ecology and environment, inc. International Specialists in the Environment 33 North Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60602 Tel. 312/578-9243, Fax: 312/578-9345 SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR TEXACO REFINERY LAWRENCEVILLE, LAWRENCE COUNTY, ILLINOIS TDD No.: S05-9610-008 PAN: 6C0801SIXX JANUARY 17, 1997 Prepared for: UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Emergency Response Branch 77 West Jackson Boulevard Chicago, Illinois 60604 Prepared by Reviewed by: Approved by: ART Assistant Program Manager L-Thomas Kouris, STAJtT Prograbi Manager Date Date: :/./?-# Date:
135
Embed
ecology and environment, inc. - Records Collectionsecology and environment, inc. International Specialists in the Environment 33 North Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60602 Tel.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
ecology and environment, inc.International Specialists in the Environment
33 North Dearborn StreetChicago, Illinois 60602Tel. 312/578-9243, Fax: 312/578-9345
SITE ASSESSMENT REPORTFOR
TEXACO REFINERYLAWRENCEVILLE, LAWRENCE COUNTY, ILLINOIS
TDD No.: S05-9610-008PAN: 6C0801SIXX
JANUARY 17, 1997
Prepared for:UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Emergency Response Branch77 West Jackson Boulevard
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) tasked the Ecology andEnvironment, Inc. (E & E), Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team (START) toperform a site assessment at the Texaco Refinery (Texaco) site in Lawrenceville, Illinois. START
was requested under Technical Direction Document (TDD) S05-9610-008 to obtain and reviewbackground information; conduct a site visit; document site conditions with written and visual
documentation; make recommendations to U.S. EPA based on site assessment data collected;
determine site characteristics; determine pollutant dispersal pathways; develop a health and safetyplan; conduct sampling activities; schedule/provide for analytical support; perform air monitoring;and perform analytical data validation. All site activities were coordinated under the authority of theU.S. EPA On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) Steve Faryan.
1-1
2. Site Background
2.1 Site DescriptionThe Texaco site is located at 1 Havoline Street, Lawrenceville, Lawrence County, Illinois
(N 38°42'30.0" latitude and W 87°41'30.0" longitude). The 952-acre site is situated in a light
industrial and residential area and consists of the refinery, a landfarm, and Indian Acres (Figure 2-1).The 30-acre Indian Acres portion of the facility consists of several lagoons and is owned by IndianRefining Company. The landfarm area of the site consists of petroleum products treated bybiodegradation and is also owned by Indian Refining Company. The refinery portion of the site isowned by American Western Refining L.P. (American Western). The Embarrass River is locatedapproximately 2,000 feet east of the site and wetlands border the site to the south. Residential areasare located to the north, west, and south; and the site is fenced. The site operated as an oil refineryfrom approximately 1907 to 1985. The site is inactive, but not abandoned. Approximately 30employees currently maintain the facility.
2.2 Site HistoryThe Texaco site operated as an oil refinery from approximately 1907 to 1985 and had several
owners from 1907 to present.From 1907 to the early 1930s, the site was owned and operated by the Indian Asphalt
Company/Central Refining Company. From the early 1930s to 1985, the site was owned andoperated by The Texas Company, later renamed Texaco, Inc. In 1985, operations were suspendedand the site was internally transferred to Texaco Refining Marketing, Inc. (TRMI). In 1986, TRMItransferred the refinery to Indian Refining Company, a subsidiary of Texaco, Inc. In 1988, TRMIsold Indian Refining Company to Oil Producers, Inc. In 1989, Indian Refining Company stock wentto Castle Energy Corporation in a litigation settlement. Indian Acres and the landfarm remained partof Indian Refining Company, and the refinery portion went to Indian Refining Ltd., Partnership
2-1
(IRLP), a subsidiary of Castle Energy Corporation. In 1995, IRLP sold the refinery to AmericanWestern. Both Indian Refining Company and American Western are owned by Gadgil WesternCorporation of Dubai, Saudi Arabia. Gadgil Western Corporation is attempting to sell the refinery.
In 1986, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) observed throughout the facility atotal of 33 potential Solid Waste Management Units, which consisted of landfarms, asbestos disposalareas, tank farm areas, and lagoons/impoundments. Numerous spills of petroleum product have beendocumented at the site from 1992 to 1995.
On July 16 and 17, 1996, the IEPA Site Assessment Unit collected soil and groundwater samplesfrom properties bordering the site. Three of the soil samples were collected in the residential areaimmediately north of Indian Acres. These samples were characterized by pH levels below 2, andcontained elevated levels of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Upon receiving this data,IEPA informed U.S. EPA of the results, and U.S. EPA conducted a site assessment.
