USVI Public Records

Document text

TECHNICAL :MEMORANDUM II RESULTS OF THE FIELD PROGRAM TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. THOMAS, U.S. VffiGIN ISLANDS VOLUME 1 OF 2 May 1993 Prepared for Tutu Environmental Investigation Committee San Juan, Puerto Rico Prepared by Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 201 West Passaic Street Rochelle Park, New Jersey 07662 (201) 909-0700 GERAGHTY 6i' MILLER. INC. ··~·1....1·'/ ()()_,:.'. 1 J.. -+ J_ *64426* 64426 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM II RESULTS OF IBE FIELD PROGRAM TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. IBOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS May 28, 1993 Geraghty & Miller, Inc. is submitting this technical memorandum to the Tutu Environmental Investigation Committee for work performed at the Tutu Service Station in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. This technical memorandum was prepared in conformance with Geraghty & Miller's strict quality assurance/quality control procedures to ensure that the technical memorandum meets industry standards in terms of the methods used and the information presented. If you have any questions or comments concerning this technical memorandum, please contact one of the individuals listed below. Respectfully submitted, GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. ~~r1..M ... Jeffrey S. Burdick Scientist ~V.Y-1/ Thomas V. Danahy n<>na.- I Senior Scientist/Project Manager 12L1Y.~ Daniel A. Nachman @ Vice President/Project Officer TU\ (){)'::·. GERAGHTY c-:;, \HLLER. l\:C VOLUME 1 CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................... 1-1 1.1 PURPOSE ....................................... 1-1 1.2 SITE LOCATION ................................... 1-3 1.3 SCOPE OF WORK .................................. 1-3 2.0 METHODOLOGY ....................................... 2-1 2.1 SOIL INVESTIGATION ............................... 2-1 2.2 GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS ........................ 2-3 2.2.1 Surficial Geology .......................... 2-4 2.2.2 Bedrock Coring ........................... 2-4 2.2.3 Downhole Geophysics ....................... 2-5 2.3 GROUND-WATER INVESTIGATION ...................... 2-7 2.3.1 Monitoring Well Installation .................... 2-7 2.3.2 Well Development .......................... 2-9 2.3.3 Water-Level Measurements ................... 2-10 2.3.4 Ground-Water Sampling and Analysis ............. 2-11 2.4 AQUIFER TESTS .................................. 2-13 2.4.1 Water-Level Measurements ................... 2-13 2.4.2 Aquifer Test Procedures ..................... 2-14 2.4.3 Water Sample Collection ..................... 2-15 2.5 DATA VALIDATION ............................... 2-15 3.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ............................ 3-1 3.1 GEOLOGY ....................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Regional Geology .......................... 3-1 3.1.2 Site Geology ............................. 3-2 3.2 HYDROGEOLOGY .................................. 3-6 GERAGHTY E« MILLER. l~C 11 CONTENTS (Continued) 3.2.1 Regional Hydrogeology ....................... 3-6 3.2.2 Site Hydrogeology .......................... 3-7 3.2.2.1 Shallow Wells ....................... 3-8 3.2.2.2 Deep Wells ......................... 3-9 3.2.3 Ground-Water Flow Regime ................... 3-10 3.3 AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS ........................ 3-13 3.3.1 Monitoring Well MW-6R Aquifer Test Analysis ...... 3-14 3.3.2 Monitoring Well MW-6D Aquifer Test Analysis ...... 3-16 4.0 SOIL QUALITY DATA ................................... 4-1 4.1 RA TIO NALE FOR EV ALU A TING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SOIL SAMPLE RES UL TS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.2 VIRGIN ISLANDS HOUSING AUTHORITY SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ....................................... 4-3 4.3 CURRICULUM CENTER SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ........... 4-3 4.4 FIRE STATION PROPERTY SAMPLING RESULTS ............. 4-6 4.5 RAMSAY MOTORS SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS .............. 4-6 4.6 ANTILLES AUTO REPAIR SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ......... 4-7 4. 7 TEXACO SERVICE STATION SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ....... 4-7 4.8 TILLETT PROPERTY SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ............. 4-9 4.9 FOUR WINDS PLAZA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ............ 4-9 4.10 VITELCO SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS .................... 4-12 4.11 ESSO SERVICE STATION SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ......... 4-12 4.12 ASSEMBLY OF GOD CHURCH SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ..... 4-13 4.13 LUTHERAN CHURCH SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ........... 4-13 4.14 O'HENRI DRY CLEANERS SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ........ 4-13 4.15 QA/QC SAMPLES ................................. 4-15 4.15.1 Organic Compound Results for QA/QC Samples ...... 4-16 4.15.2 Inorganic Compound Results for QA/QC Samples ..... 4-17 -· :ur 1iu:: :L::iisi GERAGHTY 6< MILLER. l!\C lll CONTENTS (Continued) 5. 0 GROUND-WATER QUALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 5.1 ORGANIC COMPOUND RESULTS FOR GROUND-WATER SAMPLES ...................................... 5-1 5 .1.1 Petroleum Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 5.1.2 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons .................. 5-3 5.1.3 Chlorinated Compounds ...................... 5-3 5.2 INORGANIC COMPOUND RESULTS FOR GROUND-WATER SAMPLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-5 5.2.1 Total Metals ............................. 5-5 5.2.2 Dissolved Metals ........................... 5-6 5.2.3 Total Cyanide ............................ 5-6 5.3 QA/QC SAMPLES .................................. 5-6 5.3.1 Organic Compound Results for QA/QC Samples ....... 5-7 5.3.2 Inorganic Compound Results for QA/QC Samples ...... 5-7 5.3.2.1 Total Metals Results for QA/QC Samples ....... 5-8 5.3.2.2 Dissolved Metals Results for QA/QC Samples .... 5-8 5.4 SUMMARY OF GROUND-WATER QUALITY RESULTS ......... 5-8 6.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............................ 6-1 6.1 HYDROGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ....................... 6-1 6.2 SOIL QUALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-2 6.3 GROUND-WATER QUALITY ........................... 6-4 6.4 MONITORING WELL NETWORK EVALUATION ............. 6-6 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................... 7-1 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................ 8-1 -- .. - . ' .L 1 i\.;'.:, ftJT Ui..,.,,. GERAGHTY e \1ILLER. l:\iC - IV TABLES 2-1. Soil Boring Details, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 2-2. Monitoring Well Construction Details, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 2-3. Water-Level Measurements in Shallow Wells, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 2-4. Water-Level Measurements in Deep Wells, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 2-5. Ground-Water Elevation Comparison for Monitoring Well Clusters, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 2-6. Vertical Gradients of Ground-Water Flow, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 3-1. Summary of Transmissivity and Storativity Values from Aquifer Tests, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-1. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-3. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-4. Concentrations of Metals in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-5. Concentrations of Total Cyanide in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-6. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Potable-Water Samples Collected in June 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. GERAGHTY c-< \11LLER. INC V TABLES (Continued) 4-7. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in the Field Blanks and Trip Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-8. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in the Field Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-9. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in the Field Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-10. Concentrations of Metals in the Field Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-11. Concentrations of Total Cyanide in the Field Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-12. Maximum Natural Concentrations of Metals and Cyanide in Background Soil Samples, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-13. Metal and Cyanide Soil Sample Results Above Background Values, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 5-1. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 5-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 5-3. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 5-4. Concentrations of Total Metals in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 5-5. Concentrations of Dissolved Metals in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. TUT nu,: j_J_i>/ GERAGHTY CA' \1ILLER. !:\JC Vl TABLES (Continued) 5-6. Concentrations of Total Cyanide in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 5-7. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in October and November 1992 During the Pumping Test, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. FIGURES 1-1. Site Location, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 1-2. Base Map with Topography, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 1-3. Soil Boring and Surface Soil Sample Locations, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 1-4. Monitoring Well and Cross-Section Locations, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 3-1. Hydrogeologic Cross Section, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 3-2. Ground-Water Contour Map, Shallow Wells, September 28, 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 3-3. Ground-Water Contour Map, Deep Wells, September 28, 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 3-4. Ground-Water Contour Map, Shallow Wells, November 16, 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 3-5. Ground-Water Contour Map, Deep Wells, November 16, 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 3-6. Storm Sewer Layout, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. TU\ GERAGHTY & \1ILLER. l'.'JC Vll FIGURES (Continued) 3-7. Monitoring Well MW-6R Drawdown Data, Pumping Test of MW-6R, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 3-8. Monitoring Well CHT-6D Drawdown Data, Pumping Test of MW-6D, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 3-9. Monitoring Well MW-6D Drawdown Data, Pumping Test of MW-6D, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-1. Organic Compound Concentrations for Monitoring Well Borings, Soil Borings, and Surface Soil Samples, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 4-2. Metal and Cyanide Concentrations in Monitoring Well Boring, Soil Boring, and Surface Soil Samples, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 5-1. Organic Compound Concentrations in Ground-Water Samples September 29 Through October 7, 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 5-2. Total Metal and Cyanide Concentrations in Ground-Water Samples September 29 Through October 7, 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 5-3. Dissolved Metal Concentrations in Ground-Water Samples September 29 Through October 7, 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 5-4. Volatile Organic Compound Concentrations in Supply Wells September 14 Through September 17, 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. 7-1. Proposed Monitoring Well Locations, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. A. Sample Core Logs. B. Geologic Logs. VOLUME 2 APPENDICES GERAGHTY c:;, \1ILLER. l'.\/C Vlll APPENDICES (Continued) C. Soil Sampling Procedures Provided by CDM Federal Programs Corporation. D. Record of Bedrock Coring Parameters. E. Geophysical Logs. F. Well Construction Logs. G. Water Sampling Logs. H. Monitoring Well Hydrographs. I. Soils Data Validation Report. J. First Sampling Round Data Validation Report. - ·1 UT OU'.~: 11 ::,U GERAGHTY c"-< MILLER. l;';C TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM II RESULTS OF THE FIELD PROGRAM TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS 1.0 INTRODUCTION In March 1992, Geraghty & Miller, Inc. submitted the revised Tutu Service Station Investigation Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a) to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) on behalf of the Tutu Environmental Investigation Committee (TEIC), which is comprised of Texaco Caribbean, Inc. (Texaco), and Esso Virgin Islands, Inc. (Esso). The Work Plan was to be incorporated into an Administrative Order by Consent (No. II-RCRA-7003 and 9003-92-0401) issued to Texaco and Esso by the USEPA Region II, pursuant to Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Technical Memorandum I, which was submitted to the USEPA in April 1992 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992b), provided the results of the preliminary reconnaissance activities performed to select final soil boring and monitoring well locations for the field investigation program. As indicated in the Work Plan, Technical Memorandum II is to be submitted to the USEPA after completion of the first ground- water sampling event of the field investigation program. This document, Technical Memorandum II, includes the data validation report and the hydrogeological data collected during the implementation of the field investigation, including soil sampling and the first ground- water sampling event. 1.1 PURPOSE As specified in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a), the purposes of Technical Memorandum II are to evaluate the adequacy of the monitoring well system and to develop recommendations regarding sampling and analytical procedures for the second ground- water sampling event for USEPA review. Accordingly, this technical memorandum includes descriptions of methods, pertinent hydrogeologic data, and data validation results for the first sampling event of the monitoring well system. TL.IT (.10'.~: 11 '.:; 1. GERAGHTY c-;;, \!ILLER. l:'\C - 1-2 The field investigation was designed to determine or confirm the potential sources. the horizontal and vertical extents, the rate and direction of transport, and the potential migration pathways for petroleum hydrocarbon products and chlorinated compounds in the soil and ground water at the Tutu Service Station Investigation Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands (Tutu Site). The specific chlorinated compounds of concern at the site are tetrachloroethene, commonly known as perchloroethene (PCE), and its breakdown products, trichloroethene [TCE], 1.2- dichloroethene [DCE], and vinyl chloride. Additional soil sampling locations and deep monitoring wells were included in the scope of work to assist the USEPA in evaluating the extent of chlorinated compounds. The field investigation was conducted with oversight by the USEPA and its subcontractor, Camp, Dresser & McKee Federal Programs Corporation (CDM). The field investigation program at the Tutu Site included the following activities: • Drilling soil borings. • Collecting soil samples for portable gas chromatograph (GC) analysis and laboratory analysis. • Conducting downhole geophysical surveys in deep borings. • Installing and developing shallow and deep monitoring wells. • Surveying soil boring and monitoring well locations. • Collecting ground-water samples. • Performing two aquifer tests. GERAGHTY c-.,., \1ILLER. !'.\JC - 1-3 1.2 SITE LOCATION The Tutu Site is located in the east-central portion of St. Thomas (see Figure 1-1) in the upper Turpentine Run basin. The study area and the surrounding topography are shown on Figure 1-2. Various commercial establishments line the major roads in the area. 1.3 SCOPE OF WORK The scope of work outlined in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller. Inc. 1992a) included ten shallow monitoring wells, seven deep monitoring wells, and 12 soil borings. Prior to completion of the field investigation, this scope of work was expanded to address the USEPA 's concern regarding potential sources of PCE and its breakdown products (TCE, DCE, and vinyl chloride); the expanded scope included two additional shallow monitoring wells, five additional soil borings, and eight surface soil samples. These additions to the scope of work were discussed by the USEPA and the TEIC and approved by the USEPA prior to implementation. The rationales for the revisions to the original scope of work are discussed below. The drilling program in the revised scope of work consisted of installing 12 shallow and seven deep monitoring wells, and drilling 17 soil borings. The locations of the soil borings and monitoring wells are shown on Figures 1-3 and 1-4, respectively. In the revised scope of work, Monitoring Wells MW-9S (located at the south end of the Four Winds Shopping Plaza parking lot and adjacent to the Esso Service Station) and MW-14 (located at the northwest end of Curriculum Center property) were added to the drilling program. Monitoring Well MW-9 was constructed with a screened interval slightly below the water table; therefore, it was necessary to install Monitoring Well MW-9S next to Monitoring Well MW-9 to intersect the water table. Monitoring Well MW-14 was installed northwest of the Curriculum Center (former Laga Building) to provide additional hydrogeologic and ground- water quality data for this area. Technical Memorandum I (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992b) originally proposed a shallow monitoring well (proposed designation MW-1) at the northwestern . r 1_,I T () () :~·~ .1 l '.::i ~, GERAGHTY & \1ILLER. 1.-.L - 1-4 comer of the Curriculum Center. However, CDM, the USEPA 's subcontractor, performed an independent fracture trace analysis that identified a fracture lineament near the southern end of the Curriculum Center parcel that is parallel to Route 38 (CDM Federal Programs Corporation 1992). During a May 5, 1992 meeting with CDM, USEPA, TEIC, and Geraghty & Miller, the USEPA requested an additional pair of monitoring wells at the southwestern comer of the Curriculum Center (designated MW-1 and MW-lD) to evaluate this fracture lineament. The designation of the original shallow monitoring well proposed at the northwestern comer of the Curriculum Center was then changed to MW-14. During the initial attempt at drilling the boring for Monitoring Well MW-6D (located in the center of the Four Winds Shopping Plaza parking lot) in July 1992, the core hole collapsed during reaming and the on-site geologist decided to install shallow Monitoring Well MW-6 in the remaining open hole. However, Monitoring Well MW-6 was abandoned because the collapsed material may not have provided a sufficient separation from the deeper bedrock zone, and Monitoring Well MW-6R was installed as a replacement shallow well. In August 1992, a deep well, Monitoring Well MW-6D, was installed as planned. Four soil borings (Borings B-13A, B-14, B-15, and B-16) were also added to the original scope during the field investigation. Boring B-13A, located on the western side of O'Henri Dry Cleaners, provided an additional soil sample for the risk assessment database. Borings B-14, B-15, and B-16 were located north of the Curriculum Center, where historical information suggested a potential source of PCE (Figure 1-3). In May 1992, the TEIC became aware that the area near a former discharge pipe located at the rear of the Curriculum Center was going to be covered by construction of a concrete foundation during the planned expansion of the building. The TEIC recommended to the USEPA that soil sampling be conducted at Borings B-14, B-15, and B-16 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992c). These three boring locations at the Curriculum Center were approved by the USEPA. At the request of the USEPA, eight surface soil samples were added to the scope of work specified in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a). Collection of these surface·soil r1 ... J··1· ()()2 J .:L ~,// GERAGHTY c-;;, \1ILLER. I~C. - 1-5 samples was intended to provide soil chemistry data for the risk assessment that will be performed by the USEPA. According to USEPA risk assessment guidance documents, contaminants present in soil within 2 feet of an unpaved land surface should be quantified for assessment of risk to human health and the environment (USEPA 1989a; 1991 a). The potential exposure routes to humans for contaminants in surficial soils include inhalation of contaminated soil dust or ingestion of contaminated soil, particularly by children. Soil that is covered by pavement or buildings is not accessible for exposure to humans so no risk assessment data are necessary in these areas. Therefore, the selection of surface soil sampling locations was focused in areas of potentially contaminated surficial soils in unpaved areas. Suspected contaminated surface soil areas were determined based on USEPA site evaluation reports (USEPA 1991b) and a reconnaissance of the Tutu Site. During the site reconnaissance, conducted on July 28, 1992 by Geraghty & Miller and USEPA 's oversight subcontractor, CDM, final sampling locations were designated at suspected contaminant source areas. Many of these areas were selected based on visual evidence of contaminated soil (i.e., stained or discolored soil, stressed vegetation, and lack of vegetation). The eight surface soil samples collected at the Tutu Site as part of the soil investigation were designated as Samples SS-1 throug_h SS-8 (Figure 1-3). Surface Soil Samples SS-1, SS-2, and SS-8 (located north of the Curriculum Center) were collected to evaluate background metal concentrations in surficial soil. Surface Soil Samples SS-3, SS-4 (located northwest of the Curriculum Center), and SS-5 (Tillett Gardens) were collected in potential source areas of constituents of concern (i.e., petroleum compounds, PCE, TCE, DCE, and vinyl chloride). Surface Soil Sample SS-6 (located south of the O'Henri Dry Cleaners) and its field replicate SS-7, were collected for the risk assessment analysis requested by the USEPA. GERAGHTY c.-< MILLER. INC - 2.0 METHODOLOGY This section describes the activities and procedures performed during the field investigation at the Tutu Site. The methods of investigation for soil quality, geology, ground- water conditions, aquifer characteristics, and data validation are described below. 2.1 SOIL INVESTIGATION The purpose of the soil investigation was to identify source areas of petroleum hydrocarbon products and chlorinated compounds of concern (i.e., PCE, TCE, DCE, and vinyl chloride) at the Tutu Site. Soil samples were collected during the drilling of Borings B-1 through B-13, B-13A, and B-14 through B-16, and of Monitoring Wells MW-1 through MW-10, MW-14, MW-1D, MW-4D, MW-6D, and MW-10D through MW-13D (see Figures 1-3 and 1-4). Soil samples from soil borings and monitoring wells were collected from June 4, 1992 to August 14, 1992. Soil boring details are included in Table 2-1. At several locations, the drilling was advanced through asphalt or concrete pavement. The drilling rig, hollow-stem augers, rods, and tools were steam cleaned before each boring. In addition, split-spoon samplers were decontaminated in accordance with the following procedure: washed in tap water that was mixed with Micro detergent; rinsed with tap water; rinsed with 10 percent nitric acid; rinsed with deionized water; rinsed with pesticide-grade methanol; rinsed with pesticide-grade hexane; allowed to air dry; and rinsed with deionized water. Each sampler was wrapped in aluminum foil for later use. Soil samples were collected with a 3-inch diameter, 2-foot long, stainless-steel, split- spoon sampler driven ahead of 3.25-inch inside diameter (I.D.), hollow-stem augers. Soil samples were collected continuously from ground surface to the water table or top of bedrock, whichever was encountered first. Each soil sample was collected by driving the split-spoon sampler through the unconsolidated material with a 140-pound hammer dropping 30 inches. After the sampler was TUT ,.)(i~:· ·i ·! !: .. __ .;"_ ..i ...... \,'\ .. ,• GERAGHTY <5-' \1ILLER. 1:---iC - 2-2 retrieved from the boring, it was placed on a wood table covered by new plastic sheeting and opened. The sample interval, blow counts per 6 inches of advancement, sample recovery, and the soil description were recorded on Geraghty & Miller's sample/core log form. Each soil sample was screened with an HNU Model PI-101 photoionization detector equipped with a 10.2 electron volt lamp and was calibrated on a daily basis, as specified in Appendix A of the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a). The HNU readings were recorded on the sample/core logs with the appropriate depth intervals. Copies of the sample/core logs and geologic logs are included in Appendices A and B, respectively. A portion of each soil sample was collected with a stainless-steel spatula for field GC analysis. The soil was placed in two 40-milliliter (ml) vials containing deionized water, using a stainless-steel spatula, until half of each vial was filled. Each vial was identified with the boring number, sample number, depth interval, and the date and time of collection. The vials were stored in ice and transported to the field office for GC analysis. The soil sample with the highest HNU reading from each boring was selected for off-site laboratory analysis. If no elevated HNU readings were measured, the deepest sample (above the water table or above the bedrock) was selected for laboratory analysis. Each soil sample was transferred from the split-spoon sampler to the sample container with a stainless-steel spoon. Soil sample jars were preserved in the field with ice and transported along with the field and trip blanks to the field office for packaging. Some of the soil samples were split with the USEPA's contractor, CDM, and sent to a separate laboratory for confirmatory analysis. Surface soil samples were collected from seven locations on August 19, 1992. Surface Soil Samples SS-1, SS-2 and SS-8 (background samples) were collected north of the Curriculum Center Building; Surface Soil Samples SS-3 and SS-4 were collected from the Drum Disposal Area at the Curriculum Building; Surface Soil Sample SS-5 was collected from the Tillett Gardens; and Surface Soil Samples SS-6 and SS-7 (a field replicate) were collected just southwest of the O'Henri Dry Cleaners. Surface soil sampling locations are shown on Figure 1-3. GERAGHTY c--,., \11LLER. l:\/C - 2-3 Surface soil samples were collected in the interval from 1 and 7 inches below land surface (bis) after removing the top l inch of vegetation and exposed soil. Surface soil samples were collected with a stainless-steel spatula as outlined in the sampling procedures included in Appendix C. The spatulas were decontaminated in accordance with the cleaning procedures used for split-spoon samples. One field blank was collected for laboratory analysis during each day that soil sampling occurred. The field blank was prepared by pouring laboratory-supplied deionized water through the precleaned, split-spoon sampler. One trip blank was provided in each cooler of samples. Samples were shipped to Enseco East Laboratories (Enseco) in New Jersey via overnight couner. Soil samples were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from the target compound list (TCL); selected VOCs, including 1,2-dibromomethane; n-propylbenzene; methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE); TCL base neutral/acid extractable compounds (BNAs); metals and cyanide from the target analyte list (TAL); and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH). VOC, BNA, and T AL analyses were conducted using the March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols (USEPA 1990a; 1990b). The TPH analyses were performed using USEPA Method 418. l which was modified for soil analyses. One field blank, one trip blank, and one replicate were included with the surface soil samples. A replicate sample of Surface Soil Sample SS-6 was collected from the O'Henri Dry Cleaners location and labeled SS-7. Surface Soil Samples SS-1, SS-2, and SS-8 were analyzed for TAL metals and cyanide only. Surface Soil Samples SS-3 through SS-7 were analyzed for TCL VOCs, 1,2-dibromomethane, n-propylbenzene, MTBE, TCL BNAs, TAL metals and cyanide using the March 1990 CLP protocols (USEPA 1990a; 1990b). 2.2 GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS During the field investigation at the Tutu Site, exposed outcrops were examined, and site- specific geology was documented from the drilling of the soil borings and the bedrock core GERAGHTY c"-< \1ILLER. l'.'\C 2-4 holes. Downhole geophysical surveys were also performed. These activities are described in the following sections. 2.2.1 Surficial Geoloey To correlate the geologic information obtained during the field investigation with previous geologic data, four rock outcrops located in the Tutu area were examined, and the observed rock units were described. The strike and dip of bedding planes and fractures, and the degree of weathering and fracturing were documented. These data and observations are described in Section 3.1.2 (Site Geology). 2.2.2 Bedrock Corine The bedrock was cored during the drilling of deep Monitoring Wells MW-1D, MW-4D, MW-6D, MW-10D, MW-11D, MW-12D, and MW-13D and shallow Monitoring Well MW-9 (Figure 1-4). Coring began at the top of bedrock in each borehole. Depth to the top of bedrock varied from 0 to 11.6 feet bis. Bedrock samples were obtained using the wireline NQ core barrel rotary method with a 2.75-inch outside diameter (O.D.) diamond bit. Cuttings removal and cooling of the diamond bit was accomplished by recirculating water through the drilling system. A temporary, 5-foot long, 4-inch diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) casing was installed in each 7-inch diameter boring before coring. The 5-foot long casing was used to avoid borehole collapse and to assist in recirculating the water from a holding tank to the boring. The recirculation system consisted of a holding/settling tank, a pump, and the downhole drilling tools. A sample of the drilling water was collected and analyzed for the constituents of concern prior to field activities. Sample cores were obtained in 5-foot sections wherever possible. Downhole drilling pressure, rate of penetration per foot, and water circulation were observed and recorded. The total length of each core sample was measured and recorded, along with the core recovery percentage and rock quality designation (RQD). These measurements were recorded TUT i.)\)'.Z 1:L'::.C/ GERAGHTY e \lILLER. !'.'JC 2-5 on a Geraghty & Miller bedrock core log form, along with a description of the core sample. The core descriptions include lithology, color, hardness, grain size and shape, sorting, luster, cementation, accessory minerals, inclusions, bedding, weathering, and fracturing. The following information was also noted on records of bedrock coring parameters: run number, run depth, run penetration, run duration, penetration rate, downhole pressure, run recovery, percent recovery, and RQD. Records of bedrock coring parameters are included in Appendix D. Rock cores were stored in sample core boxes. These boxes were identified with the boring number, core depth, date, project number, and box number written on the outside of the box cover. The box number, project number, date, depth, run number, recovery percentage, and RQD were recorded on the inside of the box cover. The sample core boxes were stored on- site for further lithologic analysis. Soil and rock cuttings resulting from the drilling operation were placed in 55-gallon, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)-approved drums. Three composite samples were collected from these drums to characterize the soil cuttings for disposal purposes. Drilling equipment and tools were decontaminated by steam cleaning between each core sampling location. 2.2.3 Downhole Geophysics Caliper and sonic logs were run in all bedrock core holes (Monitoring Wells MW-lD, MW-4D, MW-6D, MW-lOD, MW-1 lD, MW-12D, and MW-13D); these logs are provided in Appendix E. For Monitoring Well MW-9 (located at the south end of the Four Winds Shopping Plaza parking lot and west of the Esso Service Station), only caliper logging was attempted. The caliper log is a record of borehole diameter versus depth. The sonic log is a record of the time required for a compressional sound wave to traverse 1 horizontal foot into the rock formation. A caliper probe (Model 3ARM C004) was used for the core hole caliper logging. The caliper probe was calibrated with 3- and 4.5-inch diameter rings for the 3-inch diameter core holes, and 6- and 12-inch diameter rings for the 10-inch diameter core holes. The starting depth T•,; ___ 11· · .. •. ·· t~J t.) :.::: J .1 (J iJ GERAGHTY c-;;, \flLLER. I~C 2-6 was calculated by measuring the distance between the ground surface or the temporary PVC pipe to the bottom of the caliper arms. The PVC pipe had been installed previously in the core hole to recirculate the water used during coring procedures. The caliper was lowered slowly to the bottom of the core hole. Core hole depth was compared with the depth obtained during diamond coring. At the core hole bottom, the caliper arms were opened to start logging. A printout of the raw data was obtained during logging of the hole and processed later at the field office. A sonic probe (Model SONIC 1275) was used for the core hole sonic logging. The starting depth for the sonic log was selected by measuring the distance between the ground surface or the temporary PVC stick-up and the middle point between the two receivers of the sonic probe. The sonic log was run without centralizers in 3-inch diameter core holes (Monitoring Wells MW-1D and MW-4D). Centralizers were used on 6- and 10-inch diameter core holes (Monitoring Wells MW-6D, MW-10D, MW-11D, and MW-12D). The sonic probe was lowered to the bottom of the core hole to start logging. A printout of the raw data was obtained for some of the logs. The raw data were subsequently processed in Geraghty & Miller's Puerto Rico office. Caliper and sonic logs were performed twice on each core hole to verify the raw data obtained during logging. A detailed log was obtained by processing the raw data. This log included a three-arm caliper borehole diameter versus depth curve, a tube (i.e., borehole) wave amplitude curve, a transit time curve, a variable density log, and drilling and logging information for each core hole. The geophysical logging of Monitoring Wells MW-1D and MW-4D was conducted in 3-inch diameter core holes. The rest of the core holes were reamed prior to logging with a 10-inch diameter air-rotary hammer bit from the top of bedrock to the top of the open hole interval to minimize core hole collapse. The 6-inch stainless-steel casing was then installed, and grout was poured into the annular space between the casing and the core hole. After the grout had hardened, the bottom 20 feet of the core hole was reamed with a 5.5-inch diameter hammer bit. A second run was made with the caliper and the sonic probe in the bottom part of •i..- ·e 1. 1. l~ :L ·y\,.J-T GERAGHTY c--,., \fILLER. I:SC 2-7 hole. This procedure was followed in the core holes of Monitoring Wells MW-6D, MW-10D, MW-11D, and MW-13D. An attempt was made to log the core hole of Monitoring Well MW-9 after it was reamed; however, due to a temporary malfunction, the arms of the caliper probe did not open inside the core hole of Monitoring Well MW-9 despite several attempts during the logging procedures. The core hole of Monitoring Well MW-12D was reamed completely with the 10-inch diameter hammer bit due to the highly weathered material encountered during coring of the hole. After geophysical logging, Monitoring Well MW-12D was completed as a deep monitoring well with 4-inch diameter stainless-steel screen and casing. 2.3 GROUND-WATER INVESTIGATION The ground-water investigation included the installation of shallow and deep monitoring - wells, well development, and ground-water sampling and analysis. The purpose of the ground- water investigation was to define ground-water flow conditions and to determine or confirm potential sources of ground-water contamination by petroleum hydrocarbon products and/or chlorinated compounds (i.e., PCE, TCE, DCE, and vinyl chloride). Additionally, the ground- water investigation provided information regarding the horizontal and vertical extent, the rate and direction of transport, and the potential migration pathways for petroleum hydrocarbon products and/or chlorinated compounds. - 2.3.1 Monitorine Well Installation Twelve shallow monitoring wells were installed at the Tutu Site (Monitoring Wells MW-1 through MW-5, MW-6R, MW-7, MW-8, MW-9, MW-9S, MW-10, and MW-14). The shallow monitoring wells were screened to bridge the water table. Monitoring well construction details are presented in Table 2-2. Each well was constructed with 4-inch diameter, stainless-steel casing and screen (0.020-inch slot size). The screen and riser pipe utilized for well construction were steam cleaned before installation. A sand pack, consisting of Texblast Sand, was placed GERAGHTY c"-< \tILLER. INC. 2-8 around each well screen. The height of the sand pack above the top of the screen ranged from 1.06 to 2.8 feet. The sand pack was poured from ground surface directly into the annulus between the boring and the well screen; and a seal, consisting of bentonite pellets, was installed above the sand pack. The thickness of the bentonite seal ranged from 0.85 to 2.6 feet, depending on field conditions. The bentonite pellets were hydrated with potable water after placement. A cement-bentonite grout seal was installed on top of the bentonite seal to a depth of approximately 0.2 foot bls. The grout slurry was poured in the annulus between the boring and well casing with a 3/4-inch diameter tremie pipe. Each monitoring well was finished with a metal curb box that extended approximately 0.1 foot above the land or pavement surface. Monitoring well construction logs, including diagrams for each shallow monitoring well, are provided in Appendix F. Seven deep monitoring wells were installed at the Tutu Site during the field investigation (Monitoring Wells MW-ID, MW-4D, MW-6D, MW-10D, MW-11D, MW-12D, and MW-13D). - Deep monitoring wells were completed as open holes in previously drilled bedrock core holes (see Section 2.2.2 [Bedrock Coring]), except for Monitoring Wells MW-6D and MW-12D. The original core hole for Monitoring Well MW-6D was decommissioned due to formation collapse. The same situation was encountered in the original core hole for Monitoring Well MW- l 2D where drill tools were lost due to formation collapse. The core hole for Monitoring Well MW- 12D was, therefore, abandoned and grouted during the field program. New holes were drilled in both locations (Monitoring Wells MW-6D and MW- l 2D) for completion of the monitoring wells. Geophysical logs were run in the new holes after reaming had been completed. - Before installation of Monitoring Well MW-4D, the 3-inch diameter core hole was initially reamed with a 7 .5-inch diameter air-rotary hammer bit. A 10-inch diameter hammer bit was used for the other wells. The core holes were reamed to a predetermined depth based on the ground-water levels encountered during drilling. Depths of the deep wells were selected so that there was a 20-foot vertical separation between the bottom of the shallow monitoring wells and the top of the deep wells. GERAGHTY c" :-.1ILLER. 1'.\C - - 2-9 Borings were reamed with the 10-inch diameter hammer bit from ground surface to the top of the open hole interval. A 6-inch diameter, stainless-steel casing was then installed in each boring. The annulus between the casing and the boring was grouted from the bottom to ground surface using a 3/4-inch diameter tremie pipe, and the grout was allowed to harden for 12 hours. The borings were then reamed with a 5.5-inch diameter hammer bit through the 6-inch diameter casing. The well depth was measured to verify that the boring remained open after the reaming was completed. Deep monitoring wells were completed with a flush-mounted manhole installed approximately 0.1 foot above ground surface. Monitoring well construction logs and diagrams for the deep wells were prepared after well completion. These well construction diagrams are included in Appendix B. Shallow and deep monitoring wells were surveyed after completion of all installation operations. Land surface, top of flush-mounted manhole, and top of stainless-steel casing elevations were measured for each well installed during the field investigation. Land surface and measuring point elevations are included in Appendix B. 2.3.2 Well Development Shallow and deep monitoring wells were developed after completion between August 24 and September 15, 1992. A submersible or centrifugal pump was used for development. The submersible pump was used for Monitoring Wells MW-3, MW-4, MW-4D, MW-6R, and MW- 13D. A centrifugal pump was used for Monitoring Wells MW-1D, MW-2, MW-5, MW-6D, MW-7, MW-8, MW-9, MW-9S, MW-10, MW-10D, MW-11D, MW-12D, and MW-14. All of the wells except Monitoring Wells MW-3, MW-4, MW-4D, MW-6R, and MW-6D were flushed with potable water during development. Flushing of the wells consisted of pouring potable water into the well and pumping it out several times. Monitoring Wells MW-3, MW-4, MW-4D, MW-6R, and MW-6D did not require flushing because they sustained higher pumping rates. - .. \,. ·, -\.l. !. ,.'.::,.t:~ \ UT UC,,c. ~ GERAGHTY,:_"-< \1JLLER. INC. 2-10 The submersible pump was cleaned with a detergent (i.e., Micro) and water solution and rinsed with tap water between each well. The tubing and rope used with the centrifugal pump were changed between each well. Well development was continued until the discharged water was relatively sediment-free. Water produced during well development was stored in a 550- gallon holding tank and transported to the water treatment system installed by the TEIC at the Esso service station at the Tutu Site. Treatment consisted of air stripping and granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorption prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer, as authorized by the U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Public Works (DPW) and the Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR). A water sample was collected from the pump discharge line during well development for field GC analysis in Monitoring Wells MW-I, MW-ID, MW-2, MW-3, MW-5, MW-6R, MW-6D, MW-7, MW-8, MW-9, MW-10, MW-lOD, MW-1 lD, MW-12D, and MW-14. Another sample was collected for field GC analysis prior to discharging treated water to the sanitary sewer system. A sample from the effluent of the water treatment system was collected on September 15, 1992 for laboratory TCL VOC analysis. 2.3.3 Water-Level Measurements Depth to ground water was measured using a calibrated electronic water-level probe. The electronic probe relies on the conductivity of the water, generating a low-voltage electric circuit only when the probe touches water. Water levels were measured from the top of the stainless-steel casing of each monitoring well. Water-level measurements were recorded in shallow and deep wells in September, October, and November 1992 and are provided in Tables 2-3 and 2-4, respectively. Depth-to- water data were converted to water-table elevations relative to mean sea level (msl) by subtracting the depth to water in each well from a surveyed datum (the top of stainless-steel casing of each well) and were used to prepare ground-water contour maps. These maps were used to determine the direction of ground-water flow. GERAGHTY c--,., \11LLER. !f';C - 2-11 The water-level elevations for the monitoring well clusters were tabulated (see Table 2-5) for comparison. The vertical gradient of ground-water flow at each well cluster was calculated by dividing the difference of the water-level elevations in the well cluster by the vertical separation of the midpoints of the well screens (or the open intervals). The minimum and maximum vertical gradients for each well cluster are presented in Table 2-6. 2.3.4 Ground-Water Sampline and Analysis Ground-water samples were collected between September 29 and October 7, 1992 from the 19 monitoring wells installed at the Tutu Site. The ground-water samples were collected at least 2 weeks after completion of well development. A sample of the potable water (i.e., water supplied by the Water and Power Authority [W APA]) used for decontamination was collected from a faucet located at the Esso service station during this sampling event. Water sampling logs are included in Appendix G. The water level and well depth were measured in each monitoring well before purging. These measurements were taken with an electronic water-level indicator (i.e., M-scope) and a steel tape from the top of the stainless-steel casing. The instruments were cleaned between each monitoring well with a Micro and water solution, and rinsed with tap water. The volume of water in each well was calculated using the following formula: • For a 4-inch diameter well: height of water column x 0.65 gallon/foot. • For a 6-inch diameter well: height of water column x 1.47 gallon/foot. Three-to-five well volumes were purged from each well with either a submersible or a centrifugal pump. The submersible pump was decontaminated between wells with a Micro and water solution and rinsed with tap water. Tubing used with the centrifugal pump was discarded between each well. Monitoring Wells MW-1, MW-1D, MW-8, MW-9S, MW-10, MW-10D, and MW-13D went dry during purging operations. Field measurements of temperature, pH, and GERAGHTY c--,., MILLER. Jl\C 2-12 specific conductance, as well as HNU readings, were collected during purging and sampling of the wells; these data are included in Appendix G. Ground-water samples were collected with dedicated Teflon hailers. The first bailer of water was discarded. The sample was collected by pouring the water directly into the sample container from the bailer; VOC samples were collected first. Field blanks were also collected during ground-water sampling activities by pouring deionized water through the Teflon bailer. Some of the ground-water samples were split with the USEPA's contractor, CDM, and sent to a separate laboratory by CDM for confirmatory analysis. Samples were preserved in the field according to approved laboratory quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) preservation procedures for each specific analyte (see Appendix G). All ground-water samples, along with the field and trip blanks were preserved on ice and sent to Enseco via overnight courier. Monitoring Wells MW-1 and MW-4O were sampled a second time because problems occurred with the initial shipment of samples. Monitoring Well MW-1 was resampled because sample containers were lost during shipment to the laboratory, and Monitoring Well MW-4D was resampled for VOCs because the laboratory found air bubbles in the voe vials. Blind field replicates of ground-water samples were collected from Monitoring Wells MW-5 and MW-7 during October 1992. These blind field replicates were originally designated as MW-104 ( collected at MW-5) and MW- 105 ( collected at MW-7). After the laboratory results were received, the original designations were changed from MW-104 and MW-105 to MW-5FR and MW -?FR, re spec ti vel y. Because the laboratory notified Geraghty & Miller that air bubbles were present in the ground-water sample collected at Monitoring Well MW-7, the TCL VOC analysis for this sample was not performed. The VOC analysis for the blind field replicate sample MW-7FR (original designation MW-105) was sufficient to characterize VOC content in ground-water samples collected at Monitoring Well MW-7. Because the voe analysis of sample MW-7FR (MW-105) was substituted for sample MW-7, an additional blind field replicate sample MW-9FR (originally designated MW-106) was collected at Monitoring Well MW-9 for VOC analysis only. TUT 002 1.1.b/ GERAGHTY c--,., \1ILLER. I'.'.\._. - 2-13 The purpose of blind field replicates is to evaluate the reproducibility of sampling and laboratory procedures. 2.4 AQUIFER TESTS Two 24-hour, constant-rate aquifer pumping tests were carried out in shallow Monitoring Well MW-6R and deep Monitoring Well MW-6D (both located in the center of the Four Winds Shopping Plaza Parking Lot), to estimate the hydraulic characteristics of the uppermost and lower saturated deposits underlying the study area. These two wells were selected because of their relatively high yield. The constant-rate aquifer tests conducted on Monitoring Wells MW- 6R and MW-6D were performed on November 2, 1992 and November 5, 1992, respectively. The USEPA had originally requested that a 72-hour pump test be conducted, but later approved the 24-hour tests based upon initial pumping test results. Prior to initiation of the 24-hour constant rate aquifer pumping tests, a step-drawdown test was conducted in each well to select an optimal pumping rate. The pumping rates selected for Monitoring Wells MW-6R and MW-6D were 9.25 gallons per minute (gpm) and 14.2 gpm, respectively. The maximum pumping rate was limited by the 15 gpm capacity of the on-site treatment system. The length of the step-drawdown tests ranged from approximately 2 to 4 hours. Four to five steps, each with increasing pumping rates, were run for approximately 30 to 60 minutes each. Recovery tests were conducted immediately after pumping was stopped. Recovery water levels were measured until at least 90 percent recovery was observed in each well. 2.4.1 Water-Level Measurements Pressure transducers were placed in the pumping and observation wells, as well as in other nearby wells, for several days prior to the step-drawdown and constant rate pumping tests, to provide data regarding background water-level fluctuations. Additionally, manual water-level GERAGHTY c"' \fILLER. l~C 2-14 measurements were collected at an average of 30-minute intervals during the pumping tests. Pressure transducers were connected by a cable to computerized data loggers that were programmed to record water-level readings every 30 seconds during testing and every 10 minutes prior to testing. After completion of each test, the data from the loggers were downloaded to a field computer. Pressure transducers were installed in Monitoring Wells MW- 4, MW-4D, MW-5, MW-6R, MW-6D, MW-7, MW-8, and MW-12D. Water levels in Monitoring Wells MW-2, MW-3, MW-6R, MW-6D, MW-9, MW-10, MW-lOD, MW-1 lD, and Monitoring Wells CHT-4 and CHT-6D (installed by Caribbean Hydro-Tech) were recorded manually with an electronic water-level indicator. The electronic water-level indicators. transducer cables, and probes were decontaminated in sequence by washing in a Micro and water solution, followed by a potable water rinse and a distilled water rinse. 2.4.2 Aquifer Test Procedures On November 2. 1992, a submersible pump with a capacity of 10 gpm was used to discharge a constant rate of water from Monitoring Well MW-6R. Similarly, on November 5, 1992, a submersible pump with a capacity of 20 gpm was used for the 24-hour pumping test at Monitoring Well MW-6D. Due to treatment system limitations, the pumping test at Monitoring Well MW-6D did not exceed 15 gpm. The pumps were suspended in the wells with a 1-inch diameter galvanized pipe connected to the discharge outlets of the pumps. A 3/4-inch diameter- threaded, PVC pipe was installed as a drop line for measuring water levels in the pumping wells. This PVC pipe was placed just above the top of the pump to provide accurate water-level measurements in the event that water entered the well from dewatered portions of the bedrock. The pumps were equipped with an in-line valve to adjust the flow rate and an in-line flow meter to measure the actual flow rate. Electric power was supplied to the pumps from an electrical box outlet in the Esso Service Station. The ground water from each of the wells was discharged to a nearby water treatment system through a 1 ¼-inch diameter PVC pipe. This ground water was stored on-site in holding n.n 002 GERAGHTY e \l!LLER. I:'IC 2-15 tanks pnor to treatment with an air stripper and carbon absorption units, and was then discharged to the sanitary sewer lines, as authorized by the DPW and the DPNR. Prior to each test, the submersible pumps were decontaminated by rinsing the interior and exterior of the pumps with a Micro and water solution, followed by a rinse with potable water. A minimum of 25 gallons of potable water was run through the pumps. The galvanized pipes and the PVC drop line were decontaminated by steam cleaning before use. 2.4.3 Water Sample Collection Water samples for field GC and laboratory analysis were collected every 2 and 12 hours, respectively, from the pumping wells throughout the duration of the tests. Water samples for field GC and laboratory analysis were collected before and after treatment of the discharged water to determine the VOC concentrations in the aquifer and the effectiveness of the water treatment system. The temperature, pH, and specific conductance of the water samples were measured every hour using field instruments. Water samples were analyzed for TCL VOCs following the March 1990 CLP protocols (USEPA 1990a). 