01570

01570
FINAL
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGAThN
OPERABLE
UNITE2
MARINE
REPORT
(Sites 6,9 a& i2)
C&PS
BASE, CAMP
NORTHCAROLINA.
LEJEUNE
”
‘_
CON’i?RACT
TASK ORDER
lh.xww
p
I.
0133
oFr-g/
,’
Prepared
For:
.
DEPARTMENT
OF THE NAVY
ATLANTIC
DIVISION
NAVAL FACI&ITIES
ENGINEERING
COMMAND
.I
Norfolk,
.
Virginia
.’
,; Under the:
:
j LANTDIV
Contract
CLEAN Program
N62470-89-D-4814
Prepared
BAKER
By:
Pennsylitania
./’
”
~
ENVIRONMENTAL,
Coraopolis,
“-
-i-&T
/
AU&ST
20,1993
INC.
TABLE
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
OF CONTENTS
.. . . .. . . .. . .. . .. .. . . ... . . . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. . .. .
ES-1
1.0
INTRODUCTION
....................................................
1.1
Operable Unit Description
.......................................
1.2
Site Description and History ......................................
1.2.1 Site Description
...........................................
1.2.2 Site History
...............................................
1.3
Previous Investigations
..........................................
1.3.1 Initial Assessment Study ...................................
1.3.2 Confirmation
Study
........
...............................
1.3.3 Site Assessment Report ....................................
Studies at OU No. 2 .............................
1.3.4 Additional
1.4
.............................................
Report Organization
l-l
1-2
1-3
1-3
1,s
1-8
l-8
1-8
1-15
1-15
1-15
2.0
STUDY AREA INVESTIGATION
.. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . . .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . . .
2.1
Introduction
....................................................
2.1.1 Site Descriptions and Objectives - Sites 6 and 82 ..............
2.2
Aerial Photographic
Investigation
................................
2.2.1 Aerial Photograph - October 1949 ...........................
2.2.2 Aerial Photograph . February 1956 ..........................
2.2.3 Aerial Photograph - November 1960 .........................
2.2.4 Aerial Photograph - December 1988 .........................
.........................................
2.3
Preliminary
Site Survey
2.4
Phase I RI Field Investigations
Performed at Sites 6 and 82 ..........
..............................
2.4. I Unexploded Ordnance Survey
.................................
2.4.2 Geophysical Investigations
.........................................
2.4.3 Soil Investigation
Investigation
.................................
2.4.4 Groundwater
.....................................
2.4.5 Drum Waste Sampling
.........................................
2.4.6 Test Pit Activities
..................
2.4.7 Surface Water and Sediment Investigations
2.4.8 Ecological and Aquatic Survey ..............................
2.5
RI Field Investigations
Performed at Site 9 ........................
2.5.1 Soil Investigation
.........................................
.................................
2.5.2 Groundwater
Investigation
2.6
Phase II Field RI Investigations
Performed at Sites 6 and 82 .........
2.6.1 Soil Gas Survey
...........................................
2.6.2 Test Pit Activities
.........................................
2.6.3 Soil Investigation
.........................................
.................................
2.6.4 Groundwater
Investigation
.....................................
2.7
Decontamination
Procedures
......................
2.8
Investigative
Derived Waste (IDW) Handling
2-1
2-1
2-l
2-8
2-9
2-9
2-9
2-10
2-10
2-12
2-12
2-13
2-14
2-27
2-37
2-41
2-44
2-51
2-60
2-60
2-64
2-69
2-71
2-74
2-77
2-78
2-85
2-86
3.0
PHYSICAL
CHARACTERISTICS
OF THE STUDY
................................................
3.1
Surface Features
3.2
Meteorology
....................................................
3.3
Surface Water Hydrology
........................................
3.4
Geology
........................................................
3.4.1 Regional Geology ..........................................
3.4.2 Site Geology
..............................................
ii
AREA
............
3-1
3-l
3-2
3-4
3-6
3-6
3-6
TABLE
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Test Pits .......
.................................................
3.51 PhaseITestPits
..........................................
3.5.2 PhaseIITestPits
..........................................
Soils
..........................................................
Hydrogeology
...................................................
3.7.1 Regional Hydrogeology
....................................
3.7.2 Site Hydrogeology
.........................................
Land Use and Demography
.......................................
Regional Ecology ................................................
3.9.1 Sensitive Environments
....................................
Identification
of Water Supply Wells
..............................
3-11
3-11
3-11
3-12
3-13
3-13
3-15
3-28
3-29
3-30
3-36
4.0
NATURE
AND EXTENT
OF CONTAMINATION
.....................
4.1
Analytical
Results ...............................................
4.1.1 Site 9 .....................................................
4.1.2 Sites 6 and 82 .............................................
4.2
Extent of Contamination
........................................
4.2.1 Soil ......................................................
4.2.2 Groundwater
.............................................
4.2.3 Surface Water and Sediments
...............................
4.3
Summary
.......................................................
4.3.1 Site 6, Lot 201 .............................................
4.3.2 Site 6, Lot 203 ................................
.............
4.3.3 Wooded Areas, the Ravine, and Site 82 ......................
4.3.4 Site 9 .....................................................
4.3.5 Wallace Creek ............................................
4.3.6 Bear Head Creek ..........................................
4-1
4-l
4-l
4-9
4-41
4-41
4-48
4-55
4-58
4-58
4-59
4-62
4-68
4-69
4-71
5.0
CONTAMINANT
FATE AND TRANSPORT
..........................
5.1
Contaminant
Mobility and Persistence
............................
5.1.1 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) .......................
5.1.2 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHsl
..................
5.1.3 Pesticides/l?olychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCBs) ................
5.1.4 Inorganics
...........
....................................
5.2
Potential Sources and Migration
Routes ...........................
5-1
5-l
5-4
5-4
5-5
5-5
5-7
6.0
PUBLIC
HEALTH
ASSESSMENT
...................................
6.1
Introduction
...............................
.....................
6.2
Contaminants
of Concern
........................................
6.2.1 Criteria for Selecting Contaminants
of Concern ..............
6.2.2 Selection of Potential Contaminants
of Concern ..............
6.3
Exposure Assessment
............................................
6.3.1 Site Conceptual Model of Potential Exposure .................
6.3.2 Exposure Pathways ........................................
6.3.3 Quantification
of Exposure
.................................
6.3.4 Calculation
of Chronic Daily Intakes
........................
6.4
Toxicity Assessment
.........................
....................
6.4.1 Toxicological
Evaluation
...................................
6.4.2 Dose-Response Evaluation
.................................
6-1
6-l
6-3
6-3
6-7
6-16
6-16
6-17
6-19
6-20
6-35
6-35
6-36
.. .
111
TABLE
6.5
6.6
6.7
7.0
OF CONTENTS
Risk Characterization
...........................................
6.51 Human Health Effects .....................................
SourcesofUncertainty
...........................................
6.6.1 Analytical
Data ...........................................
6.6.2 Exposure Assessment
......................................
6.6.3 Toxicity Assessment
.......................................
6.6.4 Compounds Not Quantitatively
Evaluated
...................
......
Conclusion
................
..............................
6.7.1 Surface Soil Site 9 .........................................
6.7.2 Surface Soil Site 6 Lot 201 ..................................
6.7.3 Surface Soil Site 6 Lot 203 ..................................
6.7.4 Surface Soil - Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine) and Site 82
6.7.5 Groundwater OU No. 2 (Sites 6,9, and 82) ...................
6.7.6 Surface Water/Sediment
Wallace Creek .....................
6.7.7 Surface Water/Sediment
Bear Head Creek ...................
6.7.8 Biota ............
.........................................
6.7.9 Total Operable Unit Risk ...................................
. . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. .. .. . . .. . ..
LIST
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
...
, . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . . .. . .. .
CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1
Conclusions
. .. .. . . .. . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . . .. . .. .
7.1.1 Site 6, Lot 201 . . . ..I.......................................
7.1.2 Site 6, Lot 203 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.1.3 Wooded Areas and Site 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.1.4 Ravine
. .. . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. .. .. .
7.1.5 Site 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.1.6 Wallace Creek . . . . . . . ..*..................................
7.1.7 Bear Head Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.2
Recommendations
. .. . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. .. .
8.0 REFERENCES
l-l
2-1
2-2
(Continued)
6-38
6-40
6-43
6-44
6-44
6-46
6-47
6-47
6-47
6-47
6-48
6-49
6-49
6-49
6-50
6-50
6-50
7-1
7-1
7-l
7-2
7-3
7-5
7-5
7-6
7-7
7-8
8-l
OF TABLES
Summary of Existing Well Construction
Details - Sites 6 and 82 . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Remedial Investigation
Objectives for Storage Lot 201- Site 6 . .
Summary of Remedial Investigation
Objectives for Storage Lot 203, the
WoodedAreas,theRavine,andSite82-Sites6and82
. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . .
Soil Investigation
Sampling Grid Summary - Operable Unit No. 2 . . . . . , . . . .
Summary of Method Performance
Limits - Organic - Operable Unit No. 2 . . .
Summary of Method Performance Limits - Inorganic - Operable Unit No. 2 . .
Summary of Field Quality Assurance/Quality
Control Sampling Program
for the Soil Investigation
- Sites 6 and 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Phase I Monitoring
Well Summary and Rationale - Sites 6 and 82 . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Phase I Shallow Well Construction
Details - Sites 6 and 82 . . . . .
iv
l-10
2-3
2-5
2-11
2-20
2-24
2-26
2-29
2-31
TABLE
LIST
2-9
2-10
2-11
2-12
2-13
2-14
2-15
2-16
2-17
2-18
2-19
2-20
2-21
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
3-6
3-7
3-8
3-9
3-10
3-11
3-12
3-13
OF CONTENTS
OF TABLES
(Continued)
(Continued)
Summary of Phase I Deep Well Construction
Details . Sites 6 and 82 ........
Summary of Field Quality Assurance/Quality
Control Sampling Program
for the Groundwater Investigation
- Sites 6 and 82 ........................
Summary of Field Quality Assurance/Quality
Control Sampling Program
for the Surface Water and Sediment Investigations
- Site 6 ................
Bear Head Creek Surface Water and Sediment Station and Sample
Numbers and Locations . Site 6 .........................................
Wallace Creek Surface Water and Sediment Station and Sample
Numbers and Locations . Site 6 .........................................
Ravine Area Surface Water and Sediment Station and Sample
Numbers and Locations - Site 6 .........................................
Summary of Remedial Investigation
Objectives for Fire Fighting
Training Pit . Site 9 ....................................................
Summary of Field Quality Assurance/Quality
Control Sampling Program
for the Soil Investigation
. Site 9 ........................................
Monitoring
Well Summary and Rationale - Site 9 .........................
Summary of Newly Installed Well Construction
Details - Site 9 ............
Summary of Field Quality Assurance/Quality
Control Sampling Program
for the Groundwater Investigation
- Site 9 ...............................
Phase II Monitoring
Well Summary and Rationale . Sites 6 and 82 .........
Summary of Phase II Shallow and Deep Well Construction
Details Sites 6 and 82 .........................................................
Climatic Data Summary for MCAS New River Remedial Investigation
. . .. .
Tide Data for the New River in Jacksonville,
North Carolina
.. . . . .. . . .. . . .
.. .
Geologic and Hydrogeologic
Units in the Coastal Plain of North Carolina
Summary of Soil Physical Properties - Operable Unit No. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Water Level Measurements
from Shallow Monitoring
Wells on September 30,1992, October 26,1992, November 7,1992,
and April 1,1993 - Sites 6 and 82 ,...............,..........,............
Summary of Water Level Measurements
on September 15,1992,
September 30,1992, October 26,1992, and April 1,1993 - Site 9 . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Staff Gauge Readings on September 30,1992 and
April 1,1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Water Level Measurements
Over a 24-Hour Period at Shallow
Monitoring
Well 6GW28S
. .. . . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . .. . ..
Summary of Estimated Groundwater
Gradient Values for Surficial and
Deep Water-Bearing
Zones - Operable Unit No. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Water Level Measurements
from Deep Monitoring
Wells on October 26,1992, November 7,1992, and April 1,1993 Sites6and82
.. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . . . .. . .. . . .
Summary of Water Level Measurements
Over a 24-Hour Period at
Deep Monitoring
Well 6GW28D - Site 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Protected Species Within MCB Camp Lejeune Operable Unit No. 2 . . . . . . . , .
Summary of Water Supply Wells Within a One-Mile Radius of Sites 6 and 82
V
2-33
2-38
i-46
2-47
2-48
2-49
2-61
2-65
2-66
2-67
2-70
Z-80
2-81
3-3
3-5
3-7
3-14
3-17
3-20
3-21
3-22
3-24
3-26
3-27
3-32
3-37
TABLE
LIST
OF CONTENTS
OF TABLES
(Continued)
3-14
Summary
Radius of Site 9 . . . . . . .
3-39
4-l
4-2
4-3
4-4
4-5
Site 9 Surface Soil Positive Detection Summary . Organics
................
Site 9 Surface Soil Positive Detection Summary . Total Metals
.............
Site 9 Subsurface Soil Positive Detection Summary . Organics
.............
Site 9 Subsurface Soil Positive Detection Summary - Total Metals ..........
Operable Unit No. 2 Phase I - Round One Groundwater Positive Detection
Summary-Organics
...................................................
Operable Unit No. 2 Phase I - Round One Groundwater Positive
Detection Summary - Total Metals
......................................
Operable Unit No. 2 Phase I - Round One Groundwater Positive
Detection Summary - Dissolved Metals
..................................
Summary of the Phase I - Round One Groundwater Field Parameters Site 9
..........................................................
Summary of the Phase II - Round Two Groundwater Field Parameters
Site 9
..........................................................
Operable Unit No. 2 Phase I and II Groundwater Positive Result
Comparison-Organics
.................................................
Site 6 Lot 201 Surface Soil Positive Detection Summary - Organics
.........
Site 6 Lot 201 Surface Soil Positive Detection Summary - Total Metals ......
Site 6 Lot 201 Subsurface Soil Positive Detection Summary - Organics
......
Site 6 Lot 201 Subsurface Soil Positive Detection Summary - Total Metals
..
Site 6 Lot 203 Surface Soil Positive Detection Summary . Organics
.........
Site 6 Lot 203 Surface Soil Positive Detection Summary - Total Metals ......
Site 6 Lot 203 Subsurface Soil Positive Detection Summary - Organics ......
Site 6 Lot 203 Subsurface Soils Positive Detection Summary - Total Metals . .
Wooded Areas, the Ravine, and Site 82 Surface Soil Positive Detection
Summary-Organics
...................................................
Wooded Areas, the Ravine, and Site 82 Surface Soil Positive Detection
Summary - Total Metals
...............................................
Wooded Areas, the Ravine, and Site 82 Subsurface Soil Positive Detection
Summary-Organics
...................................................
Wooded Areas, the Ravine, and Site 82 Subsurface Soils Positive Detection
Summary - Total Metals
...............................................
Operable Unit No. 2 Phase II - Round One Groundwater Positive
Detection Summary . Volatile Organ&s
.................................
Operable Unit No. 2 Phase II - Round One Groundwater Positive
Detection Summary - Total Metals
......................................
Summary of the Phase I - Round One Groundwater Field Parameters
Sites6and82
.........................................................
Summary of the Phase II - Round One and Round Two Groundwater
Field Parameters
. Sites 6 and 82 ........................................
Site 6 Bear Head Creek Surface Water - Organics .........................
Site 6 Bear Head Creek Surface Water - Total Metals
.....................
Summary of Field Parameters
From Biological Samples . Site 6 ............