2-2
Refinery
Quadrangle Location
ecology and environment, inc.Technical Assistance Team
Region V33 N. Deirboro &., Chk^o, niinoii 60602
TITLESite Location Map
Texaco RefineryCITY
LawrencevilleSTATE
IllinoisSOURCE USGS Lawrencevfllef IL Quadrangle,
7.5 minute series
nOUREl
2-1SCALE
1:24000PAN
6C0801SIXXDATE 1965REVISED NA
2-3
3. Site Assessment
The site assessment occurred on October 16 and 17, 1996. On October 16, IEPA representativesCarol Fuller and Mark Densmore, START members Lisa Graczyk and Damon Sinars, and OSC SteveFaryan began the site assessment by performing a reconnaissance in the residential neighborhoodimmediately adjacent to the north side of Indian Acres. IEPA pointed out areas in the neighborhoodwhere a hard, black, asphalt-like substance appeared to be coming up out of the ground. These areaswere located in the yards and gardens of residents living adjacent to the Indian Acres fenceline, andalso approximately 100 yards north of the Indian Acres fenceline at 1606 4th Street. Air monitoringrevealed no organic vapors above background with the photoionization detector (PID).
START collected three soil/waste samples following the reconnaissance. All three samples,
RS-01, RS-02, and RS-03, resembled a hardened, black, asphalt-like material. Sample RS-01 wascollected from a material coming up out of the yard at 1606 4th Street (Figure 3-1). Sample RS-02was collected on City of Lawrenceville property, south of the wastewater treatment plant, andapproximately 20 feet north of the Indian Acres fenceline. Sample RS-03 was collected from asubstance coming from the ground, adjacent to Indian Acres fenceline, on residential property,approximately 200 feet west of the 302 Hickory Street house. A pH measurement was taken of soil
Sample RS-01 by mixing the soil with distilled water and then measuring the pH of the water with pHpaper. RS-01 had a pH measurement of 1.
On October 17, 1996, IEPA, START, U.S. EPA OSC, and Joe Malek, an U.S. EPA criminalinvestigator, met with refinery personnel. Joe Finch, Environmental Specialist, American Western;and John Braithwaite, Environmental Compliance Manager, American Western; showed IEPA,START, and U.S. EPA, the Indian Acres area. Indian Acres consists of several lagoons which havea hard crusty layer on top. Air monitoring throughout Indian Acres revealed no readings abovebackground of organic vapors on the PID. START collected Sample IR-1 approximately 20 feet
south of the residence at 3rd and Hickory Streets (302 Hickory Street). Sample IR-2 was collected
3-1
immediately south of the Indian Acres fenceline, and immediately south of where Sample RS-03 wascollected. Sample IR-3 was collected from what appeared to be a small lagoon which had hardened.Sample IR-4 was collected from a brown and black sediment in a large lagoon located just west of theentrance gate to Indian Acres. This lagoon contained approximately 3 feet of water over its sedimentand Sample IR-4 was collected by inserting a 5-foot PVC pipe into the sediment and then depositingthe sediment into the sample jar. The lagoon water was tested with pH paper and found to have a pHof 4. Sample IR-5 was collected approximately 5 feet south of the Indian Acres fenceline and southof where sample RS-02 was collected. Samples IR-1, IR-2, IR-3, and IR-5 resembled the black,hard, asphalt-like material collected in the neighborhood north of Indian Acres.
Samples IR-6 and IR-7 were collected approximately 20 feet south of Indian Acres in sewertrenches. While city contractors were installing a new sewer line, a black tar-like substance wasobserved in the ground. START collected samples in each of two openings which contained the tar-like material. IR-6 was collected in an east opening of the sewer trench and IR-7 in a west opening.
All samples, except IR-4, were collected at a depth of 0 to 6 inches. Sampling equipment,stainless steel trowels and bulb planters, were decontaminated prior to sampling with analconox/distilled water solution wash, followed by a distilled water rinse.
Following the sampling of Indian Acres, a tour of the landfarm was given by refinery personnel
and photographs were taken. An attorney for Indian Refining and American Western would not grantthe U.S. EPA access to the refinery property for sampling, but allowed U.S. EPA to tour the
refinery. A tour of the refinery was given by Finch and Braithwaite of American Western andphotographs of the refinery were taken.
Appendix A contains photographs of sample locations, Indian Acres, the landfarm, and therefinery.
3-2
4. Analytical Results
All samples were analyzed for pH, semivolatile organics compounds (SVOCs), volatile organiccompounds (VOCs), metals, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Sample RS-02 was also analyzedfor pesticides. All samples were analyzed using U.S. EPA SW846 methodology. Quality AssuranceLevel II, as stated in the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER)Directive 9360.4-01, April 1990, was requested. The samples were shipped Federal Express to thelaboratory, Ecology and Environment, Inc., Analytical Services Center, Lancaster, New York. The
samples were analyzed under analytical TDD S05-9610-806.Samples RS-01, RS-02, IR-1, and IR-2 had a pH of less than 2 units, and are therefore
considered a corrosive waste by 40 Code of Federal Regulations 261.22. A corrosive waste isdefined as a substance with a pH less than or equal to 2 or greater or equal to 12.5. Low levels of
VOCs and metals were detected in the samples (Table 4-1). PAHs (phenanthrene, pyrene, chrysene,and benzo(a)pyrene) were detected in the samples at moderate levels. Specifically, Sample RS-01contained the highest levels of PAHs at the following levels: 52 parts per million (ppm)phenanthrene, 190 ppm pyrene, 630 ppm chrysene, and 240 ppm benzo(a)pyrene. PCBs andpesticides were not detected in the samples. Analytical data is presented in Appendix B.