2.5 DATA VALIDATION Data validation was provided to ensure the quality of all the laboratory data under Geraghty & Miller's Analytical Quality Assurance/Laboratory Control Program (AQA/LCP) protocols. In some instances, a result was qualified as estimated (identified as J in the tables) because the corresponding analyte was not detected above the CLP contract required detection limit (CRDL). Reported detection limits are approximate and may not represent the actual limit of quantitation necessary to accurately and precisely measure the analyte in a given sample. A reporting limit is the practical quantitation limit (PQL) for a particular parameter in a given matrix that is attainable, using the specified corresponding methodology, and that can be reliably achieved within specified units of precision and accuracy. The method detection limit (MDL) is the minimum concentration of a parameter that can be measured and reported by a particular TUT ou2 GERAGHTY c-< \1ILLER. l\:C - 2-16 analytical system. The Soils Data Validation Report and First Sampling Round Data Validation Report are provided in Appendices I and J, respectively. GERAGHTY f? .\lJLLER. 1:--.iC TUT OU',2 l .l / 1 3.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The hydrogeologic conditions at the Tutu Site have been described using published regional geologic information and site-specific data obtained during this investigation. 3.1 GEOLOGY The regional information provided in this section was obtained from published technical reports, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) publications, and Geraghty & Miller files from previous projects in St. Thomas. Site-specific information was interpreted from the results of Geraghty & Miller's field investigation program. 3.1.1 Regional Geology St. Thomas is an island with an area of 32 square miles. The island is composed primarily of volcanic rocks of Cretaceous age. The Tutu Site is located within the Turpentine Run surface drainage basin, which covers approximately 3.4 square miles (see Figure 1-1). Turpentine Run is an intermittent stream that flows from northwest to southeast. The Turpentine Run basin is separated into upper and lower basins. The upper basin consists of 2.3 square miles upstream of the historical stream gaging station located near Mt. Zion, and the lower basin consists of 1. 1 square miles downstream of this station (Jordan and Cosner 1973). The bedrock in the Turpentine Run basin is underlain by two volcanic formations, the Water Island Formation and the younger Louisenhoj Formation. The Water Island Formation is composed primarily of basaltic flows and breccias. It is unconformably overlain by the Louisenhoj Formation, which consists of pyroclastic to epiclastic augite andesite tuffs and breccias (Donnelly 1959; I 966). Locally, the base of the Louisenhoj consists of the Cabes Point Conglomerate, which contains well-rounded and well-sorted pebbles and cobbles of the older Water Island Formation. A light-colored intrusive plug has been mapped near Mt. Zion. This intrusive rock is a quartz-andesine porphyry (Donnelly l 966). GERAGHTY E-< \1ILLER. I~C. 3-2 Both the Water Island and Louisenhoj Formations are present in the upper basin. By mapping the offset of formation contacts, Donnelly (1966) identified two major strike-slip faults striking northwest-southeast, with right lateral separation. One of these faults occurs approximately 2,500 feet northeast of the Tutu Site. Geologic logs of wells drilled in the upper basin do not differentiate between the Water Island and the Louisenhoj Formations. In the lower basin, only the Water Island Formation is found, and it is overlain by as much as 40 feet of alluvial deposits (Jordan and Cosner 1973). 3.1.2 Site Geolo2y The Tutu Site is a moderately developed area crossed by several roads; many commercial and residential buildings have been built along the roads. Geraghty & Miller's drilling program established that most of the shallow unconsolidated deposits under the paved areas consist of fill material, reworked native sediment, and weathered bedrock. Several small catchment areas created along the axis of Turpentine Run basin serve to trap sediment, and organic soil is found under a heavy vegetative cover along the axis of the basin. These sediments are underlain by Quaternary alluvial and colluvial deposits along the valley that appear to thicken southward. The alluvial and colluvial deposits present in the upper basin are relatively thin, with thicknesses usually varying from O to 2 feet, with as much as 10 to 20 feet in isolated valley areas. The sediment consists of unconsolidated, unstratified, poorly sorted mixtures of clay, silt, sand, gravel, cobbles, and boulders transported from the upper valley and the foothills by gravity and flash floods. Average grain size increases with proximity to valley slopes. The alluvium/colluvium is underlain by moderately weathered, fractured volcaniclastic rock in which the original rock components have been partially replaced by clay, chlorite, and oxide minerals. The unit is a gray to greenish-gray volcanic andesitic tuff and breccia with a fine-grained matrix and occasional clasts ranging in diameter from 1 to 5 centimeters (cm). Visible mineral grains in the matrix include plagioclase, epidote, pyroxene, hornblende, and chlorite. Additionally, there is a coarse-grained volcanic breccia debris flow underlying the finer TUT U0:2 1 :J.. / .::: GERAGHTY c? MILLER. l~C - 3-3 grained tuffs and breccias. This unit consists of poorly sorted breccia, slump blocks, and cobbles up to 20 cm in diameter. These deposits are compositionally similar, with occasional increases in the relative percentages of mineral composition in some areas. Generally, the primary difference between lithologies is grain size. These rocks weather to a very weak, foliated, clay-rich material. This weathered rock contains almost entirely alteration minerals such as kaolinite, sericite, chlorite, and calcite. The original structure of these rocks is usually maintained. The following four outcrops were examined: (1) behind the Seventh Day Adventist School along Route 38, (2) behind the Four Winds Shopping Center, (3) in front of the VIHA Building, and (4) in the newly exposed area north of the Tutu Park Shopping Plaza (Tutu Park) that is being constructed on the Harth man property. All outcrops contain part or all of the same succession of rock types, a volcaniclastic tuff that in some areas overlies coarser-grained breccias and debris flows. These three lithologies were observed in the subsurface during drilling, as indicated by the geologic logs (Appendix B). The rock face exposed at Tutu Park (the Harth man property) construction site is relatively fresh and illustrates a succession of progressively younger volcaniclastic rocks from the south to the north. This succession consists of basal coarse-grained debris flows and breccias overlain by finer grained andesitic tuffs. These units strike to the northwest at 45° to 50" and dip to the southwest at 45° to 60°. The easternmost extension of this outcrop is hydrothermally altered. A fine- to medium-grained, relatively mafic vertical dike was observed in this area trending north-south. The adjacent volcaniclastic units strike to the northwest, with measured strikes in the range of N 36° W to N 50" W. The coarse-grained volcanic breccias are massive, with extensive columnar jointing and sheeting. The fine-grained andesitic tuffs are more extensively weathered. On slopes where this finer grained material outcrops, it has been altered to a light- green, friable talus. The rock is most fractured at the Four Winds Shopping Center outcrop, located just west of the Four Winds Plaza. This outcrop is exposed on the northwestern side of the Four Winds GERAGHTY c"' \1ILLER. INC 3-4 Plaza and also at the southwestern comer. The northern outcrop consists of fine-grained, light- green andesite tuff. The more fractured southern outcrop is an exposure of volcanic breccia and debris flows, containing very large boulders and slump blocks (less than 20 cm in length) and occasional light gray chert nodules. Several large fractures and shear zones were observed trending to the northwest. At the outcrop behind the Seventh Day Adventist School, bedding planes dip steeply (between 36° and 23°) to the southwest and strike N 61° W to N 88° W. The predominant rock matrix is volcanic andesite tuff, alternating with thin to massive beds of volcaniclastic flow breccias. The breccias include visible, angular-to-rounded, volcanic and sedimentary clasts that range in size from pebbles to cobbles. The rock outcrop is less altered or weathered than the outcrop at the Four Winds Shopping Center. The outcrop at the VIHA property is the smallest of the four outcrops investigated. Geraghty & Miller measured a strike of N 500 W at this outcrop and a dip of 30° to the northeast. These measurements agree with the strike and dip measurements reported in the published literature (Donnelly 1966). Some of the original structure of the volcanic tuffs and breccias is visible, and because of its proximity to the Seventh Day Adventist School outcrop, it is considered to be an extension of the latter. Measurable strikes and dips of the beds are similar to those previously described. Iron staining and thin calcite veins are common along fracture surfaces. The fractured areas are usually the most weathered. Highly fractured and weathered zones were encountered in Monitoring Wells MW-4D (located at the southwest comer of the Texaco property), MW-12D (located near the Assembly of God Church), and MW-6D (located in the center of the Four Winds Shopping Plaza parking lot). The weathered zones range in thickness from 1 to 5 inches in Monitoring Well MW-4D to up to 4 feet in Monitoring Well MW-12D. The highly weathered rock (saprolite) has been altered to a friable, light brown to tan, sandy to clayey silt that maintains the original rock structure. The physical properties of this unit are characteristic of very dense fractured rock. Fractured zones in the rock units are shown on Figure 3-1. TUT GERAGHTY E-< \1ILLER. Ii':C 3-5 Evidence of intrusive rock was observed in Monitoring Well MW-4D. This rock is interpreted to be diorite. Diorite is a coarse-grained intrusive rock composed mainly of sodic plagioclase and hornblende, with variable amounts of quartz, biotite, and/or pyroxene. Samples of this unit from Monitoring Well MW-4D are described as a very dense, dark green to black rock matrix with visible, abundant plagioclase and pyroxene phenocrysts (large, well-shaped crystals). The diorite contained abundant, thin veins of calcitic minerals throughout the rock matrix. The stratigraphy of the site was interpreted from geologic logs, which are included in Appendix B. Figure 3-1 presents a cross section which extends from the southwest to northeast through the site. The geologic logs (Appendix B) and the geologic cross section (Figure 3-1) are presented in draft form; these items are subject to revision based on the final preparation and comparison of borehole geophysical logs with a detailed review of the bedrock cores. Stratigraphic correlation of the lower rock units was not possible due to the steep angles (60° to 80°) at which the rock layers dip and the large distances between borings and monitoring wells. Bed thicknesses range from very thin to massive, and strata are reported to dip north to northeast at angles of 600 to 80° (Donnelly 1966). The geologic reconnaissance of the area confirmed these trends in most areas. The rocks are reportedly faulted approximately 2,500 feet northeast of the site and are locally cut by steeply inclined joints. Most joints are filled with calcite. The weathered, less competent bedrock noted in core logs appears to be correlated with the occurrence of volcanic andesitic tuffs. This correlation may be due to the preferential development of joints in the more homogenous lithology and the texture of the volcanic andesite tuff versus the volcanic breccia. The matrix of the volcaniclastic rocks shows signs of low-grade, contact metamorphism and hydrothermal alteration. The minerals that compose the rock matrix have been weathered and transformed into clayey sediment in some areas. Chlorotic minerals are common throughout the rock matrix. This matrix, when weathered, maintains its original structure. Igneous rocks (diorites) were observed at depth in Monitoring Well MW-4D. These intrusive bodies are probably the cause of the localized metamorphism. U!b GERAGHTY c-,., MILLER. I:'iC 3-6 3.2 HYDROGEOLOGY Regional hydrogeologic information for the area was obtained from USGS studies and other published reports. The site hydrogeology was evaluated using data collected by Geraghty & Miller during the installation of the monitoring wells at the Tutu Site. Ground water in the Turpentine Run basin occurs in two aquifers (Jordan and Cosner 1973). The primary aquifer is the fractured volcanic rock of the Water Island and Louisenhoj Formation and, locally, the Cabes Point Conglomerate. The secondary aquifer consists of the alluvial deposits in the lower basin. Very thin alluvial deposits are also present in the upper basin, with thicknesses varying from less than 2 feet to 20 feet in isolated valley areas. However, the alluvial deposits in the upper basin do not constitute an aquifer capable of supplying useable amounts of water because of their limited extent and thickness, and because they are often unsaturated. The alluvial deposits are considered to be hydraulically connected to the fractured volcanic rock. Ground water in both units generally exists under water-table conditions. Localized low permeability (fine-grained) layers in the alluvial deposits result in confined conditions of limited extent. In the upper basin, ground-water supply is derived from wells installed in the fractured volcanic rock. Supply well depths in the upper basin range from 73 to 325 feet bis (Stevens et al. 1981). The depths of these wells do not correlate with yield, but rather are an indication of where water-bearing fracture zones were penetrated. Short-term well yields in the upper basin range as high as 100 gpm; sustained yields range between 2 and 21 gpm (Jordan and Cosner 1973). Recharge to the fractured volcanic rock in the upper basin is from occasional major rainstorms and is dependent on the frequency and volume of rainfall. As a result of surface runoff and a high evapotranspiration rate, rainfall of at least 2 inches within a 24-hour period TUT OU:.:: 11. 7 / GERAGHTY c-,., \1ILLER. l~C -- 3-7 is necessary for recharge to occur. Annual recharge to the upper basin due to rainfall is estimated to be 130 million gallons (Jordan and Cosner 1973). Little data is available to evaluate the hydraulic characteristics of the Turpentine Run basin aquifers. Of the six pump tests reported in the basin prior to 1982, only one test indicated a specific capacity greater than 1 gallon per minute per foot (gpm/ft) of drawdown. The specific capacity of that well was between 1 and 2 gpm/ft (Stevens et al. 1981). On May 20, 1982, Geraghty & Miller conducted a pumping test on the VIHA I supply well. After 10 hours of pumping at 48.4 gpm, 5.3 feet of drawdown were observed in the pumping well (VIHA I), which has a total depth of 140 feet. Supply well VIHA II (located 120 feet north of VIHA I) was used as an observation well during the May 1982 pumping test. After 10 hours of pumping, 1.42 feet of drawdown were observed in supply well VIHA II, which is 142 feet deep. Review of the drilling log for VIHA I indicated fracture zones at 78, 87, 105, 125, and 138 feet bls (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1983). The later part of the May 1982 pumping test indicated that the drawdown was continuing over time. Projecting the rate of drawdown defined in the later part of the test, Geraghty & Miller predicted approximately 19 .2 feet of drawdown would be present after 2 years of continuous pumping at 48 gpm from supply well VIHA I (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1983). Accordingly, the predicted specific capacity is 2.5 gpm/ft. 3.2.2 Site Hydro2eolo2y Water-level data were obtained from 12 shallow monitoring wells and seven deep monitoring wells installed at the Tutu Site. Of these, four locations contained clustered monitoring well pairs {Monitoring Wells MW-1, MW-4, MW-6, and MW-10). The locations of the wells are shown on Figure 1-4. Monitoring well construction details are presented in Table 2-2. The shallow monitoring wells, which range from 18. 7 to 45.2 feet deep, and the deeper monitoring wells, which are between 45 and 100 feet deep, generally penetrate low-yielding sections of the bedrock aquifer. With the exception of three locations, none of the monitoring ·r u T ,_· H ... 'J.·,_.., , .i.l/b GERAGHTY & \1ILLER. l~C 3-8 wells can sustain pumpage of even minimal flow rates, and these wells go dry when sampled. The three exceptions are all in an area that includes the Texaco Service Station and the northern end of the Four Winds Plaza parking lot. The wells in this area, Monitoring Wells MW-3, MW-4, MW-4D, MW-6R and MW-6D, are the only ones that could be pumped steadily during development and sampling. This is an area where independent aerial photograph analysis by Geraghty & Miller and CDM have identified a concentration of intersecting fracture traces (CDM Federal Programs Corporation 1992; Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992b). 3.2.2.1 Shallow Wells Twelve shallow monitoring wells were installed at the Tutu Site. The total depths of the shallow wells ranged from I 8. 7 to 45 .2 feet bis. All shallow wells, except Monitoring Well MW-9, were installed with screens that bridge the water table. Monitoring Well MW-9S was installed near Monitoring Well MW-9 with the top of the screen above the water table. Depth to ground water from September through November 1992 ranged from 5.5 feet bls (Monitoring Well MW-6R) to about 30 feet bls (Monitoring Well MW-1) (see Table 2-3). Six rounds of ground-water levels were measured from September through November 1992 (Tables 2-3 and 2-4). During this time, ground-water levels in the shallow wells fluctuated an average of 3.57 feet, with maximum fluctuation in Monitoring Well MW-8 (5.96 feet), located at the northeastern corner of the Esso property, and Monitoring Well MW-1 (5.19 feet}, located at the southwestern corner of the Curriculum Center property, and minimum fluctuation in Monitoring Well MW-9 (1.61 feet), located at the southern end of the Four Winds Shopping Plaza parking lot. Visual observations indicated the presence of a liquid phase hydrocarbon product in shallow Monitoring Wells MW-5, MW-9, and MW-9S between September and November 1992. These observations were confirmed by the analytical results, which indicated the presence of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) compounds in Monitoring Wells MW-5 and MW-9S. Monitoring Well MW-9 contained measurable levels of benzene, ethylbenzene, and GERAGHTY c"-< \1ILLER. f;\JC. 3-9 xylene, but not toluene. Floating product was observed once in Monitoring Wells MW-5 (0.01 foot) and MW-9 (sheen). In Monitoring Well MW-9S product was present on four occasions, with thicknesses ranging from a sheen on September 17, October 28, and November 16, 1992 to 0.11 foot on September 28, 1992. Product was not detected in Monitoring Well MW-9S on November 9, 1992. The product in Monitoring Well MW-9S appeared to be a light petroleum hydrocarbon that had weathered to a dark-colored, viscous oily liquid. A low-flow pumping test was conducted in Monitoring Well MW-9S on November 16, 1992. The purpose of the low-flow pumping test was to determine the recharge rate of product under pumping conditions and to obtain a sample of the product. Monitoring Well MW-9S was pumped at 0. 75 gpm for 15 minutes. The static ground-water level in the well was drawn down about 1.65 feet, but an attempt to sample the floating product was unsuccessful due to insufficient product thickness (less than 0.01 foot) and the limited product yield. Lowering of the water table by pumpage creates flow of both water and mobile product (if product is present) into the well. Only a sheen of product was observed on November 16, 1992, even though the water table was sufficiently lowered by approximately 2.5 feet during the low-flow pumping test. 3.2.2.2 Deep Wells Seven deep monitoring wells were installed at the Tutu Site. Total depths of the deep wells varied from 45 feet bls for Monitoring Well MW-6D, which is located in the center of the Four Winds Shopping Plaza parking lot, to 100 feet bls for Monitoring Well MW-13D, which is located at the west end of the VIHA parking lot. All deep monitoring wells, except Monitoring Well MW-12D, were installed with solid casing above an open borehole interval. Monitoring Well MW-12D had to be completed with solid stainless-steel casing and slotted screen to avoid borehole collapse during installation. Depths to static ground-water level in the deep wells ranged from 5.3 feet bis (Monitoring Well MW-6D) to about 97.3 feet bis (Monitoring Well MW-13D). Ground-water GERAGHTY c_",? \11LLER. I~C 3-10 levels in the deep wells fluctuated an average of 7. 93 feet from September through November 1992, with a maximum fluctuation of 20.9 feet (Monitoring Well MW-lD) and a minimum fluctuation of 2.72 feet (Monitoring Well MW-6D). On September 28, 1992, an oily petroleum liquid was observed floating on the water table in Monitoring Well MW-4D. The thickness of this petroleum product was measured (0.01 foot) and then bailed out of the well. No product has been observed in Monitoring Well MW- 4D since this occurrence, and no product has been observed in any other deep well. Floating petroleum, which has a specific gravity less than water, should not be present in a deep monitoring well that is screened below the water table. If light petroleum product is present in the subsurface, it should accumulate as a floating layer above the water table. The thin (0.01- foot) layer of product measured in Monitoring Well MW-4D was noted on only one occasion and later measurements indicated that product was not present. 3.2.3 Ground-Water Flow Reeime Ground-water levels at the Tutu Site have steadily risen since the installation of the monitoring wells. This rise correlates with the frequent periods of rain observed during the field program. Tables 2-3 and 2-4 present a summary of the water levels measured from September through November 1992. Ground-water elevation contour maps for the shallow and deep wells were prepared using the September 28, 1992 and November 16, 1992 water-level data (see Figures 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5). Ground water generally flows perpendicular to lines of ground-water elevation in the direction of decreasing elevation. Accordingly, ground-water flow in the shallow zone is consistently toward the south. Figures 3-2 and 3-4 show that ground-water flow converges along Route 38, toward what appears to be the axis of the Turpentine Run basin. One of the principal fractures identified in the aerial photograph analysis is oriented along Route 38 (CDM Federal Programs Corporation 1992); this fracture zone appears to act as a shallow ground-water TUT 002 .1.lbl GERAGHTY c"' \flLLER. INC 3-11 discharge zone. The valley is presently backfilled, and surface flow is channelized through a pipe or concrete box culvert under the area (see Figure 3-6). The shallow ground-water flow is characterized by a steep hydraulic gradient (see Figures 3-2 and 3-4). This steep gradient is indicative of the low overall permeability of the zone penetrated by the shallow wells. The gradient is less steep in the area that includes the Texaco Service Station and the north portion of the Four Winds Parking lot, indicating that a higher permeability may be present in the shallow zone in this area. This observation agrees with the information collected during well development; Monitoring Wells MW-3, MW-4, MW-4D, MW-6D, and MW-6R could sustain pumpage at pumping rates of approximately 2 gpm, while the other shallow monitoring wells were quickly pumped dry during development and sampling. Pumping tests at Monitoring Wells MW-6R and MW-6D indicate potential sustained yields greater than 9.25 and 14 gpm for these two wells, respectively. As shown on Figures 3-3 and 3-5, the general gradient of ground-water flow in the deeper zone at the Tutu Site is to the south, with a potential southeasterly component under part of the study area. It is possible that deeper ground-water flow mimics shallow ground-water flow on the east side of Route 38 and, therefore, the axis of Turpentine Run could also serve as a discharge zone for deeper ground-water flow. This flow pattern remained essentially constant from September through November 1992. Monitoring Well MW-13D (located at the west end of the VIHA parking lot) appeared to have anomalously low water-level readings in September 1992. These anomalous readings may have been related to the very slow recovery rate noted after well development (the well may still have been recovering). As a result, the water-level datum from Monitoring Well MW-13D was not used to construct the September 28, 1992 ground-water contour map for the deeper zone. The ground-water contour map for November 16, 1992 for the deeper zone (Figure 3-5) indicates that pumpage in the northeastern portion of the study area at the Ramsay or VIHA TUT (1U'.? l J H/ GERAGHTY c--,., \11LLER. INC. 3-12 supply wells was influencing water levels in deep Monitoring Wells MW-13D and MW-1D. The nearby shallow wells (Monitoring Wells MW-1, MW-14, and MW-3) appear to have been unaffected by that same pumpage (see Figure 3-4). The water levels in the shallow monitoring wells show a consistent trend between wells and define the anticipated water-table elevation (i.e., potentiometric surface) for the fractured bedrock unit. The anomalously low water levels measured in Monitoring Wells MW-1D and MW-13D are most likely due to pumpage of nearby supply wells, which draw water from fractures that are intersected by the deeper monitoring wells. Differences in water levels in nested well pairs were observed from September through November 1992. The greatest difference in ground-water elevations was measured at Monitoring Well MW-1 (located at the southwestern corner of the Curriculum Center property) where, on two occasions, the water in the shallow well was approximately 20 feet higher in elevation than in the corresponding deep well (see Table 2-5). The smallest difference (0 to 0.15 foot) in deep and shallow ground-water levels was measured at Monitoring Well MW-6 (located in the center of the Four Winds Shopping Plaza parking lot). The other two nested pair locations, Monitoring Wells MW-4 and MW-10, showed several inches to 1 foot of ground- water elevation difference, with consistently higher levels in the shallow wells. Based on the water-level data measured at the nested well locations, there generally appears to be a small downward vertical hydraulic gradient throughout most of the study area (see Table 2-6). A strong downward gradient is present in the northeast area (Monitoring Well MW-1) near the Curriculum Center, and a horizontal or slightly upward gradient is present near the old channel of the Turpentine Run basin (Monitoring Well MW-6). Pumpage of supply wells at the VIHA complex, upgradient of Monitoring Well MW-I, may increase the downward vertical hydraulic gradient in the northeastern portion of the Tutu Site. The rate of ground-water flow is controlled by the permeability of the geologic materials; the presence, extent, and orientation of fracture zones; and the hydraulic gradient. Measurement GERAGHTY c-:? \1ILLER. 1:--JC - 3-13 of these aquifer characteristics and the rate of ground-water flow are discussed in the following section. 3.3 AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS Monitoring Wells MW-6R and MW-6D (located in the center of the Four Winds Shopping Plaza parking lot) were selected for pumping tests because they were two of only five monitoring wells that can sustain continuous pumping rates. The aquifer hydraulic characteristics derived from the two pumping tests are, therefore, only representative of the area that includes the Texaco Service Station and the northern portion of the Four Winds Plaza parking lot. Outside of this area, the upper 100 feet of the aquifer penetrated by the other shallow and deeper monitoring wells have a significantly lower transmissivity based on well recovery rates during development and purging. As required by the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a), aquifer tests were conducted on two of the existing monitoring wells (Monitoring Wells MW-6R and MW-6D) to estimate the hydraulic properties of the aquifer in the immediate vicinity of the Tutu Site. Monitoring Well MW-6R was tested to estimate the hydraulic properties of transmissivity (T) in the shallow aquifer, as described in Section 2.4 (Aquifer Tests); the test was conducted on November 2, 1992 at a constant rate of 9.25 gpm for 24 hours. Monitoring Well MW-6D was tested to estimate the hydraulic properties of T and storage (S) in the deep aquifer, as described in Section 2.4 (Aquifer Tests); this test was conducted on November 5, 1992 at a rate of 14 gpm for 24 hours. During each of the tests, water-level measurements were recorded manually and electronically in nearby monitoring wells (see Section 2.4.1 [Water-Level Measurements]) to monitor the pumpage effects of each of the wells tested. However, because it rained before the MW-6D aquifer test had been completed, the water levels collected after rainfall began (at 1:40 a.m. on November 6, 1992) were not used for calculating aquifer characteristics. \UT GERAGHTY c-;., '.\1ILLER. ,~c 3-14 3.3.1 Monitorine; Well MW-6R Aguifer Test Analysis The water-level data collected from Monitoring Well MW-6R during the aquifer test were analyzed using the computer software AQTESOL V. This program was written by Geraghty & Miller for MS-DOS computers and allows the user to analyze the time-drawdown data using standard industry techniques. The drawdown data from Monitoring Well MW-6R were superimposed on both Theis and Bolton type curves; however, the data did not fit these curves. The Cooper-Jacob straight line method was then used. The Cooper-Jacob straight-line method involves plotting the time-drawdown data on semi-log graph paper (Cooper and Jacob 1946); this method was designed for analysis of confined conditions. To apply this method for analysis of unconfined conditions (such as at the Tutu Site), drawdown values can be corrected to compensate for decreased saturated thickness. Because excessive drawdown was not present during this pumping test, correction of drawdown values was not necessary. The aquifer coefficient of transmissivity is calculated as follows: where T Q L)S = = = T =2640 OS transmissivity, in gallons/day/feet pumping rate, in gallons/minute slope of the time-drawdown graph expressed as the change in drawdown between any two times over one log cycle GERAGHTY E« \1ILLER. l'.\C -- 3-15 The aquifer coefficient of storage is calculated as follows: where s T to r = = = = s = !1TI1o r2 storage transmissivity, in gallons/day/ft intercept of the straight line at zero drawdown, in days distance in feet from the pumped well to the observation well where the drawdown measurements were made Figure 3-7 illustrates the semi-log plot for the time-drawdown relationships for Monitoring Well MW-6R and the calculated values of T in units of square feet/minute (ft2/min) and S. The value for T, as illustrated on Figure 3-7, is calculated from the late time-drawdown data because the early data appear to represent the initial dewatering of the well casing and may not be representative of the aquifer materials. Table 3-1 presents a summary of the calculated transmissivity and storativity values for the pumping tests. The hydraulic property of S cannot be determined from drawdown data collected at a pumping well. Based on the analysis of the water-level data for this well, the transmissivity of the shallow aquifer in the immediate vicinity of the Tutu Site was 8.39 ft2/min (90,360 gallons per day per foot [gal/day/ft]). Because no confining units were identified during the drilling program, the aquifer is unconfined. In addition to the development of aquifer hydraulic coefficients, the aquifer test of Monitoring Well MW-6R also illustrated the impacts of the pumpage on the ground-water levels in the vicinity of the Tutu Site. After 24 hours of pumping at 9.25 gpm, the effects of this \ u \ ··· ·L ldh 00'..c' GERAGHTY c:_-:.: \11LLER. INC. 3-16 pumpage were measured at distances as great as 290 feet from the pumping well at Monitoring Well MW-4 (0.11 feet of drawdown). 3.3.2 Monitorin2 Well MW-60 Aguifer Test Analysis The water-level data collected from Monitoring Wells CHT-6D and MW-6D during the MW-6D aquifer test were also analyzed using the computer software AQTESOLV. The drawdown data from Monitoring Wells CHT-6D and MW-6D were initially superimposed on Theis and Bolton type curves before determining that the Cooper-Jacob straight line method was appropriate. The Cooper-Jacob straight-line method involves plotting the time-drawdown data on semi-log graph paper (Cooper and Jacob 1946). Based on the interpreted aquifer test characteristics (i.e., unconfined, non-steady state conditions), the Cooper-Jacob method is appropriate. Steady-state conditions had not been reached during the pumping. The aquifer properties of T and S were calculated as described in Section 3.3.1 (Monitoring Well MW-6R Aquifer Test Analysis). Figures 3-8 and 3-9 illustrate the semi-log plots for the time-drawdown relationships for Monitoring Wells CHT-6D and MW-6D and the calculated values of T and S. Because the hydraulic property of storage cannot be determined from the pumping well drawdown data, a value for S for MW-6D is not illustrated on Figure 3-9. Based on analysis of the water-level data for these wells, the transmissivity of the deeper parts of the aquifer in the immediate vicinity of the Tutu Site ranges from 5.2 to 8.14 ft2/min (56,010 to 87,673 gal/day/ft). Although no confining units were identified during the drilling program, the calculated S of 0.0007 from the CHT-6D time-drawdown relationship is more representative of a confined aquifer (see Table 3-1). In addition to developing aquifer hydraulic coefficients, the aquifer test of Monitoring Well MW-6D also illustrated the impacts of the pumpage on the ground-water levels in the vicinity of the Tutu Site. After 24 hours of pumping at 14 gpm, the effects of this pumpage TUT U02 11H7 GERAGHTY c_--,;, \1ILLER. J;\/C 3-17 were measured at Monitoring Well MW-7 (0.09 foot of drawdown). Because the fracture bedrock aquifer is non-homogeneous and anisotropic (i.e., not equal or similar in all directions), the effect of pumpage is not expected to result in a symmetrical drawdown cone centered at the pumping well. Rather, the uneven distribution of fractures could result in lower drawdown values at locations close to the pumping well which are not well connected to the fractures intersected by the pumping well, as compared to locations farther away which are well connected to the fractures intersected by the pumping well. The pre-pumping test hydrographs illustrate that the 0.09 foot of drawdown observed at Monitoring Well MW-7 during the pumping test is most likely due to the pumping. Pre-pumping test hydrographs for monitoring wells are provided in Appendix H. TUT OU~::'. l JUH GERAGHTY c-< \1ILLER. l'.'\C. 4.0 SOIL QUALITY DATA During drilling activities at the Tutu Site, 43 soil samples and four replicate soil samples were collected in June, July, and August 1992 for laboratory analysis. The samples were collected in accordance with the procedures established in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a). Continuous soil samples were collected during drilling at soil boring and shallow and deep monitoring well locations, except Monitoring Well MW-9S, which was installed north of MW-9. In addition, eight surface soil samples were collected. Validated analytical results are provided in Tables 4-1 through 4-11 and shown on Figures 4-1 and 4-2. Samples for laboratory analysis were selected using the methods described in Section 2.1 (Soil Investigation). Each soil sample was identified with the name of the boring or monitoring well and the depth interval. Three surface soil sample locations were selected as background locations, and five surface soil sample locations were selected in potential source areas of constituents of concern (i.e., petroleum compounds, PCE, DCE, TCE, and vinyl chloride). Soil samples collected from soil boring and monitoring well locations were analyzed for TCL VOCs, 1,2-dibromomethane, n-propylbenzene, MTBE, TCL BNAs, TAL metals, and total cyanide, following the March 1990 CLP Protocols, as indicated in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a). Soil samples were also analyzed for TPH using USEPA Method 418.1, which was modified for soil analyses. Five of the eight surface soil samples were analyzed for TCL VOCs, TCL BNAs, TAL metals, and cyanide. Three surface soil samples were only analyzed for TAL metals and cyanides: these samples were collected to provide data regarding background metal concentrations in soil for the risk assessment. 4.1 RA TIO NALE FOR EVALUATING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SOIL SAMPLE RESULTS Because VOCs are present in ground water and soil gas at the Tutu Site, the detection of low levels of VOCs (i.e., individual parameter concentrations below 10 parts per billion [ppb]) in soil samples are probably due to adsorption and incorporation of soil gas containing GERAGHTY c-;;, \HLLER. I~~. 4-2 VOCs in the soil sample. This interpretation is supported by the detection of low levels of VOCs (i.e., below 10 ppb) in soils collected from locations that are not suspected contaminant source areas. For example, PCE was reported at an estimated value of 6 ppb from Soil Sample MW-6, at O to 2.0 feet bis. This sample was from the borehole for Monitoring Well MW-6, which is in the center of the Four Winds Shopping Center parking lot, and area that is not a suspected source area. To evaluate the significance of detected metal and cyanide concentrations, soil samples were collected in areas that were not suspected to have been impacted by human activities. The analysis of these soil samples provided data to evaluate the range of the natural, or background, concentrations of naturally occurring metals in soil. Three surface soil samples (SS-1, SS-2, and SS-8) were collected approximately 150 feet north of the Curriculum Center building to evaluate natural background (i.e., non-impacted) metal concentrations. Soil Boring B-7 was drilled at the fire station east of the Texaco property. A sample from Soil Boring B-7 was selected from a depth of 2.0 to 4.0 feet bls for laboratory analysis. Because metals and other inorganic parameters may have leached from the surface soil, the natural concentrations of metals and other inorganic parameters may be greater in subsurface soils than in surface soils. Since no detectable organic compounds were reported in the sample from Soil Boring B-7 (2.0 to 4.0 feet bis), and no suspected sources of metal contamination are located near this boring location, this sample was considered to be representative of natural (i.e., background) concentrations in subsurface soils. Using the maximum background metal and cyanide soil concentrations presented in Table 4-12, metal and cyanide concentrations in soil samples above these background values are presented in Table 4-13. Due to the variation of the natural concentration of metals and cyanide and the limited number (four) of samples used to determine background concentrations, it is likely that many of the soil concentrations detected above the maximum background values (Table 4-12) are natural and the detected concentrations are not associated with contamination. In subsequent sections of this report, only metal concentrations that exceed the background values by one order ILJ'T t:.iU.i:• .!.\".;-(, GERAGHTY & \1ILLER. INC. 4-3 of magnitude or more are identified. All concentrations above the inferred background values are listed in Table 4-13. To better determine the significance of the metal and cyanide values in soil, the results above background should be compared with acceptable soil concentrations as determined by a risk assessment. The USEPA will be performing a risk assessment for the Final RI Report. The TPH concentration in the analyzed soil sample from Monitoring Well MW-5 (located at the Tillett property) was 590 parts per million (ppm). The TPH concentrations in all other analyzed soil samples are relatively low ranging from not detected to 250 ppm. Several of the reported TPH concentrations in soil may be false positives for two reasons: 1. VOC and BNA analytical results were non-detectable (in the ppb range) in several of the soil samples. 2. The TPH analytical method (USEPA Method 418.1) is prone to false positive results (Thomey et at. 1989), especially with fine-grained soil samples such as those collected at the Tutu Site. 4.2 VIRGIN ISLANDS HOUSING AUTHORITY SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS One soil sample was collected from a depth of 4.0 to 6.0 feet bls in the boring for Monitoring Well MW-13D (located approximately 50 feet west of the VIHA vehicle maintenance garage). Analytical results indicated no detectable concentrations of TCL VOCs, TCL BNAs, or TPH compounds. No metal concentrations were detected that were greater than one order of magnitude above background values. 4.3 CURRICULUM CENTER SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Eight subsurface soil samples and five surface soil samples were collected near the Curriculum Center (former Laga Building) for analysis. Surface Soil Samples SS-1, SS-2, and TUT UU'.:' I. 1 ,.7, 1. GERAGHTY L-;., \ 01ILLER. INC. 4-4 SS-8 were collected from an open, grass-covered area 150 feet north of the Curriculum Center for determination of background (i.e., natural) metal concentrations. Surface Soil Samples SS-3 and SS-4 were collected near the former drum disposal area northwest of the Curriculum Center Building. Methylene chloride, a common laboratory contaminant (or artifact), was reported in Surface Soil Samples SS-3 at 22 ppb and in SS-4 at an estimated concentration of 8 ppb. Surface Soil Sample SS-3 had reported values of 2-butanone (35 ppb), total xylenes (19 ppb), toluene (4 ppb estimated), and ethylbenzene (3 ppb estimated). No other TCL VOCs, TCL BNAs, or TPH compounds were reported in Surface Soil Samples SS-3 or SS-4. The only metal detected in Surface Soil Samples SS-3 and SS-4 at concentrations greater than one order of magnitude above background was potassium at 7140 ppm. Three soil borings, B-14, B-15, and B-16, were drilled near the location of a former discharge pipe which extended through the north wall of the Curriculum Center Building (former Laga Building). PCE was detected in Sample B-14 (0 to 2 feet bls) at an estimated concentration of 72 ppb, and in the field replicate sample, Sample B-14FR (0 to 2 feet bls) at an estimated concentration of 100 ppb. PCE was also detected in Sample B-15 (0 to 2 feet bls) at 170 ppb and in Sample B-16 (0 to 2 feet bls) at 23 ppb. These PCE concentrations represent the second through fourth and sixth highest values reported in this soil investigation, exceeded only by the 200 ppb and 29 ppb values reported in Samples B-13 and B-11 collected near the O'Henri Dry Cleaners. TCE was detected in Sample B-15 at an estimated concentration of 6 ppb. No other chlorinated VOCs were detected in samples from these three borings. Toluene was detected in Sample B-14 at an estimated concentration of 2 ppb, in the field replicate Sample B-14FR at an estimated concentration of 3 ppb, in Sample B-15 at a concentration of 12 ppb, and in Sample B-16 at an estimated concentration of 11 ppb. voe soil concentration of 10 ppb or greater are interpreted as being indicative of a release from a nearby source. TUT 002 \ .'.\.'·•>': •• : GERAGHTY c"' \1ILLER. INC 4-5 Butyl benzyl phthalate was detected in Sample B-16 at an estimated concentration of 58 ppb. Phthalate compounds are related to plastics and may be due to sampling or laboratory artifacts (USEPA 1991c). No other BNA compounds were detected in samples from B-14, B-15, and B-16. TPH was detected in Sample B-14 at an estimated concentration of 250 ppm, and in the field replicate, Sample B-14FR at an estimated concentration of 56 ppm. TPH was detected in Sample B-16 at an estimated concentration of 82 ppm, but not detected in Sample B-15. Arsenic was detected above the background level of 1 ppm in Samples B-16 (11.6 ppm) and the duplicate of B-16 (11. 9 ppm). No other metals or cyanide concentrations were detected at greater than one order of magnitude above background. Soil samples were collected for laboratory analysis at MW-1 (0 to 2 feet bls) and MW-1 D (1 to 2.5 feet bis). Methylene chloride was detected in Sample MW-1 at an estimated concentration of 2 ppb and acetone was detected in Sample MW-1D at an estimated concentration of 49 ppb. Both of these compounds are common laboratory artifacts (USEPA 1991c). No other TeL voes were detected in these samples. No TeL BNAs were detected in either sample. TPH was detected in Sample MW-1 at a concentration of 140 ppm and in Sample MW-1D at a concentration of 84 ppm. No metals or cyanide concentrations exceeded one order of magnitude above background levels. Soil Sample MW-14 (0 to 2 feet bis) was collected for laboratory analysis. Acetone was detected at a concentration of 34 ppb in the laboratory blank. Toluene and total xylenes were detected at estimated concentrations of 2 ppb and 1 ppb, respectively. No other voes were detected. Diethyl phthalate was detected at an estimated concentration of 40 ppb. Phthalate compounds are associated with plastics and may be present as laboratory or sampling artifacts (USEPA 1991c). No other BNA compounds were detected in this sample. TPH was detected at a concentration of 220 ppm. No metals or cyanide concentrations exceeded one order of magnitude above background levels. rUT GERAGHTY c« \flLLER. INC. 4-6 Soil Sample B-1 (4 to 8 feet bls) was collected northwest of the Curriculum Center, and Sample B-6 (4 to 8 feet bls) was collected south of the loading dock at the Curriculum Center. Acetone was detected at an estimated concentration of 16 ppb in Sample B-1 and at 370 ppb in Sample B-6. As mentioned previously, acetone is a common laboratory artifact. 2-Butanone was detected at a concentration of 59 ppb in Sample B-6. No other TCL VOCs were detected in either sample. No TCL BNA compounds were detected. TPH was not detected in Sample B-1; it was detected in Sample B-6 at 170 ppm. No metals or cyanide concentrations exceeded one order of magnitude above background levels. 4.4 FIRE STATION PROPERTY SAMPLING RESULTS One soil sample, Sample B-7 (2 to 4 feet bls), was collected for laboratory analysis. No TCL VOCs or TCL BNAs were detected in this sample. TPH was detected at a concentration of 28 ppm. No metals or cyanide were detected above background levels. This soil sample is considered to be non-impacted and representative of background (i.e., natural) soil chemistry. 4.5 RAMSAY MOTORS SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Soil Borings B-2 and B-3 were drilled at Ramsay Motors. Soil Boring B-2 was drilled adjacent to the drum storage area south of the maintenance garage. (A UST beneath the maintenance garage was used to store waste oil prior to the current practice of using 55-gallon steel drums). Soil Boring B-3 was drilled approximately 75 feet west of Soil Boring B-2, near a 55-gallon drum that was lying on its side with an open bunghole. Both boring locations had stained soils at the surface. Both Sample B-2 (0 to 2 feet bls) and Sample B-3 (2 to 4 feet bis) had detectable concentrations of methylene chloride estimated at 17 ppb and 26 ppb, respectively, and acetone at a concentration of 14 ppb and estimated 6 ppb, respectively. These two compounds are common laboratory artifacts. TCE was detected in Sample B-3 at an estimated concentration of 6 ppb. This reported TCE value may be due to volatization of TCE from contaminated ground water. No other chlorinated voes or BTEX voes were detected in either sample. TUT J .1 ,:,,//. GERAGHTY c--,., \11LLER. I!\IC 4-7 The most significant results for these two soil samples are the reported estimated concentrations in Sample B-2 of benzo(a)pyrene (270 ppb), benzo(g,h,i)perylene (290 ppb), and pyrene (220 ppb). No other BNA compounds were detected in either samples. TPH was detected in Sample B-2 at 110 ppm but was not detected in Sample B-3. No metals or cyanide concentrations exceeded one order of magnitude above background levels. 4.6 ANTILLES AUTO REPAIR SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Soil Boring B-5 was drilled at Antilles Auto Repair (formerly Gassett Auto Parts). This location was selected because an "oil pool" or puddle was noted in this vicinity during a site inspection on February 15, 1989 by NUS Corporation (1989). A split-spoon soil sample (B-5) was collected from O to 2 feet bis for laboratory analysis. Reported organic compounds in Sample B-5 included estimated concentrations of acetone (92 ppb), 2-butanone (18 ppb), and estimated concentrations of methylene chloride (9 ppb). As stated previously, methylene chloride, acetone, and 2-butanone are suspected laboratory artifacts (USEPA 1991c). Estimated concentrations of toluene (2 J ppb), and MTBE (1.3 ppb) were detected. No other chlorinated VOC compounds were detected. No BNA compounds were detected. This sample had a reported TPH value of 53 ppm, and no metals or cyanide were detected at concentrations exceeding background values by one order of magnitude. 4.7 TEXACO SERVICE STATION SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Four soil samples (B-4, MW-3, MW-4, and MW-4D) were collected at the Texaco Service Station for laboratory analysis. Soil Boring B-4 was drilled through a strip of unpaved soil at the northwestern corner of the Texaco Service Station where cars are commonly repaired. A split-spoon sample (B-4) was collected from 8 to 10 feet bis for laboratory analysis. Acetone was reported at an estimated value of 55 ppb in Sample B-4. Because acetone is a common laboratory contaminant, this reported result may be due to laboratory contamination (USEPA 1991c). All other organic analytical results for TCL VOCs, TCL BNAs, and TPH were non- GERAGHTY c--,., \fILLER. I~C 4-8 detectable. No cyanide or metals were detected at concentrations exceeding one order of magnitude above background values. Soil samples from three monitoring well borings (Monitoring Wells MW-3, MW-4, and MW-4D) at the Texaco Service Station were also collected for analysis. All three of these borings were drilled through concrete pavement. Monitoring Well MW-3 was installed in the northeastern corner of the Texaco property east of the drum storage area. Waste oil is stored in 55-gallon steel drums on concrete pavement north of the Texaco building. A soil sample (MW-3) from 0.4 to 2 feet bls was collected for analysis in the boring for Monitoring Well MW-3. Di-n-butyl phthalate was detected at an estimated concentration of 170 ppb. Phthalate compounds are related to plastics and may be due to sampling or laboratory artifacts. Acetone and methylene chloride, common laboratory artifacts, were detected at estimated concentrations of 11 ppb and 1 ppb, respectively. PCE was detected at an estimated concentration of 2 ppb; its presence could be due to volatilization from contaminated ground water. No BTEX compounds were detected. The TPH analysis of this sample indicated no detectable results. No cyanide or metals were detected in this sample at concentrations greater than one order of magnitude above background values. Sample MW-4 (2.7 to 4.7 feet bls) had reported concentrations of acetone at 190 ppb, of 2-butanone at 48 ppb, and methylene chloride at an estimated concentration of 2 ppb. The acetone concentration was detected in a blank sample, which indicates that sample contamination due to laboratory procedures is probable. The reported value of 2-butanone, which is also a common laboratory contaminant (USEPA 1991c), is possibly due to laboratory contamination. PCE was detected at an estimated concentration of 1 ppb; no other chlorinated VOC or BTEX compounds were detected. The trace concentration estimated at 1 ppb of PCE could be due to volatization from contaminated ground water. Benzo(a)pyrene was detected at an estimated 140 ppb; no other BNA compounds were detected. This sample had a reported TPH value of 130 ppm, and had no cyanide or metal concentrations detected at greater than one order of magnitude above background. GERAGHTY 6< \1ILLER. INC 4-9 The soil sample selected for analysis from the boring for Monitoring Well MW-4D was taken from a depth of 8. 7 to 10. 7 feet bis, immediately above weathered bedrock. This sample also had estimated results for acetone (81 ppb) and methylene chloride (1 ppb). All other results for TeL voes (including BTEX) were rejected during data validation. The MW-4D sample was analyzed one day outside the required holding time. Detected values were qualified as estimated (J) and non-detected values were rejected. TeL BNAs and TPH compounds were non-detectable, and the sample had no cyanide or metal concentrations that exceeded the background values by one order of magnitude. 4.8 TILLETI PROPERTY SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Samples SS-5, MW-5 (0 to 4 feet bis), and B-8 (0 to 2 feet bis) were collected at the Tillett property for laboratory analysis. A blind field replicate sample B-8 FR (0 to 2 feet bis) was collected from Soil Boring B-8. Soil Boring B-8 was located approximately 20 feet west of a sanitary sewer junction and 25 feet west of the Tillett Supply Well. This boring location was selected to confirm the soil thickness overlying bedrock (reported in the Tillett Supply Well log) and to determine the soil quality at this location. PeE was detected in Sample B-8 at an estimated concentration of 2 ppb, and in a field replicate of this sample, B-8FR, at an estimated concentration of 5 ppb. No other chlorinated voe compounds were detected in this sample. Toluene was detected at an estimated concentration of 4 ppb in Samples B-8 and B-8FR. Ethylbenzene was detected at an estimated concentration of 2 ppb in Sample B-8 and at an estimated 3 ppb in Sample B-8FR. No other BTEX voe compounds were detected in this sample. These trace (5 ppb or less) concentrations of voes may be due to volatization from contaminated ground water. The greatest number of BNA compounds detected in all soil samples collected during this investigation was at Soil Boring B-8. The BNA compounds with the highest concentration" ;_ 1 )_'!