4-73
4-74
4-77
4-80
4-6
4-7
4-8
4-9
4-10
4-11
4-12
4-13
4-14
4-15
4-16
4-17
4-18
4-19
4-20
4-21
4-22
4-23
4-24
4-25
4-26
4-27
4-28
4-29
of Water Supply Wells Within
(Continued)
a One-Mile
vi
4-85
4-89
4-98
4-107
4-109
4-111
4-129
4-141
4-144
4-151
4-154
4164
4-169
4-173
4-179
4-196
4210
4-231
4-252
4254
4-258
4265
4-272
4273
4276
TABLE
LIST
4-30
4-31
OF CONTENTS
OF TABLES
(Continued)
(Continued)
4-277
4-36
4-37
4-38
4-39
4-40
4-41
4-42
4-43
Site 6 Wallace Creek Surface Water Positive Detection Summary - Organics
Site 6 Wallace Creek Surface Water Positive Detection Summary Total Metals
. .. . .. . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . .. .. . .. .. . . . ... .. . . . .. . .
Site 6 Ravine Surface Water Positive Detection Summary - Organics
. . .. . . .
Site 6 Ravine Surface Water Positive Detection Summary - Total Metals . . . .
Site 6 Bear Head Creek Sediment Positive Detection Summary - Organics
..
Site 6 Bear Head Creek Sediment Positive Detection Summary Total Metals
. .. . .. . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. .. . .
Site 6 Wallace Creek Sediment Positive Detection Summary - Organics . . . . .
Site 6 Wallace Creek Sediment Positive Detection Summary - Total Metals
.
Site 6 Ravine Sediment Positive Detection Summary - Organ&
. .. . . . .. , .. .
Site 6 Ravine Sediment Positive Detection Summary - Total Metals
. .. . .. . .
Summary of TCLP Results - Site 6 Lot 201 Areas A, B, and C . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of TCLP Results - Phase I Trench Test Pits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Phase II Test Pit Soils Positive Detection Summary - Organics
. . . . . . . . . ...*
Phase II Test Pit Soils Positive Detection Summary - Total Metals . . . . . . . . . .
5-1
5-2
Organic
Relative
5-7
5-8
6-1
6-2
6-3
6-4
6-5
6-6
6-7
6-8
6-9
6-10
6-11
6-12
6-13
6-14
6-15
6-16
6-17
Soil Data Summary . Site 9 .............................................
Soil Data Summary - Site 9 .............................................
Soil Data Summary - Site 6 - Lot 201 ....................................
Soil Data Summary . Site 6 . Lot 201 ....................................
Soil Data Summary - Site 6 - Lot 203 ....................................
Soil Data Summary . Site 6 . Lot 203 ....................................
Soil Data Summary . Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine) and Site 82 ........
Soil Data Summary . Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine) and Site 82 ........
Groundwater Data Summary - Operable Unit No. 2 .......................
Surface Water Data Summary . Site 6 - Wallace Creek ..............
..i ...
Surface Water Data Summary - Site 6 - Bear Head Creek ..................
Surface Water Data Summary . Site 6 - Ravine
...........................
Sediment Data Summary - Site 6 . Wallace Creek .........................
Sediment Data Summary - Site 6 Bear Head Creek
.......................
Sediment Data Summary . Site 6 - Ravine ................................
Summary of Potential COPCs in Environmental
Media of Interest
.........
Summary of Human Receptors, Exposure Pathways, and Rationale
forTheirSelection
.....................................................
Exposure Assessment Summary . Surface Soil ............................
Exposure Assessment Summary . Surface Soil .............................
Exposure Assessment Summary . Surface Soil ............................
Exposure Assessment Summary . Groundwater
..........................
..........................
Exposure Assessment Summary . Groundwater
Exposure Assessment Summary . Surface Water
.........................
Exposure Assessment Summary . Surface Water
.........................
Exposure Assessment Summary . Sediment
..............................
Exposure Assessment Summary . Sediment
..............................
4-32
4-33
4-34
4-35
6-18
6-19
6-20
6-21
6-22
6-23
6-24
6-25
6-26
Physical and Chemical Properties
...............................
Mobilities
of Inorganics
........................................
vii
4-281
4-286
4-287
4-288
4-291
4-295
4-301
4-307
4-309
4-311
4-312
4-315
4-316
6-51
6-52
6-53
6-54
6-55
6-56
6-57
6-59
6-60
6-61
6-62
6-63
6-64
6-65
6-66
6-67
6-68
6-69
6-70
6-71
6-72
6-73
6-74
6-75
6-76
6-77
TABLE
LIST
6-27
6-28
6-29
6-30
6-31
6-32
6-33
6-34
6-35
6-36
6-37
6-38
6-39
6-40
6-41
6-42
6-43
6-44
6-45
6-46
6-47
6-48
6-49
6-50
6-51
6-52
6-53
6-54
6-55
6-56
6-57
6-58
6-59
6-60
OF CONTENTS
OF TABLES
(Continued)
(Continued)
Exposure Assessment Summary - Fish Ingestion
.........................
Toxicity Factors .........................
..............................
Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risks Values Associated with Potential
Current and Future Exposures to Surface Soil - Site 6 - Lot 201 .............
Hazard Quotients - Site 6 - Lot 201 ......................................
Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risks - Site 6 - Lot 203 ......................
Hazard Quotients - Site 6 - Lot 203 ......................................
Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risks - Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine)
Site 82
..........................................................
Hazard Quotients . Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine) Site 82 ..............
..........
Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risks . Sites 6 and 9 . Groundwater
Hazard Quotients . Sites 6 and 9 - Groundwater
..........................
Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risks . Site 6 - Wallace Creek ................
Hazard Quotients - Site 6 - Wallace Creek ................................
Hazard Quotients - Site 6 - Bear Head Creek .............................
Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risks - Site 6 - Wallace Creek ................
Hazard Quotients . Site 6 - Wallace Creek ................................
Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risks . Site 6 . Bear Head Creek .............
Hazard Quotients - Site 6 - Bear Head Creek .............................
Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risks - Biota ...............................
Hazard Quotients - Biota ...............................................
Total Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risk - Site 6 . Lot 201 ..................
Total Hazard Indices . Site 6 - Lot 201 ...................................
Total Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risk . Site 6 - Lot 203 ..................
Total Hazard Indices - Site 6 . Lot 203 ...................................
Total Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risk - Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine)
Site 82
..........................................................
Total Hazard Indices . Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine) Site 82 ...........
...................
Total Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risk - Groundwater
Total Hazard Indices - Groundwater
.....................................
Total Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risk - Site 6 - Wallace Creek ...........
Total Hazard Indices - Site 6 - Wallace Creek .............................
Total Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risk . Site 6 . Bear Head Creek .........
Total Hazard Indices - Site 6 - Bear Head Creek
..........................
Total Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risk Biota ............................
Total Hazard Indices Biota
.............................................
Total Exposure Incremental
Lifetime Cancer Risks and Hazard Indices .....
LIST
6-78
6-79
6-81
6-82
6-83
6-84
6-85
6-86
6-87
6-88
6-89
6-90
6-91
6-92
6-93
6-94
6-95
6-96
6-9’7
6-98
6-99
6-100
6-101
6-102
6-103
6-104
6-105
6-106
6-107
6-108
6-109
6-110
6-111
6-112
OF FIGURES
Volume
l-l
l-2
l-3
l-4
Location Map - Operable Unit No. 2, Sites 6,9, and 82 .....................
Operable Units and Site Locations at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune
...........................................
SitePlanofSites6,9,and82
Site 6, Lot 203 Surface Debris ...........................................
Vlll
. ..
....
1
1
1
1
TABLE
LIST
OF CONTENTS
OF FIGURES
(Continued)
(Continued)
Volume
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
2-10
2-11
2-12
2-13
2-14
2-15
2-16
2-17
2-18
2-19
3-l
3-2
.............................................
SitePlanofrLot201-Site6
Site Plan of Lot 203 . Site 6 .............................................
Site Plan of Wooded Areas, the Ravine, and Site 82 .......................
EM Survey Results . Site 6 Lot 203 ......................................
Soil Boring Locations Within Lot 201- Site 6 .............................
Soil Boring Locations Within Lot 203 - Site 6 .............................
Soil Boring Locations Within the Wooded Areas and the Ravine ............
Monitoring
Well and Staff Gauge Location Map - Site 6 ...................
Typical Shallow and Deep Type II Groundwater Monitoring
Well
Construction
Diagram
.................................................
Typical Deep Type III Groundwater Monitoring
Well
Construction
Diagram
.................................................
Drum Location Map - Sites 6 and 82 .....................................
Phase I and Phase II Test Pit Location Map . Sites 6 and 82 ................
Surface Water/Sediment
Investigation
Area and
Aquatic/Ecological
Survey - Site 6 .......................................
Site Plan . Site 9 .......................................................
Soil Boring Locations Within Site 9 .....................................
Monitoring
Well Location Map - Site 9 ...................................
Location of Soil Gas and Groundwater
Headspace Sample
Points . Sites 6 and 82 ..................................................
Distribution
of Total VOCs in Head Space Groundwater Samples - 8
Sites 6 and 82 .........................................................
Distribution
of PCE Concentrations
from Soil Gas Survey . Sites 6 and 82 ...
3-15
3-16
Site Topography and Land Features .....................................
Generalized Hydrogeologic
Cross- Section Jones and Onslow Counties,
North Carolina
........................................................
Surficial and Deep Geologic Cross-Section Location Map ..................
Geologic Cross-Section A-A’ Depicting Surficial Soil Conditions
............
Geologic Cross Section B-B’ Depicting Surficial Soil Conditions
............
...............
Geologic Cross-Section C-C’ Depicting Deep Soil Conditions
...............
Geologic Cross-Section D-D’ Depicting Deep Soil Conditions
Surficial Groundwater Contour Map . September 30,1992 .................
Surficial Groundwater Contour Map - November 7,1992
..................
Surticial Groundwater
Contour Map - April 1,1993 .......................
.......................
Deep Groundwater Contour Map - October 26,1992
Deep Groundwater Contour Map - November 7,1992 ......................
Deep Groundwater
Contour Map -April 1,1993
..........................
Contour Map Depicting Groundwater Elevation Differentials
on
.......................................
October26,1992-Sites6and82
Water Supply Wells in a One-Mile Radius of Sites 6 and 82 ................
Water Supply Wells in a One-Mile Radius of Site 9 ........................
4-l
4-2
Positive
Positive
3-3
3-4
3-5
3-6
3-7
3-8
3-9
3-10
3-11
3-12
3-13
3-14
Detections
Detections
of Pesticides
of Pesticides
in Surface Soils at Site 9 ..................
in Surface and Subsurface Soils at Site 9 ...
ix
1
1
1
r_
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
TABLE
LIST
OF CONTENTS
OF FIGURES
(Continued)
(Continued)
Volume
4-3
4-4
4-5
4-6
Positive Detections of Pesticides in Surface Soils at Lot 201- Site 6 . . . . . . . . .
Positive Detections of Pesticides in Subsurface Soils at Lot 201- Site 6 . . . . . .
Positive Detections of VOCs and SVOCs in Surface Soils at Lot 201- Site 6 . .
Positive Detections of VOCs and SVOCs in Subsurface Soils
atLot201-Site6
. . .. . . .. .. .. . . . .. .. . . .. .. . . . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. . .. . . .
4-7
Positive Detections of Pesticides in Surface Soils at Lot 203 - Site 6 . . . . . . . . .
4-8
Positive Detections of Pesticides in Subsurface Soils at Lot 203 - Site 6 . . . . . .
4-9
Positive Detections of PCBs in Surface Soils at Lot 203 - Site 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-10 Positive Detections of PCBs in Subsurface Soils at Lot 203 - Site 6 . . . . . . . . . .
4-11 Positive Detections of VOCs and SVOCs in Surface Soils at Lot 203 - Site 6 . .
4-12 Positive Detections of VOCs and SVOCs in Subsurface Soils
at Lot 203 - Site 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..e.......
4-13 Positive Detections of Pesticides in Surface Soils at Wooded Areas,
the Ravine, and Site 82 - Sites 6 and 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-14 Positive Detections of Pesticides in Subsurface Soils at Wooded Areas,
the Ravine, and Site 82 - Sites 6 and 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-15 Positive Detections of PCBs in Surface Soils at Wooded
Areas, the Ravine, and Site 82 - Sites 6 and 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-16 Positive Detections of PCBs in Subsurface Soils at Wooded Areas,
the Ravine, and Site 82 - Sites 6 and 82 ..I...............................
4-17 Positive Detections of VOCs and SVOCs in Surface Soils at Wooded Areas,
the Ravine and Site 82 - Sites 6 and 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-18 Positive Detections VOCs and SVOCs in Subsurface Soils at Wooded Areas,
the Ravine and Site 82 - Sites 6 and 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..*.............
4-19 Total VOCs Isoconcentration
Map for Surficial Groundwater - Phase I Results Operable Unit No. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-20 TCE Isoconcentration
Map for Surticial Groundwater
- Phase I Results OperableUnitNo.2
. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. .. . . .. . .. . . .. .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . .
4-21 Detections of Total Chromium
and Total Manganese in
Surficial Groundwater
Phase I Results - Operable Unit No. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-22 Total VOCs Isoconcentration
Map for Deep Groundwater - Phase I Results OperableUnitNo.2
. . . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-23 TCE Isoconcentration
Map for Deep Groundwater - Phase I Results Operable Unit No. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-24 Total VOCs Isoconcentration
Map for Surf&al Groundwater - Phase II
Results - Operable Unit No. 2 . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-25 TCE Isoconcentration
Map for Surficial Groundwater - Phase II
Results - Operable Unit No. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-26 Total VOCs Isoconcentration
Map for Deep Groundwater
- Phase II
Results-OperableUnitNo.2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...’ . . . . .
4-27 TCE Isoconcentration
Map for Deep Groundwater
- Phase II
Results - Operable Unit No. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4-28 Positive Detections of VOCs and SVOCs in Wallace Creek - Site 6 . . . . . . . . . .
4-29 Positive Detections of Several TAL Inorganics in Surface Water from
Bear Head Creek, Wallace Creek, and the Ravine - Site 6 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
X
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
TABLE
LIST
OF CONTENTS
OF FIGURES
(Continued)
(Continued)
Volume
4-33
4-34
Positive Detections of Pesticides in Sediment from Bear Head Creek,
Wallace Creek, and the Ravine - Site 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Positive Detections of PCBs in Sediments from Bear Head Creek,
Wallace Creek, and the Ravine - Site 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Positive Detections of VOCs and SVOCs in Sediments from
Bear Head Creek, Wallace Creek, and the Ravine - Site 6 . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . .
PhaseITestPitResults-Site6
. .. . . . . . .. .. . . .. . .. .. . . ... . . .. . .. . .. . . . ..
Phase II Test Pit Results - Site 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2
2
2
6-l
Site Conceptual
2
4-30
4-31
4-32
Model
.......................
..........................
xi
2
2.
