound data collected July, 1995. F-A48 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data 12/95 Date Sampled Log# 7001 45/57 SP18 7/2/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) 2-Methylbutane 9.7 1.9 Date Sampled Log# 7005 45/57 SP20 7/2/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (igg/L) 2-Methylbutane 6.6 1.3 Date Sampled Log# 7011 45/57 SF23 7/1/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gtg/L) bpRange (ng) _(gg/L) 2-Methylbutane 6.8 1.4 F-49 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data 12/95 Date Sampled L~og# 7015 45/57 SP2.5 7/1/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (kg/L) bp Range (ng) (gig/L) 13.2 p-Xylene 0.09 0.02 Date Sampled Log# 7104 45/57GP15 7/4/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pga/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 13.7 2,3-Dimethylpentane 5.9 5.9 Date Sampled Log# 7109 45/57 SP24 7/4/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) 10.8 Bentzene 1.3 0.25 F-50 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data 12/95 Date Sampled Log# 7114 45/57 SF26 7/4/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (4~g/L) No compounds detected Date Sampled Log# 7119 45/57 SP10 7/4/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 2,4-Dimethylpentane 1.9 0.37 Date Sampled Log# 7124 45/57 SF12 7/4/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Mg/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) Benzene 0.60 0.60 F-5i Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data 12/95 Date Sampled Log#t 7129 45/57 SP19 7/4/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 2-Methylpentane 16.1 16.1 Date Sampled Log# 7162 45/57 SF16 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pig/L) bp Range (ng) (gig/L) Toluene 1.7 0.33 F-52 Final Report -> ~~~~~~~~~~EielsonAFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point F&T Water Data129 Date Sampled Log# 7183 45/57SPIS 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng9) (jig/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) 2-Methylbyutane 1.3 0.26 Date Sampled Log# 7189 45/57 GPOS 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Qs~g/L) bp Range (ng) (jig/L) n-Pentane 226 226 2,3-Dimethylpentane 184 184 C-10 to C-li 227 - 227 Toluene 2,552 2,552 C-1l to C-12 141 141 Ethylbenzene 138 138 p-Xylene 711 711 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 41.7 41.7 1,2,4-Trimethylben~zene 91.0 91.0 n-Decane 11.3 11.3 1,225-Trixnethylbenzene 92.7 92.7 n-Butylbenzene 25.9 25.9 Undlecane 15.0 15.0 Naphthalene 29.7 29.7 Date Sampled Log# 7195 45/57 SP30 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (gig/L) n-Pentane 24.1 24.1 <0-6 401 401 2-Methylpentane 9.0 9.0 C-6i to C-7 5,074 5,074 n-Hexane 19.8 19.8 C-7 to C-8 455 455 Benzene 22.3 22.3 C-S to C-9 271 271 Toluene 294 294 C-9 to C-la 44A4 44A Ethylbenzene 23.6 23.6 C-iC to C-lI 26.8 26.8 p-Xylene 129 129 C-lI to C-1Z 14.8 14.8 2,3-Dimnethylperntane 0.71 0.71 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 6.1 6.1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 17.3 17.3 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene 15.0 15.0 n-Butylbenzene 2.1 2.1 Naphthalene 9.0 9.0 F-53 Final Report (.r.) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 Eielsorn APE Specific Compound and Hailing Point P&T Water Data Date Sampled Log# 7201 45/57 GPI6 7/5/95 Mas Concentration Compound Mas Concentration Compound (ng) Ulg/L) bp Range (ng) (ug/L) 2-Methylbutane 4,535 907 Date Sampled LogN 7234 45/57 SP29 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) n-Pentane 99.4 99.4 Date Sampled Log# 7239 45/57?S135 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (psg/L) bp Range (ng) (pgg/L) 2-Methylbutane 130 25.9 Date Sampled Log# 7244 45/57 SP34 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gxg/L) bp Range (ng) (jitg/L) Benzene 1.3 1.3 F-55 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific: Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data 12/95 Date Sampled Log#t 7249 45/57 SP37 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (iig/L) 2-Methylbutane 5.8 1.2 Date Sampled Log# 7254 45/570GP02 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) 2-Methylbutane 38.1 7.6 Date Sampled Log#t 7258 45/57 SF31 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (kg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 2-Methylbutane 8.1 1.6 F-56 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data Date Sampled Log# 7270 45/57 SF39 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pggL) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) 2,4-Dinmethylpentane 2.0 0.39 C-9 to C-10 0.0 - 0.0 C-10 to C-11 0.0 0.0 C-i1 to C-12 0.0 0.0 Date Sampled Log# 7273 45/57GP04 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pgIL) bp Range (ng) (jig/L) 2-Methylbutane 16.2 3.2 Date Sampled Log# 7277 45/57 SP40 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (i~g/L) bp Range (ng) &jg/L) 2-Methylbutane 3.5 0.69 .cC-6 24.9 5.0 Toluene 1.1 0.21 C-6 to C-7 18.5 3.7 C-7 to C-8 1.5 0.31 C-S to C-9 0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-10 