3-1
Appendix A
Site Photographs
A-l
5. Discussion of Potential Threats
Section 300.415, paragraph (b)(2) of the National Contingency Plan (NCP) lists factors to beconsidered when determining the appropriateness of a potential removal action at a site. Specifically,the following is a discussion of the applicable conditions which exist at the Texaco site:
• Actual or potential exposure to nearby human populations, animals, or the food chainfrom hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants. Samples of a black, asphalt-likesubstance were collected from the surface soils of residential properties, which revealed thematerial to be corrosive, pH results as low as 1.3, and to contain low levels of VOCs andmetals, and moderate levels of PAHs. Corrosive materials are generally skin and eye irritantsand can cause burns. Some acids are toxic by inhalation and ingestion. Chrysene andbenzo(a)pyrene have shown to cause cancer in rats which had these compounds applied totheir skin. Phenanthrene and pyrene are questionable carcinogens. Chrysene,benzo(a)pyrene, phenanthrene, and pyrene all have reported human mutation data.
• High levels of hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants in soils largely at ornear the surface that may migrate. All samples collected were at the soil surface and thesewere found to have hazardous properties. Heavy rains may cause migration of thesesubstances into surfacewater and groundwater. Winds can cause dust particulates containingthe hazardous constituents to migrate.
Weather conditions that may cause hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminantsto migrate or be released. Major flooding has occurred in the neighborhood immediatelynorth of Indian Acres on two occasions in the past 10 years, causing houses to becomeflooded. Flooding may potentially cause migration of these corrosive substances and PAHsinto peoples homes, surrounding soils, and groundwater. In addition, winds can cause dustparticulates containing the hazardous constituents to migrate.
5-1
6. Conclusion
The contaminants detected during this site assessment in surface soils have the potential to affecthuman health and the environment. In addition, the quantity of hazardous material in the ground isunknown. Further investigation to determine an approximate volume of this material is warranted.This may be accomplished using a drill rig, in conjunction with an appropriate extent ofcontamination sampling study.
A removal cost estimate was generated for this site using Removal Cost Management System(RCMS) Cost Projection, version 4.2. The total cost for the removal of 180 cubic yards ofcontaminated soil from the residential area north of Indian Acres is estimated at $52,000. It shouldbe noted that the actual volume of soil to excavate is unknown. The detailed RCMS cost projectionreport can be found in Appendix C.
Lagoon areas 0^2)Fence — —Sample location ANew sewer line - - - -
>ewer trench
|1] ecology and environment, inc.\T Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team
Ty Region VJ 33 N. Dearborn
>^ Chicago, IL 60602TITLE
Sample Location MapSITE
Texaco RefineryCITY - .,, STATELawrenceville IL
FIGURE *
3-1SCALE
Not To ScalePAN
6C0701SIXX
Table 4-1
Analytical Results SummaryTexaco Refinery
October 16 and 17, 1996
Parameter
PH
Volatile Organics 0»g/Kg)
Methylene chloride
Acetone
Carbon disulfide
2-Butanone
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
2-Hexanone
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Xylene (total)
Semi-volatile Organics(pg/Kg)
2-Methyl-naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Chrysene
Benzo(a)Pyrene
Sample Designation
RS-01
1.3
RS-02
1.8
RS-03
3.0
IR-1
1.6
IR-2
1.8
IR-3
6.8
43BJ
830
6J
310
ND
19
76
61J
13
ND
ND
10J
1.800E
ND
500E
ND
5.700E
190
590E
150
57
470E
14B
410E
ND
120
11
59
40
99
4J
ND
17
ND
5.000E
ND
1,500
ND
200
580
2.400E
180
110
860
ND
52.000J
190.000J
630.000J
240.000J
ND
36.000J
ND
ND
84.000J
ND
ND
ND
48.000J
ND
ND
45.000J
ND
160,000
ND
49BJ
5.100E
9J
1.700E
ND
47
940
3.300E
130
71
790
ND
39,0001
ND
ND
ND
26BJ
360
ND
120
ND
ND
21J
61
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
IR-4
6.6
3J
9J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
IR-5
3.3
IR-6
7.3
IR-7
4.5
22BJ
120
ND
88
ND
ND
30
110
ND
ND
ND
ND
22
2J
ND
ND
45
ND
ND
42
28
210
2J
650E
ND
180
ND
29
22J
67
28
21
230
ND
ND
ND
14.000J
ND
ND
ND
ND
540.000J
ND
170.000J
36.000J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Table 4-1
Analytical Results SummaryTexaco Refinery
October 16 and 17, 19%
Parameter
Metals (mg/Kg)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Sample Designation
RS-01 RS-02 RS-03 IR-1 1R-2 IR-3 IR-4
ND
4.4B1*
1.0
1.5
202*
ND
ND
ND
8.1*
35.5*
ND
3.3
171*
ND
ND
ND
4.8*
44.0*
0.08B1
4.9
148*
0.03NB1
ND
ND
2.9*
26.8*B'
ND
2.9
64.1*
ND
ND
ND
1.1*B'
12.3*B'
0.30B'
1.8
48.4*
ND
ND
ND
10.4*
113*
ND
6.7
28.6*
ND
1.0
ND
4.8*
38.2*
ND
5.6
244*
0.31N
ND
ND
IR-5 IR-6 IR-7
2.3*
59.6*
ND
2.2
47.7*
ND
0.68
ND
ND
ND
0.72
ND
7.8*
0.05N
ND
ND
8.8*
127*
ND
LIB1
17.0*
ND
ND
ND
Key,ND = Compound was not detected.E = Compound concentration exceeds calibration standard concentrations.J = Concentration is estimated.B = Compound was detected in blank.B' = Value is less than the contract required detection limit but greater than or equal to the instrument detection limit.* = Duplicate analysis not within control limits.N = Spiked sample recovery not within control limits.