APPENDIX
Appendix
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
Volume
Name
Geo-Centers’
UXO Survey
Weston’s Geophysical
Report
Summary
of Soil Sampling
Investigation
C.l
Soil Sampling Summary for Grid 201A - Site 6
C.2
Soil Sampling Summary for Grid 201B - Site 6
C.3
Soil Sampling Summary for Grid 201C - Site 6
C.4
Soil Sampling Summary for DDT Grid in Lot 203 - Site 6
C.5
Soil Sampling PCB Grid in Lot 203 - Site 6
C.6
Soil Sampling OSA Grid in Lot 203 - Site 82
C.7
Soil Sampling Ravine Area - Site 6
C.8
Soil Sampling Grid 201N - Site 6
C.9
Soil Sampling Grid 201E - Site 6
C.10 Soil Sampling Grid 201s - Site 6
C.ll
Soil Sampling Monitoring
Well Borings - Sites 6 and 82
C.12 Soil Sampling - Site 9 Soil Borings
C.13 Soil Sampling - Site 9 Monitoring
Well Borings
Field Test Boring and Test Pit Records
D.l
Grid 201A
D.2
Grid 201B
D.3
Grid 201C
D.4
Grid DDTGrid
D.5
Grid PCB Grid
D.6
Grid OSA Grid Lot 203 and Site 82
D.7
Grid Ravine Area
D.8
Grid 201N
D.9
Grid 201E
D.10 Grid 201s
D.ll
Site9
D.12 Test Pits
Test Boring and Well Construction
Records
E.l
Sites 6 and 82 - Shallow Wells
E.2
Sites 6 and 82 - Deep Wells
E.3
Site 9 -Wells
North Carolina
DEHNR
Well Construction
Permit
Field Well Development
Records
G.l
Sites 6 and 82 - Shallow Wells
G.2
Sites 6 and 82 - Deep Wells
G.3
Site 9 -Wells
Drum Logs
Compatibility
Data Sheets
Investigation-Derived
Waste Summary
and Recommendation
Dose Response Calculations
and Spreadsheets
Data and Frequency
Summary
L.1
Site 6, Lot 201- Surface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
L.2
Site 6, Lot 201- Subsurface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
L.3
Site 6, Lot 203 - Surface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
L.4
Site 6, Lot 203 - Subsurface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
xii
1
1
1
APPENDIX
Appendix
(Continued)
Volume
Name
L.5
M
Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine) and
Site 82 Surface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
L.6
Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine) and
Site 82 Subsurface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
L.7
Site 9 - Surface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
L.8
Site 9 - Subsurface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
L.9
Operable Unit No. 2 - Groundwater Organic,
Total and Dissolved Inorganic
L.10 Site 6 - Wallace Creek Surface Water, Organic
and Inorganic
L. 11 Site 6 - Bear Head Creek Surface Water, Organic
and Inorganic
L.12 Site 6 - Ravine Surface Water, Organic and Inorganic
L.13 Site 6 - Wallace Creek Sediment, Organic and Inorganic
L.14 Site 6 - Bear Head Creek Sediment, Organic and Inorganic
L.15 Site 6 - Ravine Sediment, Organic and Inorganic
L.16 Operable Unit No. 2 - Phase II Round One Groundwater
L.17 Operable Unit No. 2 - Phase II Round Two Groundwater
L.18 Wooded Areas and Ravine (Site 82) Surface and Subsurface
L.19 Phase II Test Pits
Statistical
Summary
’
M.1
Site 6, Lot 201- Surface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
M.2
Site 6, Lot 201- Subsurface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
M.3
Site 6, Lot 203 - Surface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
M.4
Site 6, Lot 203 - Subsurface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
M.5
Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine) and Site 82
Surface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
M.6
Site 6 (Wooded Areas and Ravine) and Site 82
Subsurface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
M.7
Site 9 - Surface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
M.8
Site 9 - Subsurface Soil, Organic and Inorganic
M.9
Operable Unit No. 2 - Groundwater Organic,
Total and Dissolved Inorganic
M.10 Site 6 - Wallace Creek Surface Water, Organic and
Inorganic
M.ll
Site 6 - Bear Head Creek Surface Water, Organic and
Inorganic
M.12 Site 6 - Ravine Surface Water, Organic and Inorganic
M.13 Site 6 - Wallace Creek Sediment, Organic and Inorganic
M. 14 Site 6 - Bear Head Creek Sediment, Organic and Inorganic
M.15 Site 6 - Ravine Sediment, Organic and Inorganic
Xll
--
.. .
Soils
3
APPENDIX
Appendix
N
0
:
R
S
T
U
V
(Continued)
Volume
Name
Field Duplicate
Summary
TCLP Summary
Engineering
Parameter
Summary
TPH Summary
Quality
Assurance/Quality
Control
Chain-of-Custodies
Sampling
Summary
Target’s
Soil Gas Survey
Report
Aerial Photographic
Investigation
V.l
V.2
V.3
V.4
Aerial Photograph
Aerial Photograph
Aerial Photograph
Aerial Photograph
Summary
- October 1949
- February 1956
- November 1960
- December 1988
xiv
LIST
OF ACRONYMS
AND ABBREVIATIONS
AOC
ARAR.24
AWQC
Area of Concern
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
Federal Ambient Water Quality Criteria
Baker
bgs
BOD
Baker Environmental,
Inc.
below ground surface
biological oxygen demand
CD1
CERCLA
CH
CL
CLEAN
CLP
cot
COD
CSF
Chronic Daily Intake
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response, Compensation,
Liability
Act
high plasticity clay
low plasticity clay
Comprehensive
Long-Term Environmental
Action Navy
Contract Laboratory Program
Contaminant
of Concern
chemical oxygen demand
Cancer Slope Factor
DON
Department
Eh
EPIC
ERA
ER-M
ESE
ETC
Oxidation Reduction Potential
Environmental
Photographic
Interpretation
Center
Ecological Risk Assessment
Effects Range-Median
Environmental
Science and Engineering,
Inc.
Electromagnetic
terrain conductivity
FFA
FID
FWSV
Federal Facilities Agreement
flame ionization detector
Freshwater Water Quality Screening
of the Navy
gallons per minute
ground penetrating
radar
HQ
Health Advisory
Health Effects Assessment
Hardin and Huber, Inc.
hazard index
Hoggard-Eure
Associates
hazard quotient
IAS
ICR
ID
IDW
IRIS
IRP
Initial Assessment Study
Incremental
Cancer Risk
inside diameter
Investigative
Derived Wastes
Integrated Risk Information
System
Installation
Restoration Program
HA
HEAST
HHI
HI
Hoggard-Eure
Values
Summary
Tables
and
Y==-
k
KOC
K ow
hydraulic conductivity
Organic Carbon Partition
Octanol-Water
Partition
Coefficient
Coefficient
LANTDIV
LANTNAVFACENGCOM
LEL
LOAEL
Atlantic
Facilities
Engineering
Command
Atlantic Division, Naval Facilities Engineering
lower explosive limit
Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level
Command
MCAS
MCB
MCL
mgk
MF
MH
MI
ML
msl
Marine Corps Air Station
Marine Corps Base
Maximum
Contaminant
Level
milligram
per kilogram
Modifying Factor
plastic silt
Mobility
Index
low plasticity silt
mean sea level
NACIP
NBC
N.C. DEHNR
Navy Assessment and Control of Installation
Pollutants
nuclear, biological, and chemical
North Carolina Department
of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
North Carolina State Plane Coordinate System
North Carolina Water Quality Standards
Naval Energy and Environmental
Support Activity
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
No Observed Adverse Effect Level
National Priorities List
NCSPCS
NCWQS
NEESA
NOAA
NOAEL
NPL
PAH
PCBs
PHA
PID
ppb
Division,
Naval
PVC
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon
polychlorinated
biphenyls
Public Health Assessment
photoionization
detector
parts per billion
parts per million
polyvinyl chloride
QAJQC
Quality
RA
RCRA
RfD
RI/FS
Risk Assessment
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Reference Dose
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study
s,s
storativity,
solubility
Site Assessment
Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization
Soil Conservation Service
silty sand
Secondary Drinking
Water Regulations
Sediment Quality Criteria
Standard Operating Procedures
SA
SARA
scs
SM
SMCL
SQC
SOPS
Assurance/Quality
Control
Act
Program
ssv
svocs
SWQSVs
Sediment Screening Values
semivolatile
organic compounds
Surface Water Quality Screening
T
TAL
TBC
TCL
TCLP
TDS
TEF
TSS
TVS
TOC
TRC
transmissivity
Target Analyte List
to be considered
Target Compound List
toxicity characteristic
leaching
total dissolved solids
Toxicity Equivalency Factor
total suspended solids
total volatile solids
total organic carbon
Technical Review Committee
UCL
UF
Pgn
USEPA
USGS
Upper Contidence Limit
Uncertainty
Factor
micrograms per liter
United States Environmental
Protection
United States Geological Survey
vocs
VP
volatile organic compounds
Vapor Pressure
WAR
Weston
WOE
Water and Air Research, Inc.
Weston Geophysical Corporation
Weight of Evidence
Values
procedure
Agency
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Marine
Corps Base (MCB),
Environmental
List (NPL)
1989).
Response,
Compensation,
and Liability
States Environmental
Department
UnitedStates
thoroughly
Recovery
Health
of the Navy
impacts
investigated
associated
corrective
action
Act (CERCLA)
National
Register
Agency (USEPA)
and Natural
(DON)
then
entered
The primary
CERCLA
41015, October
Region
into
4,
IV, the North
a Federal
and the
Facilities
purpose of the FFA was to ensure
activities
at the MCB
response/Resource
alternatives
Priorities
Resources (NC DEHNR)
with past and present
and appropriate
Act (RCRA)
was placed on the Comprehensive
4, 1989 (54 Federal
(FFA) for MCB Camp Lejeune.
environmental
Carolina
Protection
of Environment,
Department
Agreement
that
North
that became effective on October
The United
Carolina
Camp Lejeune,
were developed
were
Conservation
and
and implemented
as
necessary to protect public health and the environment.
This report describes the RI conducted
at Operable
Unit
(OU) No. 2, which is comprised
of
Sites 6,9, and 82.
SITE
DESCRIPTION
Operable
Unit
No. 2 is located approximately
south of State Route 24 on the mainside
by Holcomb
Boulevard
east, and by Wallace
portion
east of the New River and 2 miles
of MCB Camp Lejeune.
The unit is bordered
to the west, Sneads Ferry Road to the south, Piney Green Road to the
Creek, which
operates rail lines parallel
makes up the north boundary.
to Holcomb
covers an area of approximately
There are distinctive
1.75 miles
Boulevard
Operable
Unit
Railroad
No. 2. OU No. 2
210 acres. OU No. 2 consists of three sites: Sites 6,9, and 82.
areas of concern within
describes the background
bordering
Camp Lejeune
each site of OU No. 2. The following
section
of each site.
Site 9
Site 9 is referred to in this report as the “Fire Training
the FFA, is “Fire
approximately
Fighting
Training
Pit at Piney
2.6 acres. Site 9 is bounded
Area” (the formal
Green Road”).
by Holcomb
Boulevard
name, as provided
in
The site covers an area of
to the mst,
Bear Head
l -
ES-l
Creek approximately
500 feet to the north,
Road to the south.
unnamed
Piney Green Road to the east and Sneads Ferry
Site 6 also borders Site 9 to the north.
streets leading
to various storage buildings
Site 9 consists of an asphalt-lined
fire training
pit, an oil/water
southern
area of the site, is used to conduct training
oil/water
separator
is located next to the fire training
oil/water
separator
falls into the pit.
the site is bounded
separator,
The fire training
four aboveground
pit, located
exercises for extinguishing
These tanks are currently
in the
fires.
The
pit to collect water used in the training
The recovered
product
collected
is disposed of off site. Two of the ASTs at Site 9 are 2500-gallon
labeled “DO NOT USE”.
by
in the vicinity.
storage tanks (ASTs), and a fire tower (smoke house).
exercises and storm water that
Locally,
steel tanks
not in use. Two additional
are located in a bermed area. These tanks are constructed
in the
storage tanks
of steel and contain
approximately
500 gallons each of jet fuel.
Site 6
Site 6 is located north of and adjacent
Piney
to Site 9. Site 6 is bounded on the north by Site 82, by
Green Road to the east, by Site 9 to the south, and by Holcomb
Site 6 covers an area of approximately
177 acres that incorporates
Boulevard
to the west.
Storage Lots 201 and 203,
the wooded area between the storage lots, and a ravine, which begins at Site 6 and bisects Site
82. Three surface water bodies are associated
Creek, Bear Head Creek, and a ravine
to Wallace
discharge
Creek.
during
The ravine
with Site 6 for the purpose of this RI: Wallace
located in the wooded area north of Lot 203 that drains
is intermittent
and it receives surface runoff and groundwater
various periods.
Open Storage Lot 201 (Lot 201) is a fenced lot located in the south-central
is a flat area with sparse vegetation
in size. It is currently
hydraulic
around the fence lines.
being used for the storage of military
oils and lubricants,
non-PCB
transformers,
Lot 203 is a relatively
46 acres.
approximately
five feet. The ground
fill material.
Lot 203 is bordered
to the south, and by Holcomb
of Site 6. It
The lot is approximately
25 acres
vehicles and equipment,
lumber,
and other supplies (ESE, 1991).
Open Storage Lot 203 (Lot 203) is a fenced lot located in the northern
approximately
portion
flat
surface is comprised
area with
portion
of Site 6 covering
elevation
differences
of both naturally
existing
of
soil and
by Site 32 to the north, Piney Green Road to the east, woods
Boulevard
to the west. Lot 203 is currently
ES-2
inactive.
Approximately
labeled,
40 55gallon
were identified
storage tanks
gasoline,
drums
are present
as containing
petroleum
The majority
products,
They were labeled
commercial
as containing
decline
Empty
diesel
as the ravine
ranges from 25 feet above msl at the north boundary
above msl where the ravine
with various
or corrosives.
if
fuel,
section of Site 6. The steepest area of the ravine is located
of Storage Lot 203. The banks of the ravine gradually
Site 82. The elevation
of the drums,
19921.
A ravine is located in the northwest
“inside”
lubricants,
were also found on Lot 203.
and kerosene (Baker,
at Lot 203.
meets Wallace
debris including
ovens, commodes,
batteries,
Creek.
fencing,
and respirator
of Lot 203 to 5 feet
The surface of the ravine
tires, empty
cartridges.
unlabeled
area is littered
drums,
wire cables,
An empty drum labeled
also found in the ravine area, as were small canisters labeled to contain
bisects
“DDT”.
“DDT”
was
The canisters
were dated “1958.”
Woods and open fields surround
both Storage
area of Site 6. The topography
Lots 201 and 203 and make up the remaining
of the wooded areas is relatively
flat, but localized
trenching
and mounding
is visible just north of Lot 203 and west of Piney Green Road. The wooded areas
are randomly
littered
with debris including
spent ammunition
casings, and empty
or rusted
drums.
Markings
were observed on a few drums located north of Lot 203 (most drums did not
contain
markings
due to their condition
oils”.
Many
of the drums observed
and age). These drums were marked
were only rusted shells or fragments
as “lubrication
of drums.
(Baker,
1992)
Site 82
Site 82 is situated
at the northern
end of OU No. 2. It is bordered
Creek, to the east by Piney Green Road, to the west by Holcomb
Site 6.
Site 82 encompasses
approximately
woodlands.
The site is randomly
ammunition
casings, and empty
littered
the drums were marked
as “lubrication
The topography
Site 82 is relatively
within
Boulevard,
with debris including
Markings
markings
by Wallace
and to the south by
30 acres and is predominantly
or rusted drums.
however, most of the drums did not contain
to the north
covered
communication
by
wire, spent
were observed on a few drums,
due to their condition
and age. Some of
oil” and “anti-freeze”.
becomes very steep near the bank of Wallace
flat near the southern
Creek.
ES-3
Localized
portion
trenching
of the site, but
and mounding
is
:-
visible
near the southern
Figure
1-3.
SITE
portion
The ravine
of the site.
bisects
the site, as shown
on
HISTORY
Site 9
Site 9 has been used as a fire fighting
training
extinguishing
activities
The training
fires in the pit were started
(unleaded).
took place in an unlined
Approximately
the fire training
area from the early 1960s to the present.
Fire
pit. In 1981 the pit was lined with asphalt.
with used oil, solvents,
and contaminated
fuels
30,000 to 40,000 gallons of JP-4 and JP-5 fuel were also burned
pit (Baker,
in
1992).
Site 6
Site 6 has a long history
supplies.