/ GERAGHTY E_;r \1ILLER. INC. 4-10 this boring were pyrene estimated at 300 ppb, fluoranthene estimated at 290 ppb, benzo(b)fluoranthene estimated at 250 ppb, and chrysene estimated at 210 ppb. Benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, indeno(l ,2,3-cd)pyrene, and phenanthrene were also reported in the soil sample from Boring B-8 at estimated concentrations ranging from 84 ppb to 180 ppb. A field replicate (B-8FR) of this soil sample had no detectable BNA compounds reported. TPH was not detected and no cyanide or metals in Sample B-8 exceeded background values by one order of magnitude. However, TPH was detected at a concentration of 77 ppm, and arsenic was detected at an estimated concentration of 94 ppm in the field replicate Sample B-8FR. Surface Soil Sample SS-5 is located south of Soil Boring B-8 on the Tillett property. Methylene chloride, a common laboratory artifact, was detected in Sample SS-5 at an estimated concentration of 10 ppb. No other voes (chlorinated or BTEX) were detected. The BNA compounds with the highest concentrations in this boring were butyl benzyl phthalate estimated at 190 ppb and fluoranthene estimated at 100 ppb. Benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, chrysene, di-n-butyl phthalate, and pyrene were also reported in Soil Sample SS-5 at estimated concentrations between 55 ppb and 84 ppb. No cyanide or metal concentrations exceeded background levels by one order of magnitude or greater. No TeL voe or TeL BNA compounds were detected in Sample MW-5. TPH was detected at a concentration of 590 ppm, which is the highest TPH concentration detected in soil during this investigation. The minimum measurable thickness of product (0.01 foot), was detected once in Monitoring Well MW-5 on September 28, 1992. No metal or cyanide concentrations exceeded background levels by one order of magnitude in Soil Sample MW-5. 4.9 FOUR WINDS PLAZA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Six soil samples from borings for Monitoring Wells MW-2, MW-6, MW-6D, MW-9, MW-10, and MW-10D were collected at the Four Winds Plaza for laboratory analysis. In GERAGHTY c",? !\1ILLER. I~C 4-11 addition, a blind field replicate, Sample MW-2FR (0 to 2 feet bis), was collected from sample MW-2 (0 to 2 feet bis). All of these soil samples were collected beneath asphalt paving. The reported organic compounds in Sample MW-2 (0 to 2 feet bls) and its field replicate, Sample MW-2FR (0 to 2 feet bis), included methylene chloride (estimated 10 ppb in both samples), acetone (estimated at 58 ppb and 130 ppb, respectively), and 2-butanone (only in replicate sample MW-2FR [O to 2 feet bis] at 25 ppb). These three compounds are common laboratory artifacts (USEPA 1991c). No TCL BNA compounds were detected. TPH was detected at estimated concentrations of 66 ppm in Sample MW-2 and 86 ppm in Sample MW- 2FR. No cyanide or metals reported in Samples MW-2 (0 to 2 feet bis), and MW-2FR (0 to 2 feet bis) exceeded the background metal values by one order of magnitude. These soil samples were collected beneath the northern portion of the Four Winds Plaza, an area that is not a suspected contaminant source area. Samples MW-6 (0 to 2 feet bis) and MW-6D (0 to 2 feet bis) were collected beneath the central area of the Four Winds Plaza parking lot. Low concentrations of acetone estimated at 6 ppb in MW-6D (0 to 2 feet bls), methylene chloride at 22 ppb in MW-6 (0 to 2 feet bls), and PCE estimated at 6 ppb in MW-6 (0 to 2 feet bis) were detected. Considering this area is not a suspected contaminant source area, the reported acetone and methylene chloride are probably due to laboratory contamination; the reported PCE may be due to volatization from contaminated ground water. No TCL BNA compounds were detected. TPH was detected at a concentrations of 120 ppm in Sample MW-6 and 61 ppm in MW-6D. No cyanide or metal concentrations exceeded background values by one order of magnitude. Sample MW-9 (0 to 4 feet bis), collected west of the Esso Service Station, had non- detectable results for TCL VOCs and TCL BNAs. A TPH value of 230 ppm was reported for this sample. A sheen of product was detected once in Monitoring Well MW-9 on September 17, 1992. No cyanide or metal concentrations exceeded one order of magnitude above background values. fi .. J /_. (J ~. ") ,:.: .l .. 1 ·~/ c;1 GERAGHTY e \flLLER. I~C. 4-12 Samples MW-10 (2 to 4 feet bls) and MW-10D (0 to 2 feet bls) were collected from locations south and east of the Splash and Dash Car Wash. Estimated values of methylene chloride (17 ppb in MW-10 and 22 ppb in MW-10D) are most likely due to laboratory contamination. Acetone (35 ppb) and an estimated value of 2-butanone (5 ppb) were detected in Sample MW-10 (2 to 4 feet bls) and are also likely due to laboratory contamination. An estimated value of 1 ppb of toluene was reported in Sample MW-10D (0 to 2 feet bls). No other TCL VOCs were detected in either sample. No TCL BNAs or TPHs were detected in Samples MW-10 and MW-10D. No cyanide or metal concentrations in these two samples exceeded background values by one order of magnitude. 4.10 VITELCO SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Only two soil samples, Sample MW-7 (14 to 16 feet bis), and a field replicate, Sample MW-7FR (14 to 16 feet bis), were collected at the VITELCO property. This boring was located in the northeastern comer of a gravel-covered parking area used by VITELCO company vehicles. With the exception of methylene chloride (12 ppb in Sample MW-7 and 18 ppb in Sample MW-7FR), this sample had non-detectable results for TCL voes and BNAs. TPH was detected at 27 ppm in Sample MW-7, but was not detected in Sample MW-7FR. No cyanide or metal concentrations were detected in this sample at greater than one order of magnitude above background values. 4.11 ESSO SERVICE STATION SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Two soil samples were collected at the Esso Service Station. Both of these samples were collected beneath asphalt pavement near the northern portion of the Esso Service Station. Sample B-9 (2 to 6 feet bis) was collected in the northeastern comer of the Esso property. This soil sample had non-detectable results for chlorinated and petroleum TeL voes. This sample was also non-detectable for TeL BNAs with the exception of an estimated value of 220 ppb of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, a common laboratory and sampling artifact. TPH was detected at 160 GERAGHTY E' \tlLLER. I~C 4-13 ppm. Metals and cyanide were below detected concentrations that exceeded background values by one order of magnitude. Sample MW-8 (2 to 4 feet bls) had a reported value of methylene chloride of 25 ppb, which was likely a laboratory artifact. Sample MW-8 also had an estimated value of PCE of 2 ppb, which could be due to volatization from contaminated ground water. No other chlorinated VOC compounds were detected. This sample also had an estimated value of toluene (1 ppb). No other BTEX VOCs or TPH were detected. No cyanide or metals in this sample exceeded background values. 4.12 ASSEMBLY OF GOD CHURCH SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Sample MW-12D (4 to 6 feet bls) was collected at the Assembly of God Church property. This sample had non-detectable results for TCL VOCs, TCL BNAs, and TPH. No ..____,, metal or cyanide concentrations in this sample exceeded background values by one order of magnitude. ---- 4.13 LUTHERAN CHURCH SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Sample MW-11 D ( 10 to 11 feet bls) was collected at the Lutheran Church west of Route 38. Monitoring Well MW-11 D was installed in an unpaved area east of an asphalt-covered parking area. Estimated values of methylene chloride (4 ppb) and toluene (1 ppb) were reported for this sample. No other TCL VOCs and no TCL BNAs were detected. The TPH value was non-detectable. No metal or cyanide concentrations exceeded one order of magnitude above background values. 4.14 O'HENRI DRY CLEANERS SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS Six soil samples were collected near the O'Henri Dry Cleaners for laboratory analysis. These included five soil boring samples (from Soil Borings B-10, B-11. B-12, B-13, and B-13A) ru 1 .L GERAGHTY c--,., \1JLLER. Il\C - - 4-14 and one Surface Soil Sample, Sample SS-6. In addition, a blind field replicate of Surface Soil Sample SS-6, was collected and labeled Sample SS-7. After the laboratory results were returned, Sample SS-7 was renamed SS-6FR. Soil Boring B-10 was located approximately 50 feet north of the O'Henri Building. Analytical results for Sample B-10 (6 to 8 feet bls) included non-detectable results for TCL VOCs, and an estimated value for butyl benzyl phthalate (160 ppb). Phthalate compounds are related to plastics and may be due to sampling or laboratory artifacts. No other BNA compounds were detected. TPH was detected at 27 ppm. Barium (498 ppm) in this sample exceeded the background value (41. 9 ppm) by slightly more than one order of magnitude. Soil Borings B-11 and B-12 were located on the east side of the O' Henri Dry Cleaners near the current storage area for PCE drums. Both borings were drilled through pavement. Sample B-12 (6 to 8 feet bls) was non-detectable for all organic parameters (i.e., VOCs, and BNAs) except TPH (25 ppm). Methylene chloride, a common laboratory artifact, was reported in Sample B-11 (0 to 2 feet bis) at an estimated 3 ppb. PCE was detected in Sample B-11 at 29 ppb; no other chlorinated VOCs were detected. Because this PCE concentration is greater than trace concentrations (i.e., below 10 ppb), this reported PCE value is indicative of a release of PCE from a nearby source. Toluene was detected in Sample B-11 at an estimated concentration of 3 ppb; no other BTEX YOCs were detected. No BNA compounds were detected; TPH was detected at 41 ppm. PCE was detected in Sample B-13 (4 to 6 feet bls) at 200 ppb. The PCE concentration (200 ppb) reported in the soil sample from Boring B-13 at O' Henri Dry Cleaners represents the highest PCE value in all soil sample analyses. No other chlorinated VOCs and BTEX VOC compounds were detected in this sample. Fluoranthene was detected at an estimated concentration of 42 ppb. TPH was detected at 28 ppm. Soil Sample B-13A was collected from Oto 2 feet bis. PCE was detected at 15 ppb; no other VOCs were detected in the sample. No BNA compounds were detected. TPH was not . .. . _!_ ·_/~·_;_/ r 1....1 ·i · (. ) ,. __ ; . .::' ., - GERAGHTY 6< \HLLER. !SC - 4-15 analyzed. Surface Sample SS-6, and its field replicate SS-6FR, had reported concentrations of methylene chloride, a common laboratory artifact, at 22 ppb and 20 ppb, respectively. PCE was detected at an estimated concentration of 1 ppb in Sample SS-6; no other VOCs were detected in either sample. BNA results for Sample SS-6 were rejected during data validation; butyl benzyl phthalate and di-n-butyl phthalate were detected in Sample SS-6FR at estimated concentrations of 75 ppb and 62 ppb, respectively. Arsenic concentrations of five soil samples collected near the O'Henri facility exceeded the background value of 1 ppm by greater than one order of magnitude, these samples include B-12 (6 to 8 feet bls) at 18.3 ppm, B-13 (4 to 6 feet bls) at an estimated value of 185 ppm, B- 13A (0 to 2 feet bls) at 13. 7 ppm, SS-6 at an estimated value of 17.3 ppm, and SS-6FR at an estimated value of 19 .1 ppm. No other metals or cyanide concentrations in these samples exceeded one order of magnitude above background values. 4.15 QA/QC SAMPLES As part of the QA/QC requirements described in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a), five soil replicate samples were collected during soil sampling. Field Replicates MW- 7FR, MW-8FR, MW-2FR, MW-14FR, and SS-7 were obtained from soil samples from Monitoring Well MW-7, Boring B-8, Monitoring Well MW-2, Boring B-14, and Sample SS-6, respectively. Analytical results for soil replicates are presented in Tables 4-1 through 4-5. A sample of the decontamination water used during sampling activities was collected and analyzed for TCL VOCs, as required in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a). This sample was identified as WAPA, and was collected from the potable water supply located at the VIHA building. A field blank was collected during each sampling activity. Field blanks were obtained from the sampling equipment (stainless steel, split spoon, and spatulas) utilized during sampling - activities. Field blanks were analyzed for all parameters required for the soil samples. Also, TUT c,u:i' J. :20.::. GERAGHTY c--,.., \1ILLER. INC - 4-16 a trip blank was included with every shipment of samples to the laboratory. Trip blanks were only analyzed for TCL VOCs, as required in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a). Analytical results for the drilling water sample (W APA), field blanks, and trip blanks are included in Tables 4-6 through 4-11. 4.15.1 Or2anic Compound Results for OA/OC Samples Most analytical results for soil samples and their corresponding replicates correlate closely, which indicates that proper QA/QC procedures were followed during laboratory analysis. One exception is 2-butanone, which was reported at 25 ppb in the field replicate (MW- 2FR) of the soil sample collected from the boring for Monitoring Well MW-2, but was not detected in Soil Sample MW-2 (see Table 4-1). Another exception is the absence of BNA detections in Sample B-8FR compared to the number (ten) and range (84 to 300 ppb) of detections in Sample B-8. This lack of correlation is attributed to the inhomogeneity of soil. Analytical results for WAPA (the water supply sample), which was analyzed for TCL VOCs only, indicate estimated trace concentrations of chloroform (2 ppb), bromodichloromethane (3 ppb), dibromochloromethane (3 ppb), and bromoform (2 ppb). None of these compounds was detected in the soil samples. Methylene chloride, acetone, carbon disulfide, and TPH were reported in several field blanks. Methylene chloride, acetone, chloromethane, and carbon disulfide were also detected in several trip blanks. In addition, methylene chloride and acetone were detected in laboratory blanks. Some reported detections of these compounds in soil samples are not included on Figure 4-1 because of the data validation results (i.e., concentrations were not detected at the corresponding reporting limit or analyte was detected in the laboratory blank). GERAGHTY c:_',? MILLER. INC 4-17 4.15.2 Inoreanic Compound Results for OA/OC Samples Analytical results for soil samples and their corresponding replicates correlate closely with only a few exceptions. The lead value for Boring B-8 was rejected, and lead was reported in Replicate Sample B-8FR as an estimated concentration. Mercury was detected in Boring B-8, but was not detected in Replicate Sample B-8FR. In Soil Sample MW-2 (0 to 2 feet bls) and a soil field replicate MW-2FR, the reported concentrations of barium (81 ppm and estimated 59.80 ppm, respectively) did did not correlate very well. The inhomogeneous nature of soil may be causing these poor correlations between replicate samples. Iron and zinc were the only analytes detected above the CRDL in field blanks collected during soil sampling. Arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and vanadium were not detected in the field blanks. Other analytes were reported between the CRDL and the instrument detection limit (IDL). TUT OU'.? t .. ,!U::'', GERAGHTY 6< \HLLER. INC. 5.0 GROUND-WATER QUALITY Ground-water samples from the shallow and deeper monitoring wells were collected between September 29 and October 7, 1992. Ground-water sampling was performed in accordance with the procedures established in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller. Inc. 1992a), and described in Section 2.3.4 (Ground-Water Sampling and Analysis) of this Technical Memorandum II. Ground-water samples were analyzed for TCL VOCs, 1,2-dibromomethane, n-propylbenzene, MTBE, TCL BNAs, TAL total metals, TAL dissolved metals, and total cyanide, following the March 1990 CLP Protocols, as indicated in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a). Ground-water samples were also analyzed for TPH using USEPA Method 418.1. Validated analytical results are listed in Tables 5-1 through 5-7. 5.1 ORGANIC COMPOUND RESULTS FOR GROUND-WATER SAMPLES Ground-water samples were collected from all shallow and deep monitoring wells installed at the Tutu Site during the current investigation. The organic compounds (TCL VOCs, 1,2-dibromomethane, n-propylbenzene, MTBE, TCL BNAs, and TPH) detected in ground-water samples are shown on Figure 5-1. Validated analytical results are listed in Tables 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3. The ground water sample collected at MW-7 for TCL VOC analysis was rejected by the laboratory because of head space (air bubbles) in the sample vial. The TCL VOC analysis of the field replicate of MW-7 (MW-7FR) was substituted for MW-7 in Table 5-1 and Figure 5-1. 5.1.1 Petroleum Compounds Floating petroleum product was detected once, at the minimum measurable thickness (0.01 foot) on September 28, I 992, in Monitoring Wells MW-4D and MW-5 which are located at and south of the Texaco Service Station, respectively. Product was also present on four GERAGHTY 6? !\1ILLER. l~C 5-2 occasions in Monitoring Well MW-9S, located west of the Esso Service Station, with thicknesses ranging from a sheen on September 17, October 28, and November 16, 1992 to 0.11 foot on September 28, 1992. A sheen of petroleum product was detected once in Monitoring Well MW-9 on September 17, 1992. With the exception of an estimated concentration of 1 ppb at Monitoring WellS MW-12D and MW-13D, BTEX compounds have only been detected in Monitoring Well MW-5 (a total of approximately 3,700 ppb) and in Monitoring Wells MW-9 and MW-9S (47 ppb and 23 ppb, respectively). Monitoring Well MW-5, located south of the Texaco Service Station, contained the highest concentrations of benzene (1,000 ppb), toluene (180 ppb), ethylbenzene (930 ppb), and total xylenes (1,600 ppb). The Tillett Supply Well sample, collected in September 1992, contained 7 ppb of benzene and an estimated concentration of 1.5 ppb of ethylbenzene. The presence of BTEX compounds is apparently limited to the vicinity of Monitoring Wells MW-5, the Tillett Supply well (south of the Texaco Service Station), and at a separate isolated area near Monitoring Wells MW-9 and MW-9S (west of the Esso Service Station). BTEX compounds have not been detected in Monitoring Wells MW-6R, MW-6D, MW-10, MW-10D, and MW-11D. Other petroleum compounds of concern have been detected at the site including n- propylbenzene, MTBE, and BNA compounds. The highest concentrations of MTBE (6,200 ppb) and n-propylbenzene (180 ppb), were detected in Monitoring Well MW-5, located south of the Texaco Service Station. MTBE is a common gasoline additive, and is one to two orders of magnitude more soluble than gasoline constituents such as benzene, toluene, and xylene. MTBE also increases the solubility and mobility of benzene, toluene, xylene, and other gasoline constituents (Garrett et al. 1986). There is no Federal Drinking Water Standard for MTBE. Naphthalene (310 ppb} was detected at a secondary dilution and estimated values of 2,4- dimethylphenol (7 ppb}, and 4-methylphenol (3 ppb) were also detected in Monitoring Well MW-5. MTBE was not detected at MW-11D, and was detected at low estimated concentrations in Monitoring Well MW-7 and MW-12D. The distribution of the majority of the other GERAGHTY r_"-< \flLLER. INC. 5-3 petroleum compounds of concern (i.e., BNAs) is limited to areas near Monitoring Well MW-5, and an isolated area near Monitoring Wells MW-9 and MW-9S. Dibenzofuran was detected at estimated concentrations in Monitoring Well MW-14 (2 ppb), and 1,2-dichlorobenzene was detected in Monitoring Well MW-3 (2 ppb). Fluorene (5 ppb), 2-methylnaphthalene (1 ppb), and phenol (3 ppb) were detected at estimated concentrations in Monitoring Well MW-9. Fluorene was also detected in Monitoring Well MW-9S (9 ppb). Phenanthrene was also detected at estimated concentrations in Monitoring Wells MW-9S (2 ppb) and MW-14 (2 ppb). Dimethyl phthalate was detected in Monitoring Well MW-4D (8 ppb) and di-n-octyl phthalate was detected in Monitoring Well MW-6R (l ppb). As mentioned previously, phthalate compounds are associated with plastics and are common laboratory and sampling artifacts (USEPA 1991c). 5.1.2 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons Total TPH concentrations were detected in ground-water samples from Monitoring Wells MW-6R at 0.7 ppm and MW-9 at 1.7 ppm. An estimated TPH concentration of 4.2 ppm was detected in the ground-water sample from MW-5, and a secondary dilution of the ground water sample at Monitoring Well MW-9S detected 21 ppm of TPH. Monitoring Well MW-5 is located at the north end of the Tillett property, and Monitoring Wells MW-6R and MW-9 are located at the Four Winds Shopping Plaza, and west of the Esso Service Station, respectively. None of the other wells showed TPH concentrations above the detection limit. 5.1.3 Chlorinated Compounds Chlorinated compounds were detected in all ground-water samples, except for the sample from Monitoring Well MW-5, located at the Tillett property downgradient of the Texaco Service Station; this sample contained elevated concentrations of petroleum constituents, resulting in elevated reporting limits due to decreased analytical sensitivity. Because Samples MW-5 and MW-SFR contained relatively high concentrations of benzene (1,000 ppb and 950 ppb, TUT UO':? l 20b GERAGHTY t_"-< MILLER.1:--;c 5-4 respectively), total xylenes (1,600 ppb and 1,500 ppb, respectively), and MTBE (6,200 ppb in both samples), the samples were diluted prior to analysis. Due to the dilution factor of 50, the reporting limit was increased to 500 ppb (i.e., the sensitivity was reduced) and concentrations of chlorinated VOCs that may have been present below the reporting limit of 500 ppb were not identified. TCE and PCE were detected in Monitoring Wells MW-1, MW-4D, and MW-7, as indicated on Figure 5-1. PCE was also detected at an estimated concentration in Monitoring Wells MW-13D, MW-lD, MW-10, MW-lOD, and MW-14. TCE was detected at estimated concentrations in Monitoring Wells MW-ID, MW-2, MW-3, MW-4, MW-6R, MW-10, and MW-lOD. The highest TCE concentration (190 ppb) and the highest PCE concentration (590 ppb) were detected in Monitoring Well MW-1, which is located west of the Curriculum Center. DCE (analyzed as the sum of both cis- and trans- isomers) was detected in all ground-water samples except Monitoring Wells MW-5, MW-6D, MW-9, MW-1 lD, and MW-13D. The highest DCE concentration (1,000 ppb) was detected in Monitoring Well MW-1. Vinyl chloride was detected in Monitoring Well MW-3 and at an estimated concentration in MW-14. The highest vinyl chloride concentration (140 ppb) was detected in Monitoring Well MW-3. These monitoring wells are located west of the Curriculum Center. Bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and bromoform were detected at estimated concentrations in Monitoring Wells MW-lD, MW-6D, and MW-11D. These compounds were also detected at Monitoring Wells MW-12D, which is located at the God of Holiness Church property, where the highest concentrations of bromodichloromethane (30 ppb), dibromochloromethane (55 ppb), and bromoform (estimated 44 ppb) were detected. Chloroform was detected in Monitoring Wells MW-8 and MW-12D, and detected at estimated concentrations in Monitoring Wells MW-1, MW-ID, MW-2, MW-4D, MW-6D, MW-7, and MW-11D. These four compounds (chloroform, bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and bromoform) are referred to collectively as trihalomethanes and are often a by-product of the chlorination of drinking water. The highest concentration of chloroform was detected in Monitoring Well MW-8 (18 ppb). ru 1 uo2 ·:_ ·:•n•;, GERAGHTY c-;.;, \1ILLER. INC. 5-5 Acetone was detected at estimated concentrations in Monitoring Wells MW-9, MW-10, and MW-13D. The highest acetone concentration (56 ppb) was detected in Monitoring Well MW-13D. Carbon disulfide was only detected in Monitoring Well MW-14 at an estimated concentration of 3 ppb. 2-Butanone was detected at estimated concentrations in Monitoring Wells MW-9S and MW-13D of 2 ppb and 12 ppb, respectively. Acetone and carbon disulfide may be artifacts of laboratory contamination. 2-Butanone is usually detected at low levles, accompanying acetone and carbon disulfide, and may also be a laboratory artifact (USEPA 1991c). 5.2 INORGANIC COMPOUND RESULTS FOR GROUND-WATER SAMPLES The ground-water samples collected from the 19 monitoring wells at the Tutu Site were analyzed for TAL total metals, TAL dissolved metals, and total cyanide. The results are presented in Tables 5-4, 5-5, and 5-6, respectively. 5.2.1 Total Metals The total metal concentrations detected in ground-water samples from the Tutu Site are shown on Figure 5-2. Total antimony, beryllium, cadmium, mercury, silver, and thallium were not detected in the ground-water samples from the Tutu wells. Trace concentrations of total arsenic, calcium, copper, nickel, selenium, and zinc were detected in most of the wells. In all samples except Monitoring Wells MW-6D and MW-13 D, concentrations of total aluminum, barium, calcium, chromium, cobalt, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium, and vanadium were detected above IDLs, but below the Federal Primary Drinking Water Standard. The Federal Primary Drinking Water Standard for chromium is 100 ppb. The concentration of total chromium in Sample MW-6D was 208 ppb. The concentration of total lead in Sample MW-13D was 124 ppb. The metals in ground water probably occur naturally, due to the presence of these same metals in the crystal structure of the minerals in the volcanic rocks through which the ground water flows. ·\ .· ' ' ~, .l I ~ "~/ GERAGHTY c--:? MILLER. l:\1C 5-6 5.2.2 Dissolved Metals In general, concentrations of dissolved metals in the ground-water samples (see Figure 5-3) were lower than the concentrations of total metals. The concentration of dissolved chromium was 195 ppb in Monitoring Well MW-6D, and the concentration of dissolved lead in Monitoring Well MW-13D was 81.5 ppb. Dissolved metal concentrations in all other samples were below detection limits or USEPA maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). 5.2.3 Total Cyanide Total cyanide concentrations in ground-water samples from the wells at the Tutu Site were below detection limits, except for Monitoring Wells MW-6R, MW-8, and MW-11D. The analyses for these three wells were rejected during validation of the laboratory data (see Appendix I). Analytical results for all field blanks were below detection limits. 5.3 QA/QC SAMPLES A sample of the decontamination water used during ground-water sampling activities was analyzed for TCL VOCs, 1,2-dibromomethane, n-propylbenzene, MTBE, TCL BNAs, TPH, total and dissolved metals, and total cyanide, as required in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a). This sample was identified as ESSO-TAP and was collected from a faucet located at the Esso Service Station. As part of the QA/QC requirements described in the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a), three field replicates were collected during ground-water sampling activities. Field replicates MW-5FR, MW-7FR, and MW-9FR were obtained from Monitoring Wells MW-5, MW-7, and MW-9, respectively. As explained in Section 2.3.4 (Ground-Water Sampling and Analysis), MW-9FR was analyzed for TCL VOCs only. Validated analytical results from ESSO-T AP and field replicate samples are presented in Tables 5-1 through 5-6. TU.I OC1? .l. ,! 1.1. GERAGHTY f? MILLER. INC 5-7 A field blank was collected during each sampling activity. Field blanks were obtained from the sampling equipment (feflon bailer) used during sampling activities. Field blanks were analyzed for the same parameters required for the water samples. Also, a trip blank was included with every shipment of samples to the laboratory; trip blanks were only analyzed for TCL VOCs. Validated analytical results for field blanks and trip blanks are provided in Tables 5-1 through 5-6. 5.3.1 Oaanic Compound Results for OA/OC Samples Analytical results of VOCs for the potable water sample (ESSO-TAP) were rejected, as indicated in Table 5-1. BNAs and TPH compounds were not detected in this sample. Analytical results for ground-water samples and their corresponding replicates correlate closely. The ground-water sample collected from Monitoring Well MW-7 was not analyzed for VOCs because air bubbles were found in the sampling vials. The blind field replicate sample MW-7FR was substituted for the TCL voe analysis of the MW-7 sample. A field replicate (Replicate Sample MW-9FR) was collected from Monitoring Well MW-9 and was analyzed for VOCs only. Methylene chloride, acetone, and carbon disulfide were reported in several field blanks and trip blanks. Methylene chloride and acetone were detected in laboratory blanks. Some of the reported detections of these compounds in the ground-water samples are not included on Figure 5-1 because of the data validation results (i.e., concentrations were not detected at the corresponding reporting limit or analyte was detected in the laboratory blank). 5.3.2 Inoreanic Compound Results for OA/OC Samples Analytical results for QA/QC samples are provided in Tables 5-4, 5-5, and 5-6 . . TUT ,:··,;__;':· 1.,: l? GERAGHTY c"-< .~1ILLER. l\:C - - 5-8 5.3.2.1 Total Metals Results for QA/QC Samples Calcium and zinc were the only analytes detected above the CRDL in the potable water sample (ESSO-TAP). Other analytes detected in this sample were non-detected or reported between the CRDL and the IDL. Analytical results for ground-water samples and their corresponding replicates (Replicate Samples MW-SFR and MW-?FR) correlate closely. This correlation indicates that proper QA/QC procedures were followed during laboratory analysis. No analytes were detected above the CRDL in the field blanks. Some analytes were detected in field blanks reported between the CRDL and the IDL. 5.3.2.2 Dissolved Metals Results for QA/QC Samples Calcium and sodium were the dissolved metals detected in the potable water sample (ESSO-TAP). Other analytes were not detected or reported between the CRDL and the IDL. Analytical results for ground-water samples and their corresponding replicates (Replicate Samples MW-SFR and MW-7FR) correlate closely except for antimony in Replicate Samples MW-SFR and MW-7FR, cobalt and nickel in Replicate Samples MW-SFR, and iron and selenium in Replicate Sample MW-7FR. Calcium, iron, magnesium, sodium, and zinc were detected in field blanks, but the values reported by the laboratory were between the CRDL and the IDL. 5.4 SUMMARY OF GROUND-WATER QUALITY RESULTS The ground-water quality data for the monitoring well network and for the supply wells in the area of the Tutu Site are summarized below. The analytical results for the water supply TUT ou:;;:: ,_·)j GERAGHTY 8 MILLER. INC 5-9 well samples collected from September 14 through 17, 1992 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992c) are presented on Figure 5-4. The distribution of petroleum compounds in the monitoring and water supply wells in the Tutu study area indicates a localized presence of these compounds in the shallow ground water in the immediate vicinity of the Texaco and Esso Service Stations. These compounds are present near the Texaco Service Station and southward to Monitoring Well MW-5, the Tillett Supply Well, and Monitoring Well MW-7. BTEX compounds detected in ground-water samples collected from Monitoring Well MW-5 included benzene (1,000 ppb), toluene (180 ppb), ethylbenzene (930 ppb), and xylenes (1,600 ppb). The Tillett Supply Well sample, collected in September 1992, contained 7 ppb of benzene (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992c). The petroleum compounds in ground water near the Esso Service Station (at Monitoring Wells MW-9 and MW-9S) are present from west of the Esso property southward to Monitoring Wells MW-lOD and MW-12D. No BTEX compounds were detected in Monitoring Wells MW-10 and MW-IOD, which are located immediately downgradient of the Esso Service Station. The BTEX compounds located near the Esso Service Station appear to be contained west of the station (near Monitoring Wells MW-9 and 9S). Concentrations of benzene above the USEPA MCLs were detected in Monitoring Well MW-5 (1,000 ppb), which is south of the Texaco Service Station, and in Monitoring Wells MW- 9 (26 ppb) and MW-9S (16 ppb), which are located west of the Esso Service Station. The MCL for benzene in drinking water is 5 ppb. Ethylbenzene was reported in Monitoring Well MW-5 at 930 ppb, above the MCL of 700 ppb. Concentrations of toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes, including all estimated values, were found at non-detectable levels or below MCLs in all other ground-water samples collected during this investigation. Analytical results for ground-water samples from Monitoring Wells MW-10, MW-lOD, MW-llD, and MW-12D (all located south ., of the Esso Service Station), indicated non-detectable results or concentrations below MCLs (i.e., an estimated value of 1 ppb of toluene at MW-12D) for BTEX compounds. The TEIC has conducted seven sampling rounds of the supply wells in the Tutu area. During those sampling TUT UU::: l:? J 'l- GERAGHTY,:_".< \1ILLER. 1:--;c. 5-10 events, no petroleum compounds were detected above MCLs in any of the supply wells except the Tillett Supply Well, in which the highest concentration of benzene (71 ppb) was detected on December 2, 1991. MTBE was detected in ground-water samples collected from Monitoring Wells MW-3 (24 ppb at Texaco), MW-4 (1.2 ppb at Texaco), MW-5 {6,200 ppb at Tillett), MW-7 (5.8 ppb at Vitelco), MW-8 (51 ppb at Esso), MW-9S (2,200 ppb at Four Winds), MW-9 (2,700 ppb at Four Winds), MW-10 (660 ppb at Splash and Dash), MW-10D (780 ppb at Splash and Dash), and MW-12D (11 ppb at the Assembly of God Church). The distribution of chlorinated compounds in ground water at the Tutu Site indicates that PCE and its breakdown products (TCE, DCE, and vinyl chloride) are present throughout the site. PCE and its breakdown products occur in total concentrations in excess of 100 ppb under most of the study area, with the highest concentrations in the vicinity of the Curriculum Center (Former Laga Building) and the O'Henri Dry Cleaning property. The absence or trace level (i.e., 2 ppb of DCE at MW-12D) of these compounds in Monitoring Wells MW-11D and MW- 12D indicates that there are at least two separate sources. Concentrations of PCE, TCE, and DCE in ground-water samples from monitoring wells are highest in the vicinity of the Curriculum Center building, and the high concentrations (greater than 100 ppb) extend down the valley in a zone that includes Monitoring Wells MW-1, MW-1D, MW-3, MW-4, MW-4D, MW-7, MW-8, MW-10, and MW-10D. Supply wells in this zone also showed total concentrations of PCE, TCE, and DCE in excess of 100 ppb. Moderate total concentrations of these compounds (between 10 and 100 ppb) have been detected in a fringe that borders the high concentration zone to the north and west, in Monitoring Wells MW-2, MW-6R, and MW-14, and the Ramsay Supply Well. The VIHA Supply Wells were not sampled during the September 1992 sampling event, but previous sampling events have indicated the presence of PCE, TCE, and DCE. All of these wells show the presence of PCE and its breakdown products. The October 1992 sample from Monitoring Wells MW-11D (located at the Lutheran Church south of the Esso Service Station), and MW-12D (located at the Assembly of God GERAGHTY & \ULLER. INC. Ti..J T ()()_,:~ l :,,') :j 5-11 Church south of the Esso Service Station), had reported PCE, TCE, and DCE values that were non-detectable at Monitoring Well MW-11D and an estimated value of 2 ppb of DCE at Monitoring Well MW-12D. These two monitoring wells define the southern extent of the northern plume of PCE, TCE, and DCE ground-water concentrations in the Tutu valley. A second, separate PCE, TCE, and DCE ground-water plume is located to the south of the northern plume described above. The September 1992 sampling results for the Eglin I and Eglin II Supply Wells (located 200 to 300 feet south of Monitoring Wells MW-11D and MW- 12D) indicated total PCE, TCE, and DCE concentrations of 27.5 ppb and 26.7 ppb, respectively. The September 16, 1992 sampling results for the Eglin III Supply Well (located over 360 feet south of Monitoring Wells MW-11D and MW-12D) indicated a total PCE, TCE, and DCE concentration of 79 ppb. The September 1992 values for total PCE, TCE and DCE concentrations increase further south at the Harvey Supply Well (355 ppb) and the Steele Supply Well (238 ppb), which are located approximately 50 feet and 200 feet south of the O'Henri Dry Cleaners, respectively. The southern chlorinated ground-water plume apparently extends to the southeast where elevated chlorinated VOCs have been detected in the LaPlace, Smith, and Matthias Supply Wells. The total PCE, TCE, and DCE concentrations detected in the September 1992 sampling of two of these supply wells included 219 ppb at LaPlace and 251 ppb at Smith (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992c). The owner of the Matthias supply well denied access for sampling in May 1992 and September 1992. The most recent sampling for the Matthias Supply Well in February 1992 indicated a total PCE, TCE, and DCE concentration of 84.5 ppb (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992d). The September/October 1992 sampling results for the Eglin, Harvey, and Steele Supply Wells define an area of elevated concentrations of PCE, TCE, and DCE (26. 7 ppb to 355 ppb) compared to the trace concentrations (2 ppb or less) identified at Monitoring Wells MW-11D and MW-12D, which are located over 200 to 360 feet north of these supply wells. With the exception of one detection each of lead (at 124 ppb) in Monitoring Well MW-13D (located at VIHA), and chromium (at 208 ppb) in Monitoring Well MW-6D (located GERAGHTY fr? MILLER. l~C. ·1U\ 5-12 at Four Winds Plaza), which are above Federal Primary Drinking Water Standards, all metal concentrations were below MCLs. The total and dissolved metals detected in ground-water samples are probably indicative of naturally occurring constituents derived from the bedrock in the area. No cyanide was detected in any of the wells sampled. n.rr (_.i(.·.·.)_·, .. ··.· .1., .. :.1 ' GERAGHTY c--_., \1JLLER. 1:--;c - 6.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The following summary and conclusions are based on data obtained during this field investigation, which was designed to determine or confirm the potential sources, the horizontal and vertical extents, the rate and direction of transport, and the potential migration pathways of petroleum hydrocarbon products and PCE and its breakdown products (TCE, DCE, and vinyl chloride) in soil and ground water at the Tutu Site. An evaluation of the ground-water monitoring well network is also provided in this section. 6.1 HYDROGEOWGIC CONDITIONS The geology of the Tutu Site consists of a southward thickening mantle, 0 to 15 feet thick, of well-sorted alluvial soils overlying fractured volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks of Cretaceous age. These volcaniclastic rocks consist of andesite tuffs, debris flows, and breccias. The rocks contain numerous fine, closely spaced calcite veins, and weathered and fractured zones that are filled with clay-oxide residual minerals. Low-grade metamorphism of these rocks was caused by intrusive bodies found at depth beneath the Tutu Site. Ground water under the Tutu Site is stored and transmitted in fractures that transect the bedrock. Ground-water flow in the shallow zone is to the south; in the deeper zone, the general ground-water gradient is also southward, with the possibility of a southeastern component under part of the Tutu Site. Water levels measured in the clustered well pairs indicate a slight downward component to ground-water flow. Based on well development data, the upper 100 feet of the aquifer penetrated by the shallow and deeper monitoring wells have a low hydraulic conductivity. In the area that underlies the Texaco Service Station and the northern part of the Four Winds Plaza parking lot, Monitoring Wells MW-3, MW-4, MW-4D, and MW-6R were able to sustain relatively higher pumping rates. · 1 L.i T '._-_)( __ ·) ,--_.:_·_, , - :c .. /} :::~ GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC 6-2 Pumpage of the Ramsay or VIHA supply wells in the northeastern portion of the area of investigation appears to have a significant effect on the deep ground-water levels. In the deeper monitoring wells, MW-ID and MW-13D, located within 600 feet downgradient of the Ramsay and VIHA wells, the water-level elevations were lowered by over 20 feet. However, no effect was observed on the water levels in the nearby shallow monitoring wells, MW-1 and MW-3, during the pumping of the Ramsay or VIHA supply wells. 6.2 SOIL QUALITY Results of laboratory analyses of soil samples collected during the field program showed trace concentrations of petroleum compounds (mainly toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes) in borings located at the Curriculum Center. Benzene was not detected in any of the soil samples collected at the Tutu Site. Other petroleum-related compounds were reported in borings and surface soil samples from the Tillett Area (Boring B-8 and Surface Soil Sample SS-5), on or near ..__,., the O'Henri Dry Cleaners (Borings B-10 and B-13, and Surface Soil Samples SS-6 and SS-7), and on the Ramsay Auto Parts property (Boring B-2). -- Concentrations of TPH in soil samples ranged from non-detectable to 590 ppm, with the highest concentrations detected at and south of the Texaco Service Station in Monitoring Wells MW-4 (130 ppm), and MW-5 (590 ppm), west of the Esso Service Station in Monitoring Well MW-9 (230 ppm), and at the Curriculum Center in Monitoring Wells MW-I (140 ppm) and MW-14 (220 ppm) and in Borings B-6 (170 ppm) and B-14 (250 ppm). Other samples with TPH concentrations of over 100 ppm in shallow soils were from the Esso Service Station Boring B-9 (160 ppm), the Four Winds Plaza parking lot Monitoring Well MW-6 (120 ppm), and the Ramsay Auto Parts area in Boring B-2 (110 ppm). The TPH values may be false- positives. BNAs reported in boring soil samples collected may be associated with laboratory artifacts (especially phthalate compounds). The day-n-butyl phthalate concentrations reported in soil samples from Monitoring Wells MW-8 (at the northeastern comer of the Esso Service Station), MW-10 and MW-lOD (at the Splash and Dash car wash), MW-6D (at Four Winds TUT UO:<:' .Li ::7' GERAGHTY f? \TILLER. INC. - 6-3 Shopping Center), and MW-4 (at the Texaco Service Station) were qualified in accordance with USEPA CLP and data validation protocols, indicating that these results are most probably due to laboratory artifacts (USEPA 1991c). Di-n-butylphthalate was the only BNA compound detected in soil collected from Monitoring Well MW-3 (at the northeastern comer of the Texaco Service Station). Because of the laboratory contamination documented in other samples, this analytical result for the soil sample from Monitoring Well MW-3 is also most likely a laboratory artifact. Other BNAs were detected in soil samples collected at the Curriculum Center (Boring B-16, Surface Soil Sample SS-3, and Monitoring Well MW-14), the Ramsay Auto Parts (Boring B-2), the Texaco Service Station (Monitoring Well MW-4), the Tillett property (Boring B-8 and Surface Soil Sample SS-5), and the O'Henri Dry Cleaning property (Borings B-10 and B-13 and Surface Soil Sample SS-6/SS-7). Total chlorinated organic compound concentrations (mainly PCE, TCE, and DCE) in excess of 100 ppb were detected in soil samples from the Curriculum Center (Boring B-15), and concentrations between 10 and 100 ppb were detected in Borings B-14 and B-16. Total chlorinated organic compound concentrations in excess of 100 ppb were detected in the O'Henri Dry Cleaners (Boring B-13), and concentrations between 10 and 100 ppb were detected in Borings B-11 and B-13A. Less than 10 ppb of these compounds were detected in soil samples from the Texaco Service Station (Monitoring Wells MW-3 and MW-4), the Four Winds Plaza Shopping Center parking lot (Monitoring Well MW-6), and the Esso Service Station (Monitoring Well MW-8). Metal concentrations detected in soil samples were typically within one order of magnitude of concentrations detected in the background samples (Surface Soil Samples SS-1, SS-2, SS-8, and B-7 [2 to 4 feet bis]) and are probably representative of the natural constituents of the soil at the Tutu Site. TUT ,.,.,, !,:;•(; GERAGHTY c-< J\iflLLER. J;\/C - 6-4 6.3 GROUND-WATER QUALITY A thin layer of floating product was detected once in two wells on or near the Texaco Service Station. This product was present during the September 28, 1992 sampling, but after the sheen of product was removed by bailing, no additional product entered these wells. The minimum measurable thickness of product (0.01 foot) was detected once on September 28, 1992 in Monitoring Wells MW-4D and MW-5, which are located at and south of the Texaco Service Station, respectively. Because floating product did not re-enter these monitoring wells, there is probably a minimal volume, if any, of product near these wells. Product was present on four occasions in Monitoring Well MW-9S west of the Esso Service Station, with thicknesses ranging from a sheen on September 17, October 28, and November 16, 1992 to 0.11 foot on September 28, 1992. Product was not detected in Monitoring Well MW-9S on November 9, 1992. A sheen of product was detected once (September 17, 1992) in Monitoring Well MW-9. BTEX compounds have only been detected at two locations, in Monitoring Well MW-5 (a total of approximately 3,700 ppb) and in Monitoring Wells MW-9 and MW-9S (47 ppb and 23 ppb, respectively. The only supply well in the area in which BTEX compounds have been detected (7 ppb of benzene in September 1992) is the Tillett Supply Well, which is south of Monitoring Well MW-5. MTBE is a more soluble gasoline constituent that has also been detected at the three locations where BTEX was found: Monitoring Wells MW-5 (6,200 ppb), MW-9 (2,700 ppb), and MW-9S (2,200 ppb). At the Texaco Service Station, MTBE was detected at a concentration of24 ppb in Monitoring Well MW-3. In Monitoring Wells MW-10 and MW-10D, located south of the Esso Service Station, MTBE concentrations of 660 and 780 ppb, respectively, were detected. Monitoring Well MW-8, which is located on the northeastern comer of the Esso Service Station, had an MTBE concentration of 51 ppb. No other monitoring wells showed an MTBE concentration in excess of 20 ppb. There is no Federal Drinking Water Standard for MTBE. TUT o,J·:• ;_ ,.::·::.1 GERAGHTY c_-.,., \fILLER. INC 6-5 In summary, the downgradient extent of petroleum constituents in ground water has apparently been adequately delineated by the recently installed monitoring well network. The presence of BTEX compounds is apparently limited to the immediate vicinity of Monitoring Well MW-5, the Tillett Supply Well (south of the Texaco Service Station), and at a separate isolated area near Monitoring Wells MW-9 and 9S (located west of the Esso Service Station). This is evidenced by the absence of BTEX compounds in Monitoring Wells MW-6R, MW-6D, MW-10, MW-10D, MW-11D, and MW-12D, low concentrations of MTBE in Monitoring Well MW-7 and MW-12D, and the absence of MTBE in Monitoring Well MW-11D. PCE and its breakdown products (TCE, DCE, and vinyl chloride) occur in ground water in total concentrations exceeding 100 ppb under most of the study area. The absence of these compounds in Monitoring Wells MW-11D and MW-12D indicates that there are at least two separate sources. VOC concentrations from monitoring well samples are highest in the vicinity of the Curriculum Center building, and the high concentrations extend down the valley in a zone that includes Monitoring Wells MW-1, MW-1D, MW-3, MW-4, MW-4D, MW-7, MW-8, MW-10 and MW-10D. Supply wells in this zone also showed total concentrations of PCE, TCE, and DCE in excess of 100 ppb. Moderate concentrations have been detected north and west of the high concentration zone in Monitoring Wells MW-2, MW-6R, and MW-14, and the Ramsay Supply Well. The VIHA supply wells were not sampled during the September 1992 sampling event, but the results of previous sampling events have indicated the presence of PCE, TCE, and DCE. The presence of PCE and its breakdown products in ground-water samples from all of these wells indicates that the source could be the Curriculum Center Building, where PCE was detected in soil samples. The concentrations detected in the Harvey Supply Well and in the Eglin Supply Wells in September 1992 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992c) appear to be emanating from a separate source near the O'Henri Dry Cleaners, where PCE was also detected in soil samples. GERAGHTY E_., MILLER. INC 6-6 6.4 MONITORING WELL NETWORK EVALUATION Geraghty & Miller has implemented the scope of work described in the approved revised Tutu Service Station Investigation Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a). This scope of work included a soil and ground-water sampling and analysis program, the installation of 19 ground-water monitoring wells, and the evaluation of aquifer characteristics. Based on the data collected during this investigation, shallow ground water beneath the site flows in a southerly direction, and the flow from east and west converges in the center of the valley. The monitoring well network will be used during the next ground-water sampling round to monitor ground-water quality. Based on the hydrogeologic data collected during this investigation, Geraghty & Miller believes that the existing monitoring well network has sufficiently delineated the downgradient extent of petroleum constituents at the Tutu Site. To confirm the downgradient extent of -~ petroleum constituents, the USEPA has requested, and the TEIC has agreed, to install proposed Monitoring Well MW-18 at the God of Holiness Church property (see Section 7.0 [Recommendations] for further discussion). - The extent of petroleum constituents upgradient of the Texaco and Esso Service Stations could not be adequately delineated with the existing monitoring well network. Additional monitoring wells {proposed Monitoring Wells MW-15, MW-16, and MW-17) upgradient of the service stations are proposed in Section 7 .0 Recommendations. TI.I T U U 2 12 2 :: GERAGHTY f-< MILLER. INC - 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the findings and conclusions of this investigation, the following activities are recommended: 1. Four additional monitoring wells should be installed and included in the second monitoring well sampling event. All four proposed monitoring wells should be installed as shallow monitoring wells in accordance with the procedures presented in Appendix E of the Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a). One monitoring well (proposed Monitoring Well MW-15), should be located north of the Texaco Service Station near Boring B-2 to evaluate potential impacts to ground-water quality from the Ramsay Auto property. The BNA compounds reported in the Soil Sample B-2 are indicative of a release of petroleum hydrocarbons. Stained soils near the location of Boring B-2 are also indicative of a release from the 55-gallon drums of waste oil stored at the Ramsay property. Proposed Monitoring Well MW-15 will allow an assessment of ground-water quality south of the drum storage area and the underground storage tank located beneath the Ramsay maintenance garage. Two monitoring wells should be located in the area northwest of the Esso Service Station, in the Four Winds Shopping Center parking lot, to evaluate potential impacts to the former Western Auto USTs. One of these wells (proposed Monitoring Well MW-17) should be located approximately 100 feet northwest of existing Monitoring Well MW-9S; the other well (proposed Monitoring Well MW-16) should be located approximately 300 feet northwest of Monitoring Well MW-9S, immediately downgradient of the former Western Auto USTs. Soil samples should be collected and analyzed for TCL VOCs, TCL BNAs, and MTBE from the boring for proposed Monitoring Well MW-16 near the former Western Auto USTs. The fourth proposed well (proposed Monitoring Well MW-18) should be located between existing deep Monitoring Wells MW-11 D and GERAGHTY c~ !\1ILLER. l'.':C. rur uu2 J ... ·.·.::.24 7-2 MW-12D. The purpose of proposed Monitoring Well MW-18 is twofold: (1) to evaluate petroleum (i.e., BTEX and BNA) compound concentrations downgradient of Monitoring Wells MW-9 and MW-9S, and (2) to evaluate chlorinated compound concentrations in shallow ground water in an area where deeper monitoring wells indicate the absence of chlorinated compounds. 2. During the second sampling event, all monitoring wells should only be sampled for TCL VOCs, TCL BNAs, MTBE, dissolved metals, and total metals .. 3. The laboratory should try to detect PCE, TCE, and DCE in the sample from Monitoring Well MW-5 during the second sampling event. Due to the presence of high concentrations of other VOCs, high detection limits (500 ppb) for most VOCs were indicated during the first sampling event. PCE and its breakdown products may be present at concentrations below 500 ppb. 4. At the request of the USEPA, Supply Wells VIHA-1 and VIHA-111, located at the housing complex should be sampled during the second monitoring well sampling event, provided the VIHA removes the existing pumps and piping prior to July 1, 1993. Due to inoperative or disconnected pumps, the VIHA I and VIHA III Supply Wells have not been sampled since September 1990 and February 1991, respectively. 