Source: Ecology and Environment, Inc., Analytical Services Center, Lancaster, New York, Analytical TDD S05-9610-806.
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME; Texaco Refinery PAGE 1 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567 TDD; S05-9610-008 PAN; 6C0801SIXX
DATE: 10-16-96
TIME: 1550
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:Down__________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:1 ny,________
50 - 60°F_____
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):RS-01_________
DESCRIPTION: Close-up of Sample RS-01 location.
j.'E: 10-16-96
TIME: 1550
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:East_________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,________
50 - 60°F_____
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):RS-01_______
DESCRIPTION: Location of Sample RS-01. Edge of trailer home can be seen at^ n -v- ~I c^ •£ +~ r^-F r^ V) r^ f- r-, r~\ -y "pi Vl
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME; Texaco Refinery PAGE 2 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567 TDD; S05-9610-008 PAN; SCO8 01SIXX
DATE: 10-16-96
TIME: 1625
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:South________
WEATHEREDITIONS:
fennny,________
50 - 60°F______
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):RS-02_________
DESCRIPTION: Location of Sample RS-02. Bulb planter in center of photographmarks the exact location of Sample RS-02._______________________________
DATE: 10-16-96
TIME: 1625
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:Down____________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,____________
50 - 60°F______
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):RS-02_________
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME: Texaco Refinery PAGE 3 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567 TDD; S05-9610-008
DATE: 10-16-96
TIME: 1640
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:South________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,_______
50 - 60°F______
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):RS-03
DESCRIPTION: Location of Sample RS-03
DATE: 10-16-96
"""ME: 1640
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:South_________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,___________
50 - 60°F______
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):RS-03_________
DESCRIPTION: Location of Sample RS-03
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEETL
SITE NAME; Texaco Refinery PAGE 4 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567 TDD; S05-9610-008 PAN; 6C0801SIXX
DATE: 10-16-96
TIME: 1640
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:East_________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,________
50 - 60°F_____
P^TOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):RS-03
DESCRIPTION: Area of Sample RS-03 location.
DATE: 10-17-96
". 'E: 0955
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:North________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,_________
50 - 60°F_____
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):IR-1_________
DESCRIPTION: Close-up of Sample IR-1
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME; Texaco Refinery PAGE 5 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567 TDD; S05-9610-008 PAN; 6C0801SIXX
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 0955____
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:North________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:g- "ny,________
50 - 60°F_______
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):
DESCRIPTION: Location of Sample IR-1
J5ATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 0955
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:North_________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,__________
50 - 60°F________
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):
DESCRIPTION: Location of Sample IR-1
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME: Texaco Refinery PAGE 6 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567 TDD; S05-9610-008 PAN; 6C0801SIXX
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1010
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:North___________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,____________
50 - 60°F______
^.OTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):IR-3__________
DESCRIPTION: Close-up of Sample IR-3
DATE: 10-17-96
'ME: 1010
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:North_________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,__________
50 - 60°F_______
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):IR-2__________
DESCRIPTION: Location of Sample IR-2
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME; Texaco Refinery PAGE 7 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567 TDD; S05-9610-008 PAN: 6C0801SIXX
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1030
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:
sunny ,
50 - 60°F
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable) :IR-3 ___
DESCRIPTION: Close-up of location of Sample IR-3 on Indian Acres
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1030
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH :
WEATHERCONDITIONS :sunny, ________
50 - 60°F _____
PHOTOGRAPHED BYLisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable)IR-3
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME; Texaco Refinery PAGE 8 OF 13U.S. EPA ID: A567 TDD: S05-9610-008 PAN; 6C0801SIXX
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1035
V? - ';/ /? j " iV /
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:unknown______
WEATHERCONDITIONS:nny,________
50 - 60°F_____
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):NA
DESCRIPTION: Indian Acres property.
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1035____
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:unknown______
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,_______
50 - 60°F_____
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):NA____________
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME; Texaco Refinery PAGE 9 OF 13U.S. EPA ID: A567 TDD; S05-9610-008 PAN; 6C0801SIXX
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1035
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH :unknown
WEATHERCONDITIONS :
50 - 60°F
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczvk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable) :NA ____________
DESCRIPTION: Indian Acres property.
10-17-96
TIME: 1035
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:unknown_____________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,_______________
50 - 60°F______
PHOTOGRAPHED BY;Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):NA____________
DESCRIPTION: Indian Acres property.
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME; Texaco Refinery PAGE 10 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567 TDD; S05-9610-008 PAN; 6C0801SIXX
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1045
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:Southwest_____
WEATHERCONDITIONS:any,________
50 - 60°F_____
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):IR-4
DESCRIPTION: Lagoon where Sample IR-4 was collected.