Storage
This discussion
of various
uses including
on the history
the disposal
and storage
of wastes and
of Site 6 has been broken down into Storage Lot 201,
Lot 203, and the wooded areas and ravine
to simplify
the historical
descriptions
of
these areas.
Currently,
Lot 201 is used to store military
“non-hazardous”
supplies.
corners of the lot.
Pesticides
Transformers
equipment,
were reportedly
containing
corner of the lot (Water and Air Research,
vehicles,
hydraulic
stored in the northeast
PCBs were reportedly
1983).
at this lot. Lot 203 in not currently
the ground surface is littered
disposal
corrosives,
expended
demolition
cables, and wooded pallets.
throughout
boundaries
debris.
Empty
active as a storage or disposal
on the
area, but
Lot 203 was also used for the storage and
parts, shredded
kit training
documentation
materials,
and full 55-gallon
tires, lubricants,
ordnance,
petroleum
sheet metal
products,
debris,
drums were found at various
wire
locations
Lot 203.
Lot 203 is currently
r”“\
with various
of radio and communication
and southeast
stored in the southwest
Lot 203 has been used as a disposal area since the 1940s. There is little
disposal activities
oils, and other
fenced.
From
historical
photographs,
have changed since the lot was in operation.
ES-4
Former
it appears
employees
that
the fenced
at Lot 203 have
reported
disposal
used batteries,
of various
chemicals
including
PCBs, cleaning
solvents,
electrolytes
from
and waste oils.
The wooded areas around Lots 201 and 203 are randomly
metal storage containers,
are documented
As previously
and spent ammunition
littered
cartridges.
with debris including
No organized
for the wooded areas. A ravine is located on the northern
stated, this area is currently
the debris in the ravine,
littered
it appears that trucks
with various debris.
may have dumped
drums,
disposal operations
boundary
of Lot 203.
Prom the deposition
their
contents
of
into the
ravine from above.
Site 82
Site 82 was identified
as a result of the 1986 site assessment conducted
1992 Site Inspection.
Surface water samples collected from Wallace
volatile
organic compounds
in Wallace
Creek at that time was unknown.
contamination
originated
source near the creek.
established
No previous
(VOCs) at several locations.
at Site 6, and from the
Creek exhibited
levels of
The source of the VOC contamination
It appeared
unlikely
from Site 6 (Lot 2031, and, therefore,
that the source of the
was attributed
to another
The area located north of Lot 203 and west of Piney Green Road was
as Site 82 - The Piney Green Road VOC Site.
records indicated
The area is, however, littered
that Site 82 was used for disposal or waste handling
with debris such as trash, communication
activities.
wire, and drums
of
various sizes (e.g., 55 gallon and 5- gallon containers).
PREVIOUS
During
INVESTIGATIONS
the period 1983 through
the Department
Confirmation
of the Navy.
These studies
included
an Initial
Restoration
at Site 6 (Lots 201 and 2031, groundwater
82 and surface water/sediment
collected
Low levels of pesticides
almost
studies were conducted
Study under the DON’S Installation
soil investigations
Soil samples
1991, various
from shallow borings
ranging
all of the soil samples.
wells at Site 6 revealed
investigations
at Wallace
low levels of volatile
Assessment
Program.
investigations
and a
at Sites 6, 9, and
Creek and Bear Head Creek.
from 1.3 pg/kg to 770 &kg
samples
collected
organic
compounds
ES-5
Study
The studies included
at Lot 201 and 203 were analyzed
in concentration
Groundwater
at Sites 6,9, and 82 by
for pesticides.
were detected
in
from eight shallow monitoring
such as carbon disulfide
and
chloromethane
in well 6GW6, which is located to the east of Lot 201. In addition,
benzene and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
of Lot 203.
Further
trichloroethene
were detected in well 6GW1, which is located just north
investigation
(TCE),
supply wells HP-651
vinyl
of nearby
chloride,
and HP-653.
water supply wells revealed
1,2-dichloroethene,
in 1984,1986,
well.
wells were installed
and 1987. In addition,
No contamination
in all three shallow
(PCE)
in
200 feet. The wells are no
organic compounds
one sample was collected
wells.
(VOCs).
at Site 9. Groundwater
was detected in the supply well.
monitoring
levels of
These wells are located east of Piney Green Road near Lot
due to elevated levels of volatile
Three shallow monitoring
elevated
and tetrachloroethene
203. The supply wells are screened to a depth of approximately
longer in operation
low levels of
In addition,
samples were collected
in 1984 from a nearby supply
Low levels of phenol were detected
low levels of lead and chromium
were
detected in all three wells.
Upstream
and downstream
Bear Head Creek.
surface water samples
Surface water samples
levels of VOCs such as TCE, vinyl chloride,
was detected in Bear Head Creek.
low levels of pesticides
pesticides
Sediment
in either
from Wallace
from Wallace
Creek
Creek revealed
and 1,2dichloroethene.
(13 to 75 pg/kg)
were detected
collected
were collected
and
elevated
No organic contamination
samples collected from Bear Head Creek revealed
both upstream
sample
collected
(1,990 yg/kg total) were detected in the downstream
and downstream
from Wallace
sediment
from
Creek.
Site 6.
However,
sample collected
No
PAHs
near Holcomb
Boulevard.
Site 82
A Site
Inspection
(SD was conducted
Environmental
Corporation
Environmental
Science and Engineering
was conducted
as part of a study for Site 6). During
collected from Wallace
in Wallace
(NM).
at Site 82 in June,
Creek contained
Creek most likely
shallow
sampling
monitoring
(Wallace
conducted
(ES&E)
by Halliburton
NUS
based on results from an
field investigation
in 1986 (the investigation
this investigation,
surface water samples
that the source of the VOCs
from Site 6 (Lot 203). Subsequently
a new site,
the source of the VOCs (NUS, 1992).
by NUS consisted of installing
wells, soil and groundwater
Creek).
was initiated
VOCs. It was determined
did not originate
Site 82, was created to investigate
The investigation
The investigation
1991
Results
sampling,
from the investigation
six shallow
soil borings
and three
and surface water and sediment
indicated
positive
detections
of
I-
ES-6
organic contamination
endosulfan
in all of the media sampled.
II, and dieldrin)
pg/kg) samples
PCB-1242)
with
were detected
(220 to 700 pg/kg).
(6 to 64 pg/l), and vinyl chloride
INVESTIGATION
and sediment
(12 to 69
PCB (PCB-1260
Further,
and
(15 pg/ll,
levels of TCE (3 to 74 pg/l),
(11 pg/l) were detected
in surface water
ACTIVITIES
A Remedial
Investigation
1992 (Final
Project Plans were submitted
concern
within
surrounding
(August
(RI) was conducted
Operable
Unit
at Operable
in May 1992).
No. 2 including:
Unit
No. 2 beginning
through
study primarily
Moreover,
the investigation
November
in August
The RI focused on various
Lot
201, Lot 203, the wooded
both storage lots, the ravine north of Lot 203, Site 9, Site 82, Wallace
Bear Head Creek.
1992) and Phase II (February
through
May 1993).
contamination
areas of
areas
Creek, and
was conducted in two phases of work:
focused on Site 82, where deep groundwater
Phase I
The Phase II
was identified
the Phase I Study,
The soil investigation
Sampling
focused the reported
grids were established
Two reported pesticide
l
A reported PCB storage area within
l
A reported pesticide
l
A reported PCB disposal area within
determined
to be environmental
Sampling
Lot 201
Lot 203
Lot 203
focused on other portions
concerns
Lot 201 and Lot 203.
Lot 201
disposal area within
the soil investigation
areas within
areas:
storage areas within
In addition,
photographs.
disposal
at the following
l
historical
4,4’-DDT,
No VOCs were detected in any of the wells sampled.
REMEDIAL
during
in soil (33 to 110 pg/kg)
4,4’-DDE,
was also present in soil (150 to 1,900 pg/kg>, groundwater
surface water (80 pg/l), and sediments
samples.
(4,4’-DDD,
lower levels in surface water and groundwater.
contamination
1,2-dichloroethene
Pesticides
of Operable
Unit
No. 2 that were
based on site reconnaissances
grids were established
at the following
l
The wooded areas to the north, east, and south of Lot 201
l
Site 82
l
The fenced-in portion
l
The ravine north of Lot 203
of Lot 203
ES-7
areas:
and review
of
Two sampling
grids were also established
The grids were established
l
The fire training
l
Aboveground
at Site 9 to evaluate
potential
at:
pit and oil/water
separator
storage tanks
The grid points were surveyed by a licensed surveyor prior to initiating
Shallow
borings
continuous
were augered
intervals
analyzed
until
at each grid point
Compound
List (TCL)
particular
disposal
of concern (e.g.,TCL
at Operable
investigation
dissolved
samples
metals analysis).
I and existing
investigation
These measurements
Wallace
information
for that
at least ten percent
of
quality
at Site 9, Lot 201, Lot 203, and Site 82.
and TAL
inorganics
(total
and
were collected
from the Phase II wells.
The
three to four rounds of water level measurements.
staff gauges that were installed
in Bear
Head
Creek
and
Creek.
Placement
of monitoring
geophysical
produced
also included
included
(TAL)
two rounds of samples were collected from the Phase
wells, and one round of samples
groundwater
List
and deep groundwater
for full TCL organics
Furthermore,
Analyte
in the wooded areas, Site 82 Lot 201, Lot
wells were installed
were analyzed
of the samples were
were analyzed
however,
surfmial
Unit No. 2. Shallow wells were installed
Groundwater
of samples
at-a-foot
for full TCL organics and TAL inorganics.
focused on evaluating
203, and Site 9. Deep groundwater
and Target
pesticides);
samples collected from these areas were analyzed
The groundwater
were collected
was expected based on existing
area at Lot 2031, the majority
contaminant
the soil investigation.
The majority
organics
In areas where a certain contaminant
(e.g., pesticide
and soil samples
the water table was encountered.
for full Target
inorganics.
soil contamination.
investigation
wells was based on reported
conducted
by the U.S. Environmental
Interpretation
Center (EPIC).
at Lot 203, and review of historical
Protection
Additionally,
Surface water and sediment
Creek,
and the ravine.
middle
portion
of the stream
aerial
the placement
of a
photographs
Photographic
of the Phase II shallow wells were
of the Phase II deep wells were based on
results.
investigations
Surface
areas, results
Agency (EPA) Environmental
based on the results of a soil gas survey and placement
the results of the Phase I analytical
storage/disposal
were conducted
and subsurface
sediment
as well as from the stream
ES-8
in Bear Head
samples
bank.
Creek,
were collected
Wallace
from the
Deep surface water samples
were collected when the depth of water exceeded five feet. All samples were analyzed
for full
TCL organics and TAL inorganics.
An aquatic
survey
population
was also conducted
studies, fish tissue analysis,
streams.
Representative
In addition
to these studies, an ordnance
On two occasions, the MCB
examine
UXO.
Water
unexploded
specialists
ordnance
were contacted
to
to present a hazard.
UNIT
NO. 2
1.75 miles east of the New River and 12.5 miles north of the
New River’s outlet into the Atlantic
and 82. Wallace
Ocean. Two drainages
Creek forms the northern
toward the New River.
An estimated
is surrounded
that
measurements,
exhibits
it was determined
Wallace
on staff gauge
Creek
stream
(i.e., receives
is a gaining
effected by tidal changes on the New River based on visual
Head Creek
lies within
0.75 miles downstream
of Wallace
portion
of Site
Creek
Wallace
Creek are designated
and for the propagation
6 and empties
the state according
from its source to the New River
The Class SB NSW designation
Creek adjacent to OU No. 2 appears
observations.
into
Wallace
Bear
Creek
from the site.
classifies bodies of water within
Wallace
Creek
Based
to be slightly
the southern
Wallace
surface ponding.
discharge).
The NC DEHNR
the portion
equation.
groundwater
approximately
Moreover,
based on Manning’s
extensive
that
and adjacent to Sites 6
flow rate of 14.4 cubic feet per second (CFS) or
(gpm) was calculated
by marsh
exist within
border of Site 82 and flows in a southwesterly
6,463 gallons per minute
fishing
and TAL
Hydrology
OU No. 2 is located approximately
direction
ordnance
OF OPERABLE
Fish
at Lot 203 and the wooded areas
In both cases, the devices were not determined
CHARACTERISTICS
Creek.
for full TCL organics
of surface and subsurface
Camp Lejeune
Head
studies were conducted in both
survey was required
Lot 203 due to the presence
(UXO).
Surface
and Bear
fish tissue samples were submitted
analysis.
PHYSICAL
Creek
and benthic population
inorganics
surrounding
at Wallace
and survival
saltwaters
of aquatic
ES-9
use.
and Bear Head Creek from its source to
as Class SB NSW (Nutrient
denotes tidal
to their designated
life.
Sensitive
Waters)
surface waters.
protected
for primary
recreation,
Geologv
MCB
Camp Lejeune
sediments
is located in the Atlantic
of the Atlantic
shell beds, sandstone,
Coastal Plain
and limestone.
lenses that gently dip and thicken
nine
confining
units
pre-Cretaceous
consist of unconsolidated
“undifferentiated”
areas investigated
material.
These materials
Site 9. Historical
aerial
have been excavated
Additional
to medium-grained
size).
within
were encountered
photographs
during
basement
or near-marine
to Quaternary
and
rocks
of
(i.e., coastal
time.
OU No. 2. In general, surficial
the surficial
large
throughout
revealed
amounts
soils
aquifer.
of fill
or reworked
Lot 201, Lot 203, and portions
that soils within
extensively
the drilling
and adjacent
of
to the Lot 203
over the years. Soil boring data indicates
program
on deep subsurface
throughout
silty
for the surficial
that
of the deeper
Large
amounts
while the limestone
fragments
sands are similar
of shell fragments
within
to that
portion
of clay (borings
of the site.
HP-653
The clay varies in thickness
varies in thickness
were noted
the sands.
from the ground surface, ranges in thickness
40 to 140 feet. This silty sand unit is thickest
are present.
limestone
Below a depth of 50 to 60 feet, however, the sands become
the site and decreases toward the southern
(boring HP-635)
to 310 feet bgs was also obtained
clay, and sandy-marly
and classification
layers
of 236 feet bgs.
the deeper subsurface soils consist of fine
in the sands. Thin lenses of clay are interbedded
discontinuous
depth
Deeper subsurface soils (below 35 feet) are also
sand, silt, silty-sandy
sands.
to a maximum
soil conditions
the site. In general,
The appearance
from approximately
thin
in marine
OU No. 2 contain
The upper silty sand unit, which is encountered
unit,
beds and
they comprise 10 aquifers
which characterizes
very dense to hard (blow counts above 50).
frequently
clays,
metamorphic
throughout
logs of supply wells in the area.
consistent
described
and
were deposited
formation
and reworked
information
from boring
(gravel
sands, clays, calcareous
Regionally,
igneous
uniform
The
exists in these areas to depths greater than five feet bgs in some cases.
Soils were classified
generally
overlie
province.
deposits of silty and clayey sand, silt, and clay. These soils represent
Several
fill material
to the southeast.
are generally
physiographic
are layered in interfingering
and range in age from early Cretaceous
soil conditions
the Quaternary
Plain
consist of interbedded
These sediments
age. These sediments
plain) environments
Surficial
which
Coastal
from approximately
ES-10
in the northern
Within
of
the upper silty sand
and 6GW2Dl
and limestone
from approximately
3 to 5 feet.
portion
-
2 to 10 feet
Underlying
the upper silty sand is a limestone
from approximately
portion
unit.
5 feet near the southern
portion
of the site. Silty sands (lower unit) underlie
bgs (estimated
depth).
At boring location
10 feet thick) and limestone
respectively.