5. The distribution of chlorinated compounds in soil and ground water at the Tutu Site indicates that the Esso and Texaco Service Stations are not likely sources of chlorinated VOCs. The chlorinated compounds detected in ground-water samples collected south and southeast of the O'Henri Dry Cleaning property should not be investigated further by the TEIC because the source is clearly not associated with the Esso or Texaco Service Stations. Further evaluation of the distribution of chlorinated and petroleum compounds in ground water north of the O'Henri GERAGHTY f:-< MILLER. INC 7-3 Dry Cleaners should be conducted after the second sampling results for the Tutu Site Monitoring Well System are validated. GERAGHTY,:_";< MILLER. INC - 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY Camp, Dresser & McKee, Federal Programs Corporation (CDM). 1992. Letter to C. Kwan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Re: Technical Memorandum I, April 24, 1992. Cooper, H.H., Jr. and C.E, Jacob. 1946. A Generalized Graphical Method for Evaluating Formation Constants and Summarizing Well Field History. Transactions, American Geophysical Union, vol. 27, no. 4. Donnelly, T.W. 1959. Geology of St. Thomas and St. John, Virgin Islands. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Princeton University, 179 pp. Donnelly, T.W. 1966. Geology of St. Thomas and St. John, Virgin Islands. Caribbean Geologic Investigations. H.H. Hess, ed. Geologic Society of America Memoir 98, pp. 15-121. Garrett, P., M. Moreau, and J.R. Lowry. 1986. Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether as a Groundwater Contaminant. Proceedings of the 1986 Conference on Petroleum and Organic Chemicals in Ground Water, National Water Well Association and American Petroleum Institute, Houston, Texas, pp. 227-238. Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1983. Report on Current Ground Water Conditions in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Prepared for the U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs, April 1983, 80 pp. Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a. Tutu Service Station Investigation Work Plan, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, March 1992. Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992b. Technical Memorandum I, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, April 1992. Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992c. Seventh Sampling Report, September 1992, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, December 1992. Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992d. Fifth Sampling Report, February 1992, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, May 1992. Graves, R.P., and R. Gonzalez. 1988. Potentiometric Surface of the Turpentine Run Aquifer in the Tutu Area, Eastern St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, September 11, 1987. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigation Report 88-4131. Jordan, D.G., and 0.J. Cosner. 1973. A Survey of the Water Resources of St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 55 pp. GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. - 8-2 Kruseman, G.P., and N.A. De Ridder. 1979. Analysis and Evaluation of Pumping Test Data, Bulletin II, International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvements, Wageningen, Netherlands, 200 pp. Neuman, S.P. 1975. Analysis of pumping test data from anisotropic unconfined aquifers considering delayed yield, Water Resources Research, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 329-342. NUS Corporation. 1989. Final Draft, Preliminary Assessment, Gassett Motors, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, March 24, 1989. R. Lopez De Azua & Associates. 1992. Topographic and Planimetric Survey of Approximately 100 Acres Located at the New Tutu Section, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, November 2, 1992. Stevens, K.E., F. G6mez-G6mez, and J. Alicia. 1981. Water Wells in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Pt. 1, St. Thomas,. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 82-82. Theis, C. V. 1935. The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using groundwater storage, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, vol. 16, pp. 519-524. Thomey, N., D. Bratberg, and C. Kalisz. 1989. A Comparison of Methods for Measuring Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil. Proceedings of the Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Organic Chemicals in Groundwater; Prevention, Detection, and Restoration, Houston, Texas. National Water Well Association. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. 1985. Groundwater Manual, 480 pp. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1989a. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume 1, Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part A). Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1989b. Method 524.2, Measurement of Purgeable Organic Compounds in Water by Capillary Column Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry, Revision 3.0, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1989. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1990a. USEPA Contract Laboratory Program, Statement of Work for Organic Analysis, Multi-Media, Multi-Concentration, Document Number OLM 01.0, Revised December 1990 and February 1991. USEPA Contract Laboratory Program, Washington, D.C. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1990b. Statement of Work for Inorganics Analysis (Multi-media, Multi-concentration), Document Number ILMOl .1, March 1990. -,·ur GERAGHTY & MlLLER. INC - 8-3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1991a. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual Supplemental Guidance "Standard Default Exposure Factors" Interim Final. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, OSWER Directive 9285.6-03, March 25, 1991. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1991b. Hazardous Ranking System (HRS) Documentation Record, Tutu Wellfield, April 1991. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1991c. National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review, Draft Version December 1990, Revised June 1991. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1992. Personal Communication from C. Kwan, USEPA Project Manager, with the Tutu Environmental Investigation Committee and Geraghty & Miller, Inc., May 5, 1992. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1992. Hazardous Ranking System, 40 CFR, Part 300, Appendix A. PR01301-WP4\TMII93.RPT:df GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. Table 2-1. Soil Boring Details, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Top of Boring Total Depth Bedrock Identification Date (ft bis) (ft bis) Remarks B-1 7/3'>/Cn. 10.3 10.3 Split-spoon refusal B-2 8/3/Cn. 3.5 3.5 Split-spoon refusal B-3 8/3/Cn. 3.3 3.3 Split-spoon refusal B-4 6/9/Cn. 10.8 10.8 Split-spoon refusal B-5 8/13/Cn. 2.8 2.8 Split-spoon refusal B-6 700/Cn. 7.3 7.3 Split-spoon refusal B-7 7131/Cn. 4.0 3.0 Auger refusal B-8 8/12/Cn. 3.6 3.6 Split-spoon and auger refusal B-9 7/29/Cn. 5.1 5.1 Split-spoon refusal B-10 8/10/Cn. 8.0 Not encountered Water encountered at 7.9 feet B-11 8/10/Cn. 3.5 3.5 Split-spoon and auger refusal B-12 8/11/Cn. 8.4 8.4 Split-spoon and auger refusal B-13 8/10/Cn. 6.4 6.4 Split-spoon refusal B-13A 8/12/Cn. 2.0 Not encountered Sample for risk assessment B-14 8/14/Cn. 3.2 3.2 Split-spoon refusal B-15 8/14/Cn. 2.2 2.2 Split-spoon refusal B-16 8/14/Cn. 3.7 3.7 Split-spoon refusal fl bis Feel below land surface. l'ROllOI -TVI 10!91. WK.I TUT GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. ( Table 2-2. Monitoring Well Construction Details, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Screened Top of Casing Total Borehole Well IntervaV Top of Depth to Top Well Date Elevation Depth Casing Depth Open borehole Top of Sand Bentonite of Bedrodc Identification Installed (ft above msl) (ft bis) (ft bis) (ft bis) (ft bis) (ft bis) (ft bis) Shallow MW-I 6t30m 195.08 46.0 43.6 23.6-43.6 21.1 19.1 1.8 MW-2 fY25m I 78.15 28.0 27.0 7.0-27.0 5.0 3.0 3.1 MW-3 <illm 181.84 34.0 30.4 10.4-30.4 8.4 6.4 2.4 MW-4 <¥I1m 175.66 28.0 27.0 7.0-27.0 5.0 3.0 8.7 MW-5 fY25m 187.09 40.8 39.0 19.0-39.0 17.0 15.0 4.8 MW-6R 9{]J92 171.17 23.7 22.7 2.7-22.7 1.6 0.8 seeMW-6D MW-7 1129m 180.13 39.6 35.4 15.4-35.4 12.8 l 1.0 15.0 MW-8 7/2'31'12 167.54 26.0 25.5 5.5-25.5 3.0 1.5 8.3 MW-9 7130m 16226 34.3 34.l 14.1-34.) 11.8 10.0 5.0 MW-9S Wl4m 16237 21.0 18.7 8.7-18.7 6.7 5.7 see MW-9 MW-JO fYlom 161.50 36.7 35.6 15.6-35.6 13.0 11.0 2.9 MW-14 1nm 196.12 48.0 45.2 25.2-45.2 22.4 19.8 3.0 Deep MW-ID 7/8192 )95.14 90.0 70.0 70.0-90.0 NA NA 2.8 MW-4D <¥11m I 76.02 71.0 47.7 47.7-71.0 NA NA 10.7 MW-6D w1om 171.01 65.0 45.0 45.0-65.0 NA NA 4.92 MW-I0D s-19m 161.38 75.) 55.l 55.)-75.1 NA NA 1.7 MW-llD 1120m 153.22 74.3 53.0 53.0-74.3 NA NA 10.2 MW-12D 7/2'31'12 161.81 88.0 80.5 60.5-80.5 56.4 54.0 5.9 MW-13D 7/lSm 236.60 120.0 100.0 100.0-120.0 NA NA 5.0 --; Not applicable. ,- msl Feet above mean sea level. --; Feet below land surface. ~ Replacement well for MW-6. '' Additional shallow well at MW-9 location. I-·: ,w monitoring wells are constructed of 4-inch diameter, stainless-steel casing and screen (0.020-inch slot). wells arc constnlcted with 6-inch diameter, stainless-steel casing above the open borehole interval, except MW-12D. ;---- !:> was completed as a shallow monitoring well, with screened casing, to prevent cave-in of weathered material encountered '. 1_.·.· illing. /103092.llltJ GERAGHTY fr? MILLER. INC ( Table 2-3 .. Water-Level Measurements in Shallow Wells, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. MW-1 MW-2 MW-3 Meuuring Water-Level Measuring Water-Level Measuring Water- Level Point Elevation DTW Elevation Point Elevation DTW Elevation Point Elevation DTW Elevation Date (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) (ft above msl) (rt) (ft above msl) 9/10/92 195.08 30.08 165.00 178.15 13.60 164.55 181.84 17.40 164.44 9/17/92 195.08 29.88 165.20 178.15 13.so• 164.65 181.84 17.44 164.40 9/28/92 195.08 27.60 167.48 178.15 12.74 165.41 181.84 16.51 165.33 10/28/92 195.08 26.10 168.98 178.15 10.82 167.33 181.84 14.36 167.48 11/09/92 195.08 25.11 169.97 178.15 10.32 167.83 181.84 13.79 168.05 11/16/92 195.08 24.89 170.19 178.15 10.18 167.97 181.84 13.49 168.35 ft above msl Feet above mean sea level. DTW Depth to water . • Water level measured on September 18, 1992. •• Water level measured on October 29, 1992 NM Not measured. NI Not installed. NA Not available. Tti- -Aft<uring point for shallow monitoring wells is the top of the casing. -~ PR ·~-i IALLOW,WICJ GERAGHTY c.f MILLER. INC ( ( Table 2-3. Water-Level Measurements in Shallow Wells, Tutu Service Station Investigation, SL Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. MW-4 MW-5 MW-6R Measuring Water-Level Measuring Water-Level Measuring Water-Level Date Point Elevation DTW Elevation Point Elevation DTW Elevation Point Elevation DTW Elevation (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) 9/10/92 175.66 11.64 164.02 187.09 NM NM 171.17 8.22 162.95 9/17/92 175.66 11.62 164.04 187.09 23.68 163.41 171.17 8.20 162.97 9/28/92 175.66 10.84 164.82 187.09 22.83 164.26 171.17 7.52 163.65 10/28/92 175.66 8.80 166.86 187.09 20.76 .. 166.33 171.17 5.98 165.19 11/09/92 175.66 8.36 167.30 187.09 20.29 166.80 171.17 5.68 165.49 11/16/92 175.66 8.09 167.57 187.09 19.93 167.16 171.17 5.51 165.66 ft above msl Feet above mean sea level. DTW Depth to water. • Water level measured on September 18, 1992 . •• Water level measured on October 29, 1992. NM Not measured. NI Not installed. NA Not available. The measuring point for shallow monitoring wells is the top of the casing. Pl HAU.OW.WU _ _, GERAGHTY tt? MIU.ER. INC. ( ( Table 2-3. Water-Level Measurements in Shallow Wells, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Date 9/10/92 9/17/92 9/28/92 10/28/92 11/09/92 11/16/92 ft above msl DTW • •• NM NI NA The ,- MW-7 Measuring Point Elevation DTW ((t above msl) (rt) 180.13 17.58 180.13 17.60 180.13 17.00 180.13 15.80 180.13 15.56 180.13 15.46 Feet above mean sea level. Depth to water. Water-Level Elevation (rt above msl) 162.55 162.53 163.13 164.33 164.57 164.67 Water level measured on September 18, 1992 . Water level measured on October 29, 1992 Not measured. Not installed. Not available. 11g point for shallow monitoring wells is the top or the casing. PROl3C .OW.WU ..;:::, MW-8 Measuring Water-Level Point Elevation DTW Elevation (ft above msl) (ft) (rt above msl) 167.54 17.96 149.58 167.54 NM NM 167.54 17.03 150.51 167.54 12.00 155.54 167.54 12.57 154.97 167.54 12.20 155.34 MW-9 Measuring Water-Level Point Elevation DTW Elevation ((I above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) 162.26 NM NM 162.26 12.56 149.70 162.26 12.49 149.77 162.26 11.33 150.93 162.26 NM NM 162.26 10.95 151.31 GERAGHTY{« MILIXR. IN<·. ( ( Page4 of4 Table 2-3. Water-Level Measurements in Shallow Wells, Tutu Service Station Investigation, SL Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. MW-9S MW-10 MW-14 Measuring Water-Level Measuring Water-Level Measuring Water-Level Date Point Elevation DTW Elevation Point Elevation DTW Elevation Point Elevation DTW Elevation (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) 9/10/92 162.37 NI NA 161.50 20.66 140.84 196.12 28.08 168.04 9/17/92 162.37 13.22 149.15 161.50 20.70 140.80 196.12 27.98 168.14 9/28/92 162.37 13.11 149.26 161.50 20.52 140.98 196.12 26.96 169.16 10/28/92 162.37 10.92 151.45 161.50 17.66 143.84 196.12 25.00 171.12 11/09/92 162.37 10.94 151.43 161.50 17.42 144.08 196.12 24.29 171.83 11/16/92 162.37 10.47 151.90 161.50 16.72 144.78 196.12 24.24 171.88 fl above msl Feet above mean sea level. DTW Depth to water. • Water level measured on September 18, 1992 . •• Water level measured on October 29, 1992 NM Not measured. NI Not installed. NA Not available. The "'easuring point for shallow monitoring wells is the top of the casing. C:. 'SHALLOW.WU '· GERAGHTY {t? MILLER. INC. ( Table 2-4. Water-Level Measurements in Deep Wells, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. MW-10 Measuring Water- Level Date Point Elevation DTW Elevation (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) 9/10/92 195.14 31.48 163.66 9/17/92 195.14 31.00 164.14 9/28/92 195.14 29.98 165.16 10/28/92 195.14 50.90 144.24 11/09/92 195.14 NM NM 11/16/92 195.14 44.75 150.39 ft above msl Feet above mean sea level. DTW Depth to water. NM Not measured. The measuring point for deep monitoring wells is the top of the casing. PR0UOI- 'U -t -. ..... · f-. ·: '·-'· MW-4D Measuring Water- Level Point Elevation DTW Elevation (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) 176.02 12.32 163.70 176.02 12.32 163.70 176.02 11.44 164.58 176.02 9.50 166.52 176.02 9.50 166.52 176.02 8.78 167.24 ( MW-6D Measuring Water-Level Point Elevation DTW Elevation (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) 171.01 8.02 162.99 171.01 8.04 162.97 171.01 7.34 163.67 171.01 5.78 165.23 171.01 5.52 165.49 171.01 5.32 165.69 GERAGHTY 6< MILLER. INC ( ( Page2 of 3 Table 2-4. Water-Level Measurements in Deep Wells, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. MW-lOD MW-llD MW-12D Measuring Water-Level Measuring Water-Level Measuring Water-Level Date Point Elevation DTW Elevation Point Elevation DTW Elevation Point Elevation DTW Elevation (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) (ft above msl) (ft) (ft above msl) 9/10/92 161.38 20.96 140.42 153.22 20.40 132.82 161.81 28.94 132.87 9/17/92 161.38 21.06 140.32 153.22 17.94 135.28 161.81 26.88 134.93 9/28/92 161.38 20.98 140.40 153.22 18.94 134.28 161.81 27.72 134.09 10/28/92 161.38 17.84 143.54 153.22 16.66 136.56 161.81 24.94 136.87 11/09/92 161.38 17.88 143.50 153.22 16.51 136.71 161.81 24.29 137.52 11/16/92 161.38 17.26 144.12 153.22 15.43 137.79 161.81 23.69 138.12 ft above msl Feet above mean sea level. DTW Depth to water. NM Not measured. The measuring point for deep monitoring wells is the top of the casing. pp· .. --")l!l!P.WIO --l '-- GERAGHTY 8 MILLER. INC Table 2-4. Water-Level Measurements in Deep Wells, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Date 9/10/92 9/17/92 9(28/92 10(28/92 11/09/92 11/16/92 ft above msl DTW NM MW-13D Measuring Point Elevation DTW (ft above msl) (ft) 236.60 97.32 236.60 86.76 236.60 83.08 236.60 95.34 236.60 92.40 236.60 90.86 Feet above mean sea level. Depth to water. Not measured. Water-Level Elevation (ft above msl) 139.28 149.84 153.52 141.26 144.20 145.74 The measuring point for deep monitoring wells is the top of the casing. PR "t!EP.WU C ,-._ Page3 of3 GERAGHTY 8 MILLER. INC. Table 2-5. Ground-Water Elevation Comparison of Monitoring Well Clusters, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Ground-Water Elevations (feet above mean sea level) Well Date of Identification Development 9/10/92 9/17/92 9/'22,/92 10/'22,/92 11/9/92 11/16/92 MW-1 8/29/92 165.00 165.20 167.48 168.98 169.97 170.19 MW-1D 8/'22,/92 163.66 164.14 165.16 144.24 NM 15039 MW-4 8/24/92 164.02 164.04 164.82 166.86 167.30 167.57 MW-4D 8/24/92 163.70 163.70 164.58 166.52 166.52 167.24 MW-6R 9/9/92 162.95 162.97 163.65 165.19 165.49 165.66 MW-6D 9/2/92 162.99 162.97 163.67 165.23 165.49 165.69 MW-10 9/2/92 140.84 140.80 140.98 143.84 144.08 144.78 MW-10D 9/2/92 140.42 14032 140.40 143.54 143.50 144.12 NM Not measured. PRO 130 l - TI/02D893.wt3ncb GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. ( ( ( Table 2-6. Vertical Gradients of Ground-Water Flow, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Vertical Distance Minimum Maximum Between Center Point Ground-Water Ground-Water Vertical Gradient Well of Screen/Open Interval Elevation Difference Elevation Difference (feet/ feet) Vertical Gradient Pair (feet) (feet) (feet) Minimum Maximum Direction MW-I 46.31 1.06 24.74 0.023 0.534 Strongly Downward MW-lD MW-4 42.05 0.24 0.78 0.0057 0.019 Slightly Downward MW-4D MW-6R 42.48 0.02 0.04 0.00047 0.00094 Horizontal to MW-6D Slightly Upward MW-10 39.34 0.30 0.58 0.008 0.015 Slightly Downward MW-lOD ---------·- -- PRO! 301 .T 1/0l0893a. v.tl/lc b GERAGHTY{,? MILi.FR. INC Table 3-1. Well CHT-6D MW-6D MW-6R ft2/min NA PR0!JOI-Tl/fABJ- 1.WKJ - Summary of Transmissivity and Storativity Values from Aquifer Tests, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Aquifer Test MW-6D MW-6D MW-6R Method Cooper-Jacob Cooper-Jacob Cooper-Jacob Square feet per minute. Not applicable. GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. Transmissivity Values (ft2/min) 8.14 5.225 8.39 Storativity Values (Dimensionless) 0.0007 NA NA TlJf (;i:·1··) .J.:,?-4 .l ( Tahle 4-1. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June lo August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Page I of 4 Islands. Sample ID: B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-S B-6 B-7 B-8 B-8 FR B-9 B-10 B-11 B-11 Depth (4.0-8.0) (0-2.0) (2.0-4.0) (8.0-10.0) (0-2.0) (4.0-8.0) (2.0-4.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (2.0-6.0) (6.0-8 .0) (0-2.0) (6_0-8.0) (in feet) Analyte Date: 30-Jut-92 3-Au1-92 3-Aug-92 9-Jun-92 13-Au1-92 30-Jul-92 31-Jut-92 12-Aug-91 ll-Au1-92 29-Jut-92 10-Aug-92 I0-Au1-92 I I-Aug-92 Chloromcthane 38 U II U II U 12U II U 29U 10 U 11U II U 11 U 12 U 12 U II U Bromomethane 38 U II U 11 U 12 U 11 U 29U IOU 11 U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U Vinyl chloride 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U 10 U 11 U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U Chloroethone 38 UJ II U II U 12 U II U 29U 10 UJ 11 U 11 U II UJ 12 U 12 U II U Methylene chloride 38 U 17 J 261 12 U 91 29U 10 U II UJ II UJ II U 12 UJ 3 J II UJ Acetone 161 14 61 55 J 92 J 370 IOU II UJ II U1 II U 12 U1 26 UJ 13 UJ Carbon disulfide 38 U II U II U 12 UJ II U 29U IOU II U II U 11 U 12 U 12 U II U I, 1-Dichloroethene 38 U II U 11 U 12 U II U 29U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U I , 1-Dichloroethane 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29 U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U 1,2-Dichlorocthcne (cis/trans) 38 U II U 11 U 12 U II U 29U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U Chloroform 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29 U IOU II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U 1,2-Dichloroethane 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U 2-Butimone 38 U II U II U 12 U 18 59 10 U II UJ II UJ II U 12 UJ 12 UJ II UJ I, I, I-Trichloroethane 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U 10 U 11 U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U Carbon tetrachloride 38 U II U 11 U 12 U II U 29U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U Bromodichloromethane 38 U IIU II U 12 U II U 29U IOU IIU II U II U 12 U 12 U II U 1,2-Dichloroforopane 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U IOU II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U cis-1,3-Dich oropropene 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U Trichloroethene 38 U IIU II U 12 U II U 29U 10 U I I U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U Dibromochloromethane 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U I, 1,2-Trichloroethane 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U Benzene 38 U II U 11 U 12 U II U 29U IOU 11 U IIU 11 U 12 U 12 U II U trans- I f3-Dichloropropene 38 U II U II U 12 U 11 U 29U IOU II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U Bromo orm 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U IOU II UJ II UJ II U 12 U1 12 UJ II UJ 2-Hcxanonc 38 U II U 11 U 12 U II U 29U IOU II U1 II UJ II U 12 U1 12 UJ II UJ I, 1,2,2-Tctrachloroethane 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U 10 U 11 U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U Tetra, 1ene 38 U II U 61 12 U 11 U 29U IOU 11 SJ II U 12 U 29 II U Tolue .~-: 38 U II U II U 12 U 2J 29U IOU 41 41 11 U 12 U 31 II U Chlor C 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U IOU II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U ~ Ethyll 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29U 10 U 11 31 II U 12 U 12 U II U Styrer ,:::· 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29 U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U X}'len 38 U II U II U 12 U II U 29 U 10 U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U II U 1,2-D f·.J ltane (ED:.l 19U SU SU 6U 5.7 U IS U 5.2 U 5.8 U 5.5 U 5.3U 5.9 U 6.1 U S.7 U lert-81 yl ether ( TBE) 38 UJ IOUJ 10 UJ 12 UJ 1.3 l 30 UJ 10 UJ 12 UJ 11 UJ II UJ 12 UJ 12 UJ II UJ n-Pror \_.1.. IC 19 UJ S UJ S UJ 6 UJ 5.7 UJ 15 UJ 5.2 UJ 5.8 UJ S.S UJ 5.3 UJ 5.9 UJ 6.1 UJ 5.7 UJ .;::: Analyt Analy1 1trations in microgramsCsr kilogram £arts per billion [ppblk performed by Eriscco- st of Somers , New Jersey, usmg arch 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B is detected in the laborator3 blank. D . ~ identified at a secondary d1 ution. J Result is detected below the ::,rirtin\ limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Comft°u'?d or element analy for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R Rcsu t ~1ected. FR Field rep icate of previous nmple. GERAGHTY(? MILIJ:R. INC ( ( Tah)e 4-1. Concentrations or Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Pagc2of4 Islands. Sample ID: 8-13 8-IJA B-14 B-14 FR B-15 B-16 MW-I MW-ID MW-2 MW-2 FR MW-3 MW-4 MW-4D Depth (4.0-6.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (1.0-2.5) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0.4-2.0) (2.7-4.1) (11.7-10.7) (in feel) Analyte Date: 10-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 30-Jun-92 5-Jun-92 IJ-Aug-92 IJ-Aug-92 10-Jun-92 t6-Jun-92 4-Jun-92 Chloromethane 11.U II U II U II U 12 U II U II UJ II U II U 12 U 12 U 13U R Bromometh1me II U 11 U II U II U 12 U II U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13U R Vinyl chloride It u 11 U II U II U 12 U It u II U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R Chloroethane II U 11 U II U II U 12U JIU II U II U 11 U 12 U 12 U 13 U R Methylene chloride It UJ 11 UJ II U II U 12 U 11 U 2J II U !OJ 10 J I J 2J I J Acetone II UJ 11 UJ 11 UJ II UJ 12 UJ 11 UJ 11 U 49 J 58 J 130 J 11 J 1908 81 J Carbon disulfide II U II U II U II U 12 U II U 11 U II UJ II U 12 U 12 UJ 13 UJ R I, I -Dichloroethene II U 11 U II U II U 12 U 11 U II U II U II U l2U 12 U 13 U R I, 1-Dichloroethane II U II U II U II U 12 U II U 11 U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trans) 11 U II U II U 11 U 12 U II U It U ti u llU 12U 12 U 13 U R Chloroform 11 U II U 11 U 11 U 12 U ll U 11 U II U 11 U 12 U 12 U 13 U R 1,2-Dichloroeth11ne II U II U II U 11 U 12 U II U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R 2-But11none II UJ 11 UJ II U II U 12 U It u II UJ 11 U It u 25 12 U 48 R 1, l, I-Trichloroethane 11 U 11 U II U II U 12 U II U II U II U II U 12 U 12U 13 U R C11rbon tctr11chloride II U 11 U II U 11 U 12 U II U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R Bromodichloromethane II U II U II U II U 12 U II U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R 112-Dichlorofcropane JIU II U 11 U IIU 12U llU II U 11 U 11 U 12 U 12U 13 U R cis-1,3-Dich oropropene II U II U II U 11 U 12 U 11 U II U II U It u 12 U 12 U 13 U R Trichloroethene It u ti u II U 11 U 6J 11 U 11 U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R Dibromochloromethane II U II U II U It u 12U II U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R I, 1,2-Trichloroethane 11 U 11 U II U 11 U 12U 11 U II U II U II U 12U 12 U 13 U R Benzene II U II U II U II U 12 U 11 U II U II U 11 U 12 U 12 U 13 U R trans- I t3-Dichloropropene 11 U 11 U II U II U 12 U 11 U II U II U II U 12U 12 U 13 U R Bromo orm II U II U II U II U 12 U II U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R 4-Methyl-2-pentanone II UJ II UJ 11 U 11 U 12 U ti u II UJ II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R 2-Hexanone II UJ 11 UJ II U 11 U 12 U II U II U II U ti u 12 U 12 U 13 U R I, 1,2,2-Tetrachlorocthane II U II U II U II U 12 U 11 U II UJ II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R Tetrachlorocthene 2000 IS 72 J IOOJ 170 23 II U II U II U 12 U 2J I J R Toluene II U II U 2J 3J 12 tlJ II U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R Chlorobenzene It u II U II U II U 12 U It u II U II U JIU 12 U 12 U 13 U R Ethyl' II U IIU II U II U 12 U II U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R Styrt ~ II U II U II U II U 12 U II U II U II U II U 12 U 12 U 13 U R X)'le1 ,- I II U II U It u II U 12 U It u II U II U IIU 12U 12 U 13 U R ,_ 1,2-[ thane (ED~ S.7 U 5.4 U S.7 U S.1 U 6U S.6U S.8 U S.6 U S.7 U 6U S.9 U 6.3 U R tert-E 1yl ether ( TBE) II UJ II UJ 11 UJ II UJ 12 UJ 11 UJ 12 U 11 UJ 11 UJ 12 UJ 12 UJ 13 U R n-Pro ,. 5.7 UJ ·- ne S.4 UJ S.1 UJ S.1 UJ 6 UJ S.6 UJ S.8 UJ 5.6 UJ S.7 UJ 6UJ 5.9 UJ 6.3 UJ R Analy ;~.,.:. ntrations in microgramsc.r kilogram ~arts ~r billion [ppbi Analy r<: performed by Enseco- st of Somers , New Jcncy, usmg arch 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. 8 .p is detected in the laboratofn blank. D (.-~ identified at a secondary d ution. J 1 detected below the :rirtint limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u t~d or clement analy for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R ~~ed. FR p · le of p~iou, nmplc. GERAGHTY ft? MILLER. INC ( ( Table 4-1. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Analyte Chloromethane Bromomethanc Vinyl chloride Chloroethane Methylene chloride Acetone Carbon disulfide I, 1-Dichloroethene Sample JD: MW-5 Depth (0-4.0) (in feet) Date: l 1-Aug-92 II U llU II U ll U II UJ I, 1-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/tmns) l l UJ II U II U II U II U Chloroform 1,2-Dichloroethane 2-Butnnone I, I, I-Trichloroethane Carbon tetrachloride Bromodichloromethane 1,2-Dichloropropane cis-1,3-Dichloropropene T richlorocthene Dibromochloromcthane I, 1,2-Trichloroethane Benzene trans- I l3-Dichloropropenc Bromo1orm 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 2-Hexanone I, 1,2,2-Tetrachlorocthane Tetrachloroethcne Toluene Chlorobenzene Ethylben"'""'" Styrene ~ Xylenes r 1,2-Dib _ __, ne (EDB) tert-But: ether (MTBE) n-Propy ;..·· II U ll U II UJ ll U ll U llU llU 11 U ll U II U II U II U II U II U II UJ II UJ II U ll U II U II U II U IIU II U 5.JU II UJ S.3 UJ MW-6 (0-2.0) 21-Jul-92 II U II U II U 11 U 22 22 U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U 11 U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U 61 11 U II U II U II U II U s.s u II UJ S.S UJ MW-6D (0-2.0) 6-Aug-92 II U II U II U II U 11 UJ 6J II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U 5.3 U II UJ S.3 UJ MW-7 (14.0- 16.0) l6-Jul-92 IOU IOU IOU IOU 12 17 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 5U 10 UJ 5 UJ MW-7 FR (14.0- 16.0) l6-Jul-92 IOU JO u IOU IOU 18 16 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U JO u IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 5.2 U IOUJ 5.2 UJ MW-8 (2.0-4.0) 20-Jul-92 II U llU II U 11 U 25 27 U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U 2J I J II U II U 11 U II U 5.6U II UJ S.6 UJ MW-9 (0-4.0) 24-Jul-92 II U II U II U 11 U 18 U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U 11 U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U SU IOU SU MW-10 (2.0-4.0) 4-Aug-92 II U II U II U 11 U 17 J 35 II U II U II U II U II U ll U 5 J II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U SU IOUJ 5 UJ Analytc Analyst ,.... rations in micrograms_pcr kilogram (farts ~r billion [ppbll. icrfonned by Enseco-East of Somenc , New Jency, usmg March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B .;::, D ..r.:, J u R FR s detected in the laboratoa blank. dcntified at a secondary dilution. detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. ~ o!ctlement anatyzea for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. lf:te of prcviou, ,ample. MW-10D (0-2.0) 4-Aug-92 II U II U II U 11 U 20J 11 U II U II U II U 11U II U II U II U II U 11 U 11 U II U llU 11 U 11 U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U I J II U II U II U 11 U 5.5 U 11 UJ S.5 UJ MW-IID (10.0- ll.0) 26-Jun-92 11 U II U II U II U 4J II U II UJ II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U 11 U II U ll U II U II U II U 11 U II U II U II U II U I J II U II U II U II U 5.5 U 11 U S.5 UJ MW-120 (4.0-6.0) 6-Jul-92 llU II U II U 11 U 18 U 12 U 11 U II U II U IIU II U 11 U II U II U II U II U ll U 11 U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U 11 U II U II U II U II U 5.4 U II U 5.4 U MW-13D (4.0-6.0) 19-Jun-92 11 U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U 11 U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U II U 11 U II U II U II U II U II U II U 5.4 U 11 U 5.4 U GERAGHTY c-r MILLER. INC. MW-14 (0-2.0) l-Jul-92 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 34 B 16 U 12 U 12 U 12 lJ 12U 12 U 12U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 U 12 \J 12 U 12 U 2J 12 U 12 U 12 U I J 5.9 U 12 U 5.9 U Table 4-1. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: SS-3 SS-4 SS-5 SS.{i SS-6 FR Depth (in feet) Analyte Dale: 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 l9-Aug-92 Chloromclhane 13 U llU 11 U llU 12 U Bromomelhane 13 U 11 U 11 U 11 U 12 U Vinyl chloride 13 U 11 U 11 U 11 U 12 U Chloroethane 13 U 11 U 11 U 11U 12U Methylene chloride 22 BJ 10 J 22 20 Acetone 13 U 11 U 11 U II U 12 U Carbon disulfide 13 U 11 U II U 11 U 12U I, 1-Dichloroethene 13 U 11 U 11 U II U 12 U I, l-Dichloroethane 13 U llU 11 U II U l2U 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trans) 13 U II U II U II U 12 U Chloroform 13 U 11 U 11 U 11 U 12 U 1,2-Dichloroelhanc 13 U II U 11 U IIU 12U 2-Butanone 35 11 U II U 11 U 12 U I , I , I-Trichloroethane 13 U II U II U 11 U 12U Carbon tetrachloride 13 U II UJ 11 UJ 11 U 12 U Bromodichloromethane 13 U IIU II U II U 12 U 112-Dichloroforopane 13 U IIU II U 11 U 12 U cis-1,3-Dich oropropene 13 U 11 U 11 U IIU 12 U Trichlorocthene 13 U 11 U II U II U 12 U Dibromochloromethane 13 U IIU II U 11 U 12 U I, 1,2-Trichlorocthane 13 U 11U II U IIU 12 U Benzene 13 U 11 U II U II U 12 U trans- I {.3-Dichloropropene 13 U 11 U II U II U 12 U Bromo orm 13 U II U 11 U II U 12 U 4-Mcthyl-2-pentanone 13 U II U 11 U II U 12 U 2-He;11anone 13 U II U 11 U II U 12 U I, I ,2,2-Tetrachlorocthane 13 U 11 U II U II U 12 U T etrachlorocthene 13 U 11 U 11 U I J 12 U Toluene 4J 11 U 11 U II U 12 U Chlorobenzene 13 U 11 U II U II U 12 U Ethylben1.cne 3J 11 U II U II U 12 U Styrene 13 U I I U II U II U 12 U X)'.lenes (total) 19 II U 11 U II U 12 U 1,2-Dibromocthane (ED~ 6.4 U 5.5 U s.s u 5.7 U S.8 U tert-Butyl methyl ether ( TBE) 13 UJ II UJ 11 UJ II UJ 12 UJ n-Propylbentene 6.4 UJ S.5 UJ s.s UJ 5.7 UJ 5.8 UJ Analyte concentrations in micmgrams__pcr kilogram (parts per billion (ppbl). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somend, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B D J u R FR Analyte is detected in the laborato!'Y blank. Analyte identified at a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the ~rting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compound or clement analyzca for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. ResuJt rejected. Field replicate of previou1 sample. GERAGHTY{,? MILLER. INC Table 4-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 B-8 B-8 FR B-9 B-10 B-11 B-12 Depth (4.0-8.0) (0-2.0) (2.0-4.0) (8.0-10.0) (0-2.0) (4.0-8.0) (2.0-4.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (2.0~.0) (6.0-8.0) (0-2.0) (6.0-8.0) (in feet) Analyte Date: 30-Jul-92 3-Aug-92 3-Aug-92 9-Jun-92 13-Aug-92 30-Jul-92 31-Jul-92 12-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 29-Jul-92 10-Aug-92 10-Aug-92 l l-Aug-92 Acenaphthene 1300 U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U Acenaphthylene 1300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U Anthraccne 1300 U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U Carbnzole 1300 U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U Benzo(a)anthracene l300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 180 J 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U Benzor)flrene 1300U 2701 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340U 2001 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U Benzo b) uoranthene 1300 U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 2501 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U Benzo r,h,i)perylene 1300 U 2901 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 84 J 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U Ben1.0 )fluoranthene 1300 UJ 1400 U1 380 UJ 390 U 370 UJ 820 UJ 340 UJ 96 J 350 U 350 UJ 390 UJ 400 U1 380 U 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 1300 U 1400U 380 U1 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U Bt~I ben1.yl phthalate 1300U l400U 380 U 390 U 370U 820U 340 U 370U 350 UJ 350 U 220 J 400U 380 U1 4- loronniline 1300U 1400 UJ 380 U 390 U 370 U1 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U hisr-Chloroethoxy)methane 1300 U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U bis 2-Chloroethyl)ether 1300 U l400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U his 2-Chloroisopropyl)ether l300U l400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370U 340 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U 4-Chloro-3-met~lphenol IJOOU l400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U 2-Chloronaphth enc 1300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U 2-Chlorophenol 1300 U l400U 380 U 390U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 1300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U Chrysene 1300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 2101 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U Di-n-hutyl ~hthalate 1300 U l400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 1601 400 U 380 U Dihenz(a,h anthracene 1300 U l400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400U 380 U Dibenzofuran l300U l400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U 1,2-Dichlorobenzene IJOOU 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370U 350U 350 U 390U 400 U 3SO U 1,3-Dichlorobenzene l300U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400U 380 U 1,4-Dichlorobenzene l300U l400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U 3,3 '-Dichlorobenzidine l300U 1400 U 380 U R 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U 2,4-Dichlorophenol 1300 U l400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U Diet~I phthalate 1300U l400U 380 U 390U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U 2,4- imethylphenol 1300 U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U Dimethyl phthalate 1300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U 4 ,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 3100U 3400 U 910 U 950 U 9l0U 2000U 830 U 910 U 850 U 840 U 940 U 980 U 920 U 2,4-Dinitrophenol 3100 U 3400 U 910 U 950 U 9l0U 2000 U 830 U 910 U 850 U 840 U 940 UJ 980 UJ 920 lJ 2,4-Dinitrotoluene l300U l400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 1300 U l400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U Di-n-oct ~hthalate 1300U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U1 350 U 390 UJ 400 U1 380 l)J bis(2-Et 1yl exyl)phthalate 1300 U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 UJ 220J 390 U 400 U 380 UJ Fluoranlliene 1300 U 1400 U 380 U 390U 370 U 820 U 340 U 2901 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U Analyte concentrations in microgram~ kilogram (parts per billion [ppbu. Analyses were performed by Enseco- of Somerset, New Jersey, usmg arch 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B AnalJte is detected in the laboratory blank. J Resu t i1 detected below the :3ort1nl limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Com~u~d or element analy for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R Resu t r~~ed. FR Field rep lcate of previous sample. GERAGHTY 8 MILLER. INC ·r1..J -r !.)()'~/ :L>'.t\b ( Table 4-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Page: 2 of 8 Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 B-8 B-8 FR B-9 B-10 B-11 B-12 Depth (4.0-8.0) (0-2.0) (2.0-4.0) (8.0-10.0) (0-2.0) (4.0-8.0) (2.0-4.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (2.0-6.0) (6.0-8.0) (0-2.0) (6.0-8.0) (in feel) Analyte Date: 30-Jul-92 3-Aug-92 3-Aug-92 9-Jun-92 13-Aug-92 30-Jul-92 31-Jul-92 12-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 29-Jul-92 10-Aug-92 10-Aug-92 1 I-Aug-92 Fluorenc: l300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350U 390 U 400 U 380 U Hexachlorobenzcne 1300U 1400 U 380UJ 390U 370UJ 820U 340U 370U 350U 350U 390U 400U 380U Hc:x11chlorobut11diene 1300 U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 UJ 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U Hc:xachlorocyclopcntadic:ne 1300U 1400 U 380 U 390 UJ 370 UJ 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U Hc:xachloroethane 1300U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U lndc:no( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 87 J 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U lsophoronc: 1300U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U 2-Mc:thylnaphthalc:ne l300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U 2-Methylphenol 1300U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U 4-Mc:thylphenol 1300U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 UJ 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 UJ N~hthalene 1300U 1400U 380U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370U 350 U 350U 390U 400U 380 U 2- itroanilinc: 3100U 3400 U 910 U 950 U 910U 2000 U 830 U 910U 850 U 840 U 940U 980 U 920 U 3-Nitroaniline 3100U 3400 UJ 910U 9S0 U 910 UJ 2000 U 830 U 910U 850 U 840U 940U 980 U 920 U 4-Nitroaniline 3100U 3400 U 910 UJ 950 U 910 U 2000 U 830 U 910U 850 U 840U 940U 980U 920U Nitrobenzene l300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U 2-Nitrophenol 1300U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 3S0 U 390U 400 U 380 U 4-Nitrophenol 3100U 1400 U 910U 950 U 910 U 2000 U 830 U 910 UJ 850 UJ 840 U 940U 980 U 920 UJ N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 1300U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 3S0 U 3S0 U 390 U 400 U 380 U N-Nitroso-d1-n-propyl11mine l300U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 370 U 350 U 3S0 U 390U 400 U 380 U Pcntachlorophenol 3100U 3400 U 910U 9SOU 910U 2000U 830 U 910U 8S0 U 840 U 940U 980 U 920 U Phenanthrenc 1300 U 1400U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 1601 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U Phenol 1300U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 UJ 350 U 390U 400 U 380 UJ Pyrene 1300U 220J 380U 390 U 370 U 820U 340 U 300J 350 UJ 350U 390U 400 U 380 UJ 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzcne 1300 U 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 400 U 380 U 2,4 ,5-Trichlorophenol JIOOU 3400 U 910 U 9S0 U 910 UJ 2000U 830 U 910 U 850 U 840 U 940 U 980 U 920 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol IJOOU 1400 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 820 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 400 U 380 U Analyte concentrations in micrograms_pcr kilogram (par1s per billion [ppbl). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somend, New Jersey, usmg March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analyte is detected in the laboratory blank. J Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. U Compou~d or element analyzed for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R Result rcJected. FR Field replicate of prcviou1 umple. GERAGHTY c,.;, MILLER. INC. TUT ( Table 4-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: B-13 B-13A B-14 B-14 FR B-15 B-16 MW-I MW-ID MW-2 MW-2 FR MW-3 MW-4 MW-4D Depth (4.~.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (1.0-2.5) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0.4-2.0) (2. 7-4. 7) (8.7-10.7) (in feet) Analyte Date: 10-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 30-Jun-92 5-Jun-92 13-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 10-Jun-92 16-Jun-92 4-Jun-92 Acenaphthcne 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 390 U Acenaphthylene 380 U 350U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420U 390 U Anthracene 380U 350U 370U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 390 U Carba1.ole 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390U 420 U 390 U Bcnzo(a)anthracene 380 U 350U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420U 390 U Bcnzor)V?.rcnc 380U 350U 370U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 140 J 390 U Bcnzo b) uoranthene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 390 U Benzo f ,h,i)pcrylene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 390 U Benzo )fluoranthene 380 UJ 350 U 370 UJ 380 UJ 390 UJ 370 UJ 380 U 370 U 380 UJ 400 UJ 390 U 420 U 390 U 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 380 UJ 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380U 370U 380 U 400U 390U 420U 390 U B'al benzyl phthalate 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 58 J 380U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 390 U 4- loronniline 380 U 350 U 370 UJ 380 UJ 390 UJ 370 UJ 380 U 370 U 380 UJ 400 UJ 390 U 420 U 390 U bisr•Chloroethoxy)methane 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420U 390U bis 2-Chloroethyl)ether 380 U 350U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420U 390 U bis 2-Chloroisopropyl)ether 380U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380U 400U 390 U 420U 390U 4-Chloro-3-methr,lphenol 380 U 350U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 390 U 2-Chloronaphtha enc 380U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420U 390 U 2-Chlorophenol 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420U 390 U 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 380 U 350 U 370 U 380U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420U 390 U Chrysene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420U 390 U Di-n-butyl fihthalate 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 170 J 1900 U 390 U Dibenz(a,h 11nthracene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 390 U Dibenzofuran 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 390 U 1,2-Dichlorobcnzene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380U 390 U 370U 380 U 370U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 390U 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 390 U 1,4-Dichlorohcnzene 380 U 350U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420U 390 U 3 ,3 '-Dichlorobenzidine 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U R 380 U 400U 390 UJ 420 UJ R 2 ,4-Dichlorophenol 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 390 U DietWil phthalate 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370U 380 U 400U 390 U 420U 390 lJ 2,4- imethylphenol 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 390 U Dimethyl phthalatc 380 U 350U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 390 U 4 ,6-Dinitro-2-mcthylphenol 910U 840U 910 U 920 U 950U 890 U 920 U 890 U 910 U 960 U 950 U 1000 U 950 lJ 2,4-Dinitrophenol 910 U 840 U 910 U 920 U 950 lJ 890 U 920 U 890 U 910 U 960 U 950 U 1000 U 950 U 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 lJ 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 390 U 2 ,6-Dinitrotoluene 380 U 3.S0U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420U 390 lJ Di-n-oct ~hthalatc 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 390 U bis(2-El yl exyl)phthalate 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 390 lJ Fluoranthcne 42 J 350U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370U 380 U 370U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 390 U Analyte concentrations in microgram~ kilogram (parts per billion [ppbJJ Analyses were performed by Enscco- of Somerset, New Jersey, usmg arch 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analrite is detected in the laboratory blank. J Resu tis detected below the :r,rtm! limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Comrund or element analy for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R Rcsu t rejected. FR Field reo lcate nr n....,1---- - • .T tJ·r () () ~;? l ?'IH GERAGHTY e MILLER. INC ( Table 4-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: B-13 B-13A B-14 B-14FR B-IS B-16 MW-I MW-ID Depth (4.0-6.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (1.0-2.S) (in feet) Analyte Date: 10-Aug-91 12-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 14-Aug-91 14-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 30-Jun-92 5-Jun-92 Fluorcne 380U 350 U 370 U 380U 390 U 370U 380 U 370 U Hexachlorobenzene 380 UJ 350 U 370 UJ 380 UJ 390 UJ 370 UJ 380 U 370 U Hexachlorobutadiene 380 U 340 U 370 UJ 380 UJ 390 UJ 370 UJ 380 U 370 U Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 380 U 350 U 370 UJ 380 UJ 390 UJ 370 UJ 380 UJ 370 UJ Hexachlorocthane 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U lndeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U lsophorone 380U 350U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 2-Methylnaphthalene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 2-Mcthylphenol 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370U 4-Methylphenol 380 U 350 U 370 U 380U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370U N'tfhthalene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 2- itroaniline 910U 840 U 910 U 920 U 950 U 890 U 920 U 890 U 3-Nitroaniline 910U 840 U 910 UJ 920 UJ 950 UJ 890 UJ 920 U 890U 4-Nitroaniline 910 UJ 840 U 910 U 920U 950U 890U 920U 890 U N itrobenzene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 2-Nitrophenol 380U 350 U 370U 380U 390 U 370U 380U 370U 4-Nitrophenol 910U 840 UJ 910U 920 U 950U 870 U 920 UJ 890U N-Nitrosodjf henylamine 380 U 350 U 370 U 380U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370U N-Nitroso- 1-n-propylamine 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U Pentachlorophenol 910U 840 U 910 U 920U 950 U 890U 920 U 890U Phenanthrene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U Phenol 380 U 350U 370 U 380U 390 U 370U 380U 370U Pyrene 380 U 350 UJ 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 380 U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 910 U 840 U 910 UJ 920 UJ 950 UJ 890 UJ 920 U 890 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 380U 350 U 370 U 380 U 390 U 370 U 380 U 370 U Analyte concentrations in micrograms_pcr kilogram (paJ1s ~r billion [ppbl). Analyses were performed by Enscco-East of Somersd, New Jersey, usmg March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B J u R FR Analyte is detected in the laboratory blank. Result is detected below the repoJ1mg limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compou~ or element analyzed for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Result rejected. Field replicate of previous sample. MW-2 MW-2 FR MW-3 MW-4 (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0.4-2.0) (2.7-4.7) 13-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 10-Jun-91 16-Jun-92 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 380 UJ 400 UJ 390U 420 U 380 UJ 400 UJ 390U 420 U 380 UJ 400 UJ 390UJ 420 UJ 380 U 400U 390U 420 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 380U 400U 390U 420 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 380 U 400U 390U 420U 380 U 400 U 390U 420 U 910 U 9(j()LJ 950U IOOOU 910 UJ 9(j() UJ 950U IOOOU 910U 9(j() u 950 UJ 1000 UJ 380 U 400U 390U 420 U 380U 400U 390U 420U 910 U 9(j() u 950U lOOOU 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 910 U 9(j() u 950U lOOOU 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U 380U 400U 390U 420U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 380 U 400U 390 U 420 U 910 UJ 960 UJ 950U lOOOU 380 U 400 U 390 U 420 U GERAGHTY 8 MILLER. INC. Page 4 of8 MW-4D (8.7-10.7) 4-Jun-92 390 U 390 U 390 U 390 UJ 390 U 390 U 390 U 390 U 390 U 390 U 390 U 9S0 U 950 U 950 U 390U 390U 950U 390 U 390 U 950 U 390 U 390U 390 U 390 U 950 U 390 U ( Table 4-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: MW-5 MW-6 MW-6D MW-7 MW-7FR MW-8 MW-9 MW-10 MW-10D MW-11D MW-12D MW-13D MW-14 Deplh (()-4. 0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (14.0- (14.0- (1.0-4.0) (0-4.0) (2.0-4.0) (0-2.0) \10.0- (4.0-6.0) (4.0-6.0) (0-2.0) (in feet) 16.0) 16.0) 1.0) Analyte Date: 1 I-Aug-92 21-Jul-92 6-Aug-92 16-Jul-92 16-Jul-92 20-Jul-92 24-Jul-92 4-Aug-92 4-Aug-92 26-Jun-92 6-Jul-92 19-Jun-92 I-Jul-92 Acenaphthene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Acenaphthylene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350U 390 U Anthracene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340U 370U 350U 360U 370U 370U 350 U 350U 390 U Carbazole 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Bcnzo( a)anthracene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U BenzTwrene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370U 350 U 350 U 390 U Bcnzo b uoranthene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Benzo t,h,i)perylene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Benzo )fiuoranlhene 350 UJ 370 U 350 UJ 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 UJ 370 UJ 370 U 350 UJ 350 U 390 U 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 350 UJ 370 U 350 UJ 340 U 340 U 370 U 350U 360 UJ 370 UJ 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Bu~I benzyl phthalate 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 4- hloroaniline 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U bisr•Chloroethoxy)mcthane 350 UJ 370U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350U 360U 370 U 370U 350 U 350 U 390 U bis 2-Chlorocthyl)cther 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U his 2-Chloroisopropyl)cther 350UJ 370U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350U 350 U 390U 4-Chloro-3-mcthf◄lphcnol 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390U 2-Chloronaphtha enc 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370U 350 U 350 U 390 U 2-Chlorophenol 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340U 340 U 370 U 350U 360U 370U 370 U 350U 350 U 390U 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 350 UJ 370U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Chrysene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Di-n-butyl fihthalate 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 730 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 890 B Dibenz(a,h anthracene 350 UJ 370U 350 U 340U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Dibenzofuran 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 1,4-Dichlorohenzene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 3 ,3 '-Dichlorobenzidine 350 UJ 370 U 350 UJ 340 UJ 340 UJ 370 UJ 350 UJ 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 UJ 390 U 2,4-Dichloro11henol 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Diet~I phthalate 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 401 2,4- imethylphenol 350UJ 370U 350U 340 U 340 U 370U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Dimethyl phthalate 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370U 350 U 350 U 390 U 4 ,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 860 UJ 890 U 850 UJ 830 UJ 830 UJ 900 UJ 860 UJ 880 U 890 U 890 U 860 U 860 U 940 U 2,4-Dinilrophenol 860 UJ 890U 850 UJ 830 UJ 830 UJ 900 UJ 860 UJ 880 U 890U 890 U 860 U 860U 940 U 2 ,4-Dinitrotoluene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Di-n-oct ththalale 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U bis(2-El 1yl exyl)phthalale 350UJ 370U 350 U 340U 340 U 370 U 350U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Fluoranlliene 350 UJ 370U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 390 U Analyte concentrations in microgram~ kilogram (parts per billion (ppbll Analyses were performed by Enseco- of Som«set, New J«sey, using arch 1990 Contract laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Anallite is detected in the laboratory blank. J Resu tis detected below the :3,runl limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Comr.und or element analy for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R Reau t r~iected. FR Field rep icate of previou1 ■ample. ·T; t·T l L> I uu:,:: .l >: !:::.,:) GERAGHTY fr? MILLER. INC. ( Table 4-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Colleeted from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Simple ID: MW-5 MW-{) MW-6D MW-7 MW-7FR MW-8 MW-9 MW-10 Depth (0-4.