o.6 0.0 C-IC to C-Il 0.0 0.0 C-I1 to C-12 0.0 0.0 F-57 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling P oint P&T Water Data129 Date Sampled Log# 7285 45/57 TP9B 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) OAg/L) -bp Range (nig) (Mg/L) 2-Methylbutane 281 5i6:2 Date Sampled Log# 7356 45/57TP9M 7/5/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (rig) (Mg/L) -bp Range (rig) (g1g/L) 2-Methylbutane 280 56.1- Date Sampled Log# 7381 45/57 SF38 7/6/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) -bp Range (ng) (pggL) 2-Methylbutane 2.4 0.48 F-58 Final Report Eielson AEB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data 12/95 Date Sampled Log# 7386 45/57SP41 7/6/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 2-Methylbutane 39,957 7,991 Date Sampled Log# 7407 45/57 SF7 7/6/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pig/L) bp Range (ng) (A~g/L) 2-Methylbutane 10.2 2.0 Date Sampled Log# 7412 45/57 SP42 7/6/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (iig/L) 2-Methylbutane 36.0 7.2 F-59 Final Report ( B~~~~~~~~ielsonAFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data 12/95 Date Sampled Log#t 7417 45/57 SF43 7/6/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gig/L) bp Range (ng) (IgE/L) 2-Methylbutane 2.1 0.42 Date Sampled Log# 7434 45/57 SP44 7/6/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pig/L) b~pRange (ng) (gg/L) 2-Methylbutane 20.8 4.2 Date Sampled Log#t 7439 45/57 SF45 7/6/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (na) (ILg/L) Toluene 0.44 0.44 F-60 Finai Report Ejelson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data 12/95 Date Sampled Log#t 7571 45/57TP?22M 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (gig/L) 2,4-Dimethylpentane 1.0 0.20 Date Sampled Log# 7576 45/57 TP22B 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound. (ng) Qjig/L) bp Range (ng) (gg/L) 2-Methylpentane 5.2 1.0 Date Sampled Log# 7581 45/57TP13B 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (igg/L) 2-Methylbutane 5.0 1.0 F-6 1 Final Report 12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Faint P&T Water Data Date Sampled Log# 7592 45/57MWO6 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) OigIL) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 2-Methylbutane 9.7 1.9 C-9 to C-10 3.0 - 0.59 C-10 to C-U1 0.0 0.0 C-I1 to C-12 0.0 0.0 Date Sampled Log# 7597 45/57 SP2 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (Mg/L) 2-Methylbutane 5.5 LI1 Date Sampled Log# 7609 45/57TP13M 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (iag/L) bp Range (ng) (jig/L) 2-Methylbutane LI1 0.22 F-62 Final Report Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data Date Sampled Log#t 7614 45/57 TF3B 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (jig/L) bp Range (rig) (jig/L) n-Hexane 20.5 4.1 Date Sampled Log# 7614 45/57 TP3B Duplicate 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) -bp Rcange (nig) (gg/L) ni-Hexane 21.2 4.2 Date Sampled Log# 7619 45/57 SF4 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pig/L) -bp Range (rig) (Mg/L) Toluene 0.59 0.12 Date Sampled Log# 7625 45/57 SF1 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (nig) (g±g/L) -bp Range (rig) (jxg/L) Benizene 0.43 0.9 F-63 Final Report 12/95 Eielsdn AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data Date Sampled Log# 7630 45/57 SP5 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) No compounds detected C-9 to C-1b 0.0 - 0.0 C-10 to C-1l 0.0 0.0 C-11 to C-12 0.0 0.0 Date Sampled Log# 7635 45/57 SP27 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (Iig/L) bp Range (ng) O(tg/L) No compounds detected C-1Il to C-12 0.0 0.0 . Date Sampled Log# 7640 45/57MW09 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (igg/L) bp Range (ng) (jig/L) 2A4-Dimethylpentane 1.1 0.21 F-64 Final Report -) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12/95 Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data Date Sampled Log# 7645 45/57 SF8 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/I,) 2-Methylbutane 4.2 0.84 Date Sampled Log# 7650 45/57 MWOI 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 2-Methylbutane 1.8 0.36 cC-6 243 48.7 2,4-Dimethylpentane 2.2 0.44 C-6 to C-7 185 37.1 Benzene 1.1 0.21 C-7 to C-B 0.0 0.0 ) ~~~~~~~~~~to C-9 ~ ~~~~~~~~~~C-B0.0 0.0 C-9 to C-10 0.0 0.0 C-10 to C-li 0.0 0.0 C-Il to C-12 0.0 0.0 .Date Sampled Log#t 7655 45/57MW02 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) Oig/L) bp Range (ng) (Ag/L) 2-Methylpentane 2.2 0.44 F-65 Final Report 71 ~~~~Eielson AFB Specific Compound and Boiling Point P&T Water Data 12/95 Date Sampled Log# 7660 45/57 UWRL MWOS 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) ggL 2-Methylbutane 2.1 0.42 Date Sampled Log# 7683 45/57MWO3 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass .Concentration Compound (ng) (gg/L) bp Range (ng) (jig/L) 2-Methylbutane 94.1 18.8 Date Sampled Log# 7688 45/57 SF21 7/7/95 Mass Concentration Compound Mass Concentration Compound (ng) (pg/L) bp Range (ng) (pg/L) 2-Methylbutane 48.6 9.7