The limestone
HP-651,
(approximately
unit varies in thickness
of the site to 80 feet near the northern
the limestone
discontinuous
unit to a depth of 310 feet
layers of clay (approximately
10 feet) are present at 230 feet and 250 feet deep,
This clay layer also encountered
as soil boring/well
6GWlDA
at approximately
230 feet.
Hgdrogeologv
The suficial
aquifer is a series of sediments,
primarily
sand and clay, which commonly
extend
to depths of 50 to 100 feet. This unit is not used for water supply at MCB Camp Lejeune.
The principal
water supply aquifer
for the Base is the series of sand and limestone
occur between 50 and 300 feet below land surface. This series of sediments
as the Castle Hayne aquifer.
area and is the most productive
Onslow County
freshwater,
The Castle Hayne
aquifer
and Camp Lejeune
although
the proximity
in North
of saltwater
Surticial
groundwater
existing
and newly installed
installed
in Bear Head Creek and Wallace
program
flow patterns
at varying
depths is attributed
depths
is about 150 to 350 feet thick
aquifer
contains
water withdrawals
from the aquifer.
of OU No. 2 were evaluated
monitoring
by a network
Creek.
Groundwater
was encountered
OU No. 2. This variation
(i.e., land surface elevations)
encountered
changes.
during
A high water table
near the banks of Wallace
Creek and Bear
vicinity
GGWlS/D
depth of groundwater
near the north central
flowing
northwest
across OU No. 2 is approximately
portion
toward Wallace
Creek while groundwater
flowing southwest toward Bear Head Creek.
ES-11
and 6GW28S/D).
8 feet. A groundwater
of OU No. 2. Groundwater
the
in groundwater
than 15 feet bgs) was encountered
of well clusters
of
wells (less than 33 feet), and staff gauges
Head Creek while a lower water table (i.e., greater
of Site 82 (e.g., vicinities
in the
in deeper layers just below the aquifer and in
throughout
(i.e., less than 2 feet bgs) was typically
is known
Carolina.
in the vicinity
shallow
to topographic
generally
lie in an area where the Castle Hayne
the New River estuary is of concern in managing
drilling
aquifer
beds that
in the
An average
divide
occurs
on the north side of the divide
is
on the south side of the divide
is
Groundwater
elevations
feet [well 82MW2
located
(measured
(10/26/92)
from top of PVC casing reference points) ranged from 1.03
located
east of Lot 203 across Piney
near Wallace
Creek]
Green Road] feet above msl.
between 0.7 and 5.59 feet over a seven month period.
noted on April
over a 24-hour period from monitoring
over a 24-hour
to barometric
Site-specific
surficial
(IQ, transmissivity
the result
gallons/day/feet
7,1993.
not affected by tidal changes
to OU No. 2. Water level data
well 6GW28S.
Water levels were fairly
(T), and storativity
investigation
Aquifer
and recovery
during
test results
1993) at Hadnot
indicate
K of 21 gallons/day/feet
silty-sands
A
Point
the surficial
an average
(less
water-
T of 561
(2.8 feet/day or 8.0 x 10-4
(10 to 25 feet bgs). A very low
flow rate of less than 2 g-pm was maintained
during this test. Slightly
4 gpm were observed
development
well
conductivity
this investigation.
of T, S, and K within
cmlsec), and an average S of 0.015 for the surficial
from shallow
which can be
[i.e., hydraulic
by Baker (February,
estimates
(75 [email protected]/day), an average
fluctuations,
characteristics
(S) ] were not evaluated
conducted
pump
daily
This very small
pressure).
hydraulic
than l/2 miles from OU No. 2) provided
zones.
adjacent
of normal
effects (i.e., atmospheric
and deep aquifer
recent hydrogeologic
bearing
levels fluctuated
period as a change of only 0.06-feet was observed.
change in water level is most likely
attributed
Water
(4/l/93)
the highest water levels were
in the area is most likely
Creek which were observed to be minimal
was collected
constant
In general,
6GW2S
1,1993 and the lowest water levels were noted on November
The data suggest that the groundwater
on Wallace
to 29.39 [well
during
higher flow rates of 2 to
the field
investigation
at
OU No. 2.
Deeper groundwater
deep monitoring
extends
wells (maximum
from north
Boulevard.
in the vicinity
Creek to Site 9, and east of Piney
aquifer
hydraulic
from well production
tests”) performed
of OU No. 2 were evaluated
by a network
depth of 230 feet bgs). The deep monitoring
of Wallace
Additionally,
zones were obtained
acceptance
flow patterns
characteristic
well network
Green Road to Holcomb
data from the deeper water-bearing
tests (i.e., also commonly
on water supply
of
wells HP-651
referred
and HP-636,
to as “well
which are located
along Piney Green Road.
Three rounds of groundwater
wells.
Groundwater
elevations
9.06 feet [well 6GW37D
(4/l/93)
level measurements
(measured
were obtained
from the deep monitoring
from top of casing reference points)
located near the western boundary
ES-12
ranged
from
of Site 821 to 19.13 [well
6GW2D
(4/l/93)1
located east of Piney
Green Road) feet above msl.
Water levels fluctuated
between 2.20 and 5.17 feet over a six month period.
Water level data was also collected over a 24-hour period from deep monitoring
well 6GW28D.
The water level was also fairly constant over a 24-hour period as a change of only 0.05-feet was
observed.
This very small
fluctuations.
likely
Further,
change in water level is most likely
the data suggests that groundwater
not affected by tidal changes on Wallace
Deep groundwater
is flowing
directions
of Wallace
calculated
are within
gradients
in the vicinity
the result
in the vicinity
daily
of OU No. 2 is most
Creek which were observed to be minimal.
toward the west with local penetrations
Creek and Bear Head Creek.
the same magnitude
of Wallace
of normal
The estimated
toward
groundwater
across OU No. 2. The average
Creek and the north-central
the general
portion
gradients
groundwater
of the site are 0.003
and 0.0042, respectively.
Overall,
the deep and surficial
Subsequently,
a minimum
(i.e., boring
hydraulically
6GW2D
from
interconnected.
groundwater
vertically
NATURE
recharging
at OU No. 2 exhibit
Although
trend.
zones are at
some clay layers underlie
may impede
and are characterized
the surficial
a similar
and deeper water-bearing
25 to 2’7 feet bgs) which
these clay layers are discontinuous
Accordingly
migrate
flow patterns
this trend may suggest that the surfrcial
partly
movement,
groundwater
water-bearing
vertical
the site
groundwater
as leaky semi-confining.
zones will,
over time,
into the deeper soils.
AND EXTENT
OF CONTAMINATION
Site 6, Lot 201
Pesticides
(4,4’-DDD,
soil samples
subsurface
collected
and 4,4’-DDT)
at the three sampling
soil samples.
Some of the pesticides
handled
4,4*-DDE,
The majority
were detected
were detected in more than half of the surface
grids and in approximately
of the pesticide
concentrations
in areas where pesticides
one-third
of the
were below 100 pg/kg.
were not reportedly
stored or
(i.e., the PCB storage area at grid 0.
At only two sampling
part per million
locations,
(1,000 pg/kg).
soil boring
Soil borings
SB16 and SB17, did the pesticide
levels exceed one
SB16 and SB17 are located in the northeast
ES-13
comer
of sampling
grid A, which was reported to be one of two former pesticide
storage areas within
Lot 201 (the other area is where grid B was established).
Pesticide
contamination
at soil borings SB16 and SB17 is significant,
may have been used to dispose of unused pesticides.
It is also possible
via incidental
Pesticide
levels in surface soils were as high as 1,200,OOO pg/kg for 4,4-DDT
(460,000
have migrated
pg/kg
from the containers/drums
to subsurface
of 4,4’-DDT)
in subsurface
(54,000
soil samples
pg/kg),
(2,600
(97,000 pg/kg).
Lot 201 (i.e., soil boring
may be associated
pg/kg),
from
elevated
naphthalene
These constituents
SB17).
None of these constituents
Polychlorinated
biphenyls
SB17.
levels of total
xylene
pg/kg),
and
were only detected at one location
since petroleum-based
Camp Lejeune.
soil boring
(38,000
Because these constituents
with the pesticides
levels of pesticides
at Lot 201.
from SB17 also exhibited
ethylbenzene
2-methylnaphthalene
within
collected
collected
the pesticides.
(soil boring SB171.
by elevated
soil samples
However, no pesticides were detected in groundwater
Subsurface
which contained
soils as evidenced
that this area
that this area was
impacted
Pesticides
spills
indicating
are petroleum
pesticides
based, they
were used at MCB
were detected in nearby monitoring
wells.
/-
(PCBs) were detected in only 3 of 87 samples analyzed
The soil sample collected from soil borings SB13 and SB24 within
SB24 within
grid B, exhibited
at a concentration
were detected
reportedly
at grid C, which
was established
stored. The extent of PCB contamination
contaminants
SB24 within
over the area where
is limited
in soil, contaminant
grid A.
No PCBs
transformers
to a few random
were
areas within
levels were comparable
OU No. 2 (i.e., the wooded area, Lot 203, Site 9). Samples
201) collected
from
Lot 201 background
concentrations
within
the range of background
appear that inorganic
activities
PCB level was detected
no PCBs were detected in groundwater.
With respect to inorganic
areas within
grid A, and from soil boring
The only elevated
of 1,800 pg/kg in the surface soil at boring
Lot 201. In addition,
concentrations
borings
SB38
and SB39
levels at Camp Lejeune.
in soil are elevated
to other
(located west of Lot
indicated
inorganic
Therefore,
it does not
as a result of former waste handling
at Lot 201.
Groundwater
,“@-
PCB contamination.
at Lot 201.
at Lot 201 does not appear to be impacted
storage practices.
(i.e., the former
However,
pesticide
monitoring
storage
via former
pesticide
well 6GW22, which is located within
area), exhibited
ES-14
TCE at 1.2 pg/l.
or transformer
grid A of Lot 201
The smrce
of TCE
is
unknown.
Soil samples collected
well borehole
from borings
did not detect TCE or PCE.
local since no other well downgradient
within
grid A as well as from the monitoring
The extent of TCE in groundwater
of this area exhibited
is believed
to be
TCE contamination.
Site 6, Lot 203
The pesticides
4,4’-DDD,
out of approximately
pesticides
pg/kg
4,4’-DDE,
were detected throughout
58 surface soil sampling
exceed 1,000 pg/kg
and 1,500 yg/kg,
established
and 4,4’-DDT
(soil boring
respectively).
locations
SB30 exhibited
Samples
respectively.
of 540 pg/kg,
180 pgkg,
All three maximum
Lot 203 did the level
4,4’-DDE
collected
over an area where pesticides were reportedly
concentrations
within
Lot 203. Only one
and 4,4’-DDT
from the “DDT”
at 2,100
grid,
which
disposed of, only revealed
and 770 pg/kg for 4,4’-DDE,
4,4’-DDD,
of
was
maximum
and 4,4’-DDT,
values were detected at soil boring SB18 within
the “DDT”
grid.
As with Lot 201 and the wooded areas surrounding
levels were below 100 pg/kg.
are indicative
boring
of former pesticide
SB30 (and possibly
from this boring,
however, exhibited
are relatively
Polychlorinated
Lot 203.
ranging
SB26,
Soil boring
(PCBs)
grid) did the results
Subsurface
detected
soil samples
which
contamination.
along
anomalies
Soil samples
PCB
levels
Pesticides
were not
was PCB-1260,
exceed
railroad
that may be associated
within
1,000
that
However,
pg/kg.
within
was detected
revealed
with
72 @kg
The
from monitoring
PCB contamination.
ES-15
waste handling
of PCB-1260.
SB24,
most
elevated
6GWll
SB24.
photographs
and disposal.
Monitoring
did not exhibit
well borehole
at all
only at soil borings
spur where historical
10 feet of soil boring
collected
which
locations
was detected in the surface soil at soil boring
the former
at this location
is located
that
soil samples collected
at 12 out of 40 sampling
from 17 to 42,000 pg/kg.
42,000 pg/kg of PCB-1260,
significant
indicate
Lot 203 and OU No. 21, indicating
were detected
did the PCB
SB24 is located
Only at soil
disposal.
levels below 500 pg/kg.
(throughout
on Lot 203
in the environment.
in concentration
and SB38
concentration,
revealed
immobile
biphenyls
pesticide
samples
The most frequently
12 locations
6GWl1,
the “DDT”
of the pesticide
and low levels present
control practices rather than pesticide
at SB18 within
in any groundwater
pesticides
SB24,
distribution
may have been disposed of in that area of Lot 203. Subsurface
pesticides
present
The widespread
these lots, the majority
well
organic
did not exhibit
Subsurface
soil samples collected
The most elevated
29,000 pg/kg.
concentration
of PCB-1260
Soil samples collected from monitoring
Additionally,
any PCB constituents;
Soil samples collected
groundwater
from the northeast
and one subsurface
sampling
locations
The majority
PAHs
of semivolatile
were primarily
levels
detected
exhibited
This
soil boring SB38 did not exhibit
boring
SB22 and approximately
exhibited
elevated
(SVOCs) detected
approximately
location
SB38, exhibited
16,000
also exhibited
SB41.
Approximately
concentration
Lot 203
Subsurface
contaminant
total
levels
PAHs
were
of PCB-1254
soil samples
collected
from
36,000 pg/kg total PAHs were detected
at SB41.
spur. In addition,
Soil boring
(29,000 pg/kg) in the subsurface
portion
SVOCs including
of approximately
pg/kg
elevated
PAHs were detected
levels of PCB-1260
at a concentration
throughout
as opposed to only one or two
of Lot 203 (near well 6GW15)
and soil boring
These
SVOCs
ES-16
were detected
in
SB39, which is located along
acenaphthene
16,000 pg/kg (total SVOC).
from this boring did not reveal any organic contamination.
SB41 is
results, it appears that
and naphthalene
the PAH constituent
pg/kg.
SB22
at Lot 203.
l,Pdichlorobenzene,
of 9,500
at
SB22 also
soil. Soil boring
spur. Based on the analytical
levels at surface soil samples collected from soil boring
the former railroad
The
at Lot 203 were PAHs.
locations
soil boring
these areas may be associated with waste disposal activities
elevated
Only 4 surface soil
in the subsurface soil at Lot 203 were detected only at soil
located just south of the former railroad
The more mobile
to be an area
PAH contamination.
11,000 total
is located in the north central
this well did not
(19J pg/kg to 53 pgkg).
several PAH constituents
location
levels of PAH constituents
SB22 and soil boring
did not exhibit
soil borings SB3, SB6, SBlO, and SB13.
(2,100 pg/kg) in surface soil as discussed previously.
Elevated
from
levels of PCBs.
at nine surface soil sampling
(at this location,
soil).
6GW15S
collected
PCB-1260
Only one of these locations,
in surface
well borehole
elevated
compounds
stations exhibited
above 1,000 pg/kg
portion of Lot 203 near monitoring
samples
PCBs included
organic
detected
constituents).
any organic
corner of Lot 203, which was reported
soil sample
which exhibited
(i.e., these sampling
PAH
SB22 at a level of
however, low levels of TCE (1.9J pg/l) were present in this well.
where PCBs were disposed of, did not exhibit
samples
PCBs in only three samples.
was detected at soil boring
This boring is located in the north central
PCB contamination.
exhibit
Lot 203 exhibited
The surface soil sample collected from this boring did not exhibit
contamination.
well 6GW15S.
throughout
was detected
were detected
Subsurface
at this
at a total
soil samples collected
Inorganic
constituents
in soil at Lot 203 were comparable
throughout
OU No. 2. However,
background
levels.
Groundwater
quality
portion
pg/l).