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) \14.0- \14.0- (2.0-4.0) (0-4.0) (2.0-4.0) Analyte (in feet) 6.0) 6.0) Dale: I I-Aug-92 21-Jul-92 6-Aug-92 16-Jul-92 16-Jul-92 20-Jul-92 24-Jul-92 4-Aug-92 Fluorene 350 UJ 370U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370U 350 U 360 U Hexachlorobenzene 350 UJ 370 U 350 UJ 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 UJ Hexachlorobutadiene 350UJ 370 U 350 U 340U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360U Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 350 UJ 370 U 350 UJ 340 UJ 340 UJ 370 UJ 350 UJ 360 U Hexachloroe1h11ne 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U lndeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U lsophorone 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 2-Methylnaphthalene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340U 340 U 370U 350 U 360U 2-Methylphenol 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 4-Methylphenol 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U Nrfhthil.lene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370U 350 U 360 U 2- itroaniline 800UJ 890 U 850 U 830 U 830 U 900 U 800 U 880 U 3-Nitroaniline 860UJ 890U 850 U 830U 830 U 900U 860 U 880 U 4-Nitroaniline 860UJ 890 U 850 UJ 830 U 830 U 900U 800 U 880 UJ Nitrobenzene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370U 350 U 360U 2-Nitrophenol 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340U 370U 350 U 360U 4-Nitrophenol 860 UJ 890 U 850 U 830U 830 U 900U 860U 880U N-Nitrosodj\>henylamine 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U N-Nitroso- 1-n-propylamine 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U Pentachlorophenol 860UJ 890 U 850 U 830 U 830 U 900U 860 U 880 U Phenanthrene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U Phenol 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360U Pyrene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340 U 370 U 350 U 360 U 2 ,4 ,5-T richlorophenol 800 UJ 890 U 850 U 830U 830 U 900U 860 U 880 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 350 UJ 370 U 350 U 340 U 340U 370 U 350 U 360 U Analyte concentrations in micrograms_per kilogram (parts per billion [ppbl). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somenet, New Jeney, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B J u R FR Analyte is detected in the laboratory blank. Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compound or element analyzca for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Result rejected. Field replicate of previous sample. >:'.o'i l MW-10D MW-IID MW-120 MW-13D (0-2.0) \l0.0- (4.0-{).0) (4.0-{).0) 1.0) 4-Aug-92 26-Jun-92 6-Jul-92 19-Jun-92 370 U 370 U 350U 350 U 370 UJ 370 U 350U 350 U 370 U 370 U 350U 350 U 370 U 370 UJ 350 UJ 350 UJ 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 370 U 370 U 350U 350 U 370U 370U 350U 350 U 370 U 370 U 3SOU 350 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 370 U 370 U 350U 350 U 890 U 890U 860 U 860U 890U 890U 860 U 860 U 890 UJ 890U 860UJ 860 UJ 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 370 U 370U 350 U 350 U 890U 890 UJ 860U 860 U 370 U 370U 350U 350 U 370 U 370 U 3SOU 350 U 890 U 890U 860U 860 U 370 U 370 U 350U 350 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U 890 U 890 U 860 U 860 U 370 U 370 U 350 U 350 U GERAGHTY f,? MILLER. INC Page 6 of8 MW-14 (0-2.0) I-Jul-92 390 U 390 U 390 U 390 UJ 390U 390 U 390 U 390U 390 U 390 U 390 U 940U 940 U 940U 390 U 390 U 940 UJ 390 U 390 U 940 U 390 U 390 U 390 U 390 U 940 U 390 U ( Table 4-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample JD: SS-3 SS-<4 SS-5 SS-6 SS~ FR Depth gn feet) Analyte ate: 19-Aua-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aua-92 Acenaphthene R R 390U R 370 U Acenaphthylene R R 390U R 370U Anthr11cene R R 390U R 370 U Carbazole R R 390U R 370 U Benzo(11)anthr11cene R R 390 U R 370 U Benzopw;rene R R 390U R 370 U Benzo b uor11nthene R R 84 J R 370 U Benzo ~,h,i)perylene R R 82 J R 370 U Benzo )0uor11nthene R R 390 UJ R 370 UJ 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether R R 390 U R 370U B~I benzyl phthalate R R 190 J R 75 J 4- loroaniline R R 390U R 370U bisr-Chloroethoxy)methane R R 390 U R 370U bis 2-Chloroethyl)ether R R 390 U R 370U bis 2-Chloroisopropyl)ether R R 390U R 370U 4-Chloro-3-met~lphenol R R 390 U R 370U 2-Chloronaphth ene R R 390U R 370U 2-Chlorophenol R R 390 U R 370U 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether R R 390U R 370U Chrysene R R 59 J R 370 U Di-n-butyl fihthalate R R 55 J R 62 J Dibenz(a,h anthracene R R 390 U R 370 U DibenzofurllO R R 390 U R 370U 1,2-Dichlorobenzene R R 390 U R 370 U 1,3-Dichlorobenzene R R 390 U R 370 U 1,4-Dichlorobenzene R R 390 U R 370 U 3 ,3 • -Dichlorobenzidine R R 390 U R 370 U 2 ,4-Dichlorophenol R R 390U R 370 U Dietl:/il phthalate R R 390 U R 370 U 2,4- imethylphenol R R 390 U R 370 U Dimeth)'I phthalate R R 390 U R 370 U 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol R R 950 U R 9l0U 2,4-Dinitrophenol R R 950 U R 910U 2 ,4-Dinitrotoluene R .R 390 U R 370 U 2,6-Dinitrotoluene R R 390 U R 370 U Di-n-ocil ththalate R R 390 U R 370 U bis(2-Et yl exyl)phthalate R R 430 U R 370 U Fluorantliene R R IOOJ R 370 U Analyte concentrations in microgram~er kilogram ~arts per billion [ppb~. Analyses were performed by Enseco- st of Somer , New Jersey, usmg arch 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Anallite is detected in the laboratory blank. J Reau tis detected below the :rr•ni limit and/or ii an estimated concentration. u Comrund or element analy for, ut not detected It the corresponding reporting limit. R Reau t r~~ected. FR Field rep icate of previous Ample. T i_...J"I· GERAGHTY {-f MILLER. INC. Page7of8 ( Table 4-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: SS-3 SS-4 SS-S SS-6 SS-6 FR Analyte Depth gn feet) ate: 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 Fluorene R R 390U R 370 U Hexachlorobenzene R R 390U R 370U Hexachlorobutadiene R R 390U R 370 U Hexachlorocyclopentadiene R R 390 UJ R 370 UJ Hexachloroethane R R 390 U R 370 U lndeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene R R 390U R 370 U lsophorone R R 390U R 370 U 2-Methylnaphthalene R R 390U R 370 U 2-Methylphenol R R 390U R 370 U 4-Methylphenol R R 390U R 370 U N~hthalene R R 390U R 370U 2- itroaniline R R 9S0U R 910 U 3-Nitroaniline R R 9S0U R 910U 4-Nitroaniline R R 950U R 910 U Nitrobenzene R R 390 U R 370 U 2-Nitrophenol R R 390U R 370U 4-Nitrophenol R R 9S0U R 910U N-Nitrosodjfhenylamine R R 390 U R 370 U N-Nitroso- 1-n-propylamine R R 390 U R 370 U Pentachlorophenol R R 9S0 U R 910 U Phenanthrene R R 390 U R 370 U Phenol R R 390 U R 370 U Pyrene R R 76 J R 370U 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene R R 390 U R 370 U 2,4,S-Trichlorophenol R R 9S0 U R 9l0U 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol R R 390 U R 370 U Analyte concentrations in micrograms__per kilogram (parts l'(:f billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enscco-East of Somenet, New Jersey, usmg March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B J u R FR Analyte is detected in the laboratory blank. Resuh is detected below the reportmg limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compouqd or element analyzea for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Result reJccted. Field replicate of previou, ,ample. GERAGHTY C1' MILLER. INC. Page8of8 ( ( Table 4-3. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: 8-1 8-2 8-3 8-4 8-5 Depth (4.0-8.0) (0-2.0) (2.0-4.0) (8.0-10.0) (0-2.0) (in feet) Analyte Date: 30-Jul-92 3-Aug-92 3-Aug-92 9-Jun-92 13-Aug-92 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 77 U 110 23 U 24 U 53 Analyte concentrations in miUi_grams l)Cr kilogram (parts per million [ppml). Analyses were performed by e-nseco-Easl of Somerset, New Jersey, usmg 1JSEPA Method 418.1. D J u FR Analyte identified al a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. C!)mpoun~ or element.analyzecl for, but not detected al the corresponding reporting limit. Field replicate of previous sample. 8-6 B-7 8-8 8-8 FR 8-9 8-10 (4.0-8.0) (2.0-4.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (2.0-6.0) (6.0-8.0) 30-Jul-92 31-Jul-92 12-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 29-Jul-92 10-Aug-92 170 28 23 U 77 100 27 8-11 (0-2.0) 10-Aug-92 41 GERAGHTY c-? MIU.FR. INC. Page 1 of3 8-12 (6.0-8.0) l l-Aug-92 25 ( ( Table 4-3. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: 8-13 8-14 8-14 FR 8-15 8-16 Depth (4.~.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (in feel) Analyte Date: 10-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 l4-Aug-92 l4-Aug-92 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon, 28 250 DJ 56] 24 U 82 J Analyte concentrations in milligrams ()Cr kilogram (parts per million [ppm]). Analyses were perfonned by lrnscco-East of Somenet, New Jeney, usmg 1JSEPA Method 418.1. D J u FR Analyte identified at a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Cpm_poun~ or element.analyzeil for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. F1elcf rcphcate of previous sample. Ti..1 / MW-I MW-ID MW-2 MW-2 FR MW-3 MW-4 (0-2.0) (1.0-2.5) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0.4-2.0) (2.7-4.7) 30-Jun-92 S-Jun-92 13-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 10-Jun-92 16-Jun-92 140 84 66] 86J 24 U 130 MW-4D (8.7-10.7) 4-Jun-92 24 U GERAGHTY f.f MILLER. INC Page2of3 MW-5 (0-4.0) I I-Aug-92 590 D ( Table 4-3. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: MW-6 MW-6D MW-7 MW-7 FR MW-8 Depth (0-2.0) (0-2.0) p ◄.0- \'4.0- (2.0-4.0) ~n feel) 6.0) 6.0) Analyte ate: 21-Jul-92 6-Aug-92 16-Jul-92 16-Jul-92 20-Jul-92 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 120 61 27 21 U 22 U Analyte concentrations in milligrams l)Cr kilogram (parts per million [ppml). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, usmg 1JSEPA Method 418.1. D J u FR Analyte identified at a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the rcJ?Orling limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Cpmpoun~ or element.analyze<i for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. F1elcf rcphcate of prcv10us sample. I UI MW-9 MW-10 MW-10D MW-11D MW-12D MW-13D (0-4.0) (2.0-4.0) (0-2.0) 110.0- (4.0..{i,0) (4.0..{i.0) 1.0) 24-Jul-92 4-Aug-92 4-Aug-92 26-Jun-92 6-Jul-92 19-Jun-92 230D 22 U 22 U 22 U 22 U 21 U MW-14 (0-2.0) I-Jul-92 220D GERAGHTY 6? MILLER. INC. Page3of3 ' ( ( Table 4-4. Concentrations of Metals in Soil Samples Collected from June lo August 1992, Tutu Service Station lnvesligalion, Sl. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: 8-l 8-2 8-3 8-4 8-5 8-6 8-7 8-8 8-8 FR 8-9 Derlh (4.0-8.0) (0-2.0) (2.0-4.0) (8.0-10.0) (0-2.0) (4.0-8.0) (2.0-4.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (2.0-6.0) An1lyte (in feet) Date: 30-Jul-92 3-Aug-92 3-Aug-92 9-Jun-92 13-Aug-92 30-Jul-92 31-Jul-92 12-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 29-Jul-92 Aluminum 25100 26000 24200 32200 J 22900 35700 28400 23600 19700 20800 J Antimony 7.4 BJ 5.9 BJ 4.7 UJ JU 7.9 BNJ 4.5 BJ 5.9 BJ 4.6 UNJ 5 BNJ 4.4 BJ Arsenic 0.96 B 2.1 U 1.2 B 0.54 BWJ 0.46 U 0.74 B I B 4.3 94 J 1.6 BJ Barium 42.1 B 67.2 184 42.9 BJ 38.4 B 41 B 36.9 B 98.4 53 33.8 BJ Beryllium 0.23 U 0.26 B 0.42 B 0.27 BJ 0.23 U 0.22 U 0.21 U 0.37 B 0.35 B 0.23 BJ Cadmium 0.68 U 0.64 U 0.7 U 0.7 U 0.69U 0.67 U 0.62 U 0.69 U O.G6U 0.64 U Calcium 39600 47200 65900 7JroJ 67200 • 6490 51600 72800 • 65200 * 15400 J Chromium 29.2 31.7 35.8 31.JJ 33.6 NJ 36 28.6 29.7 22.3 35.2 J Cobalt 23 21.9 22.8 28.2 J 18.9 30.3 23.4 20.S 16.3 23.7 J Copper 85.6 79.1 104 74.7 J 47.3 NJ 67.6 73. l 157 J 49.8 J 105 J Iron 35700 38400 42500 41500 J 29800 42700 35400 31500 29100 33100 J Lead 31 SJ 26 SJ 4.5 J l.5 J 3.6J 6.2 SJ 19.8 J R lOJ 5.S J Magnesium 17600 l7100 12700 23600 J 19400 21300 21500 18000 16100 16300 J Manganese 757 834 506 941 J 861 895 828 700 791 1roJ Mercury 0.06 U 0.06 U 0.06U 0.12 BJ 0.06 U 0.06U 0.05 U 0.12 0.06U 0.05 U Nickel 18.9 17.S 17.1 18.6J 19.4 19 17.8 14.9 14.1 2l.8J Potassium 634 B 1170 471 B 569 B 386 B 833 B 4ro B 3320 J 870 BJ 528 B Selenium 0.46 U 0.42 U 0.47 U 0.47 U 0.46 UWJ 0.45 U 0.41 UWJ 0.46 U 0.44 U 0.43 U Silver 0.91 U 2.2J 2.1 BJ 2.1 BJ 0.92 U 0.98 BJ 0.83 U 3.9 NJ 1.6 BNJ 0.85 U Sodium 472 B 319 B 2040 217 BJ 271 B 274 B 561 B 465 B 453 B 248 B Thallium 0.68 U 0.64 U 0.7 U 0.7UW 0.69U 0.67 U 0.62 U 0.69 U 0.66U 0.64 U Vanadium 102 119 157 137 J 94.9 NJ 119 94.8 79.l 76.2 85.8 J Zinc 56.5 108 42.6 SJ.I J 49.9 Sl 62.4 149 63.8 58.4 J Analyte concentrations in milwrams ~r kilo§ram (parts per million lppm1M Analyses were performed hy nseco- ast of omersct, New Jersey, usmg arch 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols . • Duplicate analysis not within control limits. B R~rted value is between contract ~uircd detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). E In uctive~ coupled tlasma (ICP) seria dilution result not within control limits or graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFAA) interference present. J Result is elected be ow the re~rting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. N s u w R FR ~iked samP.le recove~ not w1 hin control limits. eported value was d ermined ?o the Method of Standard Additions JMSA). Com~und or element anaP,;zcd or, but not detected al the correspon ing reporting limit. Post-<ligestion spike for G AA out of control limits. Result ~1eclcd. Field rep icate of previous sample. 11.n 00) 1 ' , ;c. ·, \.. ,::. '··' / 8-10 8-11 (6.0-8.0) (0-2.0) 10-Aug-92 10-Aug-92 14300 19200 5.2 BJ 4.7 UJ 2.2 U s 498 124 0.22 U 0.33 B 0.65 U 0.7 U 14400 5150 13 19.S 17.2 15.l 88.7 76.6 33600 EJ 34100 EJ 5.2 J 6.9 SJ 9970 5920 2200 768 0.05 U 0.08 B 4.7 B 12.8 1900 2830 0.43 U 0.47 U 2 BJ 1.9 BJ 352 B 270 B 0.65 U 0.7 U ll9 88.8 68.2 EJ 99.S EJ GERAGHTY f,i' MILLER. INC B-12 (6.0-8.0) I I-Aug-92 15300 4.4 UJ 18.3 172 0.29 B 0.65 U (j()(i() 21.2 18.2 74.2 28100 EJ S.4 SJ 5570 2070 0.05 U 16.4 2280 0.44 U 1.8 BJ 297 B 0.65 U 87.8 89.1 EJ ( ( Table 4-4. Concenlralions of Melals in Soil Samples Collecled from June lo Augusl 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: B-13 B-l3A B-14 B-14 FR B-15 8-16 MW-I MW-ID MW-2 MW-2 FR MW-J MW-4 MW-4D Depth \ (4.0-6.0) (0-2.0) (in feet) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.o) (1.0-2.5) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0.4-2.0) (2.7-4.7) (8.7-10.7) Analyre Date: l0-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 l4-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 l4-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 30-Jun-92 .~-Jun-92 l3-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 l0-Jun-92 l6-Jun-92 4-Jun-92 Aluminum 18000 21100 25300 19000 26400 18900 26700 J 37000 J 13300 15700 25800 J 22800 J 21700 J Antimony 4.9 BJ 4.3 UNJ ,7.3 BNJ 4.6 UNJ 6.4 BNJ 6.8 BNJ 5.7 BJ 8.1 BJ 4.5 UNJ 4.6 UNJ JU 6.2 BJ 3.5 BJ Arsenic 185 J 13.7 0.46 U 0.46 U 1.3 B 11.6 0.45 BJ 0.46 uw 3 1.2 B R 1.8 BJ 0.46 U Dnrium 29 B 59,3 34.5B 33.6 B 32.1 B 39.9 B 59.1 J 23.l BJ 81 45.6 B 59.8 J 55 J 59.4 J Beryllium 0.22 U 0.22 U 0.23 U 0.23 U 0.23 U 0.22 U 0.23 lJ 0.23 BJ 0.22 U 0.23 U 0.23 U 0.24 U 0.23 U Cndmium 0.67 U 0.65 U 0.7 U 0.69 U 0.7 U 0.99 B 0.68 U 0.68 U 0.67 U 0.69 U 0,68 U 0.73 BJ 0.69 U Calcium 12800 73200 * 120000 * 73000 * 89400 * 68800 • 48300 J 412001 68500 *] 8720 *J 57300 J 9810 J 1190} Chromium 20. l 23.6 13.8 NJ 17.4 NJ 27.3 NJ 36.4 NJ 18.6 J 28.7 J 16. I NJ 7.6 NJ JI.BJ 38 EJ 27 J Cohah 15.2 16.3 20 18.2 23.2 19 22.6 J 28.8 J I 1.3 12.8 2l.6J 32.7 J 28.5 J Copper 46.4 52 48.3 NJ 77.6 NJ 65.9 NJ 72.1 NJ 47.8 J 75.2 J 40 NJ 58 NJ 51.4 J 73.9 EJ 75.3 J Iron 26800 EJ 29400 28000 23100 32600 30600 37100 EJ 39900 J 21700 30800 31500 J 39400 EJ 38000 J Lead 1.2 J 4.8 J 2.91 --2 J 12.2 J 45.6 N*J 3J 9.2 J 5.6 J 1.9 J 3.9 J 3.6 BJ 2.8 J Magnesium 14600 18300 26200 17800 22900 16300 24600 J 23600 J 9160 9640 15000 J 14000 EJ 17800 J Mangnnese 430 870 757 640 809 599 734 J 833 J 582 11 IO 725 J 947 EJ 717J Mercury 0.06 U 0.05 U 0.06 U 0.06 U 0.06U 0.51 0.06 U 0.06 U 0.06 U 0.06 U 0.06 U 0.06U 0.06U Nickel 12.3 14.7 II.I 13.1 16.5 15.7 12.8 J 19.9 J 12.7 5.6 B 16.7 J 18.8 J 19.1 J Potassium 591 B 841 B 161 B 201B 389 B 506 B 278 B 6S5 B 5S7 B 299 B 919 B 12701 505 B Selenium 0.44 U 0,43 U 0.46 UWJ 0.46 U 0.46 UWJ 0.44 UWJ 0.45 uw 0.46 UWJ 0.45 U 0.46 U 0.46 UWJ O.S5 BWJ 0.53 BWJ Silver 1.6 BJ 1.6 BNJ 0.93 B 0.92 U I. I B 1.3 B 0.68 U 2.3 J 0.89 U 1.2 B 1.4 BJ 0.72 U 2 BJ Sodium 133 B 474 B 181 B 191 B 281 B 396 B 305 B 632 B 717 B 536 B 66S B 274 B 318 B Thallium 0.67 U 0.65 U 0.7 U 0.69 U 0.7 U 0.67 U 0.68 U 0.68 uw 0.67 U 0,69 U 0.68 uw 0,72 U 0.69 uw Vrm11dium 83.9 83.1 9S.8 NJ 69.3 NJ 98.8 NJ 79.7 NJ 132 J 113 J 58 NJ 52.8 NJ 93.4 J 121 EJ 120 J Zinc 4S.7 EJ 63. I S0.9 60.t 206 459 56 EJ S2.1 J 66.2 119 42.6 J 49 EJ 46.8 J Analyte concentralions in mil'lfrrams ~r kilo§ram (parts per million lppmt Analyses were performed by nseco- ast of omersct, New Jersey, usrng arch 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. * Duplicate analysis nol wilhin conlrol limils. B R~rted value is between conlract r~uired detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). E In uclive:,; coupled filasma (ICP) seria dilulion resull not within control limils or graphile furnace atomic absorplion (GFAA) inlerference present. 1 Resull is etccted be ow the re.Jl!)rting limil and/or is an estimated concentration. N Spiked sample recover~ not within control limils. s Reported value was de ermined tg the Method of Standard Additions JMSA). u Comr<:>und or element anap;1.ed or, but nol delected at the correspon ing reporting limit. w Posl-oigestion spike for G AA out of control limils. R Result re~eclcJ. FR Field rep icate of previous sample. rur <.iERAGHTY (~Mil.I .l:R. IN<.. ( ( Table 4-4. Concentrations of Metals in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: MW-5 MW-6 MW-6D MW-7 MW-7 FR MW-8 MW-9 MW-10 MW-10D MW-IID MW-12D MW-13D MW-14 Depth (0-4.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (14.0- \14.0- (2.0-4.0) (0-4.0) (2.0-4.0) (0-2.0) \10.0- (4.0-6.0) (4.0-6.0) (0-2.0) (in feel) 16.0) 6.0) 1.0) Analyte Date: 11-Aug-92 21-Jul-92 6-Aug-92 l6-Jul-92 16-Jul-92 20-Jul-92 24-Jul-92 4-Aug-92 4-Aug-92 26-Jun-92 6-Jul-92 19-Jun-92 I-Jul-92 Aluminum 27400 20800 l 14700 26000 l 29800 l 22500 l 22400 l 14900 14100 17800 l 13600 l 23400 EJ 28700 El Antimony 5.1 BNl 5 BJ 4.3 Ul 6.7 BJ 8.5 BJ 5.6 BJ 6 BJ 4.7 UJ 4.3 UJ 3.6 BJ 3.2 BJ 3.7 BJ 3.4 BJ Arsenic 0.77 B 1.9 BJ 2.2 U 0.71 BJ 0.53 BJ 0.44 U 0.7 BJ 2.4 U 2.2 U 0.49 BJ 0.7 BJ 1.7 BJ 0.67 BJ Bnrium 50.7 137 1 122 42.5 BJ 25.1 BJ 21.7 BJ 18.7 BJ 120 199 194 J 60.51 17.9 BJ 40.2 BEi Beryllium 0.46 B 0.22 U 0.22 B 0.21 U 0.21 U 0.22 U 0.21 U 0.27 B 0.28 B 0.22 U 0.21 U 0.21 U 0.22 U Cadmium 0.64 U 0.67 U 0.65 U 0.64 U 0.82 BJ 0.65 U 0.64 U 0.71 U 0.65 U 0.68 BJ 0.63 U 0.63 U 0.67 U Calcium 54400 * 263001 23700 28200 J 477001 284001 31600 l 3480 5260 3810 J 22201 37900 El 29900 J Chromium 24.2 28.21 16.81 16.31 19.6 J 15.31 15.6 l 5.7 4.5 12.7 1 20.41 201 36 El Cobalt 24.3 31.91 13.9 30.81 32.81 191 18.91 8.8 B 7.9 B 28.7 1 29.61 26.3 1 28.3 1 Copper 115 71.4 1 51.8 60.61 60.91 49.7 1 50.7 l 42.2 40.2 1311 63.91 102 EJ 86.4 El Iron 37700 36200 l 29600 38100 J 431001 265001 257001 30000 33600 48700 El 313001 39000 El 40000 El Lead R 25.41 83.7 1 0.961 1.81 0.48 BJ 3.21 3.41 3.21 21 1.91 3.41 3.21 Magnesium 26200 16400 J 9350 28000 l 320001 15400 l 151001 5770 5770 128001 104001 17400 EJ 20300 EJ Manganese 763 l440J 769 941 J 8611 688 J 631 J 480 435 1070 J 4911 820 EJ 883 EJ Mercury 0.05 U 0.06U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.0S U 0.06 U 0.05 U 0.06U 0.08 BJ 0.05 U 0.06 U Nickel 15.3 19.5 J 7.S B 16.3 J 19.3 J 11.31 12.41 3.2 B 3.5 B 15.6 J 13.11 17.21 18.9 J Potassium 1180 544 B 911 B 1S201 14001 204 B 205 B 621 B 529 B 22001 306 B 20S B 689 B Selenium 0.43 uw 0.44 UWl 0.43 U 0.43 UWJ 0.42 UWl 0.44 UWJ 0.43 U 0.47 U 0.43 U 0.44 U 0.42 U 0.42 U 0.4S U Silver 2.2 NJ 0.67 U 1.4 BJ 0.64 U 0.64 U 0.6S U 0.64 U 2.2 BJ 2 BJ 0.67 UJ 0.63 UJ 0.63 U 0.67 U Sodium 381 B 596 B 7288 263 B 25S B 491 B 654 B 413 BJ 373 BJ 33001 15201 581 B 500 B Thallium 0.64 U 0.67 U 0.65 U 0.64 U 0.64 U 0.65 U 0.64 U 0.71 U 0.65 U 0.67 U 0.63 U 0.63 U 0.67 U Vanadium 108 1021 80 107 J 1101 59.5 J 56.31 51.9 69.5 163 J 103 J 95.1 EJ I 13 El Zinc 164 56.7 J 59.8 EJ 51.7 1 S4.51 31.8 J 32.41 57.7 58.2 94.9 El 48.6 El S9.S El S7.4 EJ Analyte concentrations in mitwrams ~ kilo§ram (parts per million (ppmt Analyses were pcrfonned by nseco- st of omerset, New Jersey, usmg arch 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. * Duplicate analysis not within control limits. B R~rted value is between contract ~uired detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). E In uctive:r. coupled ~lasma (ICP) seria dilution result not within control limits or graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFAA) interference present. J Result is elected be ow the re~rting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. N ~iked samr.le recovei not within control limits. s cported value was de ennined 'g the Method of Standard Additions jMSA). u Comr.9und or element ana~zed or, but not detected at the correspon ing reporting limit. w Post-<ligestion spike for G AA out of control limits. R Result r~1ected. FR Field rep icate of previous sample. GERAGHTY 6? MILLER. INC ( ( Table 4-4. Concentrations of Metals in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: SS-1 Depth SS-2 SS-3 SS-4 SS-5 SS-6 SS-6 FR SS-8 {in feet) Analyte Dale: 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 Aluminum 2J(i()() 16100 23100 23000 17700 14300 J 13800 J 21500 J Antimony 6.1 BNJ 4.2 UNJ 7.2 BNJ 6.5 BNJ 8.2 BNJ 7.4 BNJ 6 BNJ 14.7BNJ Arsenic 0.44 U 0.42 U 1.7 B 0.92 BWJ 3.5 17.3 J 19.1 J 0.99 BJ Barium 41.9 B JO.I B 94.2 39.4 B 97 89 J 90.91 29.3 BJ Beryllium 0.22 U 0.21 U 0.26 U 0.22 U 0.22 U 0.23 UJ 0.23 UJ 0.41 UJ Cadmium 0.66U 0.62 U 0.77 U 0.66 U 0.66U 0.68 UJ 0.7 UJ 1.2 UJ Calcium 75100 9630 56500 61100 35800 59200 J 30700 J 144000 J Chromium 23.4 NJ 25.8 NJ 33.8 NJ 25.1 NJ 17.6 NJ 23.3 NJ 18.8 NJ 16.2 NJ Cobalt 25.7 J 18 J 22.1 J 20.9 J 19.4 J 14 J 13.8 J 16.9 BJ Copper 55.3 NJ 40.3 NJ 72.8 NJ 62.9 NJ 79.2 NJ 55.4 NJ 54.8 NJ 43.1 NJ Iron 31300 22600 55400 29800 28100 39500 J 23800 J 25400 J Lead 2.1 SJ 1.7 J 12.21 9.1 J 149 SJ 14.4 J 11.4 J 2.5 SJ Magnesium 20500 13200 18700 19300 13600 99601 9670J 21400 J Manganese 763 535 886 634 708 662J 6721 888 J Mercury 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.06U 0.05 U 0.19 0.06U 0.06U 0.05 U Nickel 18.9 15.5 19.2 16.8 12.6 14.1 J 10.7 J 12.9 BJ Potassium 412B 568 B 7140 673 B 4170 1910J 20701 325 BJ Selenium 0.44 U 0.42 U 0.51 U 0.44 U 0.44 U 0.46 UJ 0.47 UJ 0.41 UJ Silver 0.98 B 0.99 B 2.1 B 0.93 B 2.8 1.6 BJ 0.93 UJ 1.7 UJ Sodium 557 B 157 B 476 B 352 B 349 B 340 BJ 251 BJ 187 BJ Thallium 0.66 U 0.62 U 0.77 U 0.66 U 0.66 U 0.68 UJ 0.1 VJ 0.62 UJ Vanadium 109 NJ 74.9 NJ 88.3 NJ 86 NJ 78.8 NJ 71.3 NJ 73.1 NJ 82. I NJ Zinc 50.6 40.1 258 265 216 91.7 J 97.1 J 43.8 J Analyte concentrations in mil'i!,rams ~ kilo§ram (parts per million [ppm~ Analyses were pcrfonned by nseco- st of omersct, New Jersey, using arch 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. * Duplicate analysis not within control limits. B R~rted value is between contract r~uircd detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). E In uctivei coupled tlasma (ICP) seria dilution result not within control limits or graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFAA) interference present. J Result is elected be ow the reri;irting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. N ~ikcd samr.le recove2c not wt hin control limits. s eported value was d ermined 'Po the Method of Standard Additions JMSA). u Comr.9und or element ana~zed or, but not detected at the corrcspon ing reporting limit. w Post-i:ligestion spike for G AA out of control limits. R Result r~~cctcd. FR Field rep icate of previous sample. I U J (_) (.', -~,· GERAGHTY c<i' MILLER. INC. ( ( ( Table 4-5. Concentrations of Total Cyanide in Soil Samples Collected from June lo August 1992, Tutu Sercice Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: 8-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 B-8 Depth (in [eel) (4.0-8.0) (0-2.0) (2.0-4.0) (ll.0-10.0) (0-2.0) (4.0-8.0) (2.0-4.0) (0-2.0) Analyte Dale: 30-Jul-92 3-Aug-92 3-Aug-92 9-Jun-92 l3-Aug-92 30-Jul-92 3I-Jul-92 l2-Aug-92 Cyanide, Total 0.57 U I.I 0.58 U 0,59 U 0.58 U 0.56U 0.52 U 0.58 U Analyte concentrations in milligrams i:>_er kilogram (parts per million [ppm I). Analyses were performed by ffnseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, usmg March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. u FR Cpmpoun~ or element.analyzed for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Field replicate of previous sample. TUT U(.i',::'. J :,:'6 .1. B-8 FR B-9 B-10 B-11 (0-2.0) (2.0-6.0) (6.0-8.0) (0-2.0) 12-Aug-92 29-Jul-92 10-Aug-92 l0-Aug-92 2.7 0.53 U 0.54 U 0.58 U ' GERAGHTY{-< MILLFR. IN<·. Page I of 4 B-12 (6.0-ll.0) I I-Aug-92 0.57 U f I I Table 4-5. Concentrations or Total Cyanide in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Sercicc Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: B-13 B-IJA B-14 B-14 FR B-1.'i B-16 MW-I MW-ID l>eplh (4.0-6.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (1.0-2 . .'i) (in feet) Analyte Date: l0-Aug-92 l2-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 l4-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 30-Jun-92 .'i-Jun-92 Cynnidc, Totnl 0 . .56U 0.54 U 0.58 U 0.58 U 0.7.5 0.55 U 0.88 0.57 U Analyte concentrations in milligrams !)Cr kilogram (parts per million fppml). Analyses were perronned by enseco-East or Somerset, New Jeney, usmg March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. u FR Cpmpoun~ or element.analyzed for, but not detected at the correJponding reporting limit. Field replicate or previous sample. 11.Jf .l ') ........ ·. MW-2 MW-2 FR MW-3 MW-4 (0-2.0) (0-2.0) (0.4-2.0) (2. 7-4. 7) 13-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 IO-Jun-92 16-Jun-92 0.56 U 0.57 U 0.57 U 0.65 , GERAGHTY 8 MILLl:R. INC Page 2 or 4 MW-4D (11.7-10.7) 4-Jun-92 0.57 U ( ( Table 4-5. Concentrations of Total Cyanide in Soil Samples Collected from June lo August 1992, Tutu Sercice Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin lslnnds. Sample ID: MW-.S MW-6 MW-6D MW-7 MW-7 FR MW-8 MW-9 MW-10 Depth (0-4.0) (0-2.0) (0-2.0) \"4.0- (14.0- (2.0-4.0) (0-4.0) (2.0-4.0) (in feet) 6.0) 16.0) Analyte Date: 1 I-Aug-92 21-Jul-92 6-Aug-92 16-Jul-92 16-Jul-92 20-Jul-92 24-Jul-92 4-Aug-92 Cyanide, Total 0.53 U 0.56 U 0.54 lJ 0.53 U 0.53 U 0.55 0.53 U 0.59 U Analyte concentrations in miHigrams per kilogram (parts per million (ppm I). Analyses were perfonned by E"nseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, usmg March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. u FR C_ompoun~ or element.analyzed for, but not detected al the corresponding reporting limit. Ftel<f replicate of previous sample. TUT J MW-10D MW-11D MW-12D MW-13D (0-2.0) \10.0- (4.0-6.0) (4.0-6.0) 1.0) 4-Aug-92 26-Jun-92 6-Jul-92 19-Jun-92 0.54 U 0.56U 0.53 U 0.52 U ' GERAGHTY 8 MILIXR. INC. MW-14 (0-2.0) I-Jul-92 0.56 U I \ Tahle 4-5. Concentrations of Total Cyanide in Soil Samples Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Sercice Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: SS-1 SS-2 SS-3 SS-4 SS-5 SS-6 SS-6 FR SS-8 Depth (in feet) Analyle Date: 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 Cyanide, Total 1.2 0.52 U 0.96 0.57 U 0.55 U 0.57 U 1.3 I.I Analytc concentrations in milligrams !)Cr kilogram (parts per million (ppm I). Analyses were performed by Enscco-Easl of Somerset, New Jersey, usmg March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. u FR C_ompoun~ or clement.analyzed for, but not detected al the corresponding reporting limit. Field replicate of previous sample. TUT OU<! GERAGHTY{-? MILi .IJ{. IN<. ( Table 4-6. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Potable-Waler Samples Collected in June 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, SI. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: WAPA Analyle Chloromethnne Bromomclhane Vinyl chloride Chloroethane Methylene chloride Acetone CRrbon disulfide I, 1-Dichloroethene Dale: I , 1-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trMs) Chloroform 1,2-DichloroethMe 2-Butanone I , I , 1-T richloroethane Carbon tetrachloride Bromodichloromethane 1,2-Dichloropropane trans-1,3-Dicldoropropene Trichloroelhene Dibromochloromethane I, 1,2-Trichloroethane Benlene cis-1,3-Dichloropropene Bromoform 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 2-Hexanone I, I ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane T etrachloroethene Toluene Chloroben1.ene Ethylbenzene Styrene X)'lenes (total) 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) tert-Butyl methyl ether (MTBE) n-Propylbenlene IS-Jun-92 I0UJ I0UJ IO UJ 10 UJ I0UJ I0UJ I0UJ I0UJ 10 UJ I0UJ 2J 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ l0UJ 3 J 10 UJ 10 UJ I0UJ JJ 10 UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 2J I0UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ 5 UJ 10 UJ S UJ Analyte concenlrations in micrograms__per liter (parts ~r billion (ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco-Easl of Somersel, New Jersey, using March 1990 Conlracl Laboratory Program (CLP) prolocols. J u Result is dctecled below lhe re~rting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compound or elemenl analyle<I for, but not delecled al lhe corresponding reporting limil. 1·ur 0()2 J>·,<:,'.:, GERAGHTY{:? MILLER. INC ( Table 4-7. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in the Field Blanks and the Trip Blanks Collected from June lo August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Page I of 4 Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Analytc Date: 4-Jun-92 5-Jun-92 9-Jun-92 16-Jun-92 19-Jun-92 26-Jun-92 30-Jun-92 I-Jul-92 6-Jul-92 16-Jul-92 20-Jul-92 21-Jul-92 24-Jul-92 Chlorometlume JOU 10 U 10 lJ JOU 10 U JOU JOU JO u IOU IOU 10 U R 10 U Bromomcthnne 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 UJ 10 UJ R IOUJ Vinyl chloride 10 U JO u IOU 10 U IOU lOUJ 10 UJ 10 U IOU IOU 10 U R 10 U Chlorocthnnc 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 lJ 10 lJ 10 U IOU 10 UJ 10 UJ R IO UJ Methylene chloride IOU I J 10 U 10 lJ 10 lJ 10 U IOU 10 U IOU I BJ I BJ 2 BJ 4 BJ Acetone 10 lJ IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 lJ 10 U IOU IOU JOU JOU 5 BJ JOB C,ubon disullide 10 U 11 10 U 11 61 31 16 25 41 10 U 4 J R 4 J I, 1-Dichloroethene IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 lJ 10 U R 10 U I, 1-Dichloroethane 10 lJ IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU JOU 10 lJ R 10 U 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/lrons) IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IO lJ 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU R 10 U Chloroform IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 lJ 10 U 10 lJ IOU 10 U R 10 U 1,2-Dichloroeth,me 10 U IOU 10 U 10 UJ I0UJ IOU IOU 10 U 10 lJ JOU JOU R 10 lJ 2-Butanone 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU JOU IOU JOU IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U I , 1, 1-T richloroethane 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U Carbon tetrachloride IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U JOU JOU JOU JO u IOU R IOU Bromodichloromethane 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U 1,2-Dichlorotopane JOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU R IOU trans-1,3-Dic loropropene 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U R 10 U Trichloroethene JOU 10 U IOU 10 U JOU JOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU R 10 U Dihromochloromelhnne IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU R IOU 1, I ,2-Trichloroethnne IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U R 10 U Beniene JOU 10 U 10 U IOU JOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU R 10 U cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU R IOU Bromoform IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU R IOU 4-Methyl-2-pentanone IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU R IOU 2-Hc:,i;anonc 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU JOU 10 U IOU IOU R 10 lJ I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 10 lJ IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U R 10 U Tetrnchloroethene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 lJ 10 lJ 10 U IOU JOU R JOU Toluene IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU R 10 U Chloroben1,ene IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U R 10 U Ethyl benzene 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U R 10 ll Styrene 10 U JO lJ IOU 10 U IOU 10 lJ JOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 lJ Xylenes (total) IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U 1,2-Dihromocthane (ED~ SU SU SU 5 U 5U 5U SU SU SU s lJ SU R SU tert-Butyl methyl ether ( TBE) 10 U 10 U 10 UJ 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 UJ I0UJ IOU IOU R 10 U n-Propylbenzene s UJ S UJ 5 UJ S UJ S UJ SU SU S UJ s UJ s UJ s u1, R S UJ Analyte concentrations in microgramsCsr liter (parts ~r billion (ppb]). Analyses were perfonned by Enseco- st of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Anat 11 tc is detected in the laboratory blank. J Rcsu t is detected below the r~ft'"t limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Com~ul'!d or clement analyz for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R Resu I reJected. ru-: 002 12/,b GERAGHTY 8 MILLl:R. INC. ( Table 4-7. Concentrationll of Volatile Organic Compounds in the Field Blanks and the Trip Blanks Collected from June lo August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Trip Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Analyte Date: 29-Jul-92 30-Jul-92 3 I-Jul-92 3-Aug-92 4-Aug-92 6-Aug-92 10-Aug-92 ll-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 5-Jun-92 Chloromelhane IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU R 10 U 10 lJ Bromomethnne IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU R 10 lJ 10 U Vinyl chloride IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU R IOU IOU Chloroethnne 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 ll IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U R 10 U IOU Methylene chloride I J 2 BJ 2J 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U 10 U Acetone IOUJ IOU 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U R IOU 10 U Cnrbon disulfide SJ 3 J 2J 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU R 10 U IOU I, 1-Dichloroethene IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U R 10 U IOU I, 1-Dichloroethnne IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U IOU I ,2-Dichloroethene ( cis/trans) 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU R IOU 10 U Chloroform 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U R IOU IOU 1,2-Dichloroethane IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U R IOU IOU 2-Butnnone 10 UJ 10 U 10 UJ 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U IOU I, I, I-Trichloroethane 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U R IOU IOU Carbon tetrachloride IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU R 10 U IOU Bromodichloromethane 10 U IOU IOU 10 ll 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU R IOU IOU 1,2-Dichloro~opane 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 lJ 10 U 10 U R 10 lJ JOU trans-1,3-Dic loropropene 10 lJ IOU IOU 10 U 10 lJ 10 lJ 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU R IOU IOU Trichloroethene 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U R 10 U IOU Dibromochloromethane 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U 10 U l, 1,2-Trichloroethane 10 U 10 lJ 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U R 10 U 10 U Benzene 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 lJ 10 U IOU R IOU IOU cis-1,3-Dichloropropene IOU 10 U 10 ll 10 U 10 ll IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 ll R IOU IOU Bromoform IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 ll IOU 10 U IOU 10 U R IOU IOU 4-Methyl-2-pentanone IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU R IOU 10 lJ 2-Hexanone IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U IOU I, I ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U R to u IOU Tetrachlorocthene 10 U IOU 10 lJ IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U R IOU IOU Toluene IOU to lJ IOU 10 lJ IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU R 10 lJ IOU Chlorobenzene IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU R 10 U 10 U Ethyl benzene 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 lJ 10 lJ R IOU 10 U Styrene 10 U IOU 10 lJ 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 lJ R 10 lJ 10 ll Xrlenes (lolltl) 10 U IOU JO u JO u JOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU R 10 U 10 U 1,2-Dibromoethone (ED~ SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU R SU SU tert-Butyl methyl ether ( TBE) 10 U IOU IOU 10 UJ 10 UJ toUJ I0UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ R 10 UJ IOU n-Propylbenzene 5 UJ SU S UJ s UJ S UJ S UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ S UJ R ' S UJ S UJ Analyte concentrations in microgramsfur liter (parts ~r billion (ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco- st of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analfitc is detected in the laboratory blank. J Rcsu t is detected below the r~r'"\ limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Com~uqd or clement analyz for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R Rcsu t rcJccted. IUT 00'./ J.:2/-:,7 (iER/\f,IITY {,? ~111.IFR. INC ( ( Table 4-7. Concentration~ of Volatile Organic Compounds in the Field Blanks and the Trip Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blink Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Analyte Date: 9-Jun-92 IO-Jun-92 15-Jun-92 16-Jun-92 19-Jun-92 26-Jun-92 30-Jun-92 I-Jul-92 6-Jul-92 l6-Jul-92 20-Jul-92 21-Jul-92 24-Jul-92 Chloromethanc IOU IOU I J IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Bromomcthnne 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU I0UJ 10 UJ IO UJ 10 UJ Vinyl chloride 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU toUJ IOU IOU IOU IOU to u IOU Chloroethnne IOU 10 1J IOU 101J 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 UJ IO UJ 10 lJJ 10 UJ Methylene chloride IOU IOU 10 U 10 U I J 10 U 10 U 2J 10 U I BJ I BJ 10 UJ 5 BJ Acetone IOU 10 U 10 lJ SJ s J 4J 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 4 BJ Cnrhon disulfide 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U I J IOU to u IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU I, 1-Dichloroethcnc 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU I .1-Dichloroethnne IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trnns) to u IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU Chloroform IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 1,2-Dichlorocthane 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 2-Butanone 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU I, I, I-Trichloroethane IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Carbon tetrachloride IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Bromodichloromcthane 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 1,2-Dichlororopane IOU 10 U 10 u 10 U 10 U IOU IOU JOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU lrMs-1,3-Dic loropropene 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Trichloroethene IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU Dibromochloromethane 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U I, 1,2-Trichloroethane to u 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU to u IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Benzene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU cis-1,J-Dichloropropene IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U to u IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Bromoform IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU JOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 2-Hcxanone IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU I, I ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Tetrachloroethenc 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U Toluene 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 lJ 10 U Chlorobenzenc 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U to u IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU Ethylbenzenc 10 U 10 U to u 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 lJ IOU IOU 10 lJ IOU Styrene 10 U 10 U 10 lJ IOU 10 lJ IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 lJ IOU 10 U 10 II Xylenes (total) IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U to u 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 1,2-Dibromoethnne (ED:!/ SU SU SU 5 U SU SU s lJ SU SU 5U 5U 5 lJ 5 lJ lcrt-Butyl methyl ether ( TBE) 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 UJ IOU 10 U 10 lJJ 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U n-Propylben1.ene s UJ s UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ SU SU 5 UJ S UJ 5 UJ s m\ 5 UJ 5 UJ Analyte concentrations in microgram~r liter (parts ~r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco- st of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP} protocols. B Anat 11 tc is detected in the laboratory blank. J Rcsu t is detected below the rcJ?(Jrtmt limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Com~u~d or clement analyzC<I for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R Rcsu t rcJected. ru1· 00? l:/·,s:::::: GERAGHTY{,? MILLER. INC Table 4-7. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in the Field Blanks and the Trip Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, SI. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Analyte Date: 29-Jul-92 30-Jul-92 31-Jul-92 3-Aug-92 ◄-Aug-92 6-Aug-92 10-Aug-92 I I-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 l ◄-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 Chloromer hane 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R IOU Bromomethane IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R IOU Vinyl chloride IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U ChloroethRne IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U Methylene chloride 31 4 BJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U I J 10 U IOU 21 10 U Acetone 10 UJ 10 U 16 J 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU R IOU Carbon disulnde 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U R IOU I, 1-Dichloroethene IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U R IOU I, 1-Dichloroethane IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU R IOU 1,2-Dichlorocthene (cis/trans) IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R IOU Chloroform IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U R IOU 1,2-Dichloroethone IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU R IOU 2-Butonone IO UJ 10 U I0UJ 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R IOU I, I ,I-Trichloroeth11ne IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU JOU 10 U IOU R IOU Carbon tetrachloride IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R IOU Bromodichloromcth11ne 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU R IOU 1,2-Dichloro~ropane IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 IJ 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU R IOU trans-1,3-Dic loropropene IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU R 10 U Trichloroethene IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU R IOU Dibromochloromethane IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU R IOU I, 1,2-Trichloroethane IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 lJ IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU R IOU Benlene 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 lJ IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU R IOU cis-1,3-Dichloropropene IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R IO lJ Bromoform 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 lJ 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U 4-Methyl-2-penlanone 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU R IOU 2-He:11anone IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R IOU I, I ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U R IOU Tetrachloroethene 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U Toluene 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U Chlorobenlene 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U Ethylben1.ene IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU R 10 U Styrene 10 U 10 U 10 lJ 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U R IOU Xylenes (total) IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U 1,2-Dibromoethane (ED~ SU SU SU 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U R 5U tert-Butyl methyl ether ( TBE) IOU IOU IOU 10 UJ I0UJ I0UJ I0UJ IOUJ I0UJ IOUJ R I0UJ n-Propylbenzene 5 UJ SU 5 UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ R ' 5 UJ Analyte concentrations in microgramsCsr liter (parts ~r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enscco- ast of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analt'e is detected in the laboratory blank. J Resu t is detected below the rev.ortmi limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Com~uqd or clement analyzecl for, ut not detected at the rnrresponding reporting limit. R Rcsu t rc1cctcd. \\.J\ (){)'.? t:?(,'··) CiERAGHTY E,,' MILi.FR. iNC. '( ( Table 4-8. Concenlrnlions of Base Neutral and Acid ExlrRclable Organic Compounds in the Field Blanks Collected from June lo August 1992, Tutu Service Station lnvcstignlion, Page I or 4 St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Fidd Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Analyte Date: 4-Jun-92 5-Jun-92 9-Jun-92 16-Jun-92 19-Jun-92 26-Jun-92 30-Jun-92 I-Jul-92 6-Jul-92 16-Jul-92 20-Jul-92 2I-Jul-92 24-Jul-92 Acenaphthene 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU Acenaphthylene 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Anthraccne 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 lJ Carbnzole 10 U IOU IOU 10 II 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 ll IOU IOU 10 lJ 10 U Benzo(a)nnthracene IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U Benzor~nuoranlhene IOU 10 lJ IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U Benzo k nuoranthene IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ IOU 10 U Benzo g,h,i)perylene 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U JOU 10 U 10 U JO u Benzo 11)plrene 10 U 10 U IOU IOU JO u 10 U JO u 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 u 10 U 4-Bromop enyl phenyl ether 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U Bug.I benzyl phth,date 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 4- loroaniline IOU 10 U 10 II 10 U IOU 10 UJ 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU bisr-Chloroethoxy)mcthane 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 u IOU IOU IOU 10 U bis 2-Chloroethyl)ether 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU bis 2-Chloroisopropyl)ether IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOUJ IOU IOU IOU IOU 4-Chloro-3-methr,lphenol IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 2-Chloronaphlha ene 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 2-Chlorophenol IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 4-Chlorophcnyl phenyl ether IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Chryscne 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU Dibenz(a,h)Mthracene IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Dibenzoruran IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Di-n-butyl phthalate 10 U IOU JO u 10 U 10 U IOU JOU JO u IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 1,2-Diclilorobenzcnc 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 1,3-Dichlorobenzene IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 1,4-Dichlorobenzenc 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 3 ,3 '-Dichlorobenzidinc R R R 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 UJ 10 UJ IOUJ 10 UJ 2,4-Dichlorophenol IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU Dietr?;I phthalate IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 2,4- imethylphenol 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U Dimethyl phthalate IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 4 ,6· Dinitro-2-methylphenol 26 U 26 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 lJ 25 UJ 25 \JJ 2,4-Dinitrochenol 26 U 26 U 25 U 25 ll 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 UJ 25 UJ 2,4-Dinilro oluene 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 II 10 U 10 ll 10 lJ 10 lJ 10 U 10 II 2,6-Dinitrotolucnc IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U Di-n-oc?i'.' f.hth1datc 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 u\ 10 U 10 U bi5(2-Et 1yl 1exyl)phthalate 3 BJ 2 BJ 7 BJ 150 BD 10 U 5 BJ 10 U I BJ 23 B 19 B 41 U 6J 12 B Fluoranthene IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U Anolytc concentrationR in microgram~er liter (parts per billion [ppb)). Analyses were performed by Ensec:o- st or Somerset, New Jersey, usmg March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analyte is detected In the laboratory blank. D Anallite identified at a secondary dilution. J Reau t is detected below the r~ortini limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Comfiound or element ar · - '"•. ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R Resu t rejected. rur ()() ::~, GERAGHTY f-i' ~ 111 J .FR. INC. J.:;l/() ( Tahle 4-8. Concentrations or Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in the Field Blanks Collected from June lo August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Analyle Dale: 4-Jun-92 5-Jun-92 9-Jun-92 16-Jun-92 19-Jun-92 26-Jun-92 30-Jun-92 1-Jul-92 Fluorene IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU Hexachlorohenzene IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U " IOU I lcxnchlorohulndiene IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU lleuchlorocyclopentndiene 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ to UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ to UJ 10 UJ llexachloroclhnne IOU 10 U 10 lJ 10 lJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U lndeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU lsophorone 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 2-Methy lnnphthnlene IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 2-Mcthylphcnol IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 4-Methylphcnol IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U Ntf hthnlcne IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 2- itroaniline 26 U 26 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 3-Nitroaniline 26 U 26U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 4-Nitroaniline 26 U 26U 25 U 25 UJ 25 U 25 UJ 25 UJ 25 UJ Nitrobenzene 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 2-Nitrophenol IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 4-Nitrophenol 26U 26 U 25 U 25 U 25 UJ 25 UJ 25 UJ 25 U N-Nitrosodiphenylnmine IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU N-Nitroso-d1-n-propyl11mine 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Penlachlorophenol 26U 26 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 UJ 25 UJ 25 U Phenanthrene JO u 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU Phenol IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Pyrene IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 2,4 ,5-Trichlorophenol 26 U 26 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol IOU to u 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU iUT U(J./ J2/ l Analyte concentrations in microgram!I_J)Cr liter (parts ~r billion (ppbl). Analyses were pcrrormed by Enseco-East or Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B D J u R Analyte is detected in the laboratory blank. Analyte identified at a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the rcf?Or1ing limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compound or element analyzcil for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Result rejected. Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank 6-Jul-92 16-Jul-92 20-Jul-92 21-Jul-92 IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 UJ IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU JO u 10 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U ' GERAGHTY 8 MII.L!J{. INC Page 2 or 4 Field Blank 24-Jul-92 10 U 10 U 10 lJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 tJ 25 U 25 U 25 U IOU IOU 25 U 10 U 10 U 25 UJ IOU IOU IOU IOU 25 U IOU ( Table 4-8. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Ell.tractable Organic Compounds in the Field Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Analyte Date: 29-Jul-92 J0-Jul-92 J 1-Jul-92 J-Aug-92 4-Aug-92 6-Aug-92 10-Aug-92 I 1-Aug-92 l2-Aug-92 IJ-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 Accnaphthene IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 lJ IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU Acenaphthylenc IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U Anthrncene 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 lJ 10 U 10 U 10 U Cnrbu:olc 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U JOU IOU IOU Benzo(a)anthracene IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U Benzor~nuonmthene IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U Bcnzo k nuoranthene 10 UJ 10 U IO UJ 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U I0UJ IOUJ 10 UJ Benzo g,h,i)pcrylene IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U Bcnzo a)phrenc IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U JOU 10 U 4-Bromop enyl phenyl ether 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU JO u IOU 10 U 10 U JO u 10 UJ ei:g1 benzyl phthalnte 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU JO u 10 U 10 U 4- hloroanilinc IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U JO u 10 U 10 U IOU IOU bisr•Chloroethol!.y)mcthane 10 U 10 U 10 lJ IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU JO u IOU IOU IOU his 2-Chloroethyl)ether JO u 10 U IOU IOU 10 UJ IOU 10 U 10 U JO u 10 U IOU 10 U bis 2-Chloroisopropyl)ethcr IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU I0UJ 4-Chloro-3-methr,lphenol IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 2-Chloronaphtha enc 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 2-Chlorophenol 10 U 10 U 10 U JO u IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 10 U 10 U JO lJ JO u 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU JOUJ Chrysene 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU JO u IOU IOU Dihenz(a,h)anthracene IOU 10 U IOU 10 lJ 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U Dibenzoforan IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U JO u IOU Di-n-butyl phthalate IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 1,2-Diclilorohenzene IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU JO lJ 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 1,3-Dichlorobenzene IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 1,4-Dichlorobcnzene 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 3 ,3' -Dichlorobenzidine 10 U 10 UJ JO u 10 UJ 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U JO u IOU 10 U 2,4-Dichlorophenol IOU IOU JO u IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU JO u JO u IOU 10 U Dietl' phthalatc IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 2,4- imethylphenol IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU JO u IOU IOU Dimethyl phthalate 10 lJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU JOU IOU 10 U 4 ,6-Dinitro-2-mcthylphcnol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U IOU 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 lJ 2 ,4-Dinitrophenol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U IOU 25 ll 25 U 25 U 25 UJ 25 UJ 25 U 2,4-Dinitrotqluene 10 U 10 U JO u 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 lJ 10 lJ IOU 10 lJ 10 U 2,6-Dinitrotoluene IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U Di-n-ocil ththalate 10 U 10 U JO u IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 UJ IOUJ' 10 U bis(2-Et yl el!.yl)phthalate 10 U 10 U IOU 16 B 10 U J.2 J 10 U IOU 19 B 65 B 47 B 16 B Fluoranthene IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U Anolyte concentrations in microgram~er liter (parts per billion (pph)}. Analyses were performed by Enseco- st of Somerset, New Jersey, usmg March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analyte is detected in the lahoratorr. blank. D Analfc identified at a secondary dilution. J Resu t is detected below the ::gortin£ limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Comfiound or element analy for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. R Resu t rejected. TUT 002 1.,:::/:.:: GERAGHTY{.? MILLER. INC. ( Table 4-8. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in the Field Blanks Collected from June lo August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Analyte Date: 29-Jul-92 30-Jul-92 3 I-Jul-92 3-Aug-92 4-Aug-92 6-Aug-92 10-Aug-92 1 I-Aug-92 Fluorene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Hexachlorobenzene IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U I0UJ 10 U IOU lfexachlorohutadicne 10 U 10 U 10 lJ 10 lJ 10 U 10 UJ IOU 10 U I lcxachlorocyclopcntnd icnc IOU 10 lJ 10 U IOU 10 II 10 UJ 10 U IOU llexachlorocthnnc IOU 10 U IOU IO \J IOU 10 \J IOU IO \J lndcno(l ,2,3-cd)pyrcnc IOU 10 U 10 lJ 10 U 10 lJ 10 U IOU IOU lsophorone 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 2-Methylnaphthalcne 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 2-Methylphcnol IOU 10 U 10 lJ IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 4-Methylphcnol 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU Ntf hthalene 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 2- itroaniline 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 UJ 25 U 25 U 25 U 3-Nitroaniline 2S U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2S U 2S U 25 U 25 U 4-Nitroaniline 25 U 25 UJ 25 U 25 UJ 2S U 25 U 25 UJ 25 UJ Nitrobenzcne 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 UJ IOU 10 U IOU 2-Nitrophcnol 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 u IOU IOU IOU 4-Nitrophcnol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U N-Nitrosodiphcnylamine IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU N-Nitroso-d1-n-propyl11mine 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U Pcntachlorophcnol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2S U 25 UJ 25 UJ Phcnanthrcne 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Phenol IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ Pyrcnc 10 U 10 U 10 lJ 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 2,4 ,5-Trichlorophenol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 lJ 2S U 25 U 25 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophcnol IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU Analyte concentrations in micrograms_pcr liter (parts ~r billion (pph]). Analyses were pcrfonned by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B D J u R Analyte is detected in the laboratory blank. Analyte identified at a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the rev.orting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compou!]d or element analyze.a for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Result rcJected. Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank 12-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 10 U 10 U IOU IOU I0UJ 10 U 10 U I0UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 UJ IOU 10 U IOU 10 UJ 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2S U 25 U 2S U 2S UJ 2S U 25 U 25 U 25 UJ 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU I0UJ IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 25 U 25 U 2S U 25 ll IOU 10 U IOU 10 U ' CiERAGlfTY 8 l'vlll.LFR. INC I Table 4-9. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in the Field Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Analyte Sample ID: Field Blank Date: 4-Jun-92 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 0.5 U Field Blank 5-Jun-92 0.5 U Field Blank 9-Jun-92 0.5 U Field Blank 19-Jun-92 0.5 U Field Blank 26-Jun-92 0.5 U Analytc conccntrntions in milligrnms p_cr liter (parts per million (ppm)). Analyse, were performed by Ei1seco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using USEPA Mclhml 418.1. U Compound or element analyzed for, but not detected al the corresponding repo11ing limit. /'' n-- t.., I Field Blank 30-Jun-92 1.4 Field Blank I-Jul-92 0.5 U Field Blank 6-Jul-92 0.5 U Field Blank 16-Jul-92 0.5 U Field Blank 20-Jul-92 0.5 U Field Blank 21~Jul-92 0.5 U ' Field Blank 24-Jul-92 0.5 U GERAGHTY {if MILi.Ht IN(·. Page I of2 Field Blank 29-Jul-92 0.5 U l \ Table 4-9. Conccntration9 of Total Petroleum llydrocarhons in the Field Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Blank Field Blank Analytc Date: 30-Jul-92 31-Jul-92 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons o.s u 0.5 U Field Blank 3-Aug-92 0.5 U Field Blank 4-Aug-92 o.s u Field Blank 6-Aug-92 0.5 U Analytc concentrations in milligrams per liter (parts per million [ppm)). Analyses were performed by Enscco-Easl of Somcnct, New Jersey, using USEPA Method 418.1. U Compound or clement analy1.cd for, but not detected al the corresponding reporting limit. TUT ,._);.)·;:· .:!. .,,'. ,' ~". Field Blank 10-Aug-92 o.s u Field Blank Field Blank Field Blank Field Blank 11-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 0.5 U O.S U 0.5 U 0.5 U GERAGHTY f-? MIi .i.FR. INC. Page 2 of2 ' ( Table 4-10. Concenlralions of Metals in lhe Field Blanks Collecle~ from June lo August 1992, Tutu Service Slalion Invesligalion, SI. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Page I of 2 Sample ID: Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Blank Analyte Date: 4-Jun-92 5-Jun-92 9-Jun-92 16-Jun-92 19-Jun-92 26-Jun-92 30-Jun-92 l-Jul-92 6-Jul-92 l6-Jul-92 20-Jul-92 21-Jul-92 24-Jul-92 Aluminum 35 U 35 U 149 B 35 U 35 U 35 U 35 U 35 U 35 U 46.3 B 74.4 B 35 U 35 U Antimony 13 U 13 U 13 U 13 U IJU 13 U 13 U 13 U 13 U 13U 15.8 B 13 U 13 U Arsenic 2U 2U 2 UWJ 2U 2\J 2U HJ 2U 2U 2U 2U 2 ll 2 lJJ Bnrium 1.3 B IU 1.3 B IU I lJ IU lU IU IU 1.3 B I U IU I lJ Beryllium IU IU IU IV IU I U IU IU 1 U I U IU IU IU Cadmium JU JU JU JU JU JU JU 3ll J u JU JU JU JU Calcium 135 B 122 B 68.3 B 23 B 19.7 B BU BU BU BU 51.8 B 32.1 B 16.8 B 31.4 B Chromium JU 4.9 B JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU Cobalt JU JU JU JU 3 lJ JU JU JU JU 3 lJ JU JU JU Copper 5.3 B 4.5 B JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU Iron II B 17.8 B 165 JU 13.5 B JU JU JU JU 36.4 B 44.9 B JU 14.4 B Lead IU IU IU JU 1 UWJ I U I U I U I U 1 U lU IU I U Magnesium 32.1 B 42.8 B 518 B 32U 32U 32 U 32 U 32U 32U 196 B 269 B 35.9 B 32U Manganese 1 U IU 1.9 B IU IU I U IU IU I U I U IU IV IU Mercury 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U Nickel 9U 9U 9U 9U 9U 9U 9U 9U 9U 9U 9U 9U 9U Potassium 484 U 652 B 677 B 484 U 484 U 484 U 484 U 484 U 484 U 484 U 484 U 484 U 484 U Selenium 2U 2 U 2U 2U 2 U 2U 2 U 2U 2U 2U 2U 2U 2 UJ Silver 3 U JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU Sodium 397 B 458 B 297 B 32U 32 U 32U 32 U 32U 32 U 1350 U IJSOU 1350 U 1350 U Thallium J uw J uw J u J lJ JU JU Ju JU JU JU JU JU JU Vanadium JU JU Jll Jll JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU Zinc 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4 U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4.2 B Analyte concentrations in microgram~r liter (parts ~r billion (ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco- ast of Somerset, New Jersey, using standard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency methodology. B Reported value is between contract ~uired detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). J Result is detected below the rer.ortinl imit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Comr.9und or clement analyzcil for, ut not detected at the corresA'!Onding reportin, limit. w Post-<Jigcstion spike for graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFA ) out of control imils. ' r1.., r (iERAGHTY {'-? MIi J FR. IN< - ( ( Table 4-10. Concentrations of Metals in the Field Blanks Collected from June to August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, SI. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Page 2 of2 Sample ID: Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Blank Bl11nk Blank Blank Bl11nk Blank Blank Rlank Blank Blank Blank Blank Analyte Dale: 29-Jul-92 30-Jul-92 31-Jul-92 3-Aug-92 4-Aug-92 6-Aug-92 IO-Aug-92 I I-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 14-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 Aluminum 43.3 B 64.3 B 39.8 B 44 B JZU JZU JZU 32 U 32U JZU 32 U 32U Antimony 20U 20 U 20 U 20U 20U 20 U 20 U 20U 20 U 20 U 20U 20U Arsenic 2U 2U 2 lJ 2U 2 lJ 2U 2U 2U 2U 2 lJ 2\J 2U Bnrium I U llJ I U I lJ I U JU I lJ IU I lJ I lJ I U IU Beryllium IU IU I U IU IU IU I U IU I U IU IU IU Cndmium 3 U JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU Calcium 82.1 B 43.7 B 33 B 42.8 B 54 B 54.9 B 55.7 B 38.8 B 74.6 B 71.4 B 73.2 B 122 B Chromium 4U 4U 4 lJ 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Cobalt 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4\J 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Copper 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 5.9 B 4.3 B 4U 4U 4U 4U 4.3 B Iron 38 B 55.5 B 16.4 B 45.1 B 29.4 B 7.5 B 8.1 B 12.8 B 9.6 B 7.7 B 9.5 B 29.2 B Lead I BJ I.I BJ 2.6 BJ 1.7 B I UJ I.I BJ I UJ IU IU I U I U I U Magnesium 84.9 B 166 B 35 U 107 B 35 U 35 U 35 U 35 U 35 U 35 U 35 U 51 B Manganese IU JU IU IU IU IU IU 1.2 B I U 1.18 I.I B 2.1 8 Mercury 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U Nickel SU SU BU BU BU BU BU BU BU SU BU SU Potassium 560 U 560 U 560 U 560 U 560 U 560U 560 U 560U 560U 5(,0 U 560 U 560 U Selenium 2U 2U 2U 2U 2U 2U 2U 2U 2U 2 U 2U 2U Silver 4U 4U 4U 4U 4 U 4U 4 (1 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Sodium 900U 900U 900 U 900U 132 B 97.9 B 113 B 49.8 B 152 B 183 B 222 B 316 B Thallium 3 UWJ 3 UWJ 3 UWJ 3 UWJ JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU Vanadium 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Zinc 2U 2U 2U 2U 7.7 B 33 5B 54.9 5.4 B 2.6 B 2U 2U Analyte concentrations in micrograms~r liter (parts ~r billion [ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco- ast of Somerset, New Jersey, using standard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency methodology. B Reponed value is between contract r~uired detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). J Result is detected below the rcJ?Or1in'f, imit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Comr.<Jund or element analyzcil for, ut not detected al the corresxonding reportin~ limit. w Post-cligestion spike for graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFA ) out of control imits. ' l.2 // GERAGHTY f-? MILLl:R. INC. I \ ( Table 4-1 I. Concenlralions of Total Cyanide in the Field Blanks Collecled from June lo August I 992, Tulu Service Station lnvesligation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Analyte Cyanide, Total Sample ID: Field Blank Date: 4-Jun-92 10 U Field Blank 5-Jun-92 IOU Field Blank 9-Jun-92 IOU Field Blank 16-Jun-92 10 U Field Blank Field Blank I 9-Jun-92 26-Jun-92 IOU IOU Field Blank 30-Jun-92 IOU Field Blank I-Jul-92 10 U Analyte concentrations in micrograms_per liter (parts per billion [ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco-Easl of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. U Compound or element analyzed for, but not detected al the corresponding reporting limit. !UT Field Blank 6-Jul-92 10 U Field Blank 16-Jul-92 10 U Field Blank 20-Jul-92 10 U ' Field Blank 21-Jul-92 IOU GERAGHTY 8 Mil.I.FR. INC. Page I of 2 Field Blank 24-Jul-92 10 U ( ( Table 4-11. Concentrations of Total Cyanide in the Field Blanks Collected from June lo August 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Analyte Cyanide, Tot11l Sample ID: Field Blank Field Blank Date: 29-Jul-92 30-Jul-92 IOU IOU Field Blank 31-Jul-92 10 U Field Blank 3-Aug-92 IOU Field Blank 4-Aug-92 10 U Field Blank 6-Aug-92 IOU Field Blank Field Blank Field Blank Field Blank Field Blank Field Blank IO-Aug-92 11-Aug-92 12-Aug-92 13-Aug-92 l4-Aug-92 19-Aug-92 IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Analyte concenlralions in micrograms per liter (parts per billion (pph]). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. U Compound or element analy7.ed for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. TUT (_!()::> GERACiHTY f-? MILi.FR. iNC Table 4-12. Maximum Natural Concentrations of Metals and Cyanide in Background Soil Samples, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Component Name Sample ID Results (mg/kg) Aluminum B-7 (2 to 4 feet) 28400 Antimony SS-8 14.7 Arsenic B-7 (2 to 4 feet) 1 Barium SS-1 41.9 Calcium SS-8 144000 Chromium B-7 (2 to 4 feet) 28.6 Cobalt SS-1 25.7 Copper B-7 (2 to 4 feet) 73.1 Cyanide, Total SS-1 1.2 Iron B-7 (2 to 4 feet) 35400 Lead B-7 (2 to 4 feet) 19.8 Magnesium B-7 (2 to 4 feet) 21500 Manganese SS-8 888 Nickel SS-1 18.9 Potassium SS-2 568 Silver SS-2 0.99 Sodium B-7 (2 to 4 feet) 561 Vanadium SS-1 109 Zinc B-7 (2 to 4 feet) 62.4 Background samples were collected from four locations SS-1, SS-2, SS-8, and B-7 (2 to 4 feet). ID Identification. mg/kg Milligrams per kilogram (parts per million [ppm]). PROIJOI-Tl/RMAXID.XLS /LIT ( .. i(_-_)_·:_· 1 ... - >:H(;, GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC Table 4-13. Metal and Cyanide Soil Sample Results Above Background VaJues, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U. S. Virgin Islands. Depth IntervaJ Component Sample Concentration Maximum Background Sample ID (in feet) Name (ppm) Value (ppm) B-1 4.0 to 8.0 Barium 42.1 B 41.9 B-1 4.0 to 8.0 Chromium 29.2 28.6 B-1 4.0 to 8.0 Copper 85.6 73.1 B-1 4.0 to 8.0 Iron 35700 35400 B-1 4.0 to 8.0 Lead 31 SJ 19.8 B-1 4.0 to 8.0 Potassium 634 B 568 B-2 0 to 2.0 Barium 67.2 41.9 B-2 0 to 2.0 Chromium 31.7 28.6 B-2 0 to 2.0 Copper 79.1 73.1 B-2 0 to 2.0 Iron 38400 35400 B-2 0 to 2.0 Lead 26 SJ 19.8 B-2 0 to 2.0 Potassium 1170 568 B-2 0 to 2.0 Silver 2.2 J 0.99 B-2 0 to 2.0 Vanadium 119 109 B-2 0 to 2.0 Zinc 108 62.4 B-3 2.0 to 4.0 Arsenic 1.2 B 1 B-3 2.0 to 4.0 Barium 184 41.9 B-3 2.0 to 4.0 Chromium 35.8 28.6 B-3 2.0 to 4.0 Copper 104 73.1 B-3 2.0 to 4.0 Iron 42500 35400 B-3 2.0 to 4.0 Silver 2.1 BJ 0.99 B-3 2.0 to 4.0 Sodium 2040 561 B-3 2.0 to 4.0 Vanadium 157 109 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Aluminum 32200 J 28400 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Barium 42.9 BJ 41.9 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Chromium 31.3 J 28.6 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Cobalt 28.2 J 25.7 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Copper 74.7 J 73.1 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Iron 41500 J 35400 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Magnesium 23600 J 21500 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Manganese 941 J 888 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Potassium 569 B 568 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Silver 2.1 BJ 0.99 B-4 8.0 to 10.0 Vanadium 137 J 109 B-5 0 to 2.0 Chromium 33.6 NJ 28.6 B-5 0 to 2.0 Nickel 19.4 18.9 B-6 4.0 to 8.0 Aluminum 35700 28400 B-6 4.0 to 8.0 Chromium 36 28.6 B-6 4.0 to 8.0 CobaJt 30.3 25.7 B-6 4.0 to 8.0 Iron 42700 35400 B-6 4.0 to 8.0 Manganese 895 888 B-6 4.0 to 8.0 Nickel 19 18.9 B-6 4.0 to 8.0 Potassium 833 B 568 B-6 4.0 to 8.0 Vanadium 119 109 - B-8 0 to 2.0 Arsenic 4.3 B-8 0 to 2.0 Barium 98.4 41.9 See last page for footnotes. ()~):.::'. "L ;?~3 .1. ! 1.J ·-r GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. Page 2 of6 Table 4-13. Metal and Cyanide Soil Sample Results Above Background Values, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U. S. Virgin Islands. - Depth Interval Component Sample Concentration Maximum Background Sample ID (in feet) Name (ppm) Value (ppm) B-8 0 to 2.0 Chromium 29.7 28.6 B-8 0 to 2.0 Copper 157 J 73.1 B-8 0 to 2.0 Potassium 3320 J 568 B-8 0 to 2.0 Silver 3.9 NJ 0.99 B-8 0 to 2.0 Zinc 149 62.4 B-8 0 to 2.0 DUP Arsenic 4.2956 1 B-8 0 to 2.0 DUP Barium 104.2529 41.9 B-8 0 to 2.0 DUP Copper 140.8381 73.1 B-8 0 to 2.0 DUP Lead 82.9547 19.8 B-8 0 to 2.0 DUP Potassium 3178.8106 568 B-8 0 to 2.0 DUP Silver 2.7446 0.99 B-8 0 to 2.0 DUP Zinc 144.3185 62.4 B-8 FR 0 to 2.0 Arsenic 94 J B-8 FR 0 to 2.0 Barium 53 41.9 B-8 FR 0 to 2.0 Cyanide, Total 2.7 1.2 B-8 FR 0 to 2.0 Potassium 870 BJ 568 B-8 FR 0 to 2.0 Silver 1.6 BNJ 0.99 B-8 FR 0 to 2.0 Zinc 63.8 62.4 B-9 2.0 to 6.0 Arsenic 1.6 BJ 1 B-9 2.0 to 6.0 Chromium 35.2 J 28.6 B-9 2.0 to 6.0 Copper 105 J 73.1 B-9 2.0 to 6.0 Nickel 21.8 J 18.9 B-10 6.0 to 8.0 Barium 498 41.9 B-10 6.0 to 8.0 Copper 88.7 73.1 B-10 6.0 to 8.0 Manganese 2200 888 B-10 6.0 to 8.0 Potassium 1900 568 B-10 6.0 to 8.0 Silver 2 BJ 0.99 B-10 6.0 to 8.0 Vanadium 119 109 B-10 6.0 to 8.0 Zinc 68.2 EJ 62.4 B-11 0 to 2.0 Arsenic 5 1 B-11 0 to 2.0 Barium 124 41.9 B-11 0 to 2.0 Copper 76.6 73.1 B-11 0 to 2.0 Potassium 2830 568 B-11 0 to 2.0 Silver 1.9 BJ 0.99 B-11 0 to 2.0 Zinc 99.5 EJ 62.4 B-12 6.0 to 8.0 Arsenic 18.3 1 B-12 6.0 to 8.0 Barium 172 41.9 B-12 6.0 to 8.0 Copper 74.2 73.1 B-12 6.0 to 8.0 Manganese 2070 888 B-12 6.0 to 8.0 Potassium 2280 568 B-12 6.0 to 8.0 Silver 1.8 BJ 0.99 B-12 6.0 to 8.0 Zinc 89.1 EJ 62.4 B-13 4.0 to 6.0 Arsenic 185 J 1 B-13 4.0 to 6.0 Potassium 591 B 568 B-13 4.0 to 6.0 Silver 1.6 BJ 0.99 B-IJA 0 to 2.0 Arsenic 13.7 1 See last page for footnotes. rur (;, __ ;:,,: L :>: ~~~ :~~ GERAGHTY & MlLLER. INC Page 3 of6 Table 4-13. Metal and Cyanide Soil Sample Results Above Background Values, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U. S. Virgin Islands. - Depth Interval Component Sample Concentration Maximum Background Sample ID (in feet) Name (ppm) Value (ppm) B-13A 0 to 2.0 Barium 59.3 41.9 B-13A 0 to 2.0 Potassium 841 B 568 B-13A 0 to 2.0 Silver 1.6 BNJ 0.99 B-13A 0 to 2.0 Zinc 63.1 62.4 B-14 0 to 2.0 Magnesium 26200 21500 B-14 FR 0 to 2.0 Copper 77.6 NJ 73.1 B-15 0 to 2.0 Arsenic 1.3 B 1 B-15 0 to 2.0 Magnesium 22900 21500 B-15 0 to 2.0 Silver 1.1 B 0.99 B-15 0 to 2.0 Zinc 206 62.4 B-16 0 to 2.0 Arsenic 11.6 1 B-16 0 to 2.0 Chromium 36.4 NJ 28.6 B-16 0 to 2.0 Lead 45.6 NJ* 19.8 B-16 0 to 2.0 Silver 1.3 B 0.99 B-16 0 to 2.0 Zinc 459 62.4 B-16 0 to 2.0 DUP Arsenic 11.9734 B-16 0 to 2.0 DUP Barium 43.9242 B 41.9 B-16 0 to 2.0 DUP Chromium 36.6984 28.6 B-16 0 to 2.0 DUP Lead 31.2843 19.8 B-16 0 to 2.0 DUP Zinc 386.041 62.4 ,,,_ MW-1 0 to 2.0 Barium 59.1 J 41.9 MW-1 0 to 2.0 Iron 37100 EJ 35400 MW-1 0 to 2.0 Magnesium 24600 J 21500 MW-1 0 to 2.0 Vanadium 132 J 109 MW-ID 1.0 to 2.5 Aluminum 37000 J 28400 MW-ID 1.0 to 2.5 Chromium 28.7 J 28.6 MW-10 1.0 to 2.5 Cobalt 28.8 J 25.7 MW-10 1.0 to 2.5 Copper 75.2 J 73.1 MW-10 1.0 to 2.5 Iron 39900 J 35400 MW-ID 1.0 to 2.5 Magnesium 23600 J 21500 MW-ID 1.0 to 2.5 Nickel 19.9 J 18.9 MW-lD 1.0 to 2.5 Potassium 655 B 568 MW-lD 1.0 to 2.5 Silver 2.3 J 0.99 MW-lD 1.0 to 2.5 Sodium 632 B 561 MW-ID 1.0 to 2.5 Vanadium 113 J 109 MW-2 0 to 2.0 Arsenic 3 1 MW-2 0 to 2.0 Barium 81 41.9 MW-2 0 to 2.0 Sodium 717 B 561 MW-2 0 to 2.0 Zinc 66.2 62.4 MW-2FR 0 to 2.0 Arsenic 1.2 B 1 MW-2 FR 0 to 2.0 Barium 45.6 B 41.9 MW-2 FR 0 to 2.0 Manganese 1110 888 MW-2 FR 0 to 2.0 Silver 1.2 B 0.99 MW-2FR 0 to 2.0 Zinc 119 62.4 -· MW-3 0.4 to 2.0 Barium 59.8 J 41.9 See last page for footnotes. ·ruT ()():~::: J ,'H :: GERAGHTY ft? MILLER. INC. Table 4-13. Metal and Cyanide Soil Sample Results Above Background Values, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Depth Interval Component Sample Concentration Maximum Background Sample ID (in feet) Name (ppm) Value (ppm) MW-3 0.4 to 2.0 Chromium 31.8 J 28.6 MW-3 0.4 to 2.0 Potassium 919 B 568 MW-3 0.4 to 2.0 Silver 1.4 BJ 0.99 MW-3 0.4 to 2.0 Sodium 665 B 561 MW-4 2.7 to 4.7 Arsenic 1.8 BJ 1 MW-4 2.7to4.7 Barium 55 J 41.9 MW-4 2.7to4.7 Chromium 38 EJ 28.6 MW-4 2.7 to 4.7 Cobalt 32.7 J 25.7 MW-4 2.7 to 4.7 Copper 73.9 EJ 73.1 MW-4 2.7to4.7 Iron 39400 EJ 35400 MW-4 2.7to4.7 Manganese 947 EJ 888 MW-4 2.7 to 4.7 Potassium 1270 J 568 MW-4 2.7 to 4.7 Vanadium 121 EJ 109 MW-4D 8.7 to 10.7 Barium 59.4 J 41.9 MW-4D 8.7 to 10.7 Cobalt 28.5 J 25.7 MW-4D 8.7 to 10.7 Copper 75.3 J 73.1 MW-4D 8.7 to 10.7 Iron 38000 J 35400 MW-4D 8.7 to 10.7 Nickel 19.1 J 18.9 MW-4D 8.7 to 10.7 Silver 2 BJ 0.99 MW-4D 8.7 to 10.7 Vanadium 120 J 109 MW-5 0 to 4.0 Barium 50.7 41.9 MW-5 0 to 4.0 Copper 115 73.1 MW-5 0 to 4.0 Iron 37700 35400 MW-5 0 to 4.0 Magnesium 26200 21500 MW-5 0 to 4.0 Potassium l 180 568 MW-5 0 to 4.0 Silver 2.2 NJ 0.99 MW-5 0 to 4.0 Zinc 164 62.4 MW-6 0 to 2.0 Arsenic 1.9 BJ 1 MW-6 0 to 2.0 Barium 137 J 41.9 MW-6 0 to 2.0 Cobalt 31.9 J 25.7 MW-6 0 to 2.0 Iron 36200 J 35400 MW-6 0 to 2.0 Lead 25.4 J 19.8 MW-6 0 to 2.0 Manganese 1440 J 888 MW-6 0 to 2.0 Nickel 19.5 J 18.9 MW-6 0 to 2.0 Sodium 596 B 561 MW-6D 0 to 2.0 Barium 122 41.9 MW-6D 0 to 2.0 Lead 83.7 J 19.8 MW-6D 0 to 2.0 Potassium 911 B 568 MW-6D 0 to 2.0 Silver 1.4 BJ 0.99 MW-6D 0 to 2.0 Sodium 728 B 561 MW-7 14.0 to 16.0 Barium 42.5 BJ 41.9 MW-7 14.0 to 16.0 Cobalt 30.8 J 25.7 MW-7 14.0 to 16.0 Iron 38100 J 35400 MW-7 14.0 to 16.0 Magnesium 28000 J 21500 - MW-7 14.0 to 16.0 Manganese 941 J 888 See last page for footnotes. TL!T t)U:/ 1.:·.?r::::4 GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. Page 5 of6 Table 4-13. Metal and Cyanide Soil Sample Results Above Background Values, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U. S. Virgin Islands. Depth Interval Component Sample Concentration Maximum Background Sample ID (in feet) Name (ppm) Value (ppm) MW-7 14.0 to 16.0 Potassium 1520 J 568 MW-7FR 14.0 to 16.0 Aluminum 29800 J 28400 MW-7 FR 14.0 to 16.0 Cobalt 32.8 J 25.7 MW-7 FR 14.0 to 16.0 Iron 43100 J 35400 MW-7 FR 14.0 to 16.0 Magnesium 32000 J 21500 MW-7 FR 14.0 to 16.0 Nickel 19.3 J 18.9 MW-7 FR 14.0 to 16.0 Potassium 1400 J 568 MW-7 FR 14.0 to 16.0 Vanadium 110 J 109 MW-9 0 to 4.0 Sodium 654 B 561 MW-10 2.0 to 4.0 Barium 120 41.9 MW-10 2.0 to 4.0 Potassium 621 B 568 MW-10 2.0 to 4.0 Silver 2.2 BJ 0.99 MW-10D 0 to 2.0 Barium 199 41.9 MW-10D 0 to 2.0 Silver 2 BJ 0.99 MW-110 10.0to11.0 Barium 194 J 41.9 MW-11D 10.0 to 11.0 Cobalt 28.7 J 25.7 MW-11D 10.0 to 11.0 Copper 131 J 73.1 MW-11D 10.0 to 11.0 Iron 48700 EJ 35400 MW-11D 10.0 to 11.0 Manganese 1070 J 888 MW-11D 10.0 to 11.0 Potassium 2200 J 568 MW-11D 10.0 to 11.0 Sodium 3300 J 561 MW-11D 10.0 to 11.0 Vanadium 163 J 109 MW-11D 10.0 to 11.0 Zinc 94.9 EJ 62.4 MW-12D 4.0 to 6.0 Barium 60.5 J 41.9 MW-12D 4.0 to 6.0 Cobalt 29.6 J 25.7 MW-12D 4.0 to 6.0 Sodium 1520 J 561 MW-13D 4.0 to 6.0 Arsenic 1.7 BJ 1 MW-13D 4.0 to 6.0 Cobalt 26.3 J 25.7 MW-13D 4.0 to 6.0 Copper 102 EJ 73.1 MW-13D 4.0 to 6.0 Iron 39000 EJ 35400 MW-13D 4.0 to 6.0 Sodium 581 B 561 MW-14 0 to 2.0 Aluminum 28700 EJ 28400 MW-14 0 to 2.0 Chromium 36 EJ 28.6 MW-14 0 to 2.0 Cobalt 28.3 J 25.7 MW-14 0 to 2.0 Copper 86.4 EJ 73.1 MW-14 0 to 2.0 Iron 40000 EJ 35400 MW-14 0 to 2.0 Potassium 689 B 568 MW-14 0 to 2.0 Vanadium 113 EJ 109 SS-3 Arsenic 1.7 B 1 SS-3 Barium 94.2 41.9 SS-3 Chromium 33.8 NJ 28.6 SS-3 Iron 55400 35400 SS-3 Nickel 19.2 18.9 SS-3 Potassium 7140 568 - SS-3 Silver 2.1 B 0.99 See last page for footnotes. .\. ·f:"'.f3 ~:,'; TUT l.1l . .rf. GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. Table 4-13. Sample ID SS-3 SS-4 SS-4 SS-5 SS-5 SS-5 SS-5 SS-5 SS-5 SS-5 SS-6 SS-6 SS-6 SS-6 SS-6 SS-6 SS-6 FR SS-6 FR SS-6 FR SS-6 FR SS-6 FR ppm DUP B 1 N "' FR E Page 6 of6 Metal and Cyanide Soil Sample Results Above Background Values, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U. S. Virgin Islands. Depth Interval Component Sample Concentration (in feet) Name Zinc Potassium Zinc Arsenic Barium Copper Lead Potassium Silver Zinc Arsenic Barium Iron Potassium Silver Zinc Arsenic Barium Cyanide, Total Potassium Zinc Parts per million (milligrams per kilogram [mg/kg]). Duplicate sample. (ppm) 258 673 B 265 3.5 97 79.2 NJ 149 SJ 4170 2.8 216 17.3 J 89 J 39500 J 1910 J 1.6 BJ 91.7 J 19.1 J 90.9 J 1.3 2070 J 97.1 J Maximum Background Value (ppm) 62.4 568 62.4 1 41.9 73.1 19.8 568 0.99 62.4 1 41.9 35400 568 0.99 62.4 41.9 1.2 568 62.4 Reported value is between contract required detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Spiked sample recovery not within control limits. Duplicate analysis not within control limits. Field replicate. Inductively coupled plasma (ICP) serial dilution result not within control limits or graphite furnace atomic absorption (GF AA) interference present. PROIJOI-TI/METBAKST .XLS GERAGHTY t:<? MILLER. INC. ( Table 5-1. C~nc;entrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Page I of 3 V1rgm Islands. Sample ID: MW-I MW-ID MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-4D MW-5 MW-5 FR MW-6D MW-6R MW-7 MW-8 MW-9 Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 7-0ct-92 l-Oct-92 l-Oct-92 30-Scp-92 29-Sep-92 S-Oct-92 29-Sep-92 7-0ct-92 Chloromethane 50 Uu R IOU 25 U IOU IOU 500 Uu 500 Uu I0UJ IOU 10 U IOU IOU Bromomethnne sou R IOU 25 U IOU IOU soou soou I0UJ 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Vinyl chloride sou 12 J 10 U 140 IOU IOU soou soou IOUJ 10 U IOU IOU IOU Chloroeth11ne 50 U R 10 U 25 U IOU 10 U soou 500 U I0UJ 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Methylene chloride SO UJ R IOU 25 U IOU IOU soou soou 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U Acetone sou R 10 UJ 25 UJ I0UJ I0UJ 500 UJ 500 UJ 12 UJ 10 UJ IOU I0UJ 10 J Carbon disulfide sou R 10 U 25 U IOU 10 U 500 U soou 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U IOU I, 1-Dichloroethene sou R 10 U 25 U IOU IOU soou soou I0UJ IOU IOU IOU 10 U I, 1-Dichloroethane sou R 10 U 25 U 10 U IOU 500 U 500 U lOUJ IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trans) 1000 600 J 26 530 E 86 ISO 500 U soou I0UJ 39 170 140 IOU Chloroform 61 10 J I J 25 U IOU IJ 500 U 500 U SJ 10 U 3] 18 IOU 1,2-Dichloroethane sou R IOU 25 U IOU 10 U soou 500U 10 UJ IOU IOU 10 U IOU 2-Butanone SO UJ R 10 UJ 25 UJ 10 UJ I0UJ 500 UJ 500UJ 10 UJ lOUJ I0UJ IO UJ IO UJ I, I, I-Trichloroethane 50 U R 10 U 25 U IOU IOU soou 500 U lOUJ 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Carbon tetrachloride sou R 10 U 25 U 10 U IOU 500U 500 U lOUJ IOU IOU 10 U IOU Bromodichloromethanc sou 41 10 U 25 U 10 U IOU 500 U 500 U 21 J IOU IOU IOU IOU 1,2-Dichloro~ropane 50 U R 10 U 25 U IOU IOU soou 500 U I0lJJ IOU IOU 10 U IOU tr11ns- I ,3-Dic loropropene 50 U R 10 U 25 U IOU IOU soou soou I0UJ 10 U IOU IOU IOU Trichloroethene 190 52 J 3 J 19 J 8 J II soou 500 U IO UJ 3 J 29 14 10 U Dibromochloromethnne 50 U 6J 10 U 25 U 10 U IOU 500 U 500 U 31 J IOU IOU 10 U IOU I, 1,2-Trichloroethane 50 U R 10 U 25 U 10 U IOU 500 U 500 U 10 UJ IOU IOU IOU IOU Benzene sou R IOU 25 U 10 U 10 U 1000 950 I0UJ 10 U IOU 10 lJ 26 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene sou R 10 lJ 25 U 10 U IOU 500 U 500 U I0UJ 10 U IOU IOU 10 U Bromoform SOUJ 81 10 UJ 25 UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 500 UJ 500 UJ 18 J 10 UJ 10 UJ I0UJ I0UJ 4-Methyl-2-pentanone S0UJ R 10 U 25 U 10 U I0UJ 500 U soou 10 UJ 10 U JOU 10 U 10 UJ 2-Hexonone S0UJ R 10 U 25 U 10 U 10 UJ 500 U 500 U 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 10 UJ I, 1,2,2-Tetrechloroethene 50 U R 10 U 25 U IOU 10 U 500 U 500 U 10 UJ IOU JOU 10 U IOU Tetrnchloroethenc 590 190 J 15 58 25 44 500 U 500 U I0UJ 13 110 38 10 U Toluene sou R 10 U 25 U 10 U IOU 180 J 170 J 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU Chlorobcn1.ene sou R 10 U 25 U 10 U IOU 500 U 500 U I0UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U JOU Ethylbenzene 50 U R JOU 25 U 10 U 10 U 930 890 J0UJ 10 U JOU 10 U 19 Styrene 50 U R 10 U 25 U 10 U IOU 500 U 500 U I0UJ 10 U JOU 10 U IOU X}'lenes (totol) sou R 10 U 25 U IOU IOU 1600 1500 IOUJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 2 J 1,2-Dibromoethane (ED~ 25 U R SU 12 U SU SU 250 U 250 U 5 UJ SU SU SU SU tert-Butyl methyl ether ( TBE) sou R 10 U 24 J 1.2 J IOU 6200 6200 I0UJ 10 U 5.8 J 51 2700 D n-Propylhenzenc 25 UJ R 5 UJ 12 UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ 180 J 170 J 5 UJ s UJ 5 UJ 5 UJ 8 J Analyte concentrations in microgramsC,r liter (parts ~r billion [ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco- ast of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analyte IS detected in the laboratorx blank. D Analyte identified at a secondary d1 ution. E Concentration exceeds calibration ran~e. J Result is dete.cled below the :Wtrtin\ imit and/or is an estimated concentration. U Compound or element anai for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. u All ~~inf limits raised ue to high levels of target analytes. R Rcsul ~1ec ed. FR Field rep icate of previous sample. / ~3;,:_;·; T ;''':(i(, J r1 r GERAGHTY c-? MILLER. INC ( ( Table 5-1. C9n~entrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Page 2 of3 V1rgm Islands. Simple ID: MW-9 FR MW-9S MW-10 MW-10D MW-11D MW-12D MW-13D MW-14 ESSO-TAP Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank. Analyte Date: 7-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 5-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 I-Oct-92 7-0ct-92 29-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 I-Oct-92 5-0ct-92 Chloromethane IOU IOU 33 Uu 50 Uu I0UJ IOU IOU 10 U R IOU IOU IOU 10 U Bromometh,me IOU IOU 33 U 50 U 10 UJ IOU IOU IOU R IOU IOU IOU 10 U Vinyl chloride IOU 10 U 33 U sou 10 UJ IOU I0UJ 17 R IOU IOU IOU IOU Chlorocthane IOU IOU 33 U sou 10 UJ IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U IOU IOU IOU Methylene chloride IOU IOU 21 U sou 10 UJ IOU 10 UJ 10 U R 4 BJ 4 BJ 2 BJ s BJ Acetone 10 J IOUJ 45 J 50 UJ 12 UJ II U S6 J 10 UJ R 6J BJ 7 BJ 6 BJ Carbon disulfide IOU IOU 33 U sou 10 UJ IOU 10 U 3J R IOU 3J 10 U 10 U I, 1-Dichlorocthene IOU IOU 33 U sou 10 UJ IOU IOU IOU R IOU IOU IOU 10 U I, 1-Dichloroethane IOU IOU 33 U sou 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U R IOU 10 U IOU to u 1,2-Dichloroethcne (cis/trans) IOU 2J 130 180 10 UJ 2J IOU 44 R IOU IOU IOU IOU Chloroform IOU IOU 33 U sou SJ 16 IOU 10 U R IOU IOU IOU 10 U 1,2-Dichloroethane IOU IOU 33 U sou 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U R IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 2-Butanone to UJ 2J 33 UJ 50UJ 10 UJ IOUJ 12 J 10 UJ R 10 UJ 10 UJ IO UJ 10 UJ I, I, I-Trichloroethane 10 U IOU 33 U 50 U 10 UJ IOU 10 U 10 U R IOU 10 U IOU IOU Carbon tetrachloride IOU IOU 33 U sou to UJ IOU 10 U IOU R IOU IOU IOU 10 U Bromodichloromcthane IOU IOU 33 U 50 U 20 J 30 10 U IOU R IOU IOU IOU 10 U 1,2-Dichlorofopane IOU 10 U 33 U sou 10 UJ IOU IOU 10 U R IOU IOU IOU 10 U lrnns-1,3-Dic loropropene IOU IOU 33 U sou IOUJ IOU IOU 10 U R IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Trichloroethene IOU IOU 29 J 18 J to UJ IOU IOU 10 U R IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Dihromochloromethanc IOU IOU 33 U sou 36J 55 IOU 10 U R IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 1, 1,2-Trichloroethane IOU IOU 33 U sou 10 UJ IOU 10 U 10 U R IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U Beniene 28 16 33 U sou 10 UJ 10 U 10 UJ 10 U R IOU 10 U JO u JOU cis-1,3-Dichloropropene IOU JO u 33 U sou 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U R IOU 10 U IOU to lJ Bromoform I0UJ to UJ 33 UJ 50UJ 29 J 44 J I0UJ 10 UJ R 10 UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 10 UJ I0UJ 33 UJ 50 UJ I0UJ IOU 10 UJ IOU R 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 2-Hexanone I0UJ 10 UJ 33 UJ 50 UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 UJ IOU R 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U I, 1,2,2-Tctrachloroethane IOU IOU 33 U 50 U 10 UJ IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U Tetrachloroethene IOU 10 U 2S J 40 J 10 UJ 10 U 7J I J R 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U Toluene IOU 2J 33 U sou 10 UJ I J I J 10 U R IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Chloroben1.ene IOU 10 U 33 U sou 10 UJ IOU I0UJ 10 U R IOU IOU IOU 10 U Ethylben1.ene 24 5 J 33 U sou I0UJ IOU 10 UJ 10 U R IOU IOU IOU 10 U Styrene IOU IOU 33 U 50 U 10 UJ 10 U 10 UJ 10 U R 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U Xylencs (total) 3 J 2J 33 U sou IOU IOU 10 UJ 10 U R 10 U to u IOU 10 U 1,2-Dibromoethane (ED~ SU SU 16 U 2S U 5 UJ SU SU SU R SU SU SU s u tcrt-Butyl methyl ether ( TBE) 2900D 2200 D 660 780 10 UJ II IOU 10 U R 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U n-Propylhenienc 13 J 12 J 16 UJ 2S UJ 5 UJ s UJ 5 UJ SU R 5 UJ s UJ SU S UJ Analyte concentrations in micrograms~r liter (parts r>«:r billion (ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco- st of Somenet, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analyte IS detected in the laboratofn blank. D Analyte identified at a secondary d1 ution. E Concentration exceeds calibration ran,c. J Result is detected below the :fjrtin\ imit and/or is an estimated concentration. U Compound or clement ana!Ti for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. u All ~~~ limits raised uc to high level■ of target analytc■. R Rcllul ~1 ed. FR Field rep icatc of previou1 ■ample. Ht~i?.l ?\Ci() Ji\J GERAGHTY 8 MILLER. INC ( ( Table 5-1. C!)m:entrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. V1rgm Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Blank Blank Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 29-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 l-Oct-92 2-0ct-92 5-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 Chloromcthane IOU R 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Bromomethane IOU R IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU Vinyl chloride 10 UJ R IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IO UJ IOU Chloroethane IOU R IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU Methylene chloride I J s BJ 3 BJ 4 BJ I BJ 2 BJ 4 BJ I J 4 BJ Acetone 10 UJ R 7J 11 10 UJ 9 BJ 6 BJ I0UJ IO UJ Carhon disulfide IOU R IOU I J 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU I , 1-Dichloroethene IOU R IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU I, 1-Dichloroethane IOU R 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trans) IOU R IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU Chloroform IOU R IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 1,2-Dichloroethane IOU R IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 2-Butanone 10 UJ R 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ I0UJ I0UJ 10 UJ I, I, I-Trichloroethane IOU R 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU Carbon telrnchloride IOU R IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU Bromodichloromethane IOU R IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 1,2-Dichlororopane IOU R 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU trans-1,3-Dic loropropene IOU R 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU T richloroclhcne IOU R 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU Dibromochloromethane IOU R IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU I, 1,2-Trichloroethane IOU R 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU Benzene IOU R IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU cis-1,3-Dichloropropene IOU R 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU Bromoform I0UJ R I0UJ I0UJ I0UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ I0UJ 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 10 UJ R IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 UJ I0UJ 2-Heltonone I0UJ R IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 UJ I0UJ I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane IOU R IOU IOU 10 U JOU IOU IOU IOU Tetrachloroethene IOU R IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU Toluene IOU R IOU 10 U 10 U JOU 10 U 10 U IOU Chlorobenlene IOU R IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU Ethylben1.ene IOU R 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU Styrene IOU R 10 U IOU IOU JOU IOU IOU IOU Xylenes (total) IOU R 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 1,2-Dibromoethone (ED~ SU R 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U SU tert-Butyl methyl ether ( TBE) IOU R 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U n-Propylhenzene 5 UJ R 5 UJ 5 UJ SU 5 UJ s UJ s UJ S UJ Analyte concentrations in microgramsc,r liter (parts p«?r billion [ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco- st of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analyte 1s detected in the laborato;n blank. D Analyte identified at a secondary d1 ution. E Concentration exceeds calibration ran,e. J Result is detected below the :flrtin\ irnit and/or is an estimated concentration. U Compound or clement ana!l; for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. u All ~rtinf. limits raised ue to high levels of target analytcs. R Rcsul ~1cc ed. FR Field rep icate of previous ,ample. /.:,F;;_:,=_i:T ?'.: ()() J.ii.i. GERAGHTY{<? MILLER. INC. ( ( Table 5-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Page 1 of6 Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: MW-I MW-ID MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-4D MW-5 MW-5 FR MW-6D MW-6R MW-7 MW-7 FR MW-8 Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 S-Oct-92 I-Oct-92 I-Oct-92 30-Sep-92 29-Sep-92 5-0ct-92 S-Oct-92 29-Sep-92 Acenaphthene IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU Acenaphthylene IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U Anthracene IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U Carbnzole IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U Bcnzo(a)nnthracene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U Benzot inuoranthene IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U Benzo k 0uoranthene IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U Benzo g,h,i)perylene IOU IOU IOU JOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU JO u 10 U Bcnzo(a)p~rene IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU JOU IOU IOU JOU 4-Bromop enyl phenyl ether IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU JOU 10 U Bu~I bcnzyl phthalate 10 UJ 10 UJ IO UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ IOU 10 UJ JO UJ 10 UJ IOU IOU IOU 10 U 4- hloroan iline IOU JO u IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U bisr-Chlorocthoxy)mcthane IOU IOU IOU 10 U JO u IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU bis 2-Chlorocthyl)cther IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U bis 2-Chloroisopropyl)cthcr IOU IOU I0UJ 10 U I0UJ JO u I0UJ I0UJ I0UJ IOU IOU 10 U IOU 4-Chloro-3-mct~lphenol IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U R IOU IOU IOU IOU 2-Chloron!lphth enc IOU IOU IOU 10 U JOU IOU IOU JOU IOU IOU JOU IOU IOU 2-Chlorophenol IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U R IOU JOU IOU 10 U 4-Chlorophcnyl phenyl ether JOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU JOU 10 U IOU JOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Chrysenc IOU IOU IOU 10 U JO u JO u IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U Dibcnz( a, h )anthraccnc IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU JO UJ 10 U 10 U IOU IOU I0UJ 10 UJ IOU Dibenzofuran IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU JOU 10 U Di-n-butyl phthalatc 10 U IOU 10 U IOU JO u 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU JOU JO u 1,2-Dichlorobenzene IOU IOU IOU 21 10 U 10 U JO u 10 U JO u IOU IOU IOU IOU l ,3-Dichloroben1.cnc IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 1,4-Dichlorobenzene IOU 10 U IOU 10 U JOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU JOU 3 ,3 '-Dichlorobenzidine IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 2,4-Dichlorophenol IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U R JOU IOU IOU 10 U DictlJil phthalnte IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU JOU IOU IOU 10 U 2,4- imcthylphcnol IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 7J 7J R 10 U IOU IOU 10 U Dimethyl phthnlatc IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU BJ 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U JO u 10 U 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphcnol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2S u 25 U 25 U R 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2,4-Dinitrorchcnol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2S UJ 25 U 25 U R 25 U 25 UJ 25 UJ 25 U 2,4-Dinitro olucnc IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 lJ 2,6-Dinitrritoluenc IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 lJ Di-n-octyl phthalate 10 UJ I0UJ 10 UJ I0UJ J0UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ I0UJ I J 10 UJ 10 U 10 lJ Analyte concentrations in microgram~er liter (parts per billion (ppb]). Analyses were performed by Ensec:o- st of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analyte is detected in the laboratory blank. D Anallite identified at a secondary dtlution. J Resu tis detected below the ;::sortinl limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Compound or clement anallc for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. t Reporting limit raised due o sample volume limitations. R Result rejected. FR Field rep icatc or previous sample. Ol::-Z:l ,~oo J.r-1.L GERAGHTY f,f MILLER. INC ( Table 5-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: MW-I MW-ID MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-4D MW-5 MW-5 FR Analyte Dale: 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 5-0ct-92 l-Oct-92 I-Ocl-92 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate JOU I0UJ 11 UJ 18 UJ 56 UJ IOU 22 UJ 22 UJ Fluoranthene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U Fluorene IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Hexachlorohenzene IOU IOU 10 UJ 10 U 10 UJ IOU 10 UJ I0UJ Hexachlorohutadiene IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U Hexachloroethane I0UJ IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU lndeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU lsophorone IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 2-Methylnaphthalene 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 130D 110D 2-Methylphenol 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 4-Melhylphenol IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 3 J 3 J Nrfhthalene 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 310 D 230 D 2- itroaniline 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 3-Nitroaniline 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 4-Nitroaniline 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U Nitrobenzene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 2-Nitrophenol IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 4-Nitrophenol 2S UJ 2S U 2S U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U N-Nitrosodj.>henylamine IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU N-Nitroso- 1-n-propylamine IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U Pentachlorophenol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2S U 25 UJ 25 U 25 U Phenanthrene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Phenol IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU Pyrene IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U 2, 4 ,5-T richlorophenol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Analyle concentrations in microgramsj>Cr liter (parts pc?r billion [ppb)). Analyses were perfonned by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B D ] u t R FR Analyle is detected in the laboratory blank. Analyte identified at a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Com~und or element analyzec:I for, but not detected al the corresponding reporting limit. Reporting limit raised due fo sample volume limitations. Result reJected. Field replicate of previous sample. lh?l ;:.::(10 J.Ci . .L MW-6D MW-6R MW-7 MW-7 FR 30-Sep-92 29-Sep-92 5-0c!-92 5-0ct-92 IOU 64 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 UJ 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU R IOU 10 U 10 U R IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 2S U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2S U IOU 10 U IOU IOU R IOU IOU IOU R 2S U 25 U 25 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU R 25 UJ 25 UJ 25 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU R IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU R 25 U 25 U 25 U R 10 U IOU 10 U GERAGHTY 6? MILLER. INC. Page2of6 MW-8 29-Sep-92 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 2S U 25 U 25 U 10 U 10 U 25 U 10 U 10 U 25 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 25 U 10 U ( ( Table 5-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Page 3 of6 Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: MW-9 MW-9S MW-10 MW-10D MW-11D MW-12D MW-13D MW-14 ESSO-TAP Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank Analyte Date: 7-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 S-Oct-92 6-0ct-92 l-Oct-92 7-0ct-92 29-Scp-92 30-Scp-92 l-Oct-92 5-0ct-92 Acenaphthene IOU IOU IOU 10 U I0UJ IOU IOU 10 U 14 Ut IOU IOU IOU 10 U Acenaphthy lene IOU JOU JOU 10 U JO UJ JOU JOU JOU 14 U JOU JOU JOU JO u Anthracene IOU IOU 10 U 10 U I0UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U Carhnzole JOU JOU 10 U 10 U 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U Benzo(a)anthracene 10 U IOU IOU IOU I0UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U JO u IOU 10 U Benzor inuoranthene JO u IOU IOU 10 U 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U Benzo k nuoranthene IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U Benzo g,h,i)perylene JO u IOU IOU 10 U I0UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Benzo a)plrene IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 UJ IOU IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 4-Bromop enyl phenyl ether 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U Bugl benzyl phthalate I0UJ I0UJ I0UJ 10 UJ IO UJ IOU 10 UJ I0UJ 14 UJ I0UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 10 U 4- hloroaniline IOU IOU 10 U IOU I0UJ IOU IOU IOU 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U bisr-Chloroethoxy)methane JOU JO u IOU 10 U IOUJ JOU IOU IOU 14 U JO u IOU JOU IOU his 2-Chloroethyl)ether IOU IOU 10 U 10 U I0UJ IOU IOU 10 U 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U bis 2-Chloroisopropyl)ethcr IOU IOU IOU IOU I0UJ 10 U IOU I0UJ 14 U IOU I0UJ I0UJ IOU 4-Chloro-3-metht,lphenol IOU IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 2-Chloron!ll)htha enc IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 UJ IOU IOU IOU 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 2-Chlorophenol 10 U IOU 10 U IOU R IOU IOU 10 U 14 U JO u 10 U IOU IOU 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether IOU IOU IOU IOU I0UJ 10 U IOU IOU 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U Chrysene IOU IOU 10 U IOU I0UJ IOU IOU IOU 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U Dibenz(a,h)anthracene IOU IOU 10 U IOU I0UJ I0UJ IOU 10 U 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U Dibenzofuran IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 UJ IOU IOU 2J 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U Di-n-butyl phthalate IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 UJ IOU 10 U 10 U 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 1,2-Diclilorobenzcne IOU IOU IOU 10 U I0UJ IOU 10 U IOU 14 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 1,3-Dichlorobenzene IOU IOU IOU 10 U I0UJ 10 U 10 U IOU 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 1,4-Dichlorobenzenc IOU IOU 10 U IOU I0UJ IOU IOU IOU 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 3 ,3 • -Dichlorobenzid inc IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 2,4-Dichlorophenol IOU IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U 10 U IOU 14 U IOU 10 U IOU 10 U Dietl:/il phthalate IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 UJ 10 U 10 U IOU 14 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 2,4- imethylphenol IOU IOU IOU 10 U R 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U Dimethyl phthalate IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 4 ,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U R 25 U 25 U 25 U 36 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2,4-Dinitrophenol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U R 25 UJ 25 U 25 U 36 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 2,4-Dinitrotoluene IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 UJ 10 U JOU 10 U 14 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U Di-n-octyl phthalate IOUJ I0UJ 10 UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 14 UJ 10 UJ I0UJ 10 UJ 10 U Analyte concentrations in microgram~ liter (parts per billion [ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco- of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Analyte is detected in the laborato!