^TE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1055____
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:Southwest_____
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,_______
50 - 60°F_____
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):IR-4
DESCRIPTION: Location of Sample IR-4. PVC pipe sticking out of lagoon incenter of photograph marks exact location of Sample IR-4._________________
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME; Texaco Refinery PAGE 11 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567 TDD: S05-9610-008 PAN; 6C0801SIXX
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1103
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:North________
WEATHERt^_ JDITIONS:sunny,________
50 - 60°F_____
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):IR-5 _____
DESCRIPTION: Location of Sample IR-5.
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1110
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:East_____________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,___________
50 - 60°F_________
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):IR-6
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME; Texaco Refinery PAGE 12 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1117
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH :Southeast
WEATHER-"•"NDITIONS:
50 - 60°F
TDD: S05-9610-008 PAN; 6C0801SIXX
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable) :IR-6 ______
DESCRIPTION: Location of Sample IR-6
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1138
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:South________
WEATHERCONDITIONS:sunny,________
50 - 60°F______
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):IR-7__________
FIELD PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SHEET
SITE NAME: Texaco Refinery PAGE 13 OF 13U.S. EPA ID; A567 TDD; S05-9610-008 PAN; 6C0801SIXX
DATE: 10-17-96
TIME: 1200
DIRECTION OFPHOTOGRAPH:Southeast_____
WEATHER'"TODITIONS:v ..nny,________
50 - 60°F_____
PHOTOGRAPHED BY:Lisa Graczyk
SAMPLE ID(if applicable):NA____________
DESCRIPTION: Landfarm area
B
Appendix B
Analytical Data
B-l
ecology and environment, inc.International Specialists in the Environment
33 North Dearborn StreetChicago, Illinois 60602Tel. 312/578-9243, Fax: 312/578-9345
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
SUBJECT:
REFERENCE:
M E M O R A N D U M
November 19, 1996
Lisa Graczyk, START Project Manager, E & E, Chicago,Illinois
David Hendren, START Analytical Services Manager,E & E, Chicago, Illinois
Mary Jane Ripp, Assistant START Program Manager,E & E, Chicago, Illinois
Organic Data Quality Review for Volatile OrganicCompounds, Texaco Refinery, Lawrenceville, LawrenceCounty, Illinois
Project TDD S05-9610-017Project PAN 6C0801SIXX
Analytical TDD S05-9610-806Analytical PAN 6CAF01TA
The data quality assurance (QA) review of ten soil/sludge samplescollected from the Texaco Refinery site is complete. The sampleswere collected on October 16 and 17, 1996, by the SuperfundTechnical Assessment and Response Team (START) contractor,Ecology and Environment, Inc. (E & E). The samples weresubmitted to Ecology and Environment, Inc., Analytical ServicesCenter, Lancaster, New York. The laboratory analyses wereperformed according to the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency (U.S. EPA) Solid Waste 846 Method 8240/8260.
The samples were collected on October 16 and 17, 1996, andanalyzed on October 28, 1996. This is within the 14-dayholding time limit.
II. Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) Tuning:Acceptable
GC/MS tuning to meet ion abundance criteria usingbromofluorobenzene (BFB) were acceptable and samples wereanalyzed within 12 hours of BFB tuning.
III. Calibrations:
• Initial Calibration: Acceptable
A five-point initial calibration was performed prior toanalysis. All average response factors were greater than0.05. The percent relative standard deviations (%RSDs)between response factors were less than 30% for alldetected target compounds.
* Continuing Calibration: Acceptable
The percent differences of the response factors were lessthan 25%, as required for detected target compounds.
IV. Blank: Acceptable
A method blank was analyzed with the samples. No targetcompounds or contaminants were detected in the blank.
V. Internal Standards: Acceptable
The areas of the internal standards in the samples wereoutside the range of -50% to +100% of the associatedcalibration check standard. Because the surrogaterecoveries were found to be acceptable, qualification wasnot judged to be necessary. The retention times of theinternal standards were within the 30-second control limit.
The mass spectrum and retention time of the detectedcompound matched those of the standards.
VII. Additional QC Checks: Acceptable
The recoveries of the surrogates used in the samples andblank were within laboratory-established guidelines, exceptfor one surrogate in three samples. The failure of one ofthe three surrogates used is allowed for this method.
VIII. Overall Assessment of Data for Use: Acceptable
The overall usefulness of the data is based on criteria forQA Level II as outlined in the Office of Solid Waste andEmergency Response (OSWER) Directive 9360.4-01 (April1990), Data Validation Procedures, Section 5.0, VOAs ByGC/MS analysis. Based upon the information provided, thedata are acceptable for use.
1AVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
EPA SAMPLE NO.
Lab Name: E & E INC.
Lab Code: EANDE Case No.: 269
Matrix: (soil/water) SOIL
Sample wt/vol: 5.1 (g/mL) G
Level: (low/med) LOW
% Moisture: not dec. 32
Contract:
SAS No.:
IR-1
GC Column: DB-624
Soil Extract Volume:
I CAS NO.