Dissolved
railroad
As mentioned
of Lot 203 exhibited
chromium
located in the southern
portion
chromium
(above the NCWQS
Well 6GW3,
Wooded
and Site 82
The wooded areas of Lot 203 can be described
Wooded
Area
Creek.
low levels
approximately
with a maximum
of PAHs
and 6GW3 is unknown
locations,
300 pg/kg).
chromium
based on the
Lot 201 to the
The area between
portion
of Lot 203
below.
The three sampling
area once served as a training
photographs.
of 240 pg/kg of 4,4’-DDT
with
constituent
in
at soil boring
a maximum
detection
of
was pyrene at 410 pg/kg) at soil
(26,000 &kg)
SB15.
Two other
low levels of PCB-1260
(less than
from soil boring SB18 also exhibited
low levels
SB18 and SB21, exhibited
to each other along Piney
with low levels of pesticides
soil [5 locations
levels of PCB-1260
soil borings
(835 pg/kg).
located adjacent
historical
in surface
detection
A subsurface soil sample collected
of PCB-1260
Creek.
begins in the northern
contaminated
2,000 pg/kg total PAHs (principal
SB161, and elevated
sampling
and well 6GW23,
East of Lot 201
surface soil (11 locations
boring
(103
near the former
These areas will be discussed separately
The wooded area east of Lot 201 is primarily
SB12),
chromium
as those areas which surround
Creek is Site 82. The ravine
disposal
in the north
levels of total
east, and south, and the area between Lot 203 and Wallace
bisects Site 82 and extends to Wallace
is located
above
levels (i.e., less than 1 pg/l) of PCE and
of 50 pg/l> detected in wells 6GW15S
Lot 203 and Wallace
from previous
located
The source of the elevated
levels in soil analyses.
north,
Well 6GWl1,
detected
were detected
located near the ravine,
of Lot 203, exhibited
(201 pgl).
the Ravine,
which
levels
low levels of TCE (1.9J pg/I) and total
absence of elevated chromium
Areas,
impacted
above, well 6GW15S,
levels were not detected.
spur, was not contaminated.
TCE, and total
constituents
at Lot 203 has not been significantly
and storage practices.
central
most of the inorganic
to inorganic
locations
at soil boring
where PCB-1260
Green Road.
According
was detected are all
to the EPIC
report,
this
area as noted by the presence of tents and roadways in one of the
There is no known or documented
this section of OU No. 2.
ES-17
waste storage or disposal
areas in
Three other locations
in the woods east of Lot 201 exhibited
soils (no PCBs were detected
PCB-1260
in surface soil samples
PCB contamination
from these locations).
in subsurface
Low levels
of
(465 pg/kg to 100 pg/kg) were detected in subsurface soil samples collected from soil
borings SBl, SB17, and SB5. Soil boring SB17 is located approximately
Soil borings SBl and SB5 are located over a thousand
200 feet west of SB18.
feet north of the area where PCBs were
detected in surface soil near Piney Green Road.
Inorganic
levels in soil are comparable
to other portions
of OU No. 2. No elevated
levels were
detected at this section of OU No. 2.
Four monitoring
wells are located in this section of OU No. 2 (wells 6GW6, 6GW14,6GW17,
and 6GW18).
Groundwater
been impacted
by either
constituents
Wooded
quality
organic
in the wooded area east of Lot 201 does not appear to have
or inorganic
above Federal or State standards
Area North
contamination.
No organic
or inorganic
were detected in these four wells.
of Lot 201
The wooded area north of Lot 201 is bordered to the south by Lot 201, to the north by Lot 203,
to the east by Piney Green Road, and to the west by the railroad
conducted
in this area, as well as test pit excavations,
surface, buried
canisters
ordnance
possibly
have revealed
(only casings and not unexploded
containing
liquid
wastes, and debris
tracks.
ordnance),
Site reconnaissances
empty
drums
numerous
(e.g., communication
on the
5-gallon
wire, bivouac
wastes, etc.).
Low levels of pesticides
(2.W p&g
samples collected during
of 4,4’-DDE
and 4,4’-DDE
contaminant
from this area revealed
With the exception
of the one occurrence
level exceeded 100 pgkg.
Subsurface
low levels (i.e., less than 10 pgkg)
of 4,4’-DDT
at two soil borings (SB4 and SB12).
to the low levels of pesticides
(1.0 J pg/kg) and toluene
PCB-1260
of test borings.
at soil boring SBl, no pesticide
soil samples collected
In addition
the drilling
to 500 pg/kg) were detected in eight of the ten surface soil
(1.0 J pgkg)
in a few subsurface soil samples, low levels of benzene
were detected at soil boring SBlO.
was detected at low levels (800 pg/kg) in surface soil at boring
samples collected from this area did not exhibit
SBl.
Subsurface
soil
PCB contamination.
I-
ES-18
Low levels of PAHs
benzyl phthalate
boring
SBl.
[approximately
concentrations
occurrences
the most contamination
in the wooded area north of Lot 201. This
levels
that
to other portions
were an order
quality
area (wells
in this portion
6GW16
Chlorobenzene
of magnitude
(maximum
numerous
approximately
B-gallon
canisters
chloroform
of 60 yg/l),
phenol
liquids.
of well 6GW16,
Creek and separates
General
either
contamination.
(1.0 pg/l),
Well
of 20 pg/l),
and 2-chlorophenol
near a test pit which
6GW25,
which
levels of phenol
is located
(2.0 J pg/l),
(1.6 pg/l).
of Lot 201
Lot 201 from Site 9. Various
debris including
were noted throughout
of organic
(maximum
exhibited
The wooded area to the south of Lot 201 encompasses
soil boring
than
Two of the six wells in
This well was installed
containing
(110 pg/l), and chloroform
Area to the South
low levels
pg/l),
in well 6GW16.
1,000 feet upgradient
chlorobenxene
exhibited
of 8,500
(maximum
(5.0 J pg/l) were detected
Pesticides
higher
of OU No. 2 has been impacted.
and 6GW25)
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
woods.
of OU No. 2. There were no
levels of other areas (e.g., Lot 201, Lot 203, etc.).
Groundwater
Wooded
was butyl
section of the woods near Lot 203.
in soil were comparable
of inorganic
background
revealed
constituent
PAHs were not detected in any subsurface samples from this area.
boring is located in the northwest
this
(principal
at 3905 pg/kg)] were detected in only one surface soil sample collected at soil
Soil boring SBl exhibited
Inorganic
1,700 pg/kg total PAH
empty
55-gallon
the area on both sides of Bear Head
dirt roads are present throughout
drums,
construction
these
debris, and garbage
this area.
were detected in all surface soil samples collected from this area. Only one location,
SB8, exhibited
and 4,4’-DDD
(12,000 pg/kg).
below 200 pg/kg.
Soil boring
south of Bear Head Creek,
borings SBl(5.0
elevated
levels of 4,4’-DDE
(4,200 pg/kg),
4,4’-DDT
The other surface soil samples exhibited
SB8 is located near Piney
The pesticide
4,4’-DDE
pg/kg) and SB6 (3.95 pgkg).
ES-19
(6,400 ugkg),
pesticides
Green Road approximately
was detected
in subsurface
levels well
100 feet
soil at soil
The only other contamination
240 pg/kg total PAH)
detected
in surface soils were low levels of PAHs
in three samples
(soil borings
SBll,
SB5, and SB8).
(less than
No PAHs
were
detected in subsurface soils.
Inorganic
compounds
were detected in soil at levels that were comparable
to other portions
of
OU No. 2.
Groundwater
impacted
quality
by either
constructed
in the wooded area south of Lot 201 does not appear
organic or inorganic
to monitor
groundwater
contamination.
quality
to have been
Five shallow monitoring
in this area.
No organics
wells were
or inorganics
were
detected above Federal or State standards.
Site 82
Site 82 encompasses
Holcomb
the area south of Wallace
Boulevard.
The ravine
Creek, west of Piney Green Road, and east of
area bisects this portion
of OU No. 2. The ravine
will be
discussed separately.
Low levels of pesticides
this area.
With
were detected in the majority
the exception
pg/kg total pesticides)
of surface soil samples
of surface soil samples
and soil boring
below 100 pg/kg for total pesticide
from soil boring
SB7 (350 pg/kg total pesticides),
concentrations.
area revealed low levels of pesticides
collected
(53 p&g
Subsurface
maximum)
collected
pesticide
SBl
from
(1,150
levels were
soil samples collected from this
in only four samples.
PAHs were detected in only three surface soil samples from this area of OU No. 2. Surface soil
samples collected from soil borings SBl (710 pg/kg total PAH),
and SB7 (380 &kg
samples
total
PAH)
revealed
collected from this area revealed
SB7 (587 pg/kg
subsurface,
total
PAH).
Soil boring
is located near the bottom
low to moderate
SB16 (2,420 pg/kg total PAH),
levels of PAHs.
Subsurface
soil
PAHs in only one sample collected from soil boring
SB7, which exhibited
section of the ravine
area may be due to surface runoff from the ravine.
area.
The ravine
PAHs
at the surface
The contamination
exhibited
elevated
and
in this
levels of
PAHs throughout.
PCB-1260
collected
was detected in only one sample in this portion
from boring
SB17 revealed
a concentration
of OU No. 2. The surface soil sample
of only 3.9 pg/kg.
This boring is located
just north of Lot 203 near Piney Green Road. The section of Lot 203 to the souii
ES-20
of soil boring
SB17 is reportedly
significant
where PCBs were disposed of. As discussed previously
levels of PCBs were detected in this portion
Elevated
levels of volatile
organic
collected
from soil borings
SB12 and SB6.
samples
were approximately
78,000 pg/kg
Subsurface
VOC).
compounds
soil was contaminated
Both of these borings
Inorganic
in surface soil samples
VOC concentrations
in these surface soil
at SB6 and approximately
8,400 pgkg
VOCs at SB12 (approximately
17,000
are located approximately
The borings are approximately
disposed of within
with
of Lot 203.
(VOCs) were detected
Total
in Section 4.32, no
300 feet apart.
at SB12.
pg/kg
300 feet west of Piney
total
Green Road.
Based on these results, solvents may have been
this portion of OU No. 2.
levels in soil did not appear
to be significantly
higher
than
other
portions
with
volatile
of
OU No. 2.
Surficial
groundwater
contamination,
quality
primarily
Surficial
groundwater
6GW28S,
6GW32,
TCE,
PCE,
and 6GW34.
(2,200 p&/l of total
6GW34
(410 pg/l of total
1,2dichIoroethene,
82MW1,
82MW2,
levels of VOCs were detected
from wells 6GWlS
of well 6GW32,
exhibited
source of VOC contamination
in Wallace
and 82MW2,
and 6GW15
in wells
Well
elevated
Creek
concentrations
also exhibited
Creek
is most
likely
is located in
of volatiles.
Several
VOCs indicating
groundwater
(0.55 pg/l) and vinyl
of
wells, which were
which are located west and northeast
low levels of l,l,l-trichloroethane
upgradient
(well 6GW15S
two of the three temporary
from Wallace
only exhibited
GGWlS,
Lower levels of VOCs were detected
section of Lot 203). Additionally,
wells 82MWl
in wells
9,600 pg/l of PCE, and 610 pg/l of TCE).
surface water samples, collected
Monitoring
and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane.
100 feet west of soil borings SB6 and SB12, which exhibited
in samples collected
located downgradient
organic
74 pg/l of PCE, and 1,500 pg/l of TCE) and
1,2-dichloroethene,
levels of VOCs in soil samples.
the northeast
impacted
was evidenced
The most significant
6GW34 is located approximately
well 6GW34
adversely
1,2-dichloroethene,
contamination
6GW32
elevated
has been
that the
discharge.
of well 6GW32,
chloride
(1.6 pg/l),
respectively.
Deep groundwater
quality
GGWlD,
6GW28D,
GGWlDA,
is severely impacted
6GW27D,
with VOC contamination.
and 6GW37D
58,000 pg/I), PCE (60 to 58,000 pg/l), and total
highest levels were detected in well 6GWlD.
ES-21
exhibited
1,2-dichloroethane
elevated
Monitoring
wells
levels of TCE (60 to
(120 to 2,600 pg/B.
The
Surficial
exhibit
groundwater
contamination
levels that
groundwater.
at GGWlS,
would correlate
Supply
well
which is located next to GGWlD,
with the significant
HP-651,
which
VOC contamination
is located
approximately
500 feet east of well GGWlD,
approximately
199 feet deep (screened from varying
just
also exhibited
did not
in the deep
east of Piney
Green
VOC contamination.
Road
This well is
depths between 125 and 194 feet) and is
no longer in operation.
The horizontal
and vertical
The horizontal
extent
extent
of off-site
of deep groundwater
contamination
however, has not been fully defined.
extends below 230 feet.
impede the vertical
Ravine
west of Site
Moreover,
depth of 230 feet at only one location.
It is unknown
82 (beyond
well 6GW3’7D1,
extent has been evaluated
at this time
as approximately
whether
to a
contamination
230 feet deep which may
Area
fenceline
the banks are steep and covered with debris
drums and other smaller
containers.
of Lot 203. In the upper portion
including
empty
Some of these containers
and were dated back to the 1950s. Going northward
gradually
and partially
indicated
of the ravine,
full
55gallon
that they contained
towards Wallace
Creek, the ravine
becomes less steep.
Samples
collected
collected
from the middle
groundwater
samples
has been evaluated.
of contamination.
The ravine area begins at the northern
“DDT”
the vertical
A clay layer is present
migration
contamination
from the banks
quality
of the ravine
was not evaluated
The ravine
discharges
No. 2. Subsurface
is intermittent
samples.
area, however, several
surface water
rain showers.
collected from the ravine exhibited
(14 to 19 pgkg),
of the other pesticide
soil samples
in nature.
Specific
the dryer seasons,
of surface soil samples
to many
in the ravine
as sediment
Samples
into the ravine (along with surface runoff?. During
(7.5 to 220 pg/kg), 4,4’-DDD
comparable
were identified
as soil samples.
the wet season,
the ravine only receives runoff during
The majority
were identified
During
were collected.
groundwater
of the ravine
collected
and 4,4’-DDT
low levels of 4,4-DDE
(25 to 510 pg/kg).
levels in surface soil throughout
from the ravine
surface soil.
ES-22
exhibited
These levels are
Operable
Unit
lower levels than in the
PCB-1260
SBlO).
PAHs
was detected in one surface soil sample at a concentration
None of the subsurface soil samples exhibited
were detected
at elevated
SB14 (9,301 pg/kg), and SB6 (6,020 pgkg).
amount
PCB contamination.
levels in several surface soil samples.
PAHs were detected in surface soil samples
substantial
of 180 pg/kg (soil boring
collected
from soil borings
SBll
levels of
(15,931 pg/kg),
These soil borings are located in an area where a
of debris has been disposed of into the ravine.
wastes disposed of into the ravine
Elevated
have impacted
soil quality.
Based on these results,
PAHs were also detected in two
subsurface soil samples collected from soil boring SB13 (271 pg/kg) and SB14 (344 pgikg).
boring
SB13 also exhibited
naphthalene
(9,600
elevated
yg/kg),
4-methyl-2-pentanone
levels of the semi-volatiles
‘2-methylnaphthalene
(2,000J pg/kg)
(11,000
and total xylenes
SB14 are also located in the southern
portion
isophorone
Soil
(7,700 yg/kg),
pg/kgl,
and VOCs
including
(950 pg/kg).
Soil borings
SB13 and
of the ravine
(near Lot 203) where debris is
present along the banks of the ravine.