}'. blank. D Anallite identified at a secondary dilution. J Resu tis detected below the :gortinl limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Compound or element anallc for, ut not detected al the corresponding reporting limit. l Reporting limit raised due o ample volume limitations. R Result r~~ected. FR Field rep icate of prevloua umple. :..:·;/::,2: T i''.00 1,-,1 GERAGHTY E,? MILLER. INC. ( ( Table 5-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Ground-Waler Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: MW-9 MW-9S MW-10 MW-10D MW-11D MW-12D MW-13D MW-14 Analyte Date: 7-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 5-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 I-Oct-92 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalatc IOU 13 U IOU IOU 10 UJ IOU 23 U 10 UJ Fluoranthenc IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 UJ IOU IOU 10 U Fluorcnc SJ 9] 10 U IOU I0UJ IOU 10 U IOU Hcxachlorobenzene IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 UJ IOU 10 U I0UJ Hexachlorobutadiene IOU 10 U 10 U IOU I0UJ 10 U IOU 10 U Hexachlorocyclopentadicne IOU 10 U 10 U IOU I0UJ 10 U IOU 10 U Hcxachlorocthane 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ I0UJ I0UJ 10 U I0UJ 10 U lndeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrenc IOU 10 U 10 U IOU I0UJ 10 U 10 U IOU lsophorone IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOUJ IOU IOU to u 2-Mcthylnaphthalcnc I J IOU IOU IOU 10 UJ 10 U IOU 10 U 2-Methylphenol IOU 10 U 10 U IOU R IOU IOU 10 U 4-Methylphenol IOU IOU 10 U IOU R IOU 10 U 10 U Nwhthalcnc IOU IOU 10 U IOU I0UJ IOU IOU 10 U 2- itroanilinc 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 UJ 25 U 25 U 25 U 3-Nitroanilinc 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 UJ 25 U 25 U 25 U 4-Nitroanilinc 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 UJ 25 U 25 U 25 U Nitrobenzcnc IOU 10 U IOU IOU I0UJ IOU IOU IOU 2-Nitrophenol IOU IOU IOU IOU R IOU IOU 10 U 4-Nitrophenol 25 UJ 25 UJ 25 UJ 25 UJ R 25 U 25 UJ 25 U N-Nitrosodcif.hcnylaminc IOU IOU 10 U IOU I0UJ 10 U IOU 10 U N-Nitroso- 1-n-propylaminc IOU 10 U 10 U IOU toUJ 10 U IOU 10 U Pcntachlorophenol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U R 25 UJ 25 U 25 U Phenanthrene IOU 21 10 U IOU 10 UJ IOU IOU 21 Phenol 3J IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U IOU IOU Pyrene IOU IOU 10 U IOU I0UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 2,4 ,5-Trichlorophenol 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U R 25 U 25 U 25 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophcnol IOU IOU 10 U 10 U R 10 U IOU 10 U Analyte concentrations in micrograms__J)Cr liter (parts per billion [ppbj). Analyses were pcrfonned by Enscco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B D J u I R FR Analyte is detected in the laborato~ blank. Analyte identified al a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Com~und or element analyze<I for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Reporting limit raised due ro sample volume limitations. Result reJected. Field replicate of previous sample. ·::1;/. T ESSO-TAP Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank 7-0ct-92 29-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 I-Oct-92 14 U SOBJ 17 J 15 J 14 U IOU IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U IOU IOU 14 U 10 U I0UJ 10 UJ 14 U I0UJ IOU IOU 14 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 14 UJ 10 U IOU IOU 14 U IOU IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U IOU IOU 14 U 10 U 10 U to u 14 U 10 U IOU 10 U 14 U IOU IOU IOU 14 U IOU IOU IOU 36 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 36 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 36 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 14 U IOU IOU IOU 14 U IOU IOU IOU 36 UJ 25 UJ 25 U 25 U 14 U IOU IOU 10 U 14 U 10 U IOU IOU 36U 25 UJ 25 U 25 U 14 U IOU IOU IOU 14 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 14 U 10 U IOU to u 14 U 10 U IOU IOU 36 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 14 U 10 U IOU IOU GERAGHTY f,? MILLER. INC Page 4 of6 Field Blank 5-0c\-92 16 IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU to u 25 U 25 U 25 U 10 U 10 U 25 U 10 U 10 U 25 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU 25 U 10 U ( ( Table 5-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Blank Blink Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 Acenaphthene IOU JOU Acenaphthylene JOU JOU Anthracene JOU JOU Carbazole JOU IOU Benzo( a)anthracene JOU JOU Benzo!b~fluoranthene JOU JOU Benzo k fluoranthene JOU 10 U Benzo g,h,i)perylene JOU JOU Benzo a)prene JO u JOU 4-Bromop enyl phenyl ether JOU JOU Bu~I benzyl phthalate JOUJ JOU 4- hloroaniline JOU JOU bist•Chloroethoxy)methane JOU IOU bis 2-Chloroethyl)ether JOU JOU bis 2-Chloroisopropyl)ether JOU JO u 4-Chloro-3-met~lphenol JOU JOU 2-Chloronaphth enc JOU JOU 2-Chlorophenol JOU JOU 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether JOU JOU Chrysene IOU JOU Dibenz(a,h)anthracene JOU IOU Dibenzofuran JOU JOU Di-n-butyl phthalate JOU JOU 1,2-Dichlorobenzene JOU JOU 1,3-Dichlorobenzene JOU JOU 1,4-Dichlorobenzene JOU JOU 3,3' -Dichlorobenzidine IOU IOU 2,4-Dichlorophenol IOU 10 U Oiet~I phthalate IOU 10 U 2,4- imethylphenol IOU IOU Dimethyl phthalate JOU 10 U 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 25 U 25 U 2,4-Dinitrophenol 25 U 25 U 2 ,4-Dinitrotoluene IOU 10 U 2,6-Dinitrotoluene JOU IOU Di-n-octyl phthalate JOU JOU Analyte concentrations in micrograms per liter (parts per billion [ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B D J u I R FR Analyte is detected in the laborato!}'. blank. Analyte identified at a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compound or element analyzed for, but not ddectcd at the corresponding reporting limit. Reporting limit raised due lo sample volume limitations. Result reJectcd. Field replicate of prevlou ■ umple. Lf"il GERAGHTY f,? MILLl:R. INC. Page 5 of6 ( ( Table 5-2. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Blank Blank Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 b is(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 16 41 Fluoranthene IOU IOU Fluorene IOU IOU Hexachlorobenzene IOU IOU Hexachlorobutadiene IOU IOU Hexachloroc)'clopentadiene 10 U IOU Hexachloroethane IOU IOU lndeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene 10 U IOU lsophorone IOU IOU 2-Methylnephthalene IOU IOU 2-Methylphenol IOU IOU 4-Methylphenol IOU IOU Nrfhthalene IOU IOU 2- itroaniline 25 U 25 U 3-Nitro11niline 25 U 25 U 4-Nitroaniline 25 U 25 U Nitrobenzene IOU IOU 2-Nitrophenol IOU IOU 4-Nitrophenol 25 U 25 U N-Nitrosodclf.henylamine IOU IOU N-Nitroso- 1-n-propylamine IOU IOU Pentachlorophenol 25 U 25 U Phenanthrene IOU IOU Phenol IOU IOU Pyrene IOU IOU 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene IOU IOU 2,4,S-Trichlorophenol 25 U 25 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol IOU IOU Analyte concentrations in micrograms_per liter (parts ~r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B D J u t R FR Analyte is detected in the laboratory blank. Analyte identified al a secondary dilulion. Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentralion. ComJX!und or element analyzcil for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Reporting limit raised due to sample volume limitations. Result reJected. Field replicate of previous 1amole. ,·:;.£:.?:T ?0(1 J!"Li GERAGHTY 61' MILLtR. INC Table 5-3. ( ( Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Pagel of3 Sample ID: MW-I MW-ID MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-4D MW-5 MW-5 FR MW-6D MW-6R MW-7 MW-7 FR MW-8 Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 2-0c:t-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U Analyte concentrations in miUigrams per liter (parts per million [ppm)). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using USEPA Method 418.l. D J u FR Analyte identified at a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the rer.orting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Cpmpoun~ or element.analyzecl for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. F1ekf replicate of previous sample . .tru 5-0c:t-92 l-Oc:t-92 1-0c:t-92 30-Sep-92 29-Sep-92 5-0c:t-92 5-0c:t-92 29-Sep-92 0.5 U 4.21 2.2 J 0.5 U 0.7 0.5 u 0.5 U 0.5 U GERAGHTY f,? MILLER. INC. ( ( Table 5-3. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: MW-9 MW-9S MW-10 MW-10D MW-1ID Analyte Date: 7-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 Tot.al Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1.7 21 D 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U Analyte concentrations in mill_igrams l)Cr liter (parts per million [ppm]). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using USEPA Method 418.1. D J u FR Analyte identified al a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. C~mpoun~ or elcment.analyze<i for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Field replicate of prevtous sample. \ MW-120 5-0ct-92 0.5 U MW-13D 6-0ct-92 0.5 U MW-14 I-Oct-92 0.5 U ESSO-TAP Field Blank Field Blank 7-0ct-92 29-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 0.5 U o . .s u o . .s u Field Blank l-Oct-92 0.5 U GERAGHTY f-? MILi.FR. INC Field Blank 5-0ct-92 0.5 U ( ( Table 5-3. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Blank Blank Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 0.5 U 0.5 U Analyte concentrations in mil~rams per liter (parts per million [ppm]). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using USEPA Method 418.1. D J u FR Analyte identified at a secondary dilution. Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. C!Jmpoun~ or element_analyze<I for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. F1elu replicate of previous sample. ,f .l/'/i GERAGHTY f.? MILLER, INC ( ( Table 5-4. Concentrations of Total Metals in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Page 1 of3 Sample ID: MW-I MW-ID MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-4D MW-5 MW-5 FR MW-6D MW-6R MW-7 MW-7 FR MW-8 Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 J0-Sep-92 JO-Sep-92 J0-Sep-92 S-Oct-92 I-Oct-92 I-Oct-92 J0-Sep-92 29-Sep-92 S-Oct-92 5-0ct-92 29-Sep-92 Aluminum 20100 19500 J 2440 3600 6790 52.9 B 1490 1140 61.9 B 16600 3640 4000 973 Antimony 20U 20 UJ 20 U 20U 20U 20 U 20 U 20U 20U 20U 20U 20 U 20 U Arsenic 2U 2 UJ 2UW 2UW 2UW 2U 3.9 B 4B 2UW 2UW 2U 2U 2UW Barium 42 B 20.8 BJ 132 B 43.3 B 61.8 B 7B 167 B 167 B 2.3 8 110B 18.8 B 16.5 B 72.6 B Beryllium 1 U 1 UJ IU I U IU IU I U IU IU IU I B IU IU Cadmium JU 3 UJ JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU Calcium 100000 38800 J 53900 56900 44700 45000 40100 40100 J 6870 64600 49200 51700 47500 Chromium 12.7 U 23.4 J 4.1 B 17.8 19 4U 15.7 12.5 208 22.5 12.7 10.4 II Cobalt 14.SB 14.6 BJ 4.8 8 5.8 8 10.2 8 4U 6.9 B 6.5 8 4U 12.3 B 5.1 8 4.8 B 4U Copper 34.7 35.8 J 16.4 B 16.8 B 28 7.1 B 9.2 B 10.98 4U 56.4 19.9 8 14.4 B 10.2 B Iron 19300 22000 J 2730 5050 10700 89.8 B 2280 1910 411 21400 5120 5470 1370 Lead 8.5 J 5.9 J IUW 1.8 BJ 2.4 BJ 2.3 B I U I U IUW 4.7 S I U IU IUW Magnesium 36400 13700 J 35500 32500 36500 36900 21700 21400 1870 B 41700 30300 30500 35000 Manganese 563 423 J 85.4 1560 1020 38.9J 407 406 9.3 8 314 120J 132 J 81.4 Mercury 0.1 U 0.1 UJ 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U Nickel 13 8 10.3 BJ 21.2 B 8.7 B 15.2 B BU 54.3 49 62 17.I B BU BU 25.2 B Potassium 1910B 13900 J 3900 8 17108 2810 8 1840 8 9310 8970 783 8 3540 8 21100 22100 13800 Selenium 2.2 BJ 2 UJ 3.3 8 2U 2.6 8 2U 2U 2U 2U 3.5 BJ 2UW 2U 2U Silver 4U 4 UJ 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Sodium 196000 J 506000 J 226000 216000 256000 228000 J 214000 213000 15600 229000 199000 J 201000 J 226000 Thallium 3 UJ 3 UJ JU JU 3 UJ 6U JU JU JU 3 UJ JU JU 3 UJ Vanadium 93.1 J 64.8 J 36.8 8 36.2 8 64.9 38.8 8 6.4 8 4.9 8 4U 110 103 106 42 8 Zinc 37.7 J 44.8 J 16.2 8 198 27 62.4 J 26.1 J 26.4 J 22.8 47 168 17 8 7.8 8 Analytc concentrations in mierogramsifaer liter (parts ~r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco- ast of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Reported value is between contract r~uired detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). J Result is detected below the r~rting imit and/or is an estimated concentration. s Reported value was determin 'g tile Method of Standard Additions JMSA). u ComP.<:Jund or element analyzed or, but not detected at the corresg_zn ing rcportin1 limit. w Post-ilige_stion spike for graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFA ) out of control imits. R Result r~1ected. FR Field rep icate of previous sample. LI ii GERAGHTY{-? MILLER. IN(. ( Table 5-4. Concentrations of Total Metals in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Page 2 of3 Sample ID: MW-9 MW-9S MW-10 MW-10D MW-IID MW-12D MW-13D MW-14 ESSO-TAP Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank Analyte Date: 7-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 S-Oct-92 6-0ct-92 I-Oct-92 7-0ct-92 29-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 I-Oct-92 S-Oct-92 Aluminum 17000 13200 17300 164 B 169 B 258 2690 5280 443 U 84.2 B 82.5 B 86.3 B 46.8 B Antimony 20U 20 U 20U 20 U 20U 20U 20U 20U 20U 20U 20U 20U 20U Arsenic 9.2 J R S.S B 2U 2U 2U 2U 2UW 2U 2UW 2UW 2U 2U Barium 419 383 482 68 S.I B 6B 138 B 123 B 17 B I.I B IU IU IU Beryllium IU IU IU IU IU I U I U I U I U IU I U IU IU Cadmium JU JU 3U 3U JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU Calcium 87400 68600 46600 44600 7330 9760 126000 89800 8470 1308 131 B 146 B 109 B Chromium 22 U 39.8 U 19.1 4.2 B 95.1 63.7 71.7 13.9 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Cobalt 21.4 B 17.4 B 20.2 B 4U 4U 4U 4U 7.3 B 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Copper 50.7 J 46 J 56.9 4U 8.S B 20.7 B 12.9 B 20.3 B 6.5 B 6.1 B 4U 4U 4U Iron 25700 17300 22800 281 461 643 674 7160 371 U 73.7 B 66.2 B 71.7 B 54.1 B Lead 8.3 J 21.21 7.6J I UJ 3.2 4.7 124 J 1.8 B I UJ I UW IUW IU I.I B Magnesium 44600 37500 28200 33600 1130 B 1950 B 654 B 42300 1040 B 257 B 240 B 125 B 117 B Manganese 2580 1700 1450 156 5.8 B 12.6 B 15.8 2480 5.6 B 18 1 B IU IU Mercury 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U Nickel 19.2 B 61.8 18.1 B 8U 10.7 B 10.4 B 8U 14.6 B 8U BU BU BU 8U Potassium 4200 B 3790 B 9060 J I IOOOJ 1280 B 1280 B 50300 J 1300 B 914 B 560 U 560U 560 U 560 U Selenium 2 UJ 2 UJ 2U 2U 2U 2UW 2U 2 UJ 2U 2U 2U 2U 2U Silver 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Sodium 234000 237000 200000 229000 113001 16200 J 215000 131000 4920 B 571 B 498 B 752 B 900 U Thallium JU JU 3 UJ 3 UJ JU JU 3 UJ JU JU JU JU JU JU Vanadium 84.1 65.1 66.9 J 69.7 J 4U 4U 12.3 B 21 B 48 4U 4U 4U 4U Zinc 97 105 88.5 J 6.7 B 19.3 B 35 J 18.6 B 34.9 J 22.4 2U 3.4 B 68 3.3 B Analyte concentrations in micrograms~r liter (parts ~r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco- asl of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Reported value is between contract re1uired detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). J Result is detected below the r:Atrting imit and/or is an estimated concentration. s Reported value was detcrmin 'g tile Method of Standard Additions JMSA). u ComP.4:>und or clement analyzed or, but not detected at the corrcsX1n ing reportin, limit. w Post-dige~tion spike for graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFA ) out of control imits. R Result r~1ected. FR Field rep icate of previous sample. GERAGHTY 8 l\11LLFR. INC ( ( Table 5-4. Concentrations of Total Metals in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Blank Blank Analytc Date: 6-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 Aluminum 32 U 776 Antimony 20U 20U Arsenic 2U 2U Barium 1 U 15.8 B Beryllium lU 1 U Cadmium 3U 3U Calcium 77.1 B 140 B Chromium 4U 16.2 Cobalt 4U 4U Copper 4U 4U Iron 9.5 B 820 Lead 1 UJ I UJ Magnesium 39.3 B 1320 B Manganese 1.18 9.7 B Mercury 0.1 U 0.1 U Nickel SU SU Potassium 560U 738 B Selenium 2U 2U Silver 4U 4U Sodium 799 B 523 B Thallium JU 3U Vanadium 4U 5.2 B Zinc 2.3 B 4.4 B Ana(yte concentrations in micrograms__per liter (parts ~r billion [ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Reported value is between contract required detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). J Result is detected below the rePQrting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. S Reported value was determined b_y Ifie Method of Standard AdditionsJMSA). U Com~und or clement analyzed for, but not detected at the correspon ing reporting limit. W Post-<lige_stion spike for graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFAA) out of control limits. R Result reJectcd. FR Field replicate of previous sample. '\. \ ('•.\ .. GERAGHTY 8 MILLER. IN(' Page 3 of3 .. ( ( ( Table 5-5. Concentrations of Dissolved Metals in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Page I of3 Sample ID: MW-1 MW-ID MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-4D MW-5 MW-5 FR MW-6D MW-6R MW-7 MW-7FR MW-8 Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 5-0ct-92 l-Oct-92 l-Oct-92 30-Sep-92 29-Sep-92 5-0ct-92 5-0ct-92 29-Sep-92 Aluminum 32 U 230 33.4 B 71.7 B 36.5 B 908 34.9 B 36.l B 58 B 57.8 B 32 U 32 U 46.8 B Antimony 20U 20U 20U 20U 20 U 20U 20U 24.8 B 20U 20U 20.l B 20 U 20 U Arsenic 2UW 2U 2U 2U 2U 2UW 3.98 3.9 B 2U 2U 2UW 2UW 2U Barium 114 B 123 B 1238 36.9 B 56.2 B 7.68 172 B 162 B 2.4 B 95.3 B 4.8 B 7.4 B 72.6 B Beryllium l U IU IU I U IU IU IU IU l U I U l U IU IU Cadmium JU JU 3U JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU JU Calcium 60400 11600 53800 57100 44000 45700 40300 39500 J 7090 48700 41200 41100 50200 Chromium 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 195 4U 4U 4U 4U Cobalt 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 5.48 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Copper 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4.1 B Iron 15.7 B 27.1 B 30.6 B 55.6 B 21.6 B 39.8 B 278 278 26.8 B 53.1 B 7U 10.5 B 28.5 B Lead l U I U IU IU IU 2.4 B IU I U I U I U l U I U IU Magnesium 28600 2450 B 36800 32500 34000 38800 21600 23200 19108 32700 28600 28700 34900 Manganese 42.7 2.8 B 40 1490 650 45.8 J 373 383 IU 43.2 1.2 B 28 45.6 Mercury 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U Nickel BU BU 23.3 B BU BU SU 39.7 B 48.8 54.1 BU BU BU 18 B Potassium 1570 B 14400 3270 B 1130 B 22008 2250 B 9850 9380 560 U 3220 B 20100 22400 13100 Selenium 2U 2U 2U 2 UJ 2U 2.3 B 2U 2U 3.2 B IOU 2.1 B 2U 2U Silver 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Sodium 219000 J 164000 241000 233000 267000 242000 233000 236000 16100 247000 209000 211000 236000 Thallium 3UW 3 UJ 3 UJ 3 UJ 3 UJ JU 3 UJ 3 UJ JU 3 UJ 3UW JU 3 UJ Vanadium 48.3 B 9.1 B 32.9 B 23.8 B 33.7 B 40.6 B 4U 4U 4U 42.8 B 96.8 99.2 42.1 B Zinc 32 68 IO.I B 12 B 8.7 B 67.5 7.5 B 5.6 B 4.8 B IO.I B 3.9 B 7.4 B 4.3 B Analyte concentrations in micrograms~r liter (parts ~r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco- st of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B Reported value is between contract re~uired detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). J Result is detected below the r~rting irnit and/or is an estimated concentration. s Reported value was determin 'g ttie Method of Standard Additions JMSA). u Com~und or element analyzed or, but not detected at the corres)Jn ing reportin' limit. w Post-i:lige~tion spike for graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFA ) out of control imits. R Result r~1ected. FR Field rep icate of previous sample. in.\. GERAGHTY ct? MILLER. INC. ( Table 5-5. Concentrations of Dissolved Metals in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Page 2 of3 Sample ID: MW-9 MW-9S MW-10 MW-10D MW-11D MW-120 MW-13D MW-14 ESSO-TAP Field Field Field Field Blank Blank Blank Blank Analyte Dale: 7-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 5-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 I-Oct-92 7-0ct-92 29-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 l-Oct-92 5-Oct-92 Aluminum 95.6B 32U 67.9B 32U 94.9 B 138 B 2180 42 B 75.2 B 32 U 32 U 32U 32U Antimony 20U 21 B 20 U 20 U 20U 20U 20U 20U 20U 20 U 20U 20U 20 U Arsenic II J R 7.4 BJ 2UW 2U 2UW 2U 2U 2UW 2U 2U 2U 2U Barium 408 365 472 5.3 B 4.3 B 4.9 B 121 B 114 B 9.5 B 1 U IU IU IU Beryllium 1 U I U I U I U 1 U 1 U 1 U 1 U I U IU IU 1 U IU Cadmium 3U 3U 3U 3U 3U 3U 3U 3U 3U 3U JU 3U JU Calcium 67100 60900 43700 45000 6950 8870 105000 88200 8760 46.1 B 73.7 8 75.8 B 73.8 B Chromium 4U 4U 4U 4U 79.4 49 J 66.8 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Cobalt 4U 4U 4.3 B 4U 4U 4U 4U 5.4 B 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Copper 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 7.2 B 4U 5.5 B 4U 4U 4U 4U Iron 97 B 27.2B 59.1 B 7U 28.7 B 27.7 B 12B 857 7U 14.9 B 12.6 B 20.4 B 10.9B Lead 1.6 B 1.3 B I U IU 1 U lU 81.5 S IU 1 U I U 1 U I U I U Magnesium 32700 28400 22400 34300 10908 1930 B 35 U 41800 438 B 44.3 B 57.6 8 86.6 B 35 U Manganese 1760 1350 1000 143 I U 1.5 B I.I B 2470 2.3 B IU IU IU IU Mercury 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U Nickel SU 15.2 B SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU Potassium 3730 B 3240 8 8490 10900 1420 B 1470 B 52800 1440 B 909 B 560 U 560 U 560 U 560 U Selenium 2U 2U 2U 2U 2.2 BJ 2U 2U 2 UJ 2U 2U 2UW 2U 2U Silver 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U Sodium 238000 244000 214000 235000 12200 17700 236000 139000 5620 379 B 391 B 450 B 900 U Thallium 3U 3UW 3UW J UJ 3U JU 3 UJ 3 UJ J uw 3U JU JU JU Vnnadium 25.1 B 15.9 B 21.9 B 72.1 4U 4U 10.9 B 4.7 B 4U 4U 4U 4U 4 lJ Zinc 28.9 J 20.I J 55.8 12.5 B 4.3 B 5.8 B 7.2 B 15.8 B 16.4 B 2U 2U 2.1 B 3.7 B Analytc concentrations in micrograms~r liter (parts ~r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco- ast of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. 8 Reported value is between contract re1uired detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). J Result is detected below the r:9trting imit and/or is an estimated concentration. s Reported value was determin ?o tfie Method of Standard Additions JMSA). u ComP.(?und or element analyzed or, but not detected at the corresAl° ing reportin' limit. w Post-dige,stion spike for graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFA ) out of control imits. R Result ~1ected. FR Field rep icate of previous sample. \.\\\ GERAGHTY ft< l\1ILLER. INC ( ( Table 5-5. Concentrations of Dissolved Metals in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Blank Blank Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 Aluminum 32 U 32 U Antimony 20U 20U Arsenic 2U 2U Barium JU I U Beryllium JU I U Cadmium 3U 3U Calcium 84.9 B 67.7 B Chromium 4U 4U Cobalt 4U 4U Copper 4U 4U Iron 10.98 7U Lead I U I U Magnesium 35 U 35 U Manganese JU I U Mercury 0.1 U 0.1 U Nickel BU BU Potassium 560U 560U Selenium 2U 2U Silver 4U 4U Sodium 65.1 B 692 B Thallium 3U 3U Vanadium 4U 4U Zinc 3.1 B 2.3 B Analyte concentrations in micrograms_per liter (parts ~r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. B J s u w R FR Reported value is between contract required detection limit (CRDL) and instrument detection limit (IDL). Result is detected below the rcpc;1rting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Reported value was determined b__y tile Method of Standard AdditionsJMSA). Comr9und or clement analyzed for, but not detected al the corrcspon ing reporting limit. Post-dige_stion spike for graphite furnace atomic absorption (GFAA) out of control limits. Result rcJected. Field replicate of previous sample. L fl i GERAGHTY {t? MILLER. INC ( ( Table 5-6. Concentrations of Total Cyanide in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: MW-I MW-ID MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-4D MW-S MW-S FR MW-6D MW-6R Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 S-Oct-92 I-Oct-92 I-Oct-92 30-Sep-92 29-Sep-92 Cyanide, Total lOUJ 10 UJ lOUJ 10 UJ 10 UJ IOUJ IOUJ IOUJ 10 UJ R Analytc concentrations in micrograms_pcr liter (parts per billion [ppb)). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somcnct, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. J u R FR Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compou~d or clement analyzcii for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Rc~ult rcJected. Field replicate of previous sample. MW-7 S-Oct-92 10 UJ Page I of3 MW-7 FR MW-8 S-Oct-92 29-Sep-92 10 UJ R GERAGHTY f,r MILLER. INC ( Table 5-6. Concentrations of Total Cyanide in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: MW-9 MW-9S MW-10 MW-10D MW-11D MW-120 MW-130 MW-14 Analyte Date: 7-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 6-0ct-92 2-0ct-92 S-Oct-92 6-0ct-92 I-Oct-92 Cyanide, Total l0UJ I0UJ 10 UJ I0UJ R 10 UJ 10 UJ 10 UJ Analyte concentrations in micrograms_per liter (parts (k?r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somerset, New Jersey, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. J u R FR Result is detected below the reP.Orting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compoul)d or element analyze.a for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Result reJected. Field replicate of previous sample. c;•f;:::: T ESSO-T AP Field Blank Field Blank 7-0ct-92 29-Sep-92 30-Sep-92 I0UJ I0UJ I0UJ Field Blank. I-Oct-92 I0UJ GERAGHTY ft? MILLER. INC Page 2 of3 Field Blank. S-Oct-92 I0UJ I ' ( Table S-6. Concentrations of Total Cyanide in Ground-Water Samples Collected in September and October 1992, Tutu Service Station Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Field Field Blank Blank Analyte Date: 6-0ct-92 7-0ct-92 Cyanide, Total IOUJ IOUJ Analyte concentrations in micrograms_per liter (parts ~r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco-East of Somenet, New Jeney, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. J u R FR Result is detected below the reP.Orting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compou~d or element analyzco for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. Result reJected. Field replicate of previous sample. illL GERAGHTY f-? MILLER. INC. Page 3 of3 I / ( Table S-7. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collcx;ted in October and November 1992 During the Pumping Test, Tutu Service Station, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment Effluent Effluent Effluent Effiuent Effiuent Effluent Influent Influent Influent Influent Influent Influent Analyte Date: JO-Oct-92 2-Nov-92 J-Nov-92 4-Nov-92 .S-Nov-92 6-Nov-92 30-0ct-92 2-Nov-92 3-Nov-92 4-Nov-92 .S-Nov-92 6-Nov-92 1,2-Dibromoethane (ED:J SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU tert-Butyl methyl ether ( TBE) IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 38 60 120 170 160 160 n-Propylbenzenc SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU SU Chloromethane IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU Bromomethane IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Vinyl chloride IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU Chloroethane 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU Methylene chloride 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU Acetone 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 41 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU Carbon disulfide IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU I, 1-Dichloroethene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU I , l-Dichloroethane IOU IOU IOU JOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trans) IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 71 110 120 170 ISO 160 Chloroform IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IJ 2J 21 3 1 21 21 1,2-Dichloroethane IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 2-Butanone IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 19 2J IOU IOU IOU IOU I, I, l-Trichloroethane IOU IOU IOU IOU 11 2J IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 21 Carbon tetrachloride IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Bromodichloromethane IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU JOU 1,2-Dichloropropane 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU trans-1,3-Dichloropropene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU Trichloroethene IOU IOU IOU IOU 61 10 6J 10 12 17 15 24 Oibromochloromethane IOU IOU IOU JOU IOU JOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 1, l ,2-Trichloroethane IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU Benzene JOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 2J 3 1 11 14 13 12 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU Bromoform IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 10 U IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU 2-Hexanone 10 U IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU l,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU Tetrachloroethene 10 U IOU IOU IOU 2J 41 20 39 49 6S 60 62 Toluene 10 U IOU IOU IOU IJ 2J IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 2J Chloroben1.ene IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U JOU Ethyl benzene IOU IOU IOU IOU 2J 31 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U 3J Styrene · IOU IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU IOU 10 U 10 U IOU 10 U IOU Xylenes (total) IOU IOU IOU IOU 61 10 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IJ 14 Analyte concentrations in microgramsc.r liter (parts ~r billion [ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enseco- st of Somenct, New Jeney, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. J Result is detected below the ~rtin\ limit and/or is an estimated concentration. u Compound or element analy for, ut not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. ,7()() GERAGHTY{-? MILLER. INC Page 1 of2 Trip Blank 30-0ct-92 SU IOU SU 10 U IOU 10 U 10 U 21 41 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 10 U IOU IOU 10 U 10 lJ 10 U 10 U 10 lJ 10 U 10 lJ 10 lJ 10 U I ( Table 5-7. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Ground-Water Samples Collected in October and November 1992 During the Pumping Test, Tutu Service Station, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Sample ID: Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Trip Blank Analyte Date: 2-Nov-92 3-Nov-92 4-Nov-92 S-Nov-92 1,2-Dibromoethane (ED~ SU SU SU SU tert-Butyl methyl ether TBE) IOU 10 U IOU 10 U n-Propylbenzene SU SU SU SU Chloromcthane 10 U IOU IOU IOU Bromomethane 10 U IOU IOU 10 U Vinyl chloride IOU 10 U IOU IOU Chloroethane IOU 10 U IOU IOU Methylene chloride 10 U IOU IOU 10 U Acetone SJ IOU IOU 10 U Carbon disulfide IOU 10 U IOU IOU I, 1-Dichlorocthene IOU IOU IOU 10 U 1, 1-Dichloroethane IOU 10 U IOU IOU 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trans) IOU IOU IOU IOU Chloroform IOU IOU IOU 10 U 1,2-Dichloroethane 10 U 10 U IOU IOU 2-Butanone IOU IOU IOU IOU I, I ,I-Trichloroethane IOU IOU 10 U 10 U Carbon tetrachloride IOU IOU IOU IOU Bromodichloromethane IOU 10 U IOU IOU 1,2-Dichlor&propane IOU IOU 10 U IOU trans-1,3-Dichloropropene IOU IOU IOU IOU Trichloroethene IOU IOU IOU JOU Dibromochloromethane IOU IOU IOU IOU I, 1,2-Trichloroethano IOU IOU IOU IOU Benzene IOU IOU IOU IOU cis-1,3-Dichloropropene IOU IOU IOU 10 U Bro mo form IOU 10 U IOU IOU 4-Methyl-2-pentanone IOU IOU IOU 10 U 2-Hexanone IOU IOU IOU 10 U I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethano IOU IOU IOU IOU Tetrachloroethene IOU IOU IOU 10 U Toluene IOU IOU IOU IOU Chlorobenune IOU IOU IOU 10 U Ethylbenzene IOU IOU IOU 10 U Styrene IOU IOU IOU IOU Xylenes (total) IOU IOU IOU IOU Analyte concentrations in micrograms__per liter (parts ~r billion (ppb]). Analyses were performed by Enscco-Ea1t of Somenet, New Jeney, using March 1990 Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. J u Result is detected below the reporting limit and/or is an estimated concentration. Compound or element analyzea for, but not detected at the corresponding reporting limit. hOf:T ( GERAGHTY{-? MILLER. INC Page 2 of2 OWG DATE:. 26M~Y;93 PRJCT NQ.:; PR0()8.0,1 FlLE NO,: NON-CAO D~M!1N,t;:: CHECKED: pRAffTER:, DE SOUZA 10'°205~· .... oo_· ______________ o5_,.ft-06_' ____________ _;0;.,;.•1ft_56_'-=--------------6-4~o50:;,-=-.• ____ _ 'O V t N TUTU SITE 0 2 -' 0 MILC::S I I I I I I I 0 2 -4 0 KILOM&TERS' 16°17'.___ _____________ ,1_ __________ _ Allf GERAGHTY Al' & MILLER, INC. ,_,. Environmental · Seniices SCALE: SHOWN SITE LOCATION TUTU Sf;RVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ·sT. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS .~Groot ?-{st. Jamoa I. w FIGURE 1-1 . I SOURCE: R.LOPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOaA TES; TOPOGRAPHIC AND PLANIMETRIC SURVEY OF APPROXJMA TEL Y 100 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NEW TUTU SECTOR, ST. THOMAS. USVl, 1992 - ENTIAL: fHiS ORAWING CONTAINU1 THERcON IS E PROPE!IT'Y OF GERAGHTY DRl~WING CONFID AND ALL INFORMATION AND SHALL REMAIN TH & MILLER, INC. AS AN SIONAL SERVICE. THIS BE USED IN WHOLE QR INSTRUMENT OF PROFES- INFORMATION SHALL NOT IN P.~R, Y~THOUl THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT FULL KNOI/ILEDGE AND f-----------~ OF GERAGHfY & MILLER , !NC. - SCALE: FEET 0 150 PRO,JECT NO.: PR013.01 SCALE VERIFICATION DRAWING: EnUTU1 --·-- THIS BAR REPRESENTS ONE INCH ON THE DRAFTE1'l BY: E. CALDERON ORIGINAL DRAWING: CHECKED BY: W, MORAl.£5 I.. ...I APPROVED BY: A. COL!ll'RG USE TO VERIFY FIGURE REPRODUCTION SCALE = f I LEGEND I 01 &. EXISTING CONTROL MONUMENT INDEX CONTOUR Q TF~EE ' FILE !NO: EFTUT!Jl PLOT SIZE: 1""150' Fl GURE DATE; 5-27-93 BASE MAP WITH TOPOGRAPHY DATE: 5-27-93 DATE: 5-27-93 -·- 1-2 TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS - - ----~~------------ ----------------- -~---------~------------~-----------------------------~ -----·------- .... ,,, ',,,-.., ',,,, ' r r I r I I I r CHUR<;H Pf>\IOl PIA ,,,,"·,,,,,n-, ,, ,, \/)' I \ I I I I \ I \ I \ \ I \ I \ I \ I I I \ *SS-8 •*ss-2 SS--1 \ I /'\ \ t ,, \ I l ,,/ \ -- "\ \\,✓,/ \, C~JJ~ SS-~,:~~ LJL-1 "- ss-~;, - ( tH'AYE!l P/fl c_~j ,/;<., -..____, CHT-6D ,il 1[0~- ► // / ;:{ j~ l I _ _, l , r j---- I \ h~· ' / B-2,.,. \ I V ; , ; I , I , I ' 8-3 0 L":,_ '------=- CURRICULUM CENTER BUILDING ·. ??.RMER IAGA BUil.DiNG) -f'IHA-11 \ / ~--.. ~w □ D I FOUi1 WINDS SHOPPiNG CENTER I ' I I , I I ' I I I I I I ' I ' r I I I I I I I I t I ' ' ' I I ' ' r I I I I I I I I r ' P"'vt:D Pl" ,- ----,--__J u , ............ _ I ' - -...... i I -......,..._ : I I L I --- _ ____ j ' , ' , ' , ' , ' , , , , , , , I ' ' I I I r ' r I I I I I I I I I I I I \ ' I ;' I ; I I I \ \ ,' \ \ ; I \ /I \ \ / \ \ I ; I I 1 I I ; I I / \ \ ; I I {j / I I / \ \ ~ I I I I \ \ ~ I \ \~'0 1 \ I J \ \ ~- \ \ l' \ \ I.H'A'Va) PIA ~ ... , \ ~ I \ \ I I I I \ \ '\. \ \ 1 I l '-<~,>~} ~\,:,p / ~ 0 I ">UR Wl!IDS SHCPSNG crnr-<R L_ ~l- "' £.~ L_ "'~ /~ SS-6 8-a3 (/) O'H™'I 8-12 ~,-;-,f3~. , \ \ \ _/,, + \ \ HARVEY \ \ SOURCE: R. LOPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOCIATES (1992). + FOUR WINDS Ill CHT-~ +rnuR WINDS II FOUR WINDS ~. ,J , 0 f~· -· B-9 '---0 w 8c~-3 § SCALE: FEET 0 100 0 LEGEND B-12 0 SS-8 * EGLIN-I+ CHT-60 ,i) SOIL BORiNG LOCATION SIJf?FACE SOIL '.)AMPLE APPROXIMATE LOCATION EX!STING SUPPLY WELL LOCATION MONITORING WELLS INSTALLED BY CARiBBE/,N HYDRO- TECH, INC. (LOCATl()f~S APPROXIMATE) I.J..--------------------------"""'"1r-"'-------r--------~--·-r~~=--,-------------,=,,-----------------------------,1 PROJECT NO.: PR01 3.01 Fl!.£ NO: EFlUTIJ .-1.,, GERAGHT'Y Alif & MILLER, INC. ,.,, Environmental S ervices DRAWING CONFIDENTIAL: TH!S DRAWING AND ALL INFORMA'nON CONTAINED TI-:EREON IS AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY CF GERAGHTY & MILLER, IMC. AS AN INSTRUMENT CF PROFES- SIONAL SERVICE. THIS INFORMATION SHALL NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE FULL l<NOWLEDGE AND PRIOR WRITTEI, CONSENT OF GERAGH'fY & MILLER, INC. SCALE VERIFICATION THIS BAR REPRE3ENTS ONE !NCH ON THE ORiGINAL DRAWING: USE TO VERIFY FIGURE REPRODU::T!ON SCALE DRAWING: EFTUTU PLOT SIZE: 1=100' ORAFrED RY: E. CAWERO!f '. DATE: 5-28- 93 CHECKED BY: W, MORALES . DATE: 5-28-93 APPROVED BY: . A. COLBERG DAT£: 5- 28-93 SOIL BORHilG AND SURF ACE SOIL SAMPLE LOCATIONS TUTU SERVICE STATION lfNESTIGATION ST. THOMAS, U.S. \/1RG,N ISLANDS FIGURE 1-3 , _____ ..._ __________ ,,,_,. __ -------------~,. ___ , ____ _,__ ____ _,,, I , I , , I I I I I I , I I I I : I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ \ I , I \ \ /", \ / ' \ / \ \ / I \ / I I ,/ \ \ / l \ ; I I ; I I ,// \ \ ' I I ,,1 \ \ / \ \ ~~ I \ \ \~ I I I I I I \ \ \ \ I I I I I ' I \ I I.H'AVED f'/11 I \ \ \ \ \ I I \ I I \\ I \ '- \ I \ \ I I \ \ I I I I I 1~-... 0' \ -tP' I ', ',,, \ \ \ \ CJ C CHURCH ----- r r 1J PAV[D Pl " FOUR 'HINDS SHOPPING CENTER I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PAYEJI PIA I I 0 fOUR WlHOS SHOPPING CEH1ER / A__,',_ ( A ~W-11D ~1.JTHERAN CHVRC1/ ,,- r ---- i"'·> / ,/ / v, v / ,- 1' / / L--"---..r-0// /// , / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / , , , / / / , , , I ; , / I , \ I I I \ I \ (// ~ / / / " ~ ,,"' % ' / 0 ',, _ _____ / +\ ~d ~ HARVEY ~/ .,,..,,,.---- SOURCE: R. l_OPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOCIATES (1992). • MW-2 c-- '- CHT-60 0 SCALE: FEET 0 100 iili8-=-7 ,,// ,,,/'<),, _,,/ ,,,, '\ / / \ .,,.,, .,,✓ \ I\ I \ I \ I \ I \ \ \ ' I I \ \ \ \ I I \ . I l ,/\ \ I ,, \ : \ ,,,/ \ I I ,, \ I \ ,/ \ \/,, '\/ ,,,,,// / / / \; /</ / ' , / I , , ' I \ I \ . \ \MW-14\ I \\ I ' I \ I \ ) \~ LEGEND • M\'-1··-,6D ·-• EGLIN--1 ' -f-¥- CIIT-6D ~ -¥1HA-II ) VIHA-~ 0 □ D \ \ I I \ \ I ,;:_ \J SH ALLOW MONITORING WELL L0Ci\TION Di.::EP MONITORING WELi . LOCATION E/ ISTING SUPPI_Y WELL LOCATION MONITORING WlLLS INSTAU_ED BY CARIBBEA i\J HYDRO- TECH, IN C. (LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE) LI HE OF HYDROGE0I_0GIC CROSS SECTION SHOWN ON FI GURE 3-1 N 1-J..---------------,-----------,,.- _""""! ________ T::'.'.'.":'=-:-:-::--::::::~:---i":~=-~::-=--r--~-- ------· .. ,-.·c ,:n,r_;.c---·--------------~·~;.;,,, ... ,·.-,.,-. ~ -,.~,·-· --------. PROJECT No., PROl3.01 ( m£ NO, fflUMW Fl G LJ RE DR WING CONFIDENTIAL SCALE VERIFICATION OT SIZE 1 oo· ..,. A : THIS DRAV,,NG 1-0-RA_ .. _"G_, __ EF_TU_"w_---:::---.-:ccPL=- · ' -~_-' =---, M 111;f,,: . ~.i1T· ·o• ·· DiN. G WELL AND _A_. GERAGHTY AND ALL INFDRMA TION CONTAINED THEREON ,s THIS BAR REPREsrnrs _ . ,, •ee~ •"- AIJ' & MILLER, INC. AAO ~'" """' - ,_m ~ ""~"" "' """ 0, "' ~ .. .,, ' - 00 > ~re ~,~., CROS ~· ~'!ECTION LOCATIONS r '--Alli ___ E_n_v_i_r-on--me_n_t_a_l _S_e_rv_i_ce_s_--L-[-~o-~-~-1-~L-~_},_· ~_;:_M~_I_?R_?_~-ffi~_:_1_~~-b~_:_~~_I_~trn:~_:_:__,'--u;_;P_R;_;:_~_;~_;;_~_:_1;;_~_EE ...... _::_~~-~-ED~/:~ -; :~:~~~ ~:;~, :=::·-=~ -:-.-.-.-. ~-,·-,··~-.. ,,. __________ :.~i:,_:_si_:,_v~_i_. s_uT-~T_l~-~R_~_~:_Ei_ ~~-IG·A·-~-~-N ______ .· --------- • 1-_4) SOUTHWEST 240 A ,,,.-. .. _J w > w _J <( w CJ) z <( w ~ w > 0 CD <( 1-w w LL .__.. z 0 ~ > w _J UJ 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 100 90 80 ~ 11 70 ,J VERTICAL EXAGGERA7 10N 1 OX NOTE: UNE OF CRO'.':s SECTION SHOWN ON F,GUPcc , - 4 I. m I- WEATHERED RESIDUUM (Cl_AY AND Sll_T) WEATHERED VOLCANIC ROCK VOLCANIC ANDESITE TUFF VOLCANIC BRECCIA LEGEND / / I / / VOLCANIC BRECCIA-DEBRIS FLOW INTRUSIVE DIORITIC ROCK I I I I I I I I I I MW-12D NR MW-10 MW-10D I I I I I I I I I I .A.,. GERAGHTY All!r & MILLER, INC. I I I I I I I MW-9 I . I I I I I 1 NR DRAWING CONFIDENTIAL: THIS DRAWING AND AU. INFORMATI ON CONTAINED THEREON IS AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. AS AN INSTRUMENT OF PROFES- SIONAL SERVICE. THIS INFORMATION SHALL NOT FRACTURED ZONE APPARENT DIP OF LITHOLOGIC CONTACTS (DIP MEASUREMENTS WERE TAKEN AT NEARBY OUTCROPS. THE DIP ANGLES WERE PROJECTED ONTO A LINE OF VERTICAL SECTION AND CORRECTED FOR APPARENT DIP AND FINALLY CORRECTED FOR VERTICAL EXAGGERATION.) DEEP WATER--LEVEL ELEVATION MEASURED ON NOVEMBER 16, 1992 SHALLOW WATER-LEVEL ELEVATION MEASURED ON NOVEMBER 16, 1992 OPEN BOREHOLE SCREENE:D SECTION NO RECOVERY MW-6D MW-6 MW-4 MW- 4D '5Z _______________ _,L- ~= I I I I I I I I SCALE 0 I I I I I I I I 200 FEET MW-.3 MW-101 MW- 1 _-:::z_-~ SCALE VERIFICATION ~R~E:_.':V::.._. ~N~O+. __.:'.D~A T.'_.:E:__~ _____ --':'.'.::.:.'.:'..'2'.'.::..'..'..:'.'.::..__ _____ ~_.':...'.__ ~~~-n~~=2'!::i! THIS BAR REPRESENTS ONE INCH ON THE ORIGINAL DRAWING: DESCRIPTION BY APPR. PROJECT NO.: PR00801 DRA\\1NG: TU-176 DRAFlED BY: PADULA/NIXON CHECKED BY: J. BURDICK APPROVED BY: T. DANAHY FILE NO: TIJ-176 PLOT SIZE: 1 6 ::cs100' DATE: 26MAY93 DATE: 26MAY93 DATE: 2BMAY93 MW-13D I ·. ". I l . . Y. 'l. NORTHEAST A 1 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 ~ 110 i ;~ 100 90 80 70 ..-.., -' w > w _J <( w Cl) z <( w ~ w > 0 CD <( I-w w LL ......... z 0 -I-< > w _J w FIGURE HYDROGEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION FULL KNOWLEDGE AND PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT USE TO VERIFY FIGW1E _,, Environmental Seru·ices 3·1 I ! I ' ---,~-~-···--~·-------....------':_-_-_-_-:_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-:_-:_-_-::_■-::_oF_G_E_RA_G_H_TY_&:_M_1u._E_R,_1N_c_. _____ _..,._,R_E_PR_O_ou_c_TIO_N_s_CA_L_E....,_ __ __. _______ ~--- - ------ ----------------'----------------i..-------s-T_._~_,H_'O_M_A:', li_· _:~=v_1_R_c_1N __ 1s_LA_N_D_s_~ _______ __. ______ ~) ,---~~"~-~--.;..., ____ ~--·---------------------~------------------~--------------""'""'I -- I - .... ._ I -- - .... __ ---.... _ -----........ =r!] I I I I ' ' ' ' I I , I , , , I , ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ ' ' ' 1/'·, \ ,/ ', \ I \ ' , ' I , I \ // \ \ I \ \ I \ \ / \ \ I \ \ I \ \ ./ \ \ / \ \ ~~ I I : \ \ ~ / I I I I ' I ' ' , ' ' I \ \ t.lN'"VEll p.,_.. l '-... \ ' ' ' ' ' \ \ ' I I ' ' I '-, \ I '- ,_ I '\. ----- .... 0' ', \ - ';x::>,, "'',, I CHURCH CHUR0-1 r ,~J ' , I I I , I I ' ' , , I PAVO PIil I , I /~, MW·- 1 D / ~· <_ UJTI-IERAN CHURCH ~ "' / ,- ,.--- "' / / I I 4vv // ,,- L / / I , ~ // ,/.' '> I I / I I I I / / I / / / I / I I / / / I I / / / / I I /' // I / / / I ,/ ,1 ,,,, /' I / ' I \ / \ I ' ' ' ' ' ~-) <// :::?, / I / C. I~ '-..._ _./' I t , ________ / '!fr· ~t \ HARVEY " \ ---r-7 I \ / I I I < I I ,/,;// <"\::,,, u .,,.,,,.,,.,,,.,,.,. V ', '" , D\i□ IH' ... VED PIA ~~ MSAY ~~~ Dw,~ r- I ► , ;:ii la I ~ • I I I I I MW-4 ( 164.82) • • MW-4D SCALE: FEET 100 0 zTF'W~-----. I I I \ I \ I ' \ ' ' \ ' \ ' ' \ I I I I I \ I ,/\ \ I ,, \ 1 \ ,.,,,, ', \ \ ,,,/ \. \,,Y ✓ \,,_/,_- ,,,,.,,,,,..".,,.,, / / ,,.,,----\ /4 / / / J I , / \ ' ' ' \ . \ 'MW-14\ \16916)\~ \ \ ~ ·~ CURR!CULU~ CENTffi BUILDING (FORl.lER lAGA BUil.DNG-) LEGEND • '~W-GD . • f..GL:N-i + CHT"'60 " ( i ~;0.9i3) 41HA-II / u ~\ D MW-130 \ □ D ~:, Q ' I I \ ' I ' ' ';,HALLOW MONITORING WELL LOCATION DEI:P MONITORll'-!G WELL LOCATION EXiST!NG SUPPLY WELL LOCATION i'l,ONITORING WELLS INSTALLED BY CARIBBEAN HYDRO- TECH , INC (LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE) WATER--LEVEL ELEVATION iN FEET ABOVE MEA~l SEA LEVEL U NE OF EQUAL WATER-LEVEL ELEVATION ii'~ FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL. (DASHED WHERE INFERRED) SOURCE: R. LOPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOCIATES (1992). ..... ------------~--,r---------~~-- --•,'•---"""'- ,,.,.~,,_, ~--~--.,---------r-----~'T"""'--- P'ROJECT NO.: PR013.01 Fil£ NO; ruru-s Al,' GERAGHTY A.,- & MILLER, INC. ~ Environmental Services • =DR..,..,Al',l..,,.N,-:-G,---::lU,::lU::--_-=-5---:t"'-;P::-;LOT Sil£: 1= 100' DRAWING CONFIDENTIAL: THIS DRAV,1,;G AND ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREON i3 THlc HN1 REPRESHJTS AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF GER/'/:;HTi' or~;:: INCH ON THE DR:Af TED BY: E. CALOERC'N DAft.: 5-28-93 SCALF VERIFICATION ---- & MILLER, INC. AS AN INSTRUMENT OF ,:iROFfS·- Oi >it~/i';\AL GRJl-clr,'((ll}: cHC:CKED aY: w. MORALES DATE: 5-28-!i3 SIONAL SERVICE. THIS INFORMATION SHALL NOT ~i;.s,~~~V~ :t~g _d l -~ ~!WVF.D BY: A, _c,JL_B_ER_G_~_OA_,E_: _5_-2_8-_S_J -·,- BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT Tl<E i , ______ _,,,,,.,,~....._, . ,.,--------------~~~ GROUt.ao~w ATER CONTOUR MAP SHALLOW WELLS SEPTEMBER 28" 1992 . ' , . .. ' " ' . - FI GURE Ii 3 2 fj - , FULL KNOWLEDGE AND PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT USE TO VEfJ:fY FlO IRE t-- .. =====1 f\JTU '3f:R\IICE STATION 11,\IE'.::TIGATION ~~-_.,_o_F_G_E_RA_G_H_TY_&_M_ILL_E_R._IN_c_. -~---,,;~~,,~.-~~·:=~~:◄ ~r~'.~~~'--~~L·-. : .. ::_ -~ -.. -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -.:.------,-_ -~ ----=~----- ----~---~---~~-~~-..---~-~:~,~!~~M-~~~:~:~_"'·_vi_R_~~-~-i,~SL,l\~~ nl----•-·•·•---·--,_,.,_,._,,•,.~ .................... ,,,,, _______ _ I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ' ' ' \ ,, \ / ' ' / ' ' / ' ' / \ \ , ' ' / \ \ / \ \ / \ ' / \ \ / \ \ , \ \ / \ \ /// \ \ / \ \ ~~ \ \ I \ \~ ; \ \ I \ '\ j ' \ I \, \ Ul-!!>#,VE!I Ph\ I ' ' I ' ' \ ' ' ' ' ' ' '\. '\ \ ' ' ' ', ' I ',,~, ~!)j ~:::-, I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I n.vai P/A /,~ / - - ~ LUTHERAN CHURCH ~ -----~ / -- r i"'-, / / ; v,v ,/ __ '1 / / /_""4// //f / / / / / ' / / // II ' / , / , , , / / ' , , / / , , , / , , / , / / / / / , , / , / ( / \ / ' ' ' \ ' ' ' SOURCE: R. LOPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOCIATES (1992). r'--~--- --r-------Y• ,All,' GERAGHTY Aa, & MILLER, INC. .,. Env·ironrnental Services AWING DRAWING CONFIDENTIAL: THI '.; DR AND ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED THER[Q AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY CF G{; & MILLER, INC. AS AN INSTRUMENT O' PR SIONAL SERVICE. THIS INFORMATION SHAL BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WI THDUT FULL KNOWLEDGE AND PRIOR WRITTH! CON N IS RAGHTY OFES- L NOT THE SENT OF GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. ----,---7 [j( - { '--. SCALE VERIFICATION THIS BAR REPRESENTS -ONE INCH ON THE ORIGINAL DRAWING: ~ ... ! USE TO VERIFY FIGURE REPRODUCTION SCALE ·--·- ...,,.,__,.,, MW--- 2 . W---4 C, .MW---4D ( 164.58) SCALE: FEET 0 100 >.!il rm -- =i PROJECT NO.: PR013,01 FILE NO: TU'JU-6 DR.I\WING: TUTIJ-6 PLOT SIZE: 1=100' ,___ DRAFTEU ·i:rr: E, CALDERON DATE: 5-27-9.3 CHECKED BY: W. MORALES DATE: 5-27-93 APPROVED BY: A .. COLBERG DATE: 5 27 93 c,_;_;,-;,,,==S>,C>.<, - \ \ \ ' , - 164'-_ ~- -- ~ MW--- 1 LEGEN D MW-1 •• MW-6D • EGLIN--1 -tit- CHT---6D " { 134.09) □ D SHALL.OW MONITORING WELL LOCATION DEEP MONITORING WELL LOCATI ON EXISTING SUPPLY WELL LOCATION MONITORING WELLS INSTALLED ~y CARIBBEAN HYDRO-TECH, INC i,LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE) WATER-LEVEL ELEVATION IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LE VEL LJNE OF EQUAL WATER-LEVEL ELEVATION IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SE/\ LEVEL (DASHED WHER E lNFERRED) "'"" ~ --.,o;,., ... .. ,,_.. __ .,,, . .. . . ...,,,,,.,.,,c.,..,..------------ - - -----~ r ~GU RE GROUt•D·WATER CONTOUR MAP DEEP WEtLS, SEPTEMBER 28, 1992 TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. THOMAS, "U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS 3-3 _J --- ~---------------'"'·---------~------------------------------------·-----~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l l l I I ' \ \ ' \ \ ' /)\ \ 1' \ \ / \ ' / \ \ / \ ' /I \ \ / ' \ / \ \ / ' \ / ' ' / ' ' / \ ' / \ \ ~~ \ I : \ \~ J l \ I l \ I \ ' I \ , \ utlf'AVEJI PIA I ' ' I \ ' \ \ \ \ \ ' ' ', \ \ ' \ '.... ,_ ' ' /). I '\.., ........ (./,/ ' \ .... _ '~ ,, \' ',,,,,, ' ' ', SOURCE: R LOPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOCIATES (1992). I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FOU~ WINDS SHOPPING. CENTER - PAVED P/" .....,- 1 I I t]\ ! / I tlMP1Wat Pl ,. Mw-ze (167.97) l!N',.VtD P/1, \ ! ~ ~ / ~~ I I I t- I MW-4 \ (157.57) - \. •MW-40 SCALE: FEET 0 100 ~:J CUR@CULUM CDITT.R flUl.OING (FORMER !.>GA B\JM..l}ING) LEGEr-,,10 • MW-60. CHT-6D .. ,,. .. ---. / ;,.O ~\ #IHA-11 VIHA-+ / od ~\ D MW-13D \ \ \ <,Q \ ' \ \ □ D ' ' \ ' ' / SHALL.OW MONITOR!~,JG WELL LOCA nm< [~EE? MONITURl l'liG WELL LOCATifll) [ ''( 1<::T,\ ' 1 ' C:' IPPL'' "'E; I LO"A-rl01·N ,., ...... 1 . 1,l\:;, ,_L , f '!V L,'-. ~ \.I I MC,\li T ORING Wf-J_L'S INSTALLED FJ/ CARIBBE.f\N HYDRO-TECH, lt•JC /, ' ' 'ATION'~ ·· prooxlMATE') \ LU l___,r..., - _ J Pi 1-' r." _ _ WATER-LEVEL EL.EVATION iN FEET ABOVE MEAi~ SEA LEVEL UI\JE OF EQUAL WATER-LEVEL ELEVA TION IN FEET ABOVE MF.AN SE,l\ LEVEL (DASHED WHERE INFERRED) N ' I I i 1-1------~----------,-D_R_A_W_IN_G_C_O_N_F_ID_E_N_T_IA-L=:-rn-1s~,,,A-V11-N1;-, """'1-SC_A_L_E _V_E_RI-FI-CA=T-iO-'N ------~---- ·------------·-----~--,-· ""'!_F_I G---L-1 R'""_ -E-_ '"i _..,, GERAGHTY AND ALL INFORMATION coNrA1NED n-,rn,:oN !s THIS BAR REPRESENTS GROUND-WA I t::R COf'lll'TOUR MAP 1 A., & MILLER, INC. ~N~IL~:~N~EM~\:~N::~!:~ ~: ;';~~~!' -,.-_ g~1~,:~Ho~w~!f Df=EP Vt/ELLS, SEPTEMBER 28, 1H92 I 3 4, ~ SIONAL SERVICE. THIS INFORMATION '.if i.'<i_L NOT ..._____ • • , -- • l. ~ Environmental Services BE u srn IN WHOLE OR IN PART VllTHUu r 1HE - I . ..., ·· ! 'o"~,LLGEKRNAOGWLHTYEDG&EMAILNLDERP.RIINOCR. WRITTEN· (ONS;:]•~T ;_•,,i US£ TO VERIFY FIGURE TUTU ·sH-<Vt::E :-ffAHt/;··~· !NVf.STIGAT!ON ' -~ . . - REP~oouc·noN $CALE ~:T. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS ' ' - __ ,.,-_____ _ ___ , ---~----------····-:,,t_,r;;,=;;,.,,;_,.,.,,..,...,_. .. ,./· -------------------------~~-----~=-'-'!->i.;.;-,? _:;<'°'/"';~:c,--->1--""' ______ .. : ....... _.. ______ ,;/_. __________ =W'-'••- ---•·:q_:.-•-•- a.'-·. . . - = .f\. --------------·-------------··----------------------------------------------~-------~~~=--~----- l I I . I I I ' I I I I I I I J I I I ' ' I I ' I I I I ' ' I I I I I I I I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ,, ' / ' .... \ / \ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' // \ \ ,// \ \ /\ / I I ' I I ' I I / \ \ ~ \ \\ ~ l \ \~\0 ; \ ' J I ' I \ \ f ' \ t ', \ lllll"A\/a P/,ti, t ' \ \ ' \ \ ' ' ' \ \ \ ',, \ \ ..._ \_ I ',, ~-G' ' -.. .... (p✓ ' ' ' \ \ ' ' '< \ ( \ ', ' ' )/ .-:/?/" /~·/ ,,/ / SOURCE: R. LOl'C'. DE A/UA & A~ GERAGHTY • - t;'" 1 .f I " LE R J ·Nr c· ,li!IIIIJIIF t'<f ,V1 .. L , _, • ~ Ji:n•,,ri,ronrnental ;ervices I I I I I I I I I I I ' I ' I I I P"'V.:D PIA lff'"'VED Pl/4 ~ J ~ f / I~ f I f t-------'--J I I I I I I I I I I SCALE: FEET ' ' I ' ' I ,' LEGEND MW-1 MW- 5D -flHA-11 □ D SHA.LIOW MON/TORIN~ wi=-u l1FFP MONITORING WELL \ '.'NATER-LE\':.::L ELEVATION IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL) EXISTING SUPPLY WELL MONITORING WELL INSTALLED ::3Y CARIBBf AN HYDRO- TECH, INC. (L_OOATl()N .,\PPROXIMA TE) ( . ..)i'>lE EOUAL WATER-LEVEL ELEVATION Iii! FTET A[7')VE MEAN SEA LEVEL (U,tsSi-iEi,J WHERE INFERRED) COMPONENT OF DEEP GROUND-WATER f--LOW . /.·:,.. . ~- ~--==,-.----------------..---"-,,---•-..--""--__;,,~-------~·---•;-,-------------~----------- ~ HY No:' nnu,_.-9 DRAWING CONFIDENTIAL: THIS DRAWll'IG AND ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED :HEREON IS' AND SHALL REMAIN 1HE PROPERTY CF GERAGi;HY & MILLER. INC. AS AN INSTRUMENT CF PROFES- SIONAL SERVICE. THIS lNFOf~MATION SHALL NOT' . BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WlffOUT TH£ \ FULL KNOWLEDGE AND PRIOR WRITTEN CONSEN'T CF GERAGHTY & MILLER, !NC. SCALE VERIFICATION THIS BAR ~EPRESENTS ONE INCH ON THE ORiGINAL 'DRAWING: I I USE T(l. VERIFY FIGURE REPROO_t!CTION SCALE PROJECT NO.: PROlJ.01 DRAWING: j PLOT SIZE: i=HOO' .... - . ·---· .. ------1 CHECKED BY: W. MORAL.ES APPROVED BY: A GOLBERG 1---------------·-··-- GROUND-WATER CONTOUR MAP DEEf;1 WELtS, NOVEMBER 16, 1992 ;'/ TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST :HOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS FIGURE 3-5 ~----... =-•----=---.. ---""-'"--..,...;"""'"""""'-""/'..>/.~1R£a,«••'"-"--·""-"""'"·'"'"-r,;e>-_~,-...,...,,,_,,,-~,..,, . ..,.;;·';..!-_____________ :~-~.-l.---~=···--❖·..._,,.,.,,,· ........ ..,.,..,, __ .. _<"-.,.~----,,·---·----------------------..JI..-----' ' -- -----'' ;•._: ;....,. --0 D~ DATE: 2-23-93 PR.JCT NO.: PR01301 nLE NO.: - DRA'MNG: TU-112 CHECKED: C. MOFFlT 28-N. ~ fEtFOACB) SMOOTH CONCfETE BOX Cll.VERT (8 FT WDE BY 2 FT tteli) V '00 D FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER i t. '11'11-&RJ W-6"7 i • I IA. /• I . CONCFETE PPE -+------- ----~ Q --- ' ~7 I I: ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, SFTWDE 1/ OPEN TCP CU..VBIT--◄~---......... ---1 8MOOT1-t CONCfETE BOX CU.VERT~ -n'-+---.----, SIJEWALK (4 FT 8 It WDE BY 7 FT HCl-t) ~ SCALE (APPROXIMATE) 0 200 FEET RAMSAY l::::::J I • • I iiJU • 8-3 e 8-2 8-1 • eMW-14 I • • ; n f-5\l_ANTILLES AUTO P:;;e ~ ~FORMER GASSETT AIJTO P -, 'llw-J JIW-1 APPRO\-£D: T. DANAHY DRAFTER: E. EAGLESTON 8-14 • • .. • FT It VIHA 0 • VIHA [ • \) .. MW-130 LEGEND SOIL BORING SHALLOW MONITORING WELL DEEP MONITORING WELL EXISTING SUPPLY WELL FEET INCH FIGURE Aaf GERAGHTY All' & MILLER, INC. ~ EnvironmentBl Services STORM SEWER LAYOUT ■ TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS 3-6 ·- <:> () t-.) DWG DA TE: 2Y-EB9J PR.JCT NO.: PROIJOI 3. 2.7 - 2.4 +J Ct-. ...._, ~ 2.1 If; 0 1.8 'C If; ~ s.. 1.5 Cl 'C 1.2 C1) +J CJ Cl) 0.9 J-4 s.. 0 u 0.6 0.3 o. 0.1 A~ GERAGHTY ~a, & MILLER, INC. .4if Environmantal Services /l. • 1. Fll£ NO.: TIJ-111 DRAMNG: TU-111 CHECKED: MOZER APPROIIED: DANAHY DRAFTER: PADULA 10. 100. 1000. 10000. Time (min) DATA SET, ,..&--6r. ra 02/11/93 AQUIFER TYPE. IKIJNF"INED S□LUT ION METHOD. C~r-Jacob EST I MATED PARAMETERS. T • I. 39 H/1!. /,., TEST DATA. Q • I. 24 ,t3 '"" r • o. 17 '1 b • 14.0 ,. MONITORING WELL MW-6R DRAWDOWN DATA PUMPING TEST OF MW-6R TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. THO..wi, U.S. VIRGIN ISL.ANDS . FIGURE 3-7 ,- :,._ DWG DA TE: 23fEB9J PR.JCT NO.: PR01J01 1. 0.9 -- 0.8 .,J Ct-4 .._ ~ 0.7 ~ 0 0.6 'O ~ «:I 0.5 '"4 Cl 'O 0.4 Q) .,J (.) Q) 0.3 Jo. Jo. 0 c.> 0.2 0.1 0. 1. A.,, GERAGHTY ~llf & MILLER, lNC. 4f Environmental Seruices ■ f1l..E NO.: T\J-11O DRAWING: TU-110 CHECKED: MOZER APPRO\t:D: DANAHY DRAFTER: PADULA 10. 100. 1000. 10000. Time (min) DATA SET. cht6-6d., n 02/11/93 AQUIFER TYPE. t.H:(H"fl£D SOL UT I □N METHOD. eoop.r-Jacolll ESTIMATED PARAMETERS. T • 8. 14 tt21Plln S • 0.OOll70:S4 TEST DATA. a • t., u 3,...., r • 110. ft b • 57.0 ft MONITORING WELL CHT-6D DRAWDOWN DATA PUMPING TEST OF MW-6D TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS FIGURE 3-8 _, ;_ --i ::::: ::::, f·.j ;- (--~ 1'•.j ,.J DWG DA TE: 2Jf'EB9J PR.JCT NO.: PRD1J01 1. 0.9 - 0.8 +' '- ..._ A 0.7 ~ 0 0.6 'O ~ (\1 M 0.5 Cl 'O 0.4 G) +J CJ Cl) 0.3 M M 0 u 0.2 0.1 0. 1 A~ GERAGHTY •• , & MILLER, INC. Environmental Sen,ices ■ 10 nL.£ NO.: lU-1D9 DRA~NG: TU-109 CHECKED: MOZER APPROVED: DANAHY DRAFTER: PADULA 100 1000 10000 Time (min) DATA SET. P1•6d-6d. ... 01!/ U/93 AQUIFER TYPE. u«:oNF"INED SOL UT I ON METHOD. C~r-Jacob ESTIMATED PARAMETERS. T • 5. 21?5 ft2 INn S • 1?18.l TEST DATA. Q • I. 9 ,t3/Plln r • 0.1?3 ft b • 65.D tt MONITORING WELL MW-6D DRAWDOWN DATA PUMPING TEST OF MW-6D TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS FIGURE 3-9 MW- 3 -io ~..2.Q'.l B-1 (0-2.o'} CHLOfl:INAJFD c□MPQIJNPS"' (ppb) Meth)(~ne chlorldo 11? J Acetoru, .,. BTEX AMI' PNA COMPOUNDS** ,~ Benzo(a)p:,-ene 270 J Benzo(g,h,J)per}'l,me 290 J Pyene 220 J TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBQNS (ppm} ,_ _ _ _ _;1c,1::.0-_.,, _ _ _ ____ __ ., B-3 (2.0-4.0') f"'H/ ORll\iAJEQ COMPQIJNDS• (ppb) Methylene chloride 26JJ Acetone G Telrnchloroeth,me 6 J m:ELANP BNA CWPOUND½ (gphl ND TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (pcf!Ll ----~~_(l _______ _ _.,__ Q:!.I QRINATfD COMPOUJ':I..Q~ Meth:,tene chloriM 1 J Acetone 11 J Tatrachloroethene 2 J .a.IEK .. AlliL.fllih.-C.Q!,!EQUNOSu fopb l. Di-n-bUt)i phth<Jlot.e 170 J TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS m B-4 (E.0-10,0') CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS,. (pgb\ ND MW- 2fR (0-2,(l} CHLORINAT£D COMPQUNDS~~l Meth)leno chlodde 10 J Acetone 2- Butanone 130 J 25 6IFX AND ~QMe..Q!lb'.D..S.~(ruibl ND TOTAL PETROLEU~ _ _l:-!YDRQCP..R80J\!5 (ppm) 86 J Acetone 5~ J '---. BTEX ANO BNA COMPOUNDS!.!_~ "" TOTAL PETROLEUM H'1DROCARBONS (pp,'Tj) MW-2 {0-2 O') CHLORINATED CQMpQUNQS• (ppQ,) Melh)itine chfQride 10 J Acetone 58 J BTFX AND RNA COMPOUNDS•• (ppb} NO TOTAi PETROL8JM HYDROCARBONS {ppm) .__ _____ , _ .. _._, _______ _, M'!t±JU=JJ'.l. CHI ORINAJFP C()MPQIJNPS• (ppb) 1,,1,.,fhyler."!I chloride 2 J f\cotooe 190 B 2-8utonone 48 Tetrnchloroe111sne 1 J il!LMill ... .i!.t-!A Cf"'-MPQIJNDS•,.. (ppb.) Ben:ro{a)p:;r-~e 140 J TOT AL PETROLEIJM H'l'DROCARBONS (P~r.!)) ND ~IL/Jl,J.