ID: 0.530 (mm)
(uL)
COMPOUND
SDG No.: 54598
Lab Sample ID: 54601
Lab File ID: F6541
Date Received: 10/22/96
Date Analyzed: 10/28/96
Dilution Factor: 1.0
Soil Aliquot Volume:
CONCENTRATION UNITS:(ug/L or ug/Kg) UG/KG Q
(uL)
74-87-3-----74-83-9-----75-01-4-----75-00-3-----75-09-2-----67-64-1-----75-15-0-----75-35-4-----75-34-3-----67-66-3-----i n i n c. oo Q Q *3 *371-55-6-----56-23-5-----75-27-4-----•7Q Q -7 C
10061-01-5--79-01-6-----124-48-1----79-00-5-----71-43-2-----10061 02 6--75-25-2-----108-10-1----.D :? X - /O-D----127-18-4----79-34-5-----1 n Q Q Q "3
74-87-3------74-83-9------75-01-4------75-00-3------75-09-2------67-64-1------75-15-0------75-35-4------75-34-3------67-66-3------107-06-2-----*"? Q Q T "3
71-55-6------56-23-5------75-27-4------"~J Q Q ""7 C
10061-01-5---H Q n i a124-48-1-----79-00-5------71-43-2------10061-02-6---75-25-2------108-10-1-----591-78-6-----"1 ?7 - 1 ft 479-34-5-------i n Q Q Q "3
74-87-3-----74-83-9-----75-01-4-----75-00-3-----75-09-2-----67-64-1-----75-15-0-----75-35-4-----75-34-3-----67-66-3-----107-06-2----78-93-3-----71-55-6-----56-23-5-----7R 07 4 _/ _j £* i iTO Q 1 C
74-87-3----74-83-9----75-01-4----75-00-3----75-09-2----67-64-1----75-15-0----75-35-4----75-34-3----67-66-3----107-06-2---78-93-3----71-55-6----56-23-5----75-27-4----n Q Q ~i c10061-01-5-79-01-6----1 94 AR TJ- i 1. i Q -L.
79-00-5----71 43 210061-02-6-75-25-2----108-10-1---C Q ~\ rj Q C.
67-64-1----75-15-0----75-35-4----75-34-3----67-66-3----107-06-2---78-93-3----71-55-6----56-23-5----7R 97 4 - - -78-87-5----10061-01-5-n Q n i c.194 4R 1J_ 4-i L i O J_
79-00-5----71-43-2----10061-02-6-75 25 2108-10-1---cr n -\ -i Q (•
197 1 R A
79-34-5----i n Q Q Q ii n Q on *~7100-41-4---100-42-5---1330-20-7--
ecology and environment, inc.International Specialists in the Environment
33 North Dearborn StreetChicago, Illinois 60602Tel. 312/578-9243, Fax: 312/578-9345
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
SUBJECT:
REFERENCE:
M E M O R A N D U M
November 19, 1996
Lisa Graczyk, START Project Manager, E & E, Chicago,Illinois
David Hendren, START Analytical Services Manager,E & E, Chicago, Illinois
Mary Jane Ripp, Assistant START Program Manager,E & E, Chicago, Illinois
Data Quality Review for Pesticides andPolychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), Texaco Refinery,Lawrenceville, Illinois
Project TDD S05-9610-017Project PAN 6C0801SIXX
Analytical TDD S05-9610-806Analytical PAN 6CAF01TA
The data quality assurance (QA) review of ten soil/sludge samplescollected from the Texaco Refinery site is complete. The sampleswere collected on October 16 and 17, 1996, by the SuperfundTechnical Assessment and Response Team (START) contractor,Ecology and Environment, Inc. (E & E). The samples weresubmitted to Ecology and Environment, Inc., Analytical ServicesCenter, Lancaster, New York. The laboratory analyses wereperformed according to the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency (U.S. EPA) Solid Waste 846 Method 8080. (Only sampleRS-02 was analyzed for pesticides.)
The samples were collected on October 16 and 17, 1996,extracted on October 25, 1996, and analyzed on November 2,1996. Sample RS-02 was extracted for pesticides and PCBson October 28, 1996, and analyzed on November 6, 1996.This is within the 14-day holding time limit, fromcollection to extraction, and 40-day limit from extractionto analysis.
II. Instrument Performance: Acceptable
The chromatographic resolution was adequate in the standardand sample chromatograms. Surrogate retention times wereconsistent in the samples and standards.
III. Calibrations:
• Initial Calibration: Acceptable
Initial calibrations for pesticides and PCBs demonstratedcorrelation coefficients exceeding 0.995.
• Continuing Calibration: Acceptable
The percent differences of the response factors for bothpesticides and PCBs were acceptable.
IV. Blank: Acceptable
A method blank was analyzed with the sample. No targetcompounds or contaminants were detected in the blank.
V. Compound Identification: Not Applicable
There were no PCBs or target pesticides detected in anysample.
VI. Additional QC Checks: Acceptable
The recoveries of the surrogates used in the samples couldnot be determined due to sample dilution.
VII. Overall Assessment of Data for Use: Acceptable
The overall usefulness of the data is based on criteria forQA Level II as outlined in the Office of Solid Waste andEmergency Response (OSWER) Directive 9360.4-01 (April1990), Data Validation Procedures, Section 6.0,Pesticides/PCBs. Based upon the information provided, thedata are acceptable for use.