Inorganic
comparable
Sediment
constituents
exhibited
samples
were collected
sample could be collected.
sediment
(23 to 120 yg/kg),
levels detected
the ravine
station
at eight
As mentioned
the proposed eight sampling
sampling
levels in both surface and subsurface
soil and were
to other portions of OU No. 2.
surface water samples.
subsurface
similar
previously,
stations
exhibited
and 4,4’-DDT
Six of the eight
of sampling
stations RVl,
sediment
sampling
station
low levels of 4,4’-DDD
RV2 (12,573 pg/kg total PAHs),
collected from sampling
the ravine
with
Two of
no surface water
RV8, all of the surface and
(4.1 to 45 ug/kg>,
These levels are comparable
levels
along
in nature.
water and therefore,
OU No. 2. Elevated
where debris is present.
from
the ravine is intermittent
(14 to 210 pgkg).
in soil throughout
stations
did not contain
With the exception
samples
sampling
of PAHs
4,4’-DDE
to pesticide
were detected
which is located in the southern
Lower levels of PAHs were detected
in sediment
portion
at
of
samples
RV3, and RV8.
stations
exhibited
low levels of PCBs.
PCB-1260
detected in the range of 19 pg/kg to 360 pg/kg.
None of the surface water samples collected fiom the ravine exhibited
ES-23
organic contamination.
was
Site 9
Surface and subsurface
samples collected
and SVOCs.
levels were comparable
Inorganic
from Site 9 revealed
not appear to be present due to fire-fighting
Pesticides
(4,4’-DDE
subsurface
soil samples.
which exhibited
and 4,4’-DDT)
pesticide
training
The most contaminated
(surface and subsurface soil) exhibited
Overall,
to other portions
VOCs,
of OU No. 2 and therefore
do
at Site 9.
were detected
650 pg/kg of 4,4’-DDE
low levels of pesticides,
in five surface
soil samples
sample was collected
and 570 &kg
of 4,4’-DDT.
levels of pesticides
and eight
from soil boring
The remaining
SBl,
samples
in the range of 4 pg/kg to 62 pg/kg.
levels in surface and subsurface soils were comparable
to other areas of OU
No. 2.
Soil boring SBl was the only location
Pyrene
and benzo(b)fluoranthene
Elevated
levels of PAHs
fluoranthene
collected
were detected
[8,013 pg/kg
from monitoring
total PAHs
well borehole
800 feet southeast
were detected in surface soil.
at 59 pg/kg
(principal
at 1,800 and 1,700 pg/kg, respectively)]
approximately
quality.
where PAH constituents
and 46 pg/kg,
constituents
9GW4.
in this boring
9GW4 is good (no organic constituents
This
boring/monitoring
is unknown.
well
upgradient
Groundwater
Toluene
training
quality
activities.
at Site 9 does not appear to be significantly
Shallow
monitoring
xylenes (0.9 pg/l) and 2-chloroethylvinyl
approximately
chromium
wells 9GW1,
above Federal
9GW2, and 9GW3.
quality
in well
100 feet north of the
separator).
impacted
by the fire-fighting
wells 9GW6 and 9GW8 exhibited
ether (1 l&l),
respectively.
100 feet to the west and east of the training
were detected
groundwater
was detected at a level of 2 pg/kg in a surface soil sample
collected from soil boring SB35 (SB35 is located adjacent to the oil/water
Groundwater
is located
(1 pg/kg) were present in the surface
soil sample collected from soil boring SB3, which is located approximately
storage tanks.
and
were detected).
Low levels of PCE (21 pg/kg) and l,l,l-trichloroethane
aboveground
were pyrene
were detected in a subsurface soil sample
of Site 9 for purposes of monitoring
The source of the PAHs
respectively.
lead and chromium
Federal or State standard.
ES-24
These wells are located
pit, respectively.
and State drinking
Dissolved
low levels of total
water standards
Total
lead and
in monitoring
were not detected
above any
Wallace
Creek
Wallace
Creek exhibited
source of contamination
stations
Sampling
elevated levels of VOCs at nine of the eleven sampling
is believed to be groundwater
discharge
WC7, WCS, and WC9 exhibited
WC7 exhibited
Surface Water
portion
a TCE concentration
Standard
of Wallace
of 92.4 pg/I.
downstream
past the Holcomb
contamination.
Up gradient
of l,Z-dichloroethene
(98pg/l)
Boulevard
sample stations
The sample
collected
exceeds the North
at
Carolina
are located just above that
into Wallace
Station
(WCl,
(6 pgfll.
stations
discharges
bridge.
from Site 82.
which
These sampling
Creek where the ravine
The
TCE (16 to 98 pg/l), 1,2-dichloroethene
(9 pg/l to 85 pg/l>, PCE (1 pg/l to 4 pg/l>, and vinyl chloride
Station
stations.
Creek (i.e., Station
WC7 exhibited
the highest
WC2, and WC3) only exhibited
(4J pg/l) at station WC4, which is approximately
WC71
level of
low levels
100 feet upstream
from
the Piney Green Road bridge.
Inorganic
constituents
above State or Federal
highest
including
cadmium,
standards
levels of inorganics.
copper, mercury,
for surface water.
Station
the site. The presence of inorganic
nickel,
Stations
WC3 and WC5 exhibited
WC3 is located approximately
constituents
in Wallace
and zinc were detected
one-half
the
mile upstream
Creek may not be associated
of
with
surface water runoff from the ravine.
Pesticides
Wallace
were detected
Creek.
in approximately
The concentrations
one-half
exceeded the EPA Region
values (SQSV, for both the lower 10 percentile
highest
levels
of pesticides
were detected
downstream
from the area where the ravine
also present,
however, in upstream
that the tides may transport
areas of Wallace
historical
pest control spraying
PCB-1260
sample
contaminants
influenced
Creek.
levels detected
at stations
discharges
station
and median
quality
percentile
WC7 and WC8,
into Wallace
Creek.
from the point
screening
The
are located
Pesticides
were
It should be noted
of entry
is likely
Tom
(ER-M).
which
WC1 above the ER-L.
upstream
collected
into
tidally
a combination
of
along with runoff from the ravine.
WC3. The concentrations
at stations
(ER-Ll
samples
IV sediment
The source of pesticides
was detected at all of the sampling
WC1 through
of the sediment
stations
with the exception
of upstream
stations
ranged from 31 pg/kg to 2,100 pg/kg with the highest
WC6, WC7, and WC8.
These stations
Site 82. The source of the PCBs may be due to runoff from the ravine.
ES-25
are located
However,
adjacent
to
soil samples
collected
approximately
300 feet south of Wallace
Creek at Site 82 did not exhibit
PCB
contamination.
PAH constituents
were detected at several sampling
located approximately
present
one-mile
in samples
collected
upstream
of the site. Elevated
from stations
(2,720 pg/kg), and WC9 (1,149 pg/kg).
stations including
WC5 (1,600
These stations
station
WCl,
which is
total PAH concentrations
pg/kg),
WC6
(1,220
are located adjacent
were
pgkg),
WC8
and downstream
of
Site 82.
Inorganic
Station
constituents
in sediment
that exceeded SQSVs include
WC3, which is located approximately
copper, lead, silver, and zinc.
one-half mile upstream
of the site, exhibited
the
most elevated levels of these constituents.
Tissue
analysis
of fish and crab specimens
presence of pesticides,
quality
within
collected
from
Wallace
TCE, and PCB that may be attributable
Wallace
Creek.
4,4’-DDE
exhibited
in concentration
(15 pg/kg to 180 pg/kg) and 4,4’-DDD
Creek.
(8.1 pg/kg
to
PCBs were detected in
Trichloroethene
was detected
in two samples
at a
of 5.0 pg/kg.
Bear Head
Creek
Surface water samples
collected
lead, mercury,
nickel,
both upstream
and downstream
Low levels of pesticides
sediment
the
from 51 pg/kg to 1000 pg/kg. Five of the six samples
the presence of PCB-1260.
concentration
indicated
to surface water and sediment
8.8 pg/kg) were detected in all six tissue samples from Wallace
tissue samples ranging
Creek
samples
BH6 exhibited
from Bear Head Creek
and silver
above surface water quality
of the Operable
(maximum
collected
value
throughout
the highest levels,
exhibited
Station
BH7
is located
presence of VOCs in sediment
standpoint
contamination.
that
neither
In addition,
collected
Sample
were detected
stations
BH4,
in
BH5, and
are located adjacent to Site 6.
about one-half
mile
samples collected from station
downstream
at Bear Head Creek is unusual
soil or groundwater
Samples
pesticides)
VOCs (TCE, PCE, and total xylenes) were detected in sediment
BH3 and BH7.
copper, iron,
these inorganics.
total
Bear Head Creek.
These stations
standards.
Unit exhibited
of 311 pg/kg
aluminum,
in that
surface water did not exhibit
of OU No. 2. The
and unexplainable
from the
area of OU No. 2 exhibited
VOC
VOC contamination;,-
ES-26
PCB (PCB-1260)
concentration
was detected
at sampling
BH3,
BH4, BH5,
and BH6 ranging
in
from 51 pg/kg to 370 pg/kg.
Lead was the only inorganic
constituent
ER-L EPA Region IV SQSV.
Elevated
BH7.
stations
These stations
are upstream
Site 6 did not exhibit
which was detected
at a level which exceeded the
levels of lead were detected at stations
and downstream
of the site. Sampling
BH3, BH6, and
stations
adjacent
to
elevated levels of lead.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of the various
environmental
investigations
conducted
at Operable
for each area of concern and media were developed and are presented
No. 2, conclusions
Unit
below.
Site 6, Lot 201
l
The northeast
corner of Lot 201 (i.e., grid area A) at the former pesticide
is contaminated
with former
limited
Former
waste storage/handling
waste storage/handling
quality
l
of soil contamination
(SB16 and SB17) exhibited
is
elevated
of pesticides
were detected
Reported
of PCB transformers
storage
to soil or groundwater,
impacted
Unit No. 2.
throughout
not associated
Unit.
contaminant
that may be associated
at Lot 201 have not adversely
of Operable
210-acre Operable
impacts
The extent
locations
activities
in this portion
control practices and is probably
a
activities.
The presence of low levels of pesticides
Low levels
and volatiles
levels.
groundwater
l
levels of pesticides
in area since only two sampling
contaminant
l
with elevated
storage area
Lot 201 is indicative
of former pest
with the former storage of pesticides.
at similar
concentrations
throughout
at Lot 201 has not resulted
based on the limited
number
the
in significant
of occurrences
and low
levels,
Low levels of TCE are present
in groundwater
but at concentrations
below
the
NCWQS.
l ”
ES-27
Overall,
l
the current
health
risk to base personnel
working
at Lot 201 is within
the
target range of 1x10-4 and 1x10-s.
Site 6, Lot 203
l
Pesticide
levels detected
Pesticide
levels at Lot 203 are comparable
The southeast
to other portions
corner of Lot 203 did not reveal
pesticides were reported
l
in soil at Lot 203 are not indicative
elevated
of pesticide
of Operable
pesticide
railroad
disposal activities.
of surface and subsurface
Historical
A limited
railroad
Unit
No. 2.
levels given
that
to be disposed of in this area.
The area of Lot 203 near the former
near the former
disposal.
number
spur have revealed
aerial photographs
indicate
spur may be associated
elevated
significant
with previous
soil samples collected
levels of PCB-1260
activity
(i.e., surficial
and PAHs.
anomalies)
in
this area of Lot 203.
a
Disposal
activities
may have occurred in the north
wells 6GW15S/D)
samples.
l
In addition
The reported
elevated
Marine
l
levels of PCBs.
portion
levels of PCBs were detected
to PCBs, elevated
PCB disposal
in subsurface
soil
levels of PAHs were also detected in this area.
area in the northeast
The reported
of Lot 203 (near
corner of Lot 203 did not reveal
area may have been inaccurately
identified
in
Corps memorandums.
Military
training
debris including
containers,
probably
at Lot 203 resulted
communication
within
Lot 203.
in a substantial
wire, shell casings,
Trenches
hazardous
battery
identified
in historical
of buried
small
5-gallon
in any of the test
photographs
were
wastes and not for purposes
wastes.
drums on the surface of Lot 203 present a potential
and the environment.
amount
packs,
drums were uncovered
excavated as a means to dispose of military-type
of disposing
Numerous
operations
and bivouac wastes. No 55gallon
pit excavations
l
where elevated
central
Samples
drum contents are characteristically
collected
from these drums indicate
hazardous.
leaking.
ES-28
impact
to human
health
that some of the
None of the drums were noted to be
l
Groundwater
disposal
quality
at Lot 203 has not been significantly
and storage practices.
Trace levels of TCE were detected
which is located in the north central
have occurred.
concentrations
of TCE
in well 6GW15,
may
in well 6GW23
at
Well 6GW23 is located in the south central portion
in well 6GW23
as well as other nearby
a source. The source of contamination
Total chromium
by former
of Lot 203 where disposal activities
and PCE were detected
from this borehole
which has since migrated
l
portion
The source of VOC contamination
collected
indicated
levels
below the NCWQS.
of Lot 203.
samples
Trace
impacted
is unknown.
Soil
soil borings
did not
may have been from a previous
spill,
from the soil to groundwater.
levels detected in wells 6GW3 and 6GW15S
were above the NCWQS
of 50 pg/l.
l
Currently,
Lot 203 is inactive
and access is restricted.
operations,
the potential
health risk (i.e., incremental
be within
Site 6 - Wooded
l
PCBs were detected
training
area.
Disposal
activities
pesticides
in surface and subsurface
risk) would
activities
soil near Piney
may have occurred in the wooded area between Lot 201 and 203.
(soil boring
SBl)
exhibited
moderate
levels
in surface soil. The extent of this contamination
during
area between Lot 201 and Lot 203.
Numerous
and battery
All of the containers
packs were encountered.
&gallon
could not be identified;
were observed
team.
by the sampling
that the material
levels of lead. Chloroform
of PCBs,
is limited
A sample
containers,
in the wooded
bivouac
wastes,
however, solvent-like
material
hazardous
odors
near
the
due to elevated
was also detected, but was below TCLP regulatory
ES-29
and
were rusted and destroyed
of the sludge
is characteristically
PAHs,
in area.
the test pit investigation
to the point where their contents
revealed
Green Road east of
may have occurred in this area, which once served as a
A former disposal area was identified
containers
carcinogenic
Areas
One location
l
lot resumed
the target range of 1x10-4 to 1x10-e.
Lot 201. Disposal
l
human
If the storage
levels.
Groundwater
l
disposal
quality
area) has been impacted
VOCs (chloroform,
6GW25.
human
exposure to soil within
the acceptable
hunters
phenol)
of chloroform
would not result in significant
within
by former
chlorobenzene,
The concentration
Potential
l
in the wooded area south of Lot 203 (near the above-mentioned
and military
health
risk range
disposal
practices.
were encountered
Elevated
in wells
levels
of
6GW16
and
Unit
No. 2
detected exceeds the NCWQS.
the wooded portions
risks.
Incremental
of Operable
carcinogenic
of 1x10-4 and 1x10-s.
risk values are
The area is frequented
by
personnel.
Site 82
The wooded area north of Lot 203 (Site 82) exhibited
l
in soil at two locations
near the eastern portion
source of VOC contamination
a
A large quantity
north
This area is a potential
in groundwater.
Samples
collected of the waste material
used for heating.
Other
Shallow
and deep groundwater
contaminants
groundwater
quality
groundwater
quality.
The horizontal
which
exceed both
the Federal
discharges
into Wallace
groundwater
just north
Creek.
as evidenced
by elevated
and
at Site 82.
MCLs
elevated
and NCWQS.
more contaminated
contamination
have migrated
portion
levels of
Deep
than shallow
is defined.
of Lot 203 (in the southern
Contaminants
6GWlS
could not be identified.
north of Lot 203 (Site 82) exhibited
extent of shallow
originates
wells
the waste as No. 6 fuel oil,
contamination
was found to be significantly
apparently
of the aquifer
analyzed
drums uncovered
This area may also be a source of groundwater
l
of the site.
levels
of drums and debris were observed on the surface and subsurface just
which is typically
VOC
VOC contaminant
of Lot 203 in the wooded area (Site 82) near monitoring
6GWlD.
l
elevated
The plume
of Site 82) and
into the deeper portion
VOC levels in deep groundwater
monitoring
wells.
l
The horizontal
and vertical
extent
of the deep groundwater
evaluated.