=l.ll]) Ci:1I 08ItM.IEO CQMeQ!JNf.!S• (Ql:ib) Methylene chlO'l"ide 1 J Acetone 81 J 6:IE)C ~D B:M~ !:;QMPQ! JNQS,." {12~bl -· NO ~ TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ' - ·m ND ' ' ' ' , -- MW-14 (0-2.0') CHl-OfilNTJEP COMPOUNDS• {opb) Meth:,tene chlorlde 34 a RJfX A~P ONA ~POUNDS.., (p;pb) Toluene 2 J Xy1enes (toto_l) 1 J Diethyl phtholate 40 J Dl- n-butyl phtholate 890 B TOTAL PETROl.£UM HYDROCARBONS (Ppm) 220 D R-1 (40 BO') CHI ORINATfD COUPOlJNPS• ~ Acetone 16 J aJEX ANO ANA COMPOUNDS•• (poiu NO TOTAL PE1ROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (opm) ----~D~-- - - - --r' SS-4 .Q:ll.QHJ.tlh~PQUNDS" (g,g.bl Meth)lene chlorid':l 8 J BJEX AND BNA COMPOUND~ .}. ND TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) NA CH[ QRI NATEP COMPOUNDS* {ppb) Meth)lene chtorlekl 22 2·-8utanone 35 an:-x f\~ln t:lt•.I) ('rn•oc • l~JQC::!.',. fonP) folu-eno -1' J Eth)olbrnzene .3 j X)4ene:s(totol) 19 TOTAL PETRQLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) E~. ll ___ ,,,.., 1,,.,,.-----~-... __ ' ' CHT-6D Q. ' lj . , ' '0' ' B 15 (0 2.0') CHI ORINAifP CQMPQ\JNPS• (pqb)_ Trichloroethene 6 J Tetrachloroelhene 170 BJEX AND BNA COMPOUNPSn (ppb) Tofueoe 12 TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) ND MW-130 (4.0-6.0') CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS, (ppb) 8-!6 (0-2.D') ~~ Tetrach1oroethene 2J. ~D BNA COMPQUNQSn (~ T/Jluene 11 J Butyl benzyl phthlate 58 J J ' ' ' *SS- 8 •*ss-2 1ss--1 C!JRRICUUJM crnTm BUIWING (FORMER LJ.GA BUWI-IG) B 5 (0 2.0') ~-SLlP.lllJ. Methylene- chloride 9 J Ac&tone 92 J 2-Butcnone 18 .B~.fil!A C□l:-1PQI INLJSo (ppb) \ \ ND BTFX AND BNA COMPOUNDS!" (oob) ND TOTAL PEJROLEut.t HWBOCABBONS (po,n) ND \ \ \ 8-14 (0-2.0') CHLORINAlED COMPOUNDS• b) 9 J 72 J BIEX ANO 8NA COMPOUNDS"* (ppb) Toluene 2 J TQTAL PElROLEUM H'tDROCARBONS (ppm) 250 DJ B-14FR (0-2.0'} CHI ORINATFP COMPO!JNQS. (ppb) Tetrachloroethene 100 J RJFX ANP BNA COMPOUNDS•• (nQh). Toluene J J TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm} 56 J B- ti (4.0-8.0') .QH.L(;ffit!!A nm _(~MPOUNDS• fopb) Acetone 370 2-Butan,:,ne 59 BTFX AIJD RNA CoMPOIJNP1•• fo11b) ND _T0T6_! PETROLEUM HYOROCARBot~S U2Q..IILl MW·-W {1.Q-2,5') CHI ORINATID COMPotJNDS• (ppb) Methylene chlorlde 2 J Acetone 4-9 J ' / mu, ~,os _,,,,., coco, 1 MW-sRe / L---------------_:_-/•--f-f---------------1L-:::=:::.1MW-6D/ MW 60 (9=2-0') Tolu~ne 2 J t-ert.-Buty!-meth),4 ether 1.3 J TOTAL PF.'.·mm.EuM HYDROCARBONS (pp~j 53 RTFX AND BNA CotAPOUNDS•• (ppb) ND TOTAi PETROi WM HYOROCa.BfilltiS_!ruml) 84 ,i:HI QflltlAJfD COMPOUNDS• (ppU) Acetone 6 J MW-1 (0 z,Q') RTEX AND BNA CoMPOlJNQSo {pph) ND TOTAL PETROLEUM H'r'OROCARSONS (j)pm) 61 ~ , .... , rl. "~ t I r ! ,<w-7 e B-7 (2.0-4.0') OfLORINAlEQ COMPOlJNPS. {pQb) ND CHLfJRINA TED COMPOUNDS• (ppb) Meth~en~ chloride 2 J BIEX AND ANA COMPrJ !NPS•• {opb) ND BITX ANO BNA COMPQUNDSo (po\l . ND t;W-6 J.9-2.QJ, TOTAL -PETRO!-EUM HYDROCARBQN$1.lw..m) TQJAL PETROLEl:JU HYDROCARBONS (ppm) 140 CHLORINATED COMPOlJ~iQ!i!..J'..g_!t.hl Meth ~erie chloride 22 Tetrach!oroet.'1ene $ J BTFX: AND...Bt-J.UQMP.OONQSh (ppb) MD TOTAL PElROLEUM H'l"DROCARBONS (pf,,n) 120 ~f) CQMPOI.INPS- fopb) I ~ ~ . BJE~ ANO 6!tLCQMPQUNDS•" (rn"Jb} ' bls2--athylhex)'I) phthok;t~ -- 220 J ) w _ I - "'~~ -=,;-O-NS-(p-pm _ _, 'ir+,~F-O_U,R~W,,l~ND;'!S~- / I ) - ~ MW-9 (0--:4.Q') ~~~PQlJNDS. (p,ruu ND U."!Il.1'!ML'=lliLJmA~~~l ND /r< __ ___ j l L_' r=i l!L_,_ i--,- --,L_ _ __________ +JO,,,· !/-1 __:_:"'.:::''~'":::""'::..:":"""'" ,.,.,, I MW-9S -~ - ~ --f+-7M::,W,.--"'~.., -- D TOTrli.. PETROlEUM H'(OROCAABONS (ppm) 230 0 MW-11D (jO.Q-11,0_'\ _ _ CHI QRINAJDUQMJ'll.VMlS. (Ml.!) Meth)lene chlorkle 4 J 8JEX ANQ 8NA CQMPOUNQS,.,. fopb) Toluene 1 J TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) NO ; , ' , I {] -;------_~- I ---it-~:---- L ' , ' ' ' ; ' ' ' \ ' ' ' ' ' \ ' B-10 (6.0-:-,~ CHLORINATED Q.lM.POUNUS• < ppb' ND ,-- ---=~=------~\ SS- 7 (SS-6FR) '5'5-6 .<J:ll.~"2S! . .i..~ l ,- CHLORINATED ~NOS" (ppb) Methylene <:hlcrlde 20 BT£X AND BNA CQMPOIJNDS.,. (pot,) Butyl benz~ phtho!ote 75 J .Me-th)len.e chloride 22 Teil'o,~hloroethene 1 J BJEX -'ND 8NA COMPOUNDS,... foQhl BTEX ND / L" CHT-2r::::=t .. _ . 'L.:':'-f~-3 w _ 28 MW 8 (2.0-4.0') CHI ORIN ATFP COMPO\JNPS• (ppb} Methylene chloride · 25 Tetrochloroethe11e 2 J BJEX ANO ElNA COMPOll~r.ibl Toluene 1 ,1 Di-n-bul)4 phthaloie 62 J . TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS' (ppm) BNA~ R TOTAL PETROLEUM !-!YOROCARB0NS ~l NA. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, \ ' \ \ ~----------- - - ~-\ 8-13A (0-2.0') .Q:ibQ.R!NA TED COMPOUNDS• ~ TetruchloroetMne 15 B1EX AND fil!t\ COMPOlJNQSu (npb) ND TOTAL PETROl£UM H'fDR0CARBONS~ NA 8-13 (4.0- 6.0') C~SL(Jml!) ' ' \ \ Tetrochtoroethene 2000 BTEX AND BNA COMPO!lNPS~*___(pP.b:) Fluorcnthene 42 J ' ' ' ' ' ' ', \ ', ' ',, - \ .I.OTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON:3 (ppm) 28 /; B-1 2 (6,0-8.0') ~/ r CHI ORINAlEO COMPOUNDS• (ppb) ! / NO m AND ANA cOMeotJND~ul 11 ND TOTAL PElROlBJM HYDROCARBON~ 25 B-·11 (0-2.0) Q:!J,QfilfiAJID CPMPmmP~l ! M<'lth}i,i,ne <:",ilor!df'., 3 J I Tetf'JchlOl'<.lethend 29 I ~~~'i~~PO!JN!)jV,: (~} J i JC.'•.'.Al ·~ .1.iMj,__:(_Q.RQCAR;QONS {t,y;o} I ! .... ,., .. ,.-.. .......... ,,,_, ~~ .... - ·,.- " ND . "1W-10D (0- 2.0') 0:11 9RINATEQ COMPQUNOS• (op[)) 1.-lethylen,a chloride 20 J BTEX AND BNA CQMPQIJNQSn (opb) Toluene 1 J TOTAL PElROlEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) NO MW-10 (2.0-4.0') f.J:ILQB!li6JELCOMPO!~.QQQ}_ Meth)'lene chlor!".:e 17 J Acetone 2-autonon,:, 35 5 J WLLI~JP BNA COMPQ!..illD~J. NO .IGTAI PETROi EIJM HYQROCARflONS {ppm) NO MW-12D (-4.0-6.0') Ci:11 ORINA TFO CQMPOlJNDS• foob) N!l flJ.EX ANQ BNA~~.,~.'.'!~ NO . ~ ,TAL_ PETROI...EUM HYDROCP.JR13,0NS t"~!:~1. I Nu ___ ---•···· .•. __ .l MW-~ (0 4.[L_ CHLORINAJEQ COMPOUND~ NO BTFX AND ANA COMPOUNDS•• (gpb) NO TOTAi PETROL EUM HYPROCARBONS ( ppm) 590 8-8 (0-?,0') CHI ORINAJED CQMPOIJNDS• (pgb) Tetroch!oroethene 2 J BTEX ANO BNA COMPOUNRS0 {ppb) Tolu'!ne -4 J Ethylbenzene 2 J 8en:.:o~o)onthroc1:1nfJ 180 J Benzo\o p)1'eoe 200 J ~ - -\--- - ------- --- -! Benz<:J(o)fluoronthene 250 J ----~ -----, SS-5 CHI or@AJFD COMPOUNDS• fopb) M•th)'lene chlol"lde 10 J f)iU.,AN0 BNA COMPOUNDS>t,. fopb) fknzo~b)fluoronthen.e 84 J Bfflzo g,h,1,)per)"l~e 82 J 13ut)'I enz~ phtholate 1~0 J Chrysone 59 J D!-·n-but)I phtholote 55 J Fiuoronthena 100 J P)fene 76 J NTAI. PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) NA MW 7 (14.2::.1.M'..) CHLC+JINAJFD c..QMFO!.!.t!Q~q} Meth)tene ch loride 12 BTEX AND ?NA COMPOL!MD$!:i- ( ppb} ND TQJAI PEIBOt ft/M HYORQCARBON.'i...uw:m) 27 LEGEND Benzo(g,h,i,y,lti!r}'lene 84 J Bm:zo(!l)fluor<mther.e 96 J Chr~ne 210 J Fluorran thene 290 J lnde'no(l,2,J- cd)p,«!Oe 87 J Phfflonthren~ 160 J P:;rene 300 J TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) ND B-8FR (0-2.0") CHI ORINATED COMPOllNQS• foabl Tetrochloroethet1e !) J BTEX ANO BNA Cot.lPOUNOS0 lppb) Toluene 4 J ElhylbenzeM 3 J TOTAL PEl"ROlEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppmj 77 MW-7FR {14.g J6.0') .QtjLQfilN...A.IEQ___Q_OMPQUNDS• (ppb) Methylene cllloride 18 BTEX ANO BNA CQMPQLJNPSn (ppb) ND TQTAJ PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) ND MW-1 • SHALLOW MONITORING WELL LOCATION MW·-6D .. ss-,a * <:GLIN-i4 CHT- 60 .I DEEP MONITORING WELL LOCATION SOIL BORING LOCATION sur,FACE SOIL SAMPLE APPROXIMATE LOCATION EXISTING SUPPLY WELL LOCATI ON MO~JITORING WELLS INSTALLED BY CAr~IBBEAN HYDRO- TECH, IN C. (LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE) SURVEY BASE POINT AND ELEVATION IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL errx BENZENE, TOLUENE, ETHYLBENZENE, AND XYLENES 9NA • BASE NEUTRAL/ACID EXTRACTABLE COMPOUNDS INCLUDES NON-CHLORINATED, NON-BTEX VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS INCLUDES MOSTLY PETROLEUM-RELATED COMPOUNDS SOME BNA COMPOUNDS MAY BE LABOR ATORY ARTIFACTS SCALE: FEET 1.20 SOURCE: R. LOPEZ DE AZU/<, & ASSOCIATES (1992). :.tillt, GERAGHTY Alf & MILLER, INC. ,Allllf Environmental Services PROJECT NO.: DMW!NG SCALE VERIFICATION DRAWING: EON IS THIS BAH Ri?/~£SLNTS GER.AGHTY ONE lt.lCH ON THE DRAFTED BY: PROrE:S- ORIG!Ni\L DRAWING: CHECKED BY: JT 1H£ . k ' - _ i &~ <· ~?Pf!,C?,:'8) BY; • '', ' !l. DRAWING CONFiOENTI AL: Ti liS A~lO ALL I NF◊RMA TION CONTA.1N£D fHER ANO SMALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY Of &: MILLER, 1NC. AS AN INSTRUMENT Of SIONAL SERVICE. TI1lS iNFOPM;\ TION SH BE USED tN M-!OU::. 0H IN FART" 'MlH01_ FULL 1<:NOWL£DGE ANO PRiOR \-VR!TlEN ( OF GERAGHTY & MILLi:R, i!\lC. REPRODUCTlON SCA.LE _____ _ _ ~] I . --- ;ONS[NT · USE TO 'Ji::-, 1,'i flGUR:_t - _.,_..,._ - .. -- ----• .. ,_,r.,.,_-.,.- . . .. , ______ , _____________ ,.._, _________ ,,..~-...,----•~c•.-,.,..._ PR013.01 TU- 168 E. CALDERON J. miRDlCK T. DANAHY . T FILE NO: TU-168 PLOT SIIZE: 1-120· --··- ""· DATE: 5- 28--93 IN ' DATE: 5-2e•M93 OATE: 5-26- 9.3 - ND NOT DETECTED NA NOT ANALYZED (t1- 2.0') J DEPTH OF SAMPLE INTERVAL IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE RESULT WAS DETECTED BELOW THE REPORTING LIMIT AND /OR IS AN ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION o ANAL YTE IDENTIFIED AS A SECONDARY DILUTION ••b Parts per billion ppm Parts per million • REJECTED - .. -.,-~.•,--------------·------------! .,..,., OR GANIC C~)MPOUND CONCENTRATIONS ONITORlt~G WELL BORING, SOIL BORING, Af"D s.:URF ACE SOIL SAMPLES FIGURE M ---• TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION '.,:T. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS 4-1 ' Aluminum 28700 E.J Alumfnum Antimony Arsenic Bcrium Colcfum Chromi1.1m Cobalt Ccpp..- lrc;n Lood Mognesh.rm Manganese: B-1 (4.0-8.0') A!uminum Antimony Aruriic B\1rium Caldum Chromium Cobolt Copper Icon Lead Mogne:aiium Mongonest1 Nickel Potassium Sodium Vonadklm Zinc Cymide (total) 23100 7.2 BNJ 1.7 8 94.2 5651)0 33.8 NJ 22.1 J 72,8 NJ 55400 12.2 J 18700 886 19.2 7140 25100 7.4- BJ 0.96 8 42.1 8 J9600 29.2 23 85.6 35700 J1 SJ 17600 757 18.9 634 B 472 6 102 56.5 ND Alumlrn.:m Ant imony Ar'!lenic Barium Cdeium Chromium Cobo::in eoo,~ Iron B- 16 (0-2.0') Atuml"lum Antimony Arsenic Barium Codmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper ''"" Lead Magn-csium Mang,:ineSfl Mercury Nickel Polas:iium She r Sodium Van<Jdium Zinc Cyanide ( total) 18900 6.8 BNJ 11.6 39.9 B 0.99 6 68800 ,. .36.4 NJ 19 72.1 NJ 30600 45.6 N•J 16300 599 0.57 15.7 506 B 1.J 8 396 B 79.7 NJ 459 ND 8-14 (0-2.0') Aluminum Antimony & rium C<Jlcium Chromium Cobalt Copp.,- lrcn lead Mognei:iium Mongonese Nickel PQtassium Silver Sodium Vonodlum Zinc Cyanide (tot~) 25300 7.3 BNJ J4.5 B 120000 • 13.8 NJ 20 #3 • .3 NJ 28000 2.9 J 26200 757 11.1 161 B o.93 a 181 B 95.8 NJ 50.9 NO B·-15 (0-2.0') 23000 6.5 BNJ 0.92 BWJ 39.4 8 61100 25.1 NJ 20.9 J 52.9 NJ 29800 9.1 J 19300 6J4 16.8 673 8 0.93 B 352 9 Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium C!llcium Chromium Cob<:Jlt Copper Iron 26400 6.4 BNJ 1.3 8 32.1 B -89400• 27.J NJ 23.2 55.9 NJ 32600 12.2 J 22900 809 16.5 Alumlnum Antim,:my Arsenic 8<Jrium Coldum Chromlum Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Mogne3lum Manganese Nickel Potassium Sodium Vonoditlm Zinc B-14FR (0-2.0') Aluminum Barium Colciorn Chromium Cobalt. Copper Iron Lead Magnesium MongoM$$ Nickel Pai.osslum Sodium Vanadlutn Z1nc Cyan!d<:1 (tota!) 21500 J 14.7 BNJ 0.99 BJ 29.J BJ 144000 J 16.2 NJ 16.9 BJ 4J.1 NJ 25400 J 2.5S J 21400 J 888 J 12.9 BJ 325 BJ 167 BJ 82.1 NJ 43.8 J 19000 3.3.5 B 73000 • 17.4 NJ 18.2 77.6 NJ 23100 2 J 17800 640 13.1 201 8 1'91 B 69 . .J NJ 60.1 ND Alumtnum Antimony Barium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magne:fum Monqonelle Nlckel Potassium Sliver Sodium Vanadium Ztnc 2:36-00 6.1 BNJ 41.9 B 75100 23.4 NJ 25.7 J 55.3 NJ 31300 2.1S J 20500 703 18,9 412 B 0.98 B 557 B 109 NJ 50.6 Aluintnum Barium Caldum Oir,;,m ium Ccb.Jlt Cop;>er lrrJn Lea,\ Magnesium Man1anese Nt;:kel Pot<Jsslum Sll'ffir Sodi:.Jm Von,;;di•Jm Zinc 8-6 ( 4-.0-8.0') Aluminum Anllmony Arsen ic Botfum Coldum Chromium Coholt Copp(!r le= Lend Mm)f1eslum Manganese Nid:el PolOS'Slum s11.,.er So,lium Vonadlum Zinc C)'<.mide {total) 16100 30.1 8 9630 25.8 NJ 18 J 40.3 NJ 22600 1.7 J 1J200 ,,, 15.5 568 B 0.99 B 157 B 74.9 NJ 40.1 3!')700 4.5 BJ 0.74 B ♦1 B 5,i.90 36 30.3 67.6 42700 6.2 SJ 21300 895 19 833 B 0.98 BJ 274 B 119 51 ND MW- 1 (0-2.0'} Aluminum Antimony Arttinlc Barium Calcium Chl'omlum Cobalt Copper ''"" Lead Mo9(lesium Monganel!e Nkkel Potas!llum Sodium Vonad!um Zinc C}'llflide (tottJI) 26700 J 5.7 BJ 0.-4-5 BJ 59.1 J 48300 J 18.8 J 22.8 J 47.8 J 37100 EJ 3 J 24600 J 734 J 12.8 J 278 B 305 8 132 J 56 EJ 0.88 N Antimony 3.4- BJ Nickel Poto:ssium Silver Sodium Vanadium Zfnc C)Clnld& (total) 2.1 B 47t3 B 88.3 NJ 258 0 .96 Leod "4ogn"l'.Jm Mongonese Nlckel Potassium Sll~r Sodium Van,:idJu11 Zinc Cycnldo (total) 86 NJ 265 Lead Mogne:3fum Mongone::1<1 Nickel Potoa<.>;uin Silver Sodium Vanadium Zinc Cy;inlcJe { total) 389 B 1.1 B 281 8 98.8 NJ 2D6 0.75 Cyonide {total) 1.1 Cymlde (total) 1.2 Cyonlde (total) ND MW-130 (4.0-5.QJ_ Aluminum Antimony Barium Beryllium Calcium O,r,imfum CAJbclt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium M □nyMese Mlckel Potassium Sll'fflr SoJ!um Von'.!rJlum 1Jr,c. Cy,::in1d<: (total) Aluminum 15700 Arsenic 1.2 B 26000 5.9 BJ 67.2 0.26 B 47200 }1.7 21.9 79.1 38400 26S J 17100 8J4 17.5 1170 2.2 J 319 B 119 108 1.1 Anienic 0.67 BJ Barium 40.2 BEJ Calcium 291300 J Chromium 36E J Cobalt 28.3 J Copper 86.4 EJ Iron 4-0000 EJ Lead 3.2 ,J Mognesium 20300 [ .J, Manganese 18.9 J Nicl<:el 883 EJ Potassium 689 B Sodium 500 B VoMdlum 113 E.J Zinc 57.4 EJ C~nlde (talol) NO MW-2 (0-2.ff) Alumlnum 13JOO Arsenic 3 ·e-3 {2.0 4.oJ. Aluminum Arsenic Bc:irium Calcfum 8er)41ium Chromium Cobol\ Copper •on 242{}0 1.2 a '"" 0.42 8 6S90Q .35.8 22.8 104 42000 4.5 J 12700 506 17.1 471 B 2040 --- ND Barium 45.6 8 Barium 81 Calcium 8720 .,. Calclum 68500 J• Chromium 7.6 NJ Chromium 16.1 MJ L~d MtJgn.,,shJm Manganese Nickel PottJMlum SHwr Sodium Vonodium Zinc Cyanide (totol) 2.1 BJ r---- - - ---- -.l=:::=: ___ -1 ~r. -r---,.,=~1---1-:_-~~~~""r---,---t~1 NO J Cobalt 12.B Copper 58 NJ Iron 30800 lead 1.9 J Mo,;iniesium 9640 Manganese 1110 N!ckel 5.6 8 Potassium 299 B Silvar 1.2 B Sodii.m SJS 8 Vonadlum 52.B NJ Zinc 119 Cyanide ( total) NO B- 4 (8.0- 10,C..) .A.luminum Arsenl,:, Barium 9er)411um Co!dum Chromium Ccbolt Copper !r,:,n lii,ad MagnMium M<:mqans':le Men:;ury Nickel Potassium S ilver Sodium Vonodium Zino Cyonlde (totol) 32200 J 0.54 BWJ 42.S BJ 0.27 BJ 7360 J .31.J J 28.2 J 74.7 J -1-1500 J 1.5 J 23600 J 941 J [),)2 8,J 18-.6 J 559 8 2.1 BJ 217 BJ 137 53.1 ND MW-60 (0 - 2.0') Alumlnum Barium Ber )fllum Cotclum Chromium Cobalt C,o,p-p~r lcvn Laad Mogneslum Manqonese Nk kel Potoosium Si!'<'er Sodium Vanadium Z!nc CJQnide (total) A!mninum Antimony Arsenic Borium Ber~lium Cole/um Cht.om ium Cobolt Coppr!!r kon L;;,fl:d te!ognesium Manganese Nickel Potosslurr, Sodium VoMdium Zinc Cyan!<le (total) 14700 122 0.22 8 23700 16.B J 13.9 e.,_;;; 296-GO 83.7 J 9350 769 7.5 8 911 B 1.4 BJ 728 8 80 59.8 JE ND 20800 J 4.4 BJ 1.6 BJ .3.3.13 BJ 0.2,J BJ 15400 J 35.2 J 23.7 J 105 J 33100 .J 5.5 J 16300 J 760 ,! 21.8 J 5 28 8 248 8 85.B J 58.4 J flD 8-10 (6.0- 8.0) Aluminum Antimony Barium Calcium Chroniium COOalt Copper lrnn leod Mognesium Mongone.5e Nlckl'!I Putas~ium Siver Sodium Vano<lium Zin<: Lyonld,i (totol) 14XIO 5.2 BJ 498 144-00 1J 17.2 88.7 33500 EJ 5.2 9970 22DO 4.7 e 1900 2 BJ 352 8 119 68.2 EJ J,10 Cobalt 11 . .3 Cupp~r 40 NJ Iron 21700 Lt-ad 5.6 J° ~nesium 9160 Mm19unesti 582 Nick~ 12.7 Potassium 557 B Sodium 717 8 Vtingdl•Jm 58 NJ Zin c 66.2 Cyanide (totol) NO MW- 4 {2. 7-4,7) Aluminum Antimony Ar~erilc Barium Cudmium Colcium Chromium Cobalt Copper 1,on Lead Magna!!ium Mangon~:se Nickel Poto!!sium Selenium Sodium Vanadium ~ .. C}"IJnide (totcl) 22600 J 6.2 BJ 1.8 BJ ss J 0.73 BJ 981D .J J8 EJ .32.7 J 73.9 EJ J94-00 EJ .3.6 BJ 14000 EJ 947 EJ 18.8 J 1270 J 0.55 8WJ 274 B 121 EJ 49 CJ 0.65 MW-6 (2::2-0') Aluminum Antimo,1y Anenic 8orium C □l c tum Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron lead Mogneslum M,.:mg.::mese Nickel Potassium Sodium Vanac:llum Zinc Cyanide (total) l.0800 J 5 HJ l .9 BJ 137 J zeJOC: J 2~.2 J 31.9 J TIA J 36200 J 25.4 J 16400 J 14,40 J 19.5 J s« a 596 B 102 ,/ 56.7 J NO MW-9 (Q-4.0'l Aluminum 22400 J Antimony 6 BJ Ar~nic 0. 7 BJ Barium 18.7 BJ C6iclU01 JWOO J Chromium 15.6 J Co\xllt 18.9 J Copper 50. 7 J Iron 25700 J Leed 3.2 J Magnesium 15100 J Manganese f}.J1 ,I N!ekel 12.4 J Potassium 205 a B 5 (O-? O') Ab.1mlnum Antimony Barium Colclum Chromium Cobalt. C<'.!pper Icon L=d Magnesium Mon9onese Nickel P,otossium Sodium VQn<Jdlum Zinc Cyanide ( total) 22900 7.9 BNJ 38.4 B 67200 ., JJ.6 NJ 1S.9 4-7.3 NJ 29801) 3.6 J 19400 861 19.4 386 B 271 B 9•t9 NJ 49.9 NO / Sodium 654 i3 /4 V,:madium 56,3 J Zinc J2. 4 J (\. L..c_,._"·_,d_,_(_t_o_t•_IJ_N_o_~,-\-'<\ ~'\) ! \ ~~ / ' ' ' "\ \ lMWI/Ul P✓I, I '-.,_, \ I\ ' ' ' ~ ' \ ',<_";:-, .,..---------:-r ~ f'.:----Y~' ~~ p: 8-131\ (0-2.:Q:1. 11100 13.7 59.3 73200 ,. 2 J,6 t-3.:J Alumfnum Arsenle Boriutl'I Calcium Chromium Cobol!: II B-1J (4.0- G.O') i6Wb 4.1 BJ ,es J 29 t1 12800 20.l 1S.i 0 C,.;pp.:r li .:ll1 L~ti..1 Mu9r1,•1iu.-u ~0,,9.,,,esrc t,fo:t<:t!l f-0\ <".s;t,1;;.m tiiV'M Sodium Vanndium Zinc !>2 2.S400 4.8 .:: ;a..,:u;; ·uo i i:I 54·1 a U i 8NJ -+74 B B3.l ~.l.1 Aluminum Antimony An!enk Doduo'; Cu!dum Ct",l\)lil!~m Cobalt ,:;·vj:]i);:);" ii•)j; L·.::,.,·<l !•,fc::.·,;;,1!1;,;iu1 !\ M,1r1gonl!Se Nk!(al Potf'.r.3'!jft.lm '-Siver Sodium Yanodlum Zinc -rv.-l .i.6800 c:J 1 ~ C_t(ln!de (t.otcl) "° Cyor,ide (total) i4-ECC <JO 12.,) 591 B 1.6 8J 133 8 83.9 ♦5.7 EJ 9 SS-7 (S5--·0FR} ~ SS-6 ) .A-Jumlnum ___ 14J-OO J Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Calc!um Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Leac:l Magnesium Manganese Nickol Potoulum Sodium Vanadium Zinc C~nfde {total) 13800 J S BNJ 19.1 J 90.9 J 30700 J 18.8 NJ 13.8 J 54.8 NJ 23800 J 1--•--1 "rl .4 J 9670 J 6 72 J 10.7 J 2070 J 251 9,J 73.1 NJ Ant1rnony 7.4 BNJ Ar!!e!lic 17.l J Barium 89 J Calcium 59200 .J Chromium 2.J.3 NJ C.OOalt 14 J Co:Jper 55.4 NJ Iron 39500 .J l~d 14.4 ,J Mogn~sium 9960 J Mang,;;uleee 662 J Nicke/ · 14.1 J Potam1lurn 1910 J Si!v.er L6 BJ Sodium 3+0 BJ \looodfum 71.3 NJ 97.1 J 1.J i Zinc 91.7 J ' Cyonide (total) NO SOURCE: R. LOPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOCIATES (1992). ,.ailllf GERAGHTY · ,Ar, & MILLER, INC. ,...,. Environmental Services DRAWING CONFIDENTIAL: 11-11s DRA"MNG AMO ALI . INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREON IS AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. AS AN INSTRUMENT OF PROfES- SI CNAL SERV!CE. THIS INFORMATION SHALl NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE FULL KNOV.l.WGE ANO PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT r B-12 (6.0-8.0') Aluminum Arsenic Borfum Beryllium Cotd um (,'hm1nl"urn Cob-,:J.~ Copp:o( ''"" Le,;.,d Mognc,ium M·:1 11<,10; ,~ Ni(.i(e! p.J(,:,.-,8fum S~vei-- S<";dil,;m V~-'101:llum I t"' J _·~-~n!de (total~ "'C: 15300 18-.3 172 0.29 B 6061} 21.1, rn.z 14.'i. 28100 f.J 6.~ S,J 5:>7U ZOiO l J.4 ~ .80 1.8 ti,i ?.$7 B B7.G 89.1 ~-J ND CHT- 60-' + FOUR WINDS !II -$-FOUR WINDS II I FOUR WINDS I CHT~ 1 --$-· B-9 Ill ~C'"'H"T~----,4-- ~.~- M B- 11 (0-2.0') Aluminum Arsenic Barium B«;mum C::fo1um Chron,ium C-Ob..1lt Coppo!I· iron Leed M<JgMt1iUm MongCiliO!l.@ M<f.ln:.:ury Nickel Poto~:iium s~-- Sodium V(lfladium ZJnc Cyanidt, {lotol) 19200 5 12..- ;J.",B b 5100 Ht S 7~.1 76.6 :WIOO EJ 6.9 SJ 5920 768 o.ua s 12.8 :2830 1.9 6J 210 a 88.8 99,5 E.J ND C SCALE: FEET 0 120 - PROJECT NO.: PR013.01 FILE NO; TIJ-177 SCt\L I: VERIFICATION - ~~--- ,i REPRESENTS TH:S BA ONE or~1G1 i,'iGH ON THC: l,:AL DRAWING: I ' i,;ce lJ'JE TO VERIFY FIGURE ORA"'1NG: TU- tn PLOT SIZE: 1 .. no· DRAFTED BY: D. LORENZ DATE: 5-2.5-93 CHECKED BY: J. GOMEZ DATE: 5-?5-9J APPROVED BY: T. DANAHY DATE: 5-25-83 _, OF GERAGHTl' & MILLER, INC, fic.Hm \)UGlON SCAt.£ ·* s·-s SS-8 * '' * \ , SS-1 \ I / '~ , ., , ' \ \ VIHA- 11 + \/iH ' ' ' \ \ ' ' ' \< MW J (0.4 2.0') Aluminum 25800 J Barium 59.8 J Calcium 57300 J Chromium 31.8 J Cobalt 21.6 J Copper 57.4 J Iron .)1500 J Leacl 3.9 J Magnesium 15000 J Manganese 72~ J Nkkel 16.7 J Potassium 919 B Silver 1.4 BJ Sodium 665 B Alumlnum 2J400 EJ Antimony 3. 7 B,J Arsenic 1.7 BJ Bor!um 17.9 BJ Calcium 37900 EJ Chromium 20 J Cobalt 26.3 J Copper 102 EJ Iron -39000 EJ l~ad 3.4 J Magnesium 17 400 EJ Mongonese 820 EJ Nfckel 17 .2 J Potassium 205 B Sodium 581 B Vano<llum 95.1 EJ Zinc 59.5 EJ Cyanide {totoJ) NO MW 10 (1.0 2.5') Aluminum Antimony Barium Beryllium Calcium Chromium C'Jbolt Copper Iron Lead Magn~3ium Manganese Nickel Pot03S!um Silver Sodium Vanadium Zinc C)'Onidti (total) 37000 J 8.1 BJ 23.1 BJ 0.23 BJ ~1200 J 28.7 J 2a.a J 75.2 J 39900 J 9.2 J 23600 J 833 J 19.9 J 655 B 2.3 J 632 B 113 J 52.1 J ND B·- 7 {2.0- 4.0') MW-3 Vanadium 9.3.4 J Zinc 42.6 J ~ • CY'lnide (total) ND ~ \~~~~;____- - - ---I Aluminum Antimony Arsenic 6orium Calcium Chromium Cobo1t Copper 28400 5.9 BJ 1 8 36.9 8 51600 28.6 23.4 73.1 35400 19.8 J 21500 828 17.8 460 B 551 8 94.8 62.4 ND !dYi-110 (10 0 H a') Alumlnum .~Umony ..-,rser:lc Barium Cadm~.1m Calcium Chromium Cob<1lt Copper '"'" Leod M::igr.,tt:;i..nn Manganese Nickel Potassium 5Qdiu·fl1 VQnoJdfum 17800 J 3.68 J 0.49 BJ 194 J 0.68 BJ 3610 J 12.7 J 28.7 J 131 J 48700 EJ 2 J 12800 .j 1070 J 15.6 J , ~5~ j 163 J Zinc 94.9 EJ Cyonid8 (foJtof) ND •"'' . . . METAL MW 40 /6.7=-1.QLl Aluminum Antimony 3orlum Colc!um ChrQffilum Cobalt C,:;,pp<lr 1,00 Lt,od M<Jgn e~!um Mongoneso Nickel Potcsslum Selenium Sliver Scdium Vanadium Zinc Cyan ide (tot al) 21700 J 3.5 BJ 59.4 J 7790 J 27 J 28.5 J 75.3 J 38000 J 2.8 J 17BOO J 717 J 19.1 J 505 B 0,53 BWJ 2 BJ 318 B 120 J 46.8 J NO Iron Lood t.!ognes!um Monqoneste Nlckef Pol ossium Sodium Vonadium Zinc Cyonkle (total) MW-5 (0:--~JU Aluminum 274(10 Antimony 5:i 8NJ Arsenic 0. 77 B Barium 50.7 Ber)lllum 0.46 B Calcium 54400 • Chromium 24.2 Cobalt 24.3 -~ ____________________ _, Copper 115 Iron 37700 MW-JD (2 o-+.o') MW::-120 (40- § O') Al•Jm!num Barium Be~llum Catdum a,romium Cobolt Copp~r lrcn 14900 120 0.27 B 3480 5.7 Alumlnum Antimony Ar.5enlc Borlum Coldum Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron lead Magnesium Manganese Merc·ury Nickal Pota~slum Sodium Vanadium Zinc t_::)"'lnl<!e ( t ,:,tol) .,~ MW---1 • MW-60 • SS-8* EGLIN-I 4 CHT-Bo <ii ----- (0-2/J') 1.3500 J 3.2 SJ 0.7 BJ 60.5 J n20 J .::o.~ J 2s:6 J 63.9 J 31300 J 1.9 J 10400 J 4.91 J o.mJ BJ 1.).1 J J06 8 1520 J 103 J 46.6 EJ NO Lead r-.!Ggn~sium Ma;1yonesa Nkkel Pototi~lurn Sliver Sodium Vonodium Zinc Cyanide (total) 8.8 B 42.2 30000 3.4 J 5770 480 J.2 B 621 B 2.2 BJ . 413 BJ 57.9 57.7 NO Sf!ALLOW MONITORING WELL DEEP MONITCi<iNG. WELL SOIL BORING LOCATION SURF ACE SOil. SAMPLE APPROXIMATE LOCATION EXISTING WA I LR WELL MONITORING WELL INSTALLED BY CARIBBEAN HYDRO- TECH, INC. (LOCATION APf'J10XIMA TE) FENCE DEPTH OF SAMPLE INTERVAL IN- FEET BELOW LAND SURF ACE Lead R 8-8 (0-2.0'} IAogneslum 26200 Manganese 763 B-BFR (0 -2.0') Aluminum Ars@nic Barium BeqAllum Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper lt()(I.- ,. Moqnti:ciium Mangonese Ni<:kel MP.n:ury Poto~il.Jm Sliver Sodium V(lnodium Zinc Cyanide (total) 23600 4.J 98.4 0.37 B 72800 • 29.7 20.5 157 J 31500 18000 }00 14.9 0.12 J-320 J 3.9 NJ 465 B 79.1 149 ND Nicl<:el 15.J Potassium 11 BO Sliver 2.2 NJ So<llum 381 B Vanadium 106 Zinc 164 Cymlde (total) ND Alumlnum .Anllmot1y Arsenic Barium Col-::Jum Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron 17700 a2 BNJ 3.5 Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Ber)ilium Calcium Chromium Cobolt Copper l,ci CJ Lt!(Jd Magn esium Manqonesa Nickel Potos:,ium Silver Sodium Vonodlum Zinc C)'Onlde (total) 19700 5 BNJ 94 J 53 D.35 B 65200 • 22.3 16 .. J 49.e J ?:9100 1Q. J 16100 791 14.1 870 BJ 1.6 6NJ 45.J B 76.2 63.8 2.7 MW- 7 {14.0- 16.0') Leod Mognesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Pota3slum Sil~r Sodium Vanadium Zinc 97 35800 17.6 NJ 19.4 J 79.2 HJ 28100 149 SJ 13600 708 0.19 12.6 4170 2.8 MW- 7FR {14.0-16.0') Alumlnum Antimony Ars,mlc Bctium Calcium Chromium Cobolt Copper i,oo Leod Mognei!llum Mangone!Hl Nkk..11 Potos11ium Sodium 1/ori,::idfum Zinc Cyanide (total) Aluminum Barium Ber,(lfum Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper lmn lt!'od Magm,sfum ManganMe N!ckel PrJtossium s,- Sodlum Vcnadium Zinc C)'Onide (total) 26000 J 6.7 BJ 0.71 BJ 42.5 BJ 28200 J 16.3 J 30.8 J 60.6 J 38100 J 0.96 J 28000 J 941 J 16.3 J 1520 J 2s3 a 107 J 51.7 J ND 14100 199 0.28 B 5260 4.5 7.9 B 40.2 J.3600 3.2 J 5770 4J5 3.5 B 529 B 2 BJ 373 BJ 69.5 58.2 NO C~nide (totol) Aluminum Antimony Borlum Colclum Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron L•od Mogne:,ivm Mangones11 Nickel Potosslum Sodium Vanadium Zinc C~nide (totol) S49 B 78.8 NJ 216 NO 22500 J 5.6 BJ 21.7 BJ 2B400 15.3 J 19 J 49.7 J 26500 J 0.48 BJ 15400 J 688 J 11..3 .J 204 a 491 a 59.5 J 31.8 J 0.55 Alumlnum Antinony Arsenic Borium C<idmium Calcium Chromium Cobolt Copper- Icon Lead Magnesium M<Jngonese Nickel Poto,sium Sodium Vanadium Zinc Cyonide (total) 29600 J 8.5 BJ 0.5J BJ 25.1 BJ 0.82 HJ 47700 J 19.6 J 32.8 J 60.9 ,J 43100 J 1.8 J 32000 J 861 J 19.3 J 1400 J 255 B 110 J 54.5 J ND LEGEND B E FR J N ND R REPORTED CONCENTRATIONS ARE IN PARTS PER MILLION REPORTED VALUE IS BETWEEN CONTRACT REQUIRED DETECTION LIMIT (CRDL) AND INSTRUMENT DETECTION LIMIT (IDL) INDUCTIVE;L Y COUPLED PLASMA (ICP) SERIAL DILUTION RESULT NOT WITHIN CONTROL LIMITS OR GRAPHITE FURNACE ATOMIC ABSORPTION (GFAA) INTERFERENCE PRESENT FIELD REPLICA TE RESULT WAS DETECTED BELOW THE REPORTING LIMIT AND/OR IS AN ESTIMATED CONCEN TRATION SPIKED SAMPLE RECOVERY NOT WITHIN CONTROL LIMITS NOT DETECTED RESULT REJECTED s REPORTED VALUE WAS DETERMINED BY THE METHOD OF STANDARD ADDITIONS (MSA) w POST- DIGESTION SPIKE FOR GFAA OUT OF CONTROL LIMITS DUPLICATE ANALYSiS NOT WITHIN CONTROL. LIMITS AND CY llt~~DE CO~J(';~NTRATiONS IN MONITORING WELL BORING, SOil BORIN1I1~ AND SURFACE SOIL SAMPLES FIGURE 4-2 , __ __,,_,.._.,.,. ___ _ ·-------·---- ----··----- --------l~~---- ,,...,...,_~,_,,,.~,.,.,,---~·~,-...r.,~;;ri'.', TUJ"IJ SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ,,; L THOMAS. U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS MW-·3 CHI ORINA TFP COMPOUNDS * ~ Vinyl chloride 140 ·1,2-Dichtoroethene(cis/trans) 530 E Trlchloroethene 19 J Tetrochloroethene 58 BlEX AND BNA COMPOUNDS •• (pob) tert-Butyl methyl ether 24 J 1,2-Dichlorol>enzene 2 J TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (oom) ND MW-4_ CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS * (ppb) 1,2-Dichloroethene(cis/trons) 86 Trichloroethene 8 J Tetrochloroethene 25 BTEX ANO BNA COMPOUNDS ¥• (ppb) tert-But)'l methyl ether 1.2 J TOTAL PETROLEUM HJDROCARBONS (ppm) NO UNPAVED PIA UfoPAVED PIA MW-2 .,. .... .,,,.,, V' // ..,.,/ <\", u ...--- ,~ ___ ,_,_,, ______ ' ~ I MW-14 ':::O,, l CHI.ORINA TED COMPOUNDS • (ppb) Vin ,ii chlodde 17 Carbon disulfide 3 J 1,2·-Dichloroethene(cis/trons) 44 Tehachloroethene 1 J BTEX /\f'.10 BMA COMPOUNDS ** (ppb) Dlb~.nz:ofuran Phenanthrene 2 J 2 J ' \ ' \ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) NO \ l _.,·'\ \ I ,, \ l\ .,.../ \ I I ,/' \ I \ _.,. \ \ ~.... \ )._,. \ .,,,,,,,,,,. \ / , I I .,,,,,..,,,,,.-,,· ,/ ' \ \ / \ \ I I I / / ' ' (Mw-14\ \ \~, I \f' \ ' I \ ) \\ CURRICULUM CENTER BUILDING (FORMER LAGA BLDG) (FORMER GASS \..__ __-· AL1TOP NW-3 ~\ \ @ -flHA-11 ' \ ' ' \Q ,,.,,,,,." ' ' \ ' \ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' \ MW-1.JD CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS • (ppb) 2-Butanone 12 J Tetrachlornethene 7 J Acetone 56 J BTEX AND Bt-JA COMPOUNDS ** (ppb) Toluene 1 J TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) NO ~ CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS • (ppb) 1,2-Dichloroethene(cis/trons) 1000 Chloroform 6 J Trichloroethene 190 Tetrochloroethene 590 BTEX AND BNA COMPOUNDS •• (ppb) TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (opm) ND MW-40 --------·-+\·-.\-_;MV/-4 CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS • (Rr&L 1,2-Dichloroethene ( cis/trans) 150 Chloroform Trichloroethene Tetrochloroethene I J 11 44 0 ~ ~~----===---- MW-10 CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS • (ppb) 12 J --8.IE.X.__8..tlQ_BNA COMPOUNDS ._, (ppb) Dimethyl phthalote 8 J TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) ND MW-6R _\1~il - \ CHT-6D,i) ll I _.,,,) t V < ~//M,W/~5----- ---- - / ...---.,__"""'M"Wcc_-'5~--------, /' ~ ..... 1 CH LORINA TED COMPOUNDS * (pp~.2_ ,// --~,, / ,,,.,, "'-...,~ / ND , // 1 , 0 , 1 BTEX AND BNA COMPOUNDS '* (ppb) ,,,/>r/,~1 ~J tg: fill, \ / i~ftf f :i;~~) ]i~ J □ D Vinyl chloride 1,2-Dichloroethene( cis/trans) Chloroform Bromodichlorometh,:me Trlchloroethene Bromoform Tetrachloroethene Dibromochloromethone 600 J 10 J 4 J 52 J 8 J 190 J 6 J BTEX AND BNA COMPOUNDS ** (ppb) ND Q:!kQBINATED COMPOUNDS • (pol,)_ 1,2 Dichloroethene( cis/trons) 39 Trichloroethene 3 J Tetrachloroethene 13 BTEX AND BNA COMPOUNDS •• (ppb) Di-n-octyf phthclate 1 J MW-6R MW-6D TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS {Dpml.. 0.7 MW·-6D I I CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS • (pplJ.. I I I Chloroform 5 J I I Bromodichloromethone 21 J , I Dibromochloromethane 31 J , I Bromoform !8 J I , BTEX AND BNA COMPOUNDS ,. (ppb)~ ND TOTAL PE1ROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm)_ ND f I MW--9S CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS * (ppb) 1,2-Dichloroethene (els/trans) 2 J 2-Butanone 2 J BTEX ANO BNA COMPOUNDS ,.. {ppb) Benzene 16 Toluene 2 ,j Ethytbenzene 5 J Xyienes(total) 2 J tert-Butv1 methyl ether 2200 D n--Prop)'ibenzene 12 J Fluorene 9 J Phenanthrene 2 J TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (oom) C:.~ 21 D .JMi:c5J_ f;HLORINATED COMPOUNDS • (olll!l.. Acetone 10 J , , , I , BTEX ANO BNA COMPOUNDS ** (ppb) Benzene ~- I I I I , I I Ethyibenzen8 19 X~enes( to1al) 2 J tert-But}'l methyl ether 2700 D n-Propyibenzene 8 J I I I , , Fluorene 5 J 2-Meth:,lnaphthalene 1 J Phen-ot 3 J I , I I TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) 1.7 I I I I I I I I \ \ I \ I ' ' ' ' ' ,, \ I ' ' I ' ' I ' ' ; ' \ ; ' ' I \ \ ,' l \ I I \ ; I \ I \ / \ ; \ MW-11D CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS * (pp.Q)_ Chloroform Bromodichloromethone Dibromochioromethane Bromoform 8 J 20 J 36 J 29 J BTEX AND BNA COMPOUNDS ** (ppb) TOTAL PETROLCUM HYDROCARBONS (opm) ND ------~---~··-.-~~-~--•~ / ' ; I I , \\\, ~~ I \ \~ '\) / I ' ' I \. \ L':°F.\'.IE!.I PIA I .. , \ \ i I PI\VDI 'i'/A ,-,---1 ! ____ ' MW-9S FOUR WlN05 SHOPPING CENTER + FOUR W!NDS Ill ~OUR WINDS II FOUR WINDS I CHT-1 -,ji- CHT-4 Ii) MW-8 r- -9 /J '~--•.-· 0 CHT-2'"' ~- ~ L __ CAR,- WASH _ I CHT~ 3 0 _,__j ~ 1 OD ~"'~ L_lL 'l CHT-~:10 " ',:::J-~~ ~-::--===·=:::::{) ~ --~==-~ \ MW-11 D ',, --~ ' --------. ' ', rl- V,) i ~o t~ ,, 0 C 4 00 , 1 ;7, !{J ~ R ":;J tert-Butyl methyl ether 6200 I/ 1f ;: g E n-Propylbenzene 180 J i'5 ::/ 2.4-Dimethylphenol 7 J / r --- 2-Methylnaphthalene 130 D MW-5FR CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS , (p~ ND TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) ND BTEX AND BNA COMPOUNDS ** (ppb) Benzene 950 I/ •:' cb.. ~ 4-Methylphenol 3 J y I Naphthalene 31 o □ / \ \llJ.LLETT TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROC,<\RBONS (ppm) I 1 ~__\ HOUSE 4.2 J Mll:E'S ,--. \ L1 M~. Li\ ft--7t::=o _______ \ WfELCt) ~r- \ --- L~ ~::::----_ ______ r:;:i L---f;/~-~-- r/ \L __ _j D /1 r; a l--•~--, " 1,2-Dichloroethene(cis/trans) 180 Trichloroethene 18 J Tetrachloroethene 40 J BTEX ANO BNA COMPOUNDS *' (ppb) tert-But}'i methyl ether 780 TOTAL PE1ROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) ND LEGEND MW-1 • Mtl::1Q CHI ORINATED COMPOUN0.2._!_U2pb) 1,2-Dichloroethene(cis/trans) 130 MW-6D • Trichloroethene 29 .I Tetrachloroether1e 25 J A:::'d~\me :'.:.::,; -J ~ i.f:i 0t-Buty! methyi ether G60 B-12 0 EGUN-14 Toluene 170 J Ethylbenzene 890 Xylenes( total) 1500 ter't-Bulyl methyl ether 6200 n-Propytbenzene 170 J 2,4-Dimeth~phenol 7 J 2-Methylnaphthalene 110 D 4-Meth:0.phenol 3 J Naphthalene 230 D TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) 2.2 J MW-7 CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS • (ppb) 1,2-Dichforoethene( cis/trons) 170 Chloroform 3 J Trichloroethene 29 T etrochloroethene 11 O BTEX ANO 8NA COMPOUNDS ** (ppb) tert-Butyl methyl ether 5.8 J TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) ND MW-8 CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS • (ppb) 1,2-Dichloroethene( cis/trans) 140 Chloroform 18 Trichloroet.hene Tetrach1oroethene 14 38 BTEX ANO BNA COMPOUNDS '* (ppb) tert-Butyl methyl ether 51 TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (ppm) ND SHALLOW MONITORING WELL LOCATION DEEP MONITORING WELL LOCATION SO!L SOR!NG LOCATION EXISTING SUPPLY WELL ' ' ' ' ' ' ', \ \ '\ .. \_ \ '--,, ~'~-.. 01 \ \,>--. - '~ \ ' () I f f r, / : (~ / I I I I ' \ ; \/' ,, '~ 8TEX (;ND 8NA COMPOUNDS ** {r:~pb) . j TOTAt~fC:rROLEUM HYDROCARBOl~S (2p!!!2, NU c--•-cc•·•"·'•·•.•·-~- . ·.,.-.. ,,,~;,.n~·~·--·• CHT-6D 'i, fJ'/ CAr·<1BBF /\\J 1'4":'Di:<0-- (LOCATiONS APi-\[;;O><IMAiE) ' '· -,,, / \~ ,,.✓,,. \ I //'<,,, ), : / # MW-12D CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS • (opb) 1,2-0ichloroethene(cis/tnms) 2 J Chloroform 16 Bromodlchloromethone 30 D]:,romoch\oromethane 55 Bromoform 44 J BTEX AND BNA COMPOUNDS ., (ppb) Toluene 1 J hrt-But)'i methyl ether 11 TOTAL PETIWLEUi.i H'(l)ROC.i\RBONS (ppm) ND :,OURCE: R. LOPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOCIATES (1992)_ j .... GERAGHTY Alf & MILLER, INC. ,.,, Environmental Serv·ices DRAWiNG CONFiDENTiAL: THIS DRAWING AND ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREON IS AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. AS AN INSTRUMENT OF PROFES- SIONAL SERVICE- THIS INFORMATION SHALL NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE FULL KNOWLEDGE AND PRIOR WRIHEN CONSENT OF GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC, SCALE VERIFICATION ·1t11s BAR REPRESENTS ONE INCH ON THE ORIGINAL DRAWING: USE TO VERIF-Y FIGURE REPRODUCTION SCALE SCALE: FEET 0 100 PRCJECT NO.: PR01-3.01 illE NO: TUTIJ-4 DRAWING: TUlU-4 ?LOT SIZE: 1=100' DRAFTED BY: E. CALDERON l~ATE:: 5-28-93 CHECKED BY: W. MORALES DATE: 5-28-93 APPROVED f1Y: A. COLBERG liAIT: 5-28-93 ~ BTEX •• NA E SURVEY BASE POINT AND ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL BENZEt'-IE, TOLUENE, ETHYLBENZENE, BASE ~-!EUTRAL/ AC!D EXTR;\CT/\8 !~,JCUJDES NON-CHLOF<ii\J,\ TED, ~-l "f·,r,, N1r• ~r 'AP'"' .,,;c.,-, u \'ct\ \., LUi' ·uUi'\IU0 CTEX t3 . _, \iOLA Ti LJ.-~ PETROU::Ur-A-RELA TED COMPOUNDS c: () M c [" ,.,i 11 e u··-- '1 ff' ,J, I. __ ll'l/ ,..,, I\/;, NDS MAY BE L.ABORATORY ARTIFACTS NOT DETECTED NOT A.t'-!/\LYZED CONCENTRATION EXCEEDS CALIBRATION RANGE; ESTIMATED VALUE RESULT WAS DETECTED BELOW THE REPORTING LIMIT AND/OR IS AI\J ESllMATED CONCENTR,t.\ TIOt,J ,\r\lAL YTE iOENTIFIED AS A SECOND/\f(( DIL.U Oi\i ppb Parts per biiiion ppm Parle; oer million ORGANIC COMPOUND CONCENTRATIONS iN GROUND-WATER SAMPLES SEPTEMBER 29 THROUGH OCTOBER 7, 1992 TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISlANDS FIGURE I 5-1 I c·--·- ___ , ______ , _____ .,__,~,.--------------------------------·------ I I Aluminum Barium Cal.dum Chromit.Jm Cobol t Copper Iron. Aluminum Barium Colcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potassium Selenium Sodium Vanadium Zinc Cyonide ( total) 6790 61.88 44700 19 10.2B 28 10700 2.4BJ 36500 1020 2440 1328 53900 4.18 4.88 16.48 2730 35500 85.4 21.28 ,39008 3.3B 226000 36.88 16.?B NC [j I MW- 40 Aluminum lead ~Qgnesi1Jm Mcnganese NiCkcl Po:t-:1ssium Seien.ium Sodium Vanadium Zinc 15.28 2810B 2.6B 256000 64.9 t'NPII\IE!I P/~ Barium Calcium Chrom[um Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc Cyanide (total) MW-6D 52.98 78 45000 NO 7.1B 89.8B 2.38 36900 38.9J 18408 228000J 38.88 62.4J ND Aluminum 61.98 Barium 2.38 27 G}"Cln ide (total) ND MW-6R Aluminu m Barium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potossium Selenium Sodium I --~ I _J JI MW-2 CHT-6D-1 Calcium 6870 Chromium 208 Iron 411 Vanadium Zinc Cyonide (total) Lead NO Magnesium 1870B Manganese 9.3B Nickel 62 16600 110B 64600 22.5 12.3B 56.4 21400 4.7S 41700 314 17.1B 35408 3.5BJ 229000 110 47 ND ===~-- - i~- M~~~MW-\ 6···6 -/ ·/) fC:JR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER • , I MW-6. Potassium 7838 Sodium 15600 Zinc 22.8 Cyanide (total) ND Aluminum Borium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron MW-9S Lead Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc Cyanide (total) 13200 383 68600 ND 17.48 46J 17300 21.2,J 37500 1700 61.8 3790B 237000 65.1 105 ND Aluminum Arsen,c Barium Calcium Chromium Cobon Copper Iron Lead' Magnesium Mang,:Jn,:se Nickel Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc ..M..W- 8 Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Copper Iron M1Jgneslum Manganese Nickel Potassiurn Sod/um Vanadium Zinc 17000 9.2J 419 87400 ND 21.48 50.7J 25700 8.3J 44600 2580 19.28 42008 234000 84. 1 97 MW-10 Cyanide (total) ND Aluminum Arsenic Barium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potassium Sodium Vonadiuni Zinc Cyanide (total) MW-110 Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Copper Iron L~'ld Magnesium Mangonese Nickel Potassium Sodium Zinc Cyanide (total) 17300 5.5B 482 46600 19.1 20.28 56.9 22800 7.6J 28200 1450 18.18 9060J 200000 66.SJ 88.SJ ND 1698 5.1B 7330 95.1 8.58 461 3.2 11308 5.8B 10.78 1280B 1'1300J 19.38 ND ' \ I ' \ ' SOURCE: R. LOPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOCIATES (1992). .Allf GERAGHTY ,A.,- & MILLER, INC. _,. Environmental Services I I I I I I 973 I I 72.6B I 47500 I I 11 I ' 10.28 I 1370 I I 35000 81.4 25.2B 13800 226000 428 I 7.a~- II (ABANDONED) I 7 I I I I J + ,J rnce "'"' "' It r----,-.._J' FOUR WINDS .FOUR WINDS II .. , I MW- 8 0 FOUR WINOS SHOPPING Cl::NTER MW-9S D ~ -I ~~Jo I I I f ! I / : I I ~, 1/) HARVEY ""-, I ,,. ..,.------ /,;:~---=:\ (1/ //A /'- 1\ SCALE: FEET ~ P~(M::cr .MO.: PR013.01 SCALE VER!FiCATION DRAWINI.,: TUTU-10 THIS BAR REPRESENTS ONE INCH ON THE DhAF"lED 8Y: C CAI.DERON ORIGINAL DRAWING: -·- CHECKHl B"(: w. !,JC RAl.f".:.S ' I ... APPRO\Q CY: I',. COLf#:Rr; ~ 0 C - ; m DRAWING CONFIDENTIAL: THIS DRA\\1NG AND ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREON IS AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. AS AN INSTRUMENT OF PROFES- SIONAL SERVICE. THIS INFORMATION SHAU. NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN PART \\1THOU T THE FULL KNOWLEDGE AND PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT I -•~• .. , ,.~-r.-• l l OF GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. USE TO VERIFY FIGURE REPRODUCTION SCALE . MW-3 Aluminum 3600 Barium 43.38 Calcium 56900 Chromium 17.8 Cobalt 5.8B Copper 16.8B kon 5050 Lead 1.8BJ Magnesium 32500 Manganese 1560 Nickel 8.7B Potassium 17108 Sodium 2160D0 Vanadium 36.28 Zinc 198 Cyanide (total) ND ~7f,_~SAY ~~~ Tiu I ~ ! !~ I I I I MIK E"S PAl.'ff -- r~J ' ' 0 MW-120 Aluminum ~arlum fo!ciurn f hromium 9opper lror1 Leod ;,fo~nesium ~ 6r,<;~nese ickei otassium ~odium Zi11c Cy0nide {total) FILE NG; lUTV-·W PLOT SIZE: 1=100' DATE, 5·--28--93 DATE: :3-•2!!,•-93 DATE: 5-28-93 258 6B 9760 63.7 20.7B 643 4.7 !950B 12.68 10.46 12808 ~~OOJ l ·- __ .._ _________________ ,~_.,, ....... , ' ----,"" . .. .,.....,...,,. ~..,,., T "'-"'"'" ,,,., .. \ ' ' ' I / J , , MW- 14 Aluminum 6orlum Calcium Ch,.omium Cobalt Copper Iron· Lead Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potassium Sodium Vonadium Zinc Cyanide (total) ' ' ' \ ' \ 5280 123B 89800 13.9 7.38 20.38 7160 1.8B 42300 2480 14.68 1300B 131000 218 34.9J NO \ I _,.·'\ \ I ,,,, \ 1 \ ,,,,,,,. \\ I \ ,,/ \ \ \ ,. \ ' y ✓- \ }"' \ ,,,,,// ' ' I W \ ,M - 14\ CURf<!CUi.JJM CENTER BUILDING (FORMER LAGA BUILDING) I \~ I ' I \ ' \ \ ' ) ~jV 1/1- W-10 flHA-11 Aluminum Barium Calclum Chrornium Copper lrao Lead Magnesium Manganese Potassium Sodium Vonodium Zinc Cyanide (total) 01 ', \) ' ' \ \ ~\ Q· / ' ' \ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' \ ' ' ' ' ' 2690 1388 126000 71.7 12.9B 674 124J 6548 15.8 50300J 215000 12.3B 18.6B NO Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Copper Iron N \ \ Lead Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc 19500J 20.8BJ 38800J 23.4J 3-'5.8J 22000 5.9J 13700J 423J 10.3BJ 139DOJ 5D6000J 64.8J 44.8 LEGEND MW-1 • 1490 3.98 167B 40100 □ D Aluminum Barium Beryllium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc MW- 5FR Aluminum Arsenic Borium Colcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potassium Sodium '<-.., ,,u,J;.,; ,·, Zinc Cyanide (total) 3640 18.8B 1B 49200 12.7 5.1B 19.9B 5120 ND 30300 120J 21100 199000J 103 168 Cyanide (total) ND MW-1 00 Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Iron Magnesium Mangones1;; Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc Cyanide (t.ota:) 1648 6B 44600 4.2B 281 33600 156 11000J 229000 69.7J 6.7B NO SHALLOW MONITORING WELL Cyanide (total) ND Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron lead Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potassium Selenium Sodium Vanadium Zinc Cyanidti (total) 1140 48 1678 4010D 12.5 6.5B 10.9B 1910 ND 21400 406 49 8970 ~:;goo W 26.4J NO 20100 428 100000 ND 14.58 34.7 19300 8.5J 3640D 563 138 1910B 2.28J 196000J 93. I J 37.7J ND MW- 7FR Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Mognasium Manganese Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc Cyanide (total) 4000 16.58 51700 10.4 4.88 14.48 5470 30500 132J 22100 2DIOOOJ 106 178 NO · DEEP MONITORING WELL. EGU~ -1$- CHT-6D._, EXISTING WATER WELL MONITORING WELL INSTALLED BY CARIBBEAN HYDRO- TECH, (LOCATION APPROXIMATE) INC. PEPORTE0 CONCEr~TRATIONS ARE IN PAf~lS PLI,; MiU.lOhi ,,D ~J.OT DETECTED 8 J s REPORTED VALUE IS BETWEEN CONTRACT REQU IRED DETECTI Oi~ LltvllT (CRDL) AND i~.!STRUtAENT DETECf 10rJ LIMIT (iDL) RESUL; WAS DETEClED BELOW THE REPORT!NG LIMIT AND/OR IS AN ESTIMATED cot~CE!\ITRATION REPOF(fED VALUE WAS DETERMINED BY THE ~AE !HOD OF STANDARD ADDI TIONS (MSA). I I I I ___ , ----•-_c_.-_ .,a~•.Cc==-<"Er:-..,.----------------------------------1 TOTAL M·. ET AL AJ1JIO CYANIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN GROUND-WATER SAMPLES SEPTE MBER 29 THROUGH OCTOBER 7, 1992 TIJPJ S[f.:VIC,: STATION INVESTIGATIO~: SI. fe'O!-/i'i',, U.S. VIRGIN ISU\NDS -- FIGURE MW-40 Aluminum 90B 7.6B 45700 ND 39.88 2.48 38800 45.8J 22508 2.38 242000 40.68 67.5 Barium Calcium Chromium Iron Le-ad Magnesium Manganese Potassium Selenium Sodium Vanadium Zinc MW- 6D Aluminum 58B Barium 2. 4B Colcium 7090 Chromium 195 Iron 26.8B Lead ND Mognesium 1910B Nickel 54.1 Selenium 3.28 Sodium 16100 Zinc 4.88 MW-9S Antimony Barium Calcium Chromium iron Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Potassium Sodium Vanadiu m Zinc Aluminum Barium Calcium • Chromium Iron lead Magnesium Mangon1:ise Nickel Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zin:; 36.58 56.28 44000 ND 21.6B ND 34000 650 2200B 267000 33.78 8.7 ______ .......__ Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Iron Leod Magnesium r-Aangonese Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Copper Iron 57.88 95.3B 48700 ND 53.1B ND 32700 43.2 32208 247000 42.88 10.18 46.88 J::t6B 502,J0 ND 4.18 28.58 ND 34900 45,6 18B 13100 236000 42.18 33.4B 123B 53800 ND 30.68 ND 36800 40 23.38 32708 241000 32.9B "10.18 ---- I I I I I I I I I I I f I I I L Pit.VE.II ?/A FOUR Vr~NDS SHOPPii,&G CENTER Le.:.d Magnesium Mangonese 21B 365 60900 ND 27.2B 1.3B 28400 1350 15.2 34208 244000 15.9B 20.1J Lead Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc ,-,----J Nickel Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc MW-J.Q_ Aluminum 67.9B 7.48J 472 43700 ND 4.38 59.18 NO 22400 1000 8490 214000 21.98 55.8 Arsenic Barium Colcium Chromium Cob<Jlt Iron Leed Magnesium Manganese Potassium Sodium Von<'.ldium Zinc MW--110 Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Iron Leod "'4aqnesium Pota~sium Selenium Sodium Zinc 94.98 4.38 6950 79,4 28.7B NO 10908 14208 2.2BJ 12200 4.3ll I I I I I I I I I I I I I LN>AVl;:D Pfll I I I ' I I I I ___ !)' I ' ' SOURCE: R. LOPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOCIATES (1992). ', 1-1- -------------------~~-----------..----·-~ .Allf GERAGHTY .A.,- & MILLER, INC. ,,Alj( Environmental Services DRAWING CONFIDENTIAL: THIS DRAWING AND ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED TI-IEREON iS AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF GE/<AGHTY & MILLER, INC. AS AN INSTRUMENT OF PRGiTS- SIONAL SERVICE. THIS INFORMATION SHALL W)T BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT -,,,,: FULL KNOWLEDGE AND PRIOR WRITTEN CON:'£'11' OF GERAGHTY & MlillR, INC. T!ON SCALE VERiFICA . THIS BAR REPRES ONE INCH ON T ORIGINAL DRA<>1N F.NTS HE G: \ .J USE TO VERIFY FlG REPRODUCTION SC ·URE ALE ---------------------...i-----------------"''""-''''·· ,_..._ _____ _ MW-3 Aluminum 71.7B Barium 36.98 Calcium 57100 Chromium ND Iron 55.6B l ead ND M'agnesium 32500 Manganese 1490 Potassium 1130B Sodium 233000 Vanadium 23.88 Zinc 128 ~MSAY I.M'IIVED P/~ ~J:,_ TILJ \ CHT- 6Dii, • MW-60 · MW-6 (ABANDONED) ff ' 4 I/ FOUR: WINDS 111 +FOUR WINDS II FOUR WINDS I CHT- 1 -Bl- CHTf- 4 ii, ~ ' MW-8 □ I l] / 11 I I I I 0 MW-12D Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Potassium Sodium Zinc 138B 4.9B 8870 49J 27.78 NO 19308 1.5B 1470B 17700 5.88 MW- 130 ,MW-1!_ Aluminum Aluminum Barium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc 42B 41HA-II Barium 1148 Calcium 88200 Chromium ND Copper Iron 5.48 857 ~ lead ND Mongonese 41800 Potassium 2470 Sodium Vanadium 1440B 139000 4.78 15.8B (;IJRRICU1.Ut,1 CENTER 8Ull01NG (fORMER lAGA BUllOING) Aluminum Arsenic . Barium Calcium· Chromium Iron Lead Mogn~sium MGnganese Nickel PotCISSium Sodium Zinc 34.98 .}.98 172B 40300 ND 278 ND 21600 373 39.78 9850 233000 7.58 VIHA~ □ D Zinc \ \ \ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' MW-tlFR Aluminu,n Antimony Arsenic Barium Calcium Chrorniom Cobalt Iron r.e'ld Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potassium Sodium Zinc MW-?_ [ - MW- l0D Barium Calcium Chromium Lead M,:ignesium Mangonese Potassium Sodium Von<Hlium Zinc Antimony Barium Calcium Chromium Lead Magnesium Moriganese Potassium Selenium Sodium Vanadium Zinc 5.38 45000 ND ND 34300 143 10900 235000 72.1 12.58 _j 20.18 4.88 41200 NO NO 28600 1.2B 20100 2.'18 209000 96.8 3.98 2180 1218 105000 66.8 7.28 128 81.5S 1.1B 52800 236000 10.98 7,28 Aluminum Barium Calcium Chroml1Jm Iron Lead Magnesium Mangcmese Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc Barium Cotcium Chromium Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Potassium Sodium Vanadium Zinc 7 36.18 24.88 3.98 1s::s 39500J ND 5.4B 278 ND 23200 383 48.8 9380 236000 5.68 \ 114B 60400 ND 15.7B ND 28600 42.7 15708 219000J 48.38 32 230 123B 11 600 ND 27.lB ND 24508 2.88 14400 164000 9.18 68 MW-7FR BariL•m 7.48 Calcium 41100 Chromium ND Iron 10.58 lead ND Mogr,esium 2B700 Manganese 28 Potassium 22400 Sodium 211000 Vanadium 99.2 Zinc 7.48 LEGEND SCALE: FEET 0 100 I f'ROJEC'T NO.: PPOH.01 Fl!.£ NO: ·ruru--11 ~ _!:.Rfl.lMNG: ~cc,-:~lew, •~~~ - - · - ----- ------ . -- - - -·- ORAmo BY: E. CALDERON DATE: 5-27- 9.3 - · W. ~ORALES . DAT£: 5-•27-93 . - . C;HEC..-.UI EIY: -/,PPR<.>VEO BY: A. COl.8ERG OATE: 5- 27-93 ' MW-oiJ. EGUN-1 CHT-6-U .. ND B J s SHALLOW MONiTORING WELL t:'.<!STi.NG WAfT:R WELL !vlOl\l:TORING 'NELL INS-11.1Jt !:C BY CAFIBBEAN HYDRO- JECH, INC . (LOCATIOI\J ,\PPRO>WAATE) ·FNC''' ] __ [ ' ,t. N,,.,.. ·c-'-Tl-c-·Ec u i ,;..:_ -_ l -_ I RE.POR TED VALL!,.:: !S BETWEEN co~~TR/\CT REOU!F(ED DFrECT!Ci'I. LIM!T (CRDL') AM) INSTF,iUMEl,IT DE![C TiON L!ic1i!r (iDL) f~ESULl WAS ~,-;,·-r:T, ED b·.:1.r·1 C',\M ·1,_ l _lF . _, _, . ,_ ·, ~· '- .~ [7.__ IS AN ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION REPORTED VALUE WAS DETERMINED STAND ARD 1\DD!TIONS REF'Of(r\1',JG LIMIT Ah!D/OF: BY THE l\r1E.THOD OF I ! I I i ,.., . ----·-------= ·•'-"""""-' ___________ ,,..,,,,.,,_ ___ """"'·""·-•i----,~=~=t DISSOLV ED METAL CONCENTRATIONS FIGURE ' IN G ROUND-WATER SAMPLES SEPTEMBER -· 29 THROUGH OCTOBER 7, 1992 TUTU SERV\Cf s~:!AT!ON INVESTIGATlQM ST f HOMAS. U.S, VIRGIN ISLANDS 5-3 ,nc,-•------------~-----•----..L.- •=·· __ ,/ I I i i ! I ! I i I i I I ' - -------------- ·---- ---------.,~·-·--=·•~···-- --- ---------,-- r I L _J PIW£!l P/11. r---J Cll<JRCH I RAMSAY FR CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS •_{ruib) 1,2-Dichloroethene {cis/trons) 1.4 Chloroform 2.8 Bromodichloromethane 0.89 Trk:hloroethene 0.89 Tetrachloroethene 16 81£X COMPOUNDS (ppb) ND RAMSAY CH LORINA 1£0 COMPOUNDS .!:.Jru:,b) 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trans) 1.4- Chloroform 2.9 Trichloroethene 0.94 T etrochloroethen~ 16 Bromodichloromethane 0.98 Carbon disulfide 0.15 J 81£X COMPOUNDS (ppb) IN'#IVEll PIA ND MW-4 • '•, ' ' \ ~4~P---□ ---'=---- FOUR VrlNDS SHOPPING CENTER f ,,_,,_ . ~ CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS •JruM 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trnns) 99 Chloroform 1 J Trichloroethene 10 Tetrachloroethene 38 B1EX COMPOUNDS ND FOUR WlNDS I (ppb) CHLORINATED COMPOUNDS •Jl>Qb) 1,2-0:Chloroethene (cis/trons) 170 f f f I J f f I I I I I ' ' Chloroform 1.6 J Trichloroethen-9 21 Tetrachloroethene 78 B"fEX COMPOUNDS ND {ppb}. -/ ' I I :i0URCE: R. LOPEZ DE AZUA &: ASSOCIATES (1992). A~ GERAGHTY Alif & MILLER, INC . Alif En1Jironmental Services ,_~c,=CI'CC - RA\\1NG DRAWING CONFIDEN TIAL: THIS D AND ALL INFGRMA TION CONTAINED THEF:E AND SHALL ?J:MAt"i TI-IE PROPERTY OF G & M!LLER, =,w(;. ?,S ,<\N iNSTRUMENT OF P S!DNfo.L SER VICE. fHiS iNFORMATION SHA 8f usrn iN "/o/HCL£ OR IN PART Y~THOUT fl/..L Ki\.WVtU::":DGE ft..~lO PRiOR WRl~N C(, ON IS EnAGHTY ROPES- ,LL NOT r.=-1£ 1~.1:.::HiT OF GERAGHTY & :\·HUER, JNC. 1 .MW--60 1 • • MW-6 (ABANDONED) 4 I FOUR WINDS 111 ! □ SCALE: FEET 0 100 PROJECT NO.: PR01 S.01 SCALE VERIFICATION DRAWING: TUTU-13 THIS BAR REPRESENTS ONE INCH ON THE DRAFTED SY: E. CALDERON ORIGINAL DRAWING: CHECKED BY: 'N. t.40RALES I I APPROVED BY: A. COLBE~G USE TO VERIFY FIGURE r .... REPRODUCTION SCALE ~-= ... ~ ~~ j=·-=;.a,-.~==--• 0 ' ! FILE NO: TUTU- IJ PLOT SIZE: 1=100' DATE: 5- 27-93 DA1£: 5-27-9J DATF: 5--27--93 - MW-1 •• Mw-w LEGEND MW- 1 • MW-6D :!', ;·,;·.;:.Jf.J-·i 41HA-II "' \ \ \ -✓-~ I I \ \ □ D TILLETT CHLORINATED CQMPQtJNQS • (ppb) Methylene chloride 16 B Acetone 85 BJ 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis/trans) 290 Chloroform 3.6 J Trichloroethene 62 Tetrachloroethene 140 BTEX COMPOUNDS Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene (ppb) 7 0.5 J 1.5 J SHALLOW MONITORING WELL MONITORING WELL ., NG WATER SUPPLY WELL i'AC!'t fORIHG WELL IN STALLED EY CARll3i3EAN HYDRO- TECH , (L0CA TION APPROXIMATE) NOT DETECTED INC. Ai\lALYT[ WAS DETECTED IN THE LABORATORY BLANK RESULT WAS DETECTED BELOW THE iS ,\ri ESTIM ATED CONCENTRATION REPORTING LIMIT AND/OR / ENE, roLUENE, ETHYLBENZENE, AND XYLENES ! __ IDES NON-CH LORINA TED ·-BTDC VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ppb Pnd.c·. per oillion I .,_.·okO••>'C:-----------------------------.--------1 VOL CONCE SEPTEMBER A'T~L.E ORGANIC COMPOUND NTRATIONS IN SUPPLY WELLS ·14 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 17, 1992 TUTU SERVICE STATION INVESTIGATION ST. iHOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS FIGURE 5-4 ~- '-"•···-·--··-·--------------------------I.-----✓ -~ --=- ~--· -----~--~--~-----------------------·------------.. CHURCH • MW-2 UNPAVED P/A ,,,:::>A,,, ~ \ ,,,,,,, V \ LJ ;/ , ~1\\0 I I I I I I I \ I \ \ I I ' \ I I ' \ I I I I l ,/'\ \ I .,. \ : \ ,,,/ \ 1 \ ,/ \ I ' _,, \ I )../ \ )..,, \ / \ 41HA-II + YIHA-1 0 I \ ,,,,,,,, / r\ \ \ ,,/,,,/ . \ e\ 1',)l,',.J- ·1 _) [}. \ / ~ I ,s ! ~ I I I I Ef) MW- 15 s. \- MW-4 \ . ' .MW-4D 0 \ \ , , I / / I I , I ' Je \ ,MW-14\ \ \~ \ --~ \ \'- > \~ W-1 .. MW-1D CURRICULUM CENTER BUILDING (FORMER lAGA BUILDING) / / I ----, I I I I ' I I I ' I I I I I I I ' I I ' ' I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ \ \ //'\, \ / ' \ / ' \ / I \ / I \ // \ \ ; I I / I I ' I I / \ \ ; I I I I I I AREA U/C AREA U/C c!] \ \ 0-. \ \ '\\) \ \ : \ \~ / I , I I ' I ' ' I ',, '\ UflPAVt.D PIA : ' ' I ' ' I \ \ I ',\_ \~~ \ ',,< ~-,_()J '\ \ 10 )<, ',,_ ' ' ' ' ' ' ', ',, ','-, ..... , ..... , ', AREA U/C f AREA U/C ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' I I I I ' I I I I I I I ' I ' I ' ' I ' ' I ' ' I I I ' I SOURCE: R. LOPEZ DE AZUA & ASSOCIATES (1992). FOUR WINOS SHOPPING CDITER MW-6R. •MW-6D • /_ MW-16 e ------· \.If.STERN AUTO --- __ MW-17~ I . _______, o" I -~□NLRETE 'J L!DE'w'ALK 0 FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER 0 MW-6 (ABANDONED) + FOUR WINDS Iii +rnuR WINDS II FOUR W~JDS ~ fj. CHT-4 .~ 'w'ALL MW-8 ESSO G"5 MW-9i- /1_]~' MW-9,_ L_ D ., CHT-~e:•-"=1 ~· °': WASH ]~HT -3 ~ MW 10D Mw~°io / ~-~~ ~~,_=C~=:;;_,) ~ ~- MW-1 0 • -------...... "' • MW-7 YITElCOl SCALE: FEET 0 100 :,id~ Hi (f) MW--1 . ., ;.::''fl'-{iO • ~C:LiN-1 .. ('HT--dD >ii 101 " 175,89 u/c □ D f'ROPO',;FD SHALL0\'1/ MONITORING <NELL LOCATION C<lSTii',JG ~iHALLOW fdO~JITORiNG vi/DL LOCATIO!\J E\!STIHG DEEi' l<.10NITORING Wf1L LOCATION ,_::x1STl i'✓C '.:iUF'FL Y WELL LOCATIOM MON!1 0i'dNG WELLS INSTALLED BY CAl~iBBEAN HYDf;'.0- TECH .. ( 1 ,-,r,A r1nr,,.,.), 1\PPRC)v1,,1A ··rE' 1 .. vv ., • , __ 1,•~ .. . . i , / -. !IV ; EXISTIHG CON IT~OL MONUMU~T (ELE:VATION !N FEET ABOVE t,AF/\~,i SEA LEVEL) lJ·:,,10·- 0 , ''N·~·-r,ucT o 1 t.r,. ·,;u. :~ ,! , •. ~ i 'hi i------------------T------------~--,·-------....,r.P::R-:oJ::'.Ec::r-::N"."o_-, "".e=R':".01':'3_".:".01--..,.,-l "::F1:'."'.L£~N~o:--, "."ru---1s_9_..., ___________________________ ~,,·,=---------,,·r-· ____ , DRAWING CONFIDENTIAL: THIS DRAWING SCALE VERIFICATION DRAWING: TU-169 IPLOT SIZE, 1=100' Altf GERAGHTY A., & MILLER, INC. ~ Environm,ental Services AND All INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREON 1$ THIS BAR REPRESENTS ANO SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF GERAGI-JT\· ONE INCH ON THE & l,UUER. INC. AS AN INSTRUMENT OF PROFES-. ORIGINAL DRAWING: SIONAL SERVICE, THIS INFORMATION SHALL N◊-1 BE USED IN 1/HOlE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE FULL KN0\11..EDGE AND PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. USE TO VERIFY FIGURE REPRODUCTION SCALE DRAFTED BY": E. CALDERON IDATE: 5-27-93 CHECKED 8Y: W. MORAL.ES !DATE: 5-27-93 PROPOSED MONfff ORiNG WELL , .. oc{~ TIONS APPROVED EIY: A. CCU3ERG !DATE: 5-27-93 -----,··- I Fi ' ! I '- I