TEST CODE :SPCB 1
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center
CLIENT : START - CHICAGORESULTS IN DRY WEIGHTTEST NAME : 8080 PCBSAMPLE ID LAB : EE-96-54598SAMPLE ID CLIENT: RS-01
QUALIFIERS: C = COMMENTJ = ESTIMATED VALUEX = EXCEEDS CALIBRATION LIMITN = ANALYTE WAS NOT CONFIRMED BY ALTERNATE PROCEDUREA = PHENOMENON OF METHODOLOGY WITH ACID PRESERVATION
TEST CODE :SPCB 1
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center
CLIENT : START - CHICAGORESULTS IN DRY WEIGHTTEST NAME : 8080 PCBSAMPLE ID LAB : EE-96-54600SAMPLE ID CLIENT: RS-03
QUALIFIERS: C = COMMENT ND = NOT DETECTEDJ = ESTIMATED VALUE B = ALSO PRESENT IN BLANKN = ANALYTE WAS NOT CONFIRMED BY ALTERNATE PROCEDURE
1146
ecology and environment, inc.International Specialists in the Environment
33 North Dearborn StreetChicago, Illinois 60602Tel. 312/578-9243, Fax: 312/578-9345
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
SUBJECT:
REFERENCE:
December 19, 1996
Lisa Graczyk, START Project Manager, E & E, Chicago,Illinois
David Hendren, START Analytical Services Manager,E & E, Chicago, Illinois
Mary Jane Ripp, Assistant START Program Manager,E & E, Chicago, Illinois
Data Quality Review for Polynuclear AromaticHydrocarbons (PAH), Texaco Refinery, Lawrenceville,Illinois
Project TDD S05-9610-017Project PAN 6C0801SIXX
Analytical TDD S05-9610-806Analytical PAN 6CAF01TA
The data quality assurance (QA) review of one soil/sludge samplecollected from the Texaco Refinery site is complete. The samplewas collected on October 16, 1996, by the Superfund TechnicalAssessment and Response Team (START) contractor, Ecology andEnvironment, Inc. (E & E). The sample was submitted to Ecologyand Environment, Inc., Analytical Services Center, Lancaster, NewYork. The laboratory analysis was performed according to theUnited States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) SolidWaste 846 Method 8310.
Sample Identification
LaboratoryIdentification No.
EE-96-54598
STARTIdentification No.
RS-01
Data Qualifications:
I. Sample Holding Time: Qualified
The sample was collected on October 16, 1996, extracted onNovember 12, 1996, and analyzed on November 19, 1996. Thisexceeds the 14-day holding time limit, from collection toextraction. All results have been qualified as estimated.
The chromatographic resolution was adequate in the standardand sample chromatograms.
III. Calibrations:
• Initial Calibration: Acceptable
The relative standard deviations for all target compoundsin the initial calibration were less than 20%.
• Continuing Calibration: Acceptable
The percent differences of the response factors for allreported PAHs were less than 15%.
IV. Blank: Acceptable
A method blank was analyzed with the sample. No targetcompounds or contaminants were detected in the blank.
V. Compound Identification: Qualified
Confirmation analysis was not performed by the laboratory.Because of the possibility of chromatographic peak shiftsand the absence of secondary analysis, in the professionaljudgement of the reviewer, all identifications should bequalified as tentatively identified at estimatedconcentration.
VI. Additional QC Checks: Acceptable
The recoveries of the surrogates used in the samples couldnot be determined due to sample dilution.
VII. Overall Assessment of Data for Use: Qualified
The overall usefulness of the data is based on criteria forQA Level II as outlined in the Office of Solid Waste andEmergency Response (OSWER) Directive 9360.4-01 (April1990), Data Validation Procedures, Section 9.0, GenericData Validation Procedures. Based upon the informationprovided, the data are acceptable for use with the abovestated qualifications.
QUALIFIERS: C = COMMENTJ = ESTIMATED VALUEX = EXCEEDS CALIBRATION LIMITN = ANALYTE WAS NOT CONFIRMED BY ALTERNATE PROCEDUREA = PHENOMENON OF METHODOLOGY WITH ACID PRESERVATION
13
ecology and environment, inc.International Specialists in the Environment
33 North Dearborn StreetChicago, Illinois 60602Tel. 312/578-9243, Fax: 312/578-9345
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
SUBJECT:
REFERENCE:
M E M O R A N D U M
November 19, 1996
Lisa Graczyk, START Project Manager, E & E, Chicago,Illinois
David Hendren, START Analytical Services Manager,E & E, Chicago, Illinois
Mary Jane Ripp, Assistant START Program Manager,E & E, Chicago, Illinois
Inorganic Data Quality Review for ResourceConservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Metals,Refinery, Lawrenceville, Illinois
Texaco
Project TDD S05-9610-017Project PAN 6C0801SIXX
Analytical TDD S05-9610-806Analytical PAN 6CAF01TA
The data quality assurance (QA) review of ten soil/sludge samplescollected from the Texaco Refinery site is complete. The sampleswere collected on October 16 and 17, 1996, by the SuperfundTechnical Assessment and Response Team (START) contractor,Ecology and Environment, Inc. (E & E). The samples weresubmitted to Ecology and Environment, Inc., Analytical ServicesCenter. The laboratory analyses were performed according to theUnited States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) SolidWaste 846 Methods 6010 and 7000.
The samples were collected on October 16 and 17, 1996, andanalyzed on November 4, 1996. Analysis for mercury wasperformed on August 25, 1996. This is within the 6-month(28 days for mercury) holding time limit.
II. Calibration:
• Initial Calibration: Acceptable
Recoveries for the initial calibration verification werewithin 90 to 110% (80 to 120% for mercury), as required.The correlation coefficient for mercury exceeded 0.995.
• Continuing Calibration: Acceptable
All analytes included in the continuing calibrationverification standard were within 90 to 110% (80 to 120%for mercury), as required.
III. Blanks: Acceptable
Calibration and preparation blanks were analyzed with eachanalytical batch. No target analytes were detected in theblanks.
IV. Overall Assessment of Data For Use: Acceptable
The overall usefulness of the data is based on criteria forQA Level II as outlined in the Office of Solid Waste andEmergency Response (OSWER) Directive 9360.4-01 (April 1990)Data Validation Procedures, Section 3.0, Metallic InorganicParameters. Based upon the information provided, the dataare acceptable for use.
START - CHICAGO
1INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
Contract:
EPA SAMPLE NO.
Lab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT_ _
Lab Code: EANDE Case No.:9602.269 SAS No.:
IR-1
SDG No.: IR-1
Matrix (soil/water): SOIL
Level (low/med): LOW
Solids:
Lab Sample ID: 54601
Date Received: 10/22/96
_68.5
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight): MG/KG
ecology and environment, inc.International Specialists in the Environment
33 North Dearborn StreetChicago, Illinois 60602Tel. 312/578-9243, Fax: 312/578-9345
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
SUBJECT:
REFERENCE:
M E M O R A N D U M
November 19, 1996
Lisa Graczyk, START Project Manager, E & E, Chicago,Illinois
David Hendren, START Analytical Services Manager,E & E, Chicago, Illinois
Mary Jane Ripp, Assistant START Program Manager,E & E, Chicago, Illinois
Organic Data Quality Review for SemivolatileOrganic Compounds, Texaco Refinery, Lawrenceville,Lawrence County, Illinois
Project TDD S05-9610-017Project PAN 6C0801SIXX
Analytical TDD S05-9610-806Analytical PAN 6CAF01TA
The data quality assurance (QA) review of ten soil/sludge samplescollected from the Texaco Refinery site is complete. The sampleswere collected on October 16 and 17, 1996, by the SuperfundTechnical Assessment and Response Team (START) contractor,Ecology and Environment, Inc. (E & E). The samples weresubmitted to Ecology and Environment, Inc., Analytical ServicesCenter, Lancaster, New York. The laboratory analyses wereperformed according to the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency (U.S. EPA) Solid Waste 846 Method 8270.
Sample Identification
STARTIdentification No.
RS-01RS-02RS-03IR-1IR-2IR-3IR-4IR-5IR-6IR-7
LaboratoryIdentification No.
E E - 9 6 -E E - 9 6 -E E - 9 6 -E E - 9 6 -EE-96-EE-96E E - 9 6 -EE-96E E - 9 6 -EE-96
The samples were collected on October 16 and 17, 1996,extracted on October 28, 1996, and analyzed on October 29and 31, 1996. This is within the 14-day holding timelimit, from collection to extraction, and 40-day limit,from extraction to analysis.
II. Gas Chromatoqraphy/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) Tuning:Acceptable
GC/MS tuning to meet ion abundance criteria usingdecafluorotriphenylphosphine (DFTPP) were acceptable andsamples were analyzed within 12 hours of DFTPP tuning.
III. Calibrations:
• Initial Calibration: Acceptable
A five-point initial calibration was performed prior toanalysis. All average response factors were greater than0.05. The percent relative standard deviations (%RSDs)between response factors were less than 30% for alldetected target compounds.
• Continuing Calibration: Acceptable
The percent differences of the response factors were lessthan 25%, as required for detected target compounds.
IV. Blank: Acceptable
A method blank was analyzed with the samples. No targetcompounds or contaminants were detected in the blank.
V. Internal Standards: Qualified
The areas of two internal standards in the samples wereoutside the range of -50% to +100% of the associatedcalibration check standard. All associated targetcompounds have been flagged "J", as estimated. Theretention times of the internal standards were within the30-second control limit.
The mass spectrum and retention time of the detectedcompound matched those of the standards.
VII. Additional QC Checks: Not Applicable
The recoveries of the surrogates used in the samples couldnot be determined due to sample dilution.
VIII. Overall Assessment of Data for Use: Acceptable
The overall usefulness of the data is based on criteria forQA Level II as outlined in the Office of Solid Waste andEmergency Response (OSWER) Directive 9360.4-01 (April1990), Data Validation Procedures, section 4.0, BNAs ByGC/MS analysis. Based upon the information provided, thedata are acceptable for use, with the above-statedqualifications.
Data Qualifiers and Definitions:
J - The associated numerical value is an estimated quantitybecause the reported concentrations were less than requireddetection limits or quality control criteria were not met.