The horizontal
extent of offsite contamination
6GW3’7D),
however, has not been fully defined.
ES-30
Moreover,
contamination
has been
west of Site 82 (beyond well
the verticatixtent
has been
evaluated
to a depth of 230 feet. It is unknown
extends
below 230 feet.
approximately
As mentioned
the deep groundwater
the baseline
database
study on the deep aquifer,
remedial
a clay
the vertical
migration
alternatives.
are required
to support
wells.
database
design
is present
is also adequate
risk assessment,
a feasibility
to select feasible
data points west of Holcomb
of an alternative
In addition,
further
assess the presence or absence of contamination
which
studies
at
of contamination.
For purposes of performing
additional
the
layer
health and ecological
is adequate.
However,
containment/extraction
human
the current
whether contamination
previously,
230 feet which may impede
For purposes of conducting
at this time
Boulevard
may
are required
employ
to better
on top and below the clay formation.
Ravine
l
None of the TCL organics
criteria
values.
lead, silver,
detected
Surface water
concentrations
or were infrequent
practices.
“DDT”
Wallace
Creek).
copper, iron,
in some of the samples.
occurred in upstream
and/or downstream
of the ravine (i.e., near Lot 203) is most likely
of the ravine
%-gallon
markings
cadmium,
The
samples
levels of PAHs in soil and low levels of PCBs in sediment
This portion
partially-filled
WQSV
water quality
in occurrence.
The presence of elevated
the upper portion
exceeded applicable
of aluminum,
and zinc exceed the WQS and/or
exceedance of those TAL inorganics
l
in the ravine
drums
is filled
debris,
and other containers.
were found in the middle
However,
with
no elevated
due to former disposal
including
In addition,
section of the ravine
levels of pesticides
in
empty
canisters
and
with
(between Lot 203 and
were detected in the ravine
sediments.
a
Soil contamination
surface runoff.
detected
Wallace
in the ravine
Creek sediments
has likely
revealed
migrated
to Wallace
the same constituents
Creek via
detected in
ravine soils and sediments.
l
Because of the amount
that human
exposure
of debris and difficulty
would occur.
wooded areas and ravine
within
Incremental
area have indicated
the target range of 1x10-4 and 1x10-s.
ES-31
in accessing the ravine,
carcinogenic
that potential
it is unlikely
risk estimates
human
health
for the
risks are
Site 9
l
Ongoing
fire training
exercises at Site 9 have not significantly
quality.
Surface soil revealed TPH contamination
Low levels of pesticides
l
present
impacted
groundwater
in a few areas.
at Site 9 are likely
the result
of former
pest control
practices and not associated with waste disposal.
Total
l
lead
and chromium
concentrations
Potential
l
Wallace
were
detected
health
carcinogenic
risks to military
personne1 training
and portions
203) have impacted
quality.
Pesticides
detected
screening
values.
ravine
and/or
sediment
Creek.
the
in sediment
Levels
samples
pest control
A surface water sample
which exceeded the North
EPA
Region
practices.
IV sediment
runoff from the
stations that were located just downstream
of
levels above the sediment
areas of Wallace
are
of
exhibited
influenced
and pesticides
levels
into Wallace
contaminants
PCBs,
may be due to either
spraying
discharges
the tides may transport
Creek is due to
were also detected in the ravine.
have exceeded
where the ravine
pesticide
of PAHs,
The source of contamination
historical
in Wallace
of Site 82 (the wooded area north of Lot
These contaminants
pesticides were detected in two sampling
a
at Site 9 are within
discharge.
Surface runoff from the ravine
present in Wallace
l
at
Creek
shallow and possibly deep groundwater
l
9GW3
risk range of 1x10-4 and 1x10-e.
The presence of TCE, PCE, and other VOC contaminants
l
in well
which exceed both the Federal MCLs and NCWQS.
human
incremental
concentrations
Creek.
The highest
One upstream
screening values.
upstream
from the point
sampling
location
It should be noted that
of entry
into tida!ly
Creek.
collected
Carolina
from Station
WC7 exhibited
Surface Water Standard.
ES-32
a TCE concentration
Inorganic
l
levels for aluminum,
and zinc exceeded North
Region
Carolina
IV acute or chronic
sampling
locations
Quality
Quality
inorganic
constituents
statistics.
in Wallace
No anomalies
nickel,
(NCWQS)
Values
silver,
and/or EPA
(WQSVs).
Upstream
levels which exceeded these standards.
in Wallace
Creek
Standards
Screening
Unit No. 2 since no source of inorganic
The fish community
l
copper, iron, lead, mercury,
Water
Water
also exhibited
The presence of inorganic
Operable
cadmium,
Creek may not be associated
contamination
with
is apparent.
appears to be healthy,
based on population
were observed on any of the fish collected during
the aquatic
survey.
l
The fish population
PCBs, pesticides,
Ingestion
l
l
from Wallace
carcinogenic
Sediment
Creek
tissue concentrations
to Site 6 and the ravine
could
result
in human
health
of
area.
risks
risks) above the target point of 1x10-4.
quality
in Bear Head Creek may be impacted
wooded areas.
Low levels PAHs,
stations
border
which
Site 6.
pesticides,
however,
adjacent
soil and groundwater
sediment
are not likely
Inorganic
constituents
practices
at Sites 6 and 9. Upstream
did not exhibit
detected
in sediment
are not likely
that
Pesticides
in
sampling
locations
screening
the result
of disposal
also exhibited
inorganic
values.
at Bear Head Creek appears to be healthy,
lesions or other anomalies
zinc in tissue.
given
associated with disposal practices.
and observations.
The fish community
in sediment
is unknown
VOC contamination.
from the
in sampling
were also detected
the source of the VOC contamination
above EPA Region IV sediment
The fish community
via surface runoff
and PCBs were detected
VOC contaminants
samples;
statistics
l
Creek exhibited
Creek
constituents
l
in Wallace
and TCE, which may be attributable
of fish taken
(incremental
Bear Head
and diversity
None of the fish collected
that would represent
based on population
at Bear Head Creek exhibited
adverse conditions.
in Bear Head Creek had elevated
The presence of these contaminants
levels of pesticides,
PCBs, and
in fish tissue may be the result
of
‘..
ES-33
contaminated
sediment.
incremental
Ingestion
carcinogenic
risks above the 1x10-4 departure
None of the TCL organic
l
quality
criteria
of fish taken from Bear Head Creek could result in
values.
detected
Dissolved
point.
in Bear Head Creek exceeded applicable
oxygen concentrations
WQS and WQSV at some of the stations,
water
and pH values were below
but probably
were associated with natural
conditions.
Surface water concentrations
l
of aluminum,
silver exceeded the WQS and/or WQSV
these TAL
inorganics
infrequent
occurred
copper, iron, lead, mercury,
in some of the samples.
in upstream
and/or
nickel,
and
The exceedances
downstream
samples
of
or were
in occurrence.
RECOlWMENDATIONS
1.
Further
groundwater
groundwater
investigations
contamination
below the clay formation.
design of alternatives
2.
Operating
supply
contamination.
3.
are required
detected
west of Holcomb
employing
containment/extraction
wells in the vicinity
of deep
and on top of and
to support the remedial
wells.
of Lot 203 should
be monitored
for VOC
If elevated levels of VOCs are detected, the wells should be closed.
As a time critical
VOC contamination
Surficial
Boulevard,
These studies would be required
removal
action,
a fence should
area north of Lot 203 (i.e., Site 82), including
4.
to better define the extent
drums
was encountered
the ravine
around
to prevent
the wooded
access. Surficial
in this area.
at Lot 203 and in the wooded areas and ravine
over-packed, and properly
present a potential
be constructed
disposed of as non-time
source of groundwater
critical
contamination
removal
should be removed,
action.
The drums
and human/ecological
health
hazard.
5.
Additional
studies should
presence of contaminants
limited
database
due to site-related
be conducted
in Wallace
Creek to determine
such as PCBs and pesticides
is not sufficient
to conclude
whether
whether
the
in fish are due to the site.
The
bioaccumulation
is occurring
contamination.
l -
ES-34
6.
Based on the results
of the Human
Health
groundwater
contaminant
deep aquifers
under Site 82 is recommended
Risk Assessment
levels to standards,
remedial
and on a comparison
action
of the surficial
of
and
in order to restore the aquifers for future
use.
7.
Based on the soil data results, remedial
soil with elevated
potential
action is recommended
levels of VOCs, PCBs, PAHs,
sources of groundwater
contamination.
ES-35
and pesticides.
for “hot spot” areas of
These areas may be
1.0
INTRODUCTION
Marine
Corps Base (MCB)
Response,
Compensation,
Camp Lejeune
and Liability
became effective on October
States
Environmental
Department
United
Protection
Agency
Priorities
List (NPL)
41015, October 4,1989).
(USEPA)
Region
Carolina
(DON) then
entered
Camp Lejeune.
The primary
purpose of the FFA was to ensure
investigated
with
and appropriate
Act (RCRA)
corrective
into
DEHNR)
response/Resource
alternatives
were developed
and
a Federal
past and present activities
CERCLA
action
(NC
North
of the Navy
associated
Resources
the
The United
Department
impacts
and Natural
IV,
that
Health
that environmental
Recovery
National
4,1989 (54 Federal Register
(FFA) for MCB
thoroughly
Act (CERCLA)
Environmental
of Environment,
States
Agreement
was placed on the Comprehensive
the
Facilities
at the MCB
were
Conservation
and
and implemented
as
necessary to protect public health and the environment.
The Fiscal Year 1994 Site Management
identified
(RI/l!%)
in the FFA, identifies
activities.
proceeding
These
Plan for MCB Camp Lejeune,
27 sites requiring
27 sites have been divided
with RI/F’S activities.
(OU) No. 2, which is comprised
pollutants,
provides information
health RA. An ecological
Training
These
of the Hadnot
Point
the analytical
release of hazardous
sediment,
RA has been prepared
Green Road”.
substances,
data, and performing
tRA) and
action.
a human
health
Moreover,
Area.
and
and the human
under separate cover.
Site 82 is known as the ‘Piney
the “Fire
Green Road
sites are located in the north eastern section of MCB Camp Lejeune,
Industrial
Unit
and surface water)
the results of all field investigations
The sites are bordered
west, Piney Green Road to the east, Wallace
south.
at Operable
referred to as “Open Storage Lots 201 and 203”. Site 9 is entitled
Pit at Piney
VOC Site”.
to simplify
the nature and extent of the threat to public health
all media (soil, groundwater,
This RI report contains
Site 6 is commonly
units
The RI serves as the basis for the risk assessment
by sampling
at Sites 6, 9 and 82, evaluating
RA.
13 operable
in support of the FS and record of decision for final remedial
This was accomplished
ecological
into
Study
of Sites 6,9, and 82.
caused by the release or threatened
or contaminants.
document
Investigation/Feasibility
This report describes the RI conducted
The purpose of this RI is to fully determine
and the environment
Remedial
a primary
by Holcomb
Boulevard
north
on the
Creek to the north, and Sneads Ferry Road to the
Bear Head Creek separates Site 6 from Site 9. A location
l-l
map is shoti
on Figure
l-l
[note that all figures
are presented
in separate volumes
from this RI Report
(Volumes
I and
m.1
This RI Report is to be submitted
of the Technical
Engineering
Review
Command,
Operable
1.1
to the USEPA
Committee
Atlantic
Unit
Region
(TRC) for their
Division
review
and to members
by the DON, Naval
Facilities
(LANTDM.
Description
Operable
units
(OU) are formed
problems.
There are currently
as an incremental
23 Installation
Lejeune which have been grouped
step toward addressing
Restoration
into twelve operable
associated with a site or a group of sites. Figure
MCB Camp Lejeune.
IV, the NC DEHNR,
OU No. 2 includes
Program
individual
site
(IRP) sites on MCB Camp
units to simplify
the specific problems
1-2 shows the breakdown
of operable
units on
Sites 6,9, and 82. Because the three sites border each
other, they have been grouped into one operable unit.
OU No. 2 is located
approximately
two miles
east of the New River
State Route 24 on the main section of MCB Camp Lejeune.
Boulevard
and two miles
The unit is bordered
by Holcomb
on the west, Sneads Ferry Road on the south, Piney Green Road on the east, and by
Wallace
Creek on the north boundary.
Holcomb
Boulevard
bordering
Camp Lejeune
Railroad
operates rail lines parallel
OU No. 2. OU No. 2 covers an area of approximately
OU No. 2 consists of three sites:
during
to
210 acres.
Site 6, Site 9, and Site 82. Note that Site 82 was originally
referred to as “the wooded area north of Lot 203” in the Final RI/FS Work Plan.
renamed
south of
the RI investigation
because a previous
investigation
This area was
was conducted
at this
site which referred to the area as “Site 82.”
Site 9, the fire training
area, has two aboveground
where flammable
are burned
liquids
Site 6 is comprised
ravine
storage
as part of training
vehicles
used for storage
pesticides,
of military
of hazardous
Lot 203. In addition,
of Lot 203.
documented
separator.
the wooded area between Lot 203 and Wallace
201 is active and is used to store military
north
exercises, and an oil/water
pit
of Lots 201 and 203, the wooded areas around both storage lots and the
area. Site 82 encompasses
Disposal
tank areas, a fire training
equipment,
substances
cleaning
such as pesticides,
solvents
and supplies.
Lot 203 is inactive
and transformers
paints,
were reportedly
containing
activities,
but site investigations
l-2
Lot
but was
PCBs.
and solvents has been reported
at
disposed of at Site 82, which is just
The wooded areas to the south, east and west of the storage
disposal
Creek.
revealed
random
lots have no
disposal
of debris
including
ravine.
batteries
Detailed
and 55-gallon
Large quantities
drums.
site background
of debris were also noted in the
and site history descriptions
follow in Section 1.2 of this RI
report.
1.2
This
Site Description
section provides
a description
OU No. 2. A detailed
1.2.1
and History
of the physical
setting
history of these areas is also included
of the areas of concern
within
in this section.
Site Description
There are distinctive
The following
1.2.1.1
areas of concern, as shown on Figure
section describes the background
1-3, within
each site of OU No. 2.
of each site.
Site 9 Description
Site 9 is referred to in this report as the “Fire Training
the FFA, is “Fire Fighting
approximately
Training
Pit at Piney
2.6 acres. Site 9 is bounded
Area” (the formal
Green Road”).
by Holcomb
name, as provided
The site covers an area of
Boulevard
on the west, Site 6 to the
north, Piney Green Road on the east, and Sneads Ferry Road on the south.
bounded
by unnamed
streets leading
consists of an asphalt-lined
to various
fire training
tanks (ASTs), and a fire tower (smoke house).
area of the site, is used to conduct
flammable
liquids.
The oil/water
water used in the training
additional
and contain
steel tanks labeled
separator
exercises
Site
four aboveground
storage
pit, located
for extinguishing
is disposed of offsite.
500 gallons
each.
located at Site 9. Their contents are unknown.
of Site 9, is also used for training
exercises.
area.
fires
caused
pit to collect
The recovered
in use. Two
are constructed
containment
tanks
of steel
were also
The smoke house, located in the northern
No fuel products are used in this area.
1-3
by
Two of the ASTs at Site 9 are
These tanks
Two pressurized
9
in the southern
These tanks are not currently
in a bermed
the site is
in the vicinity.
is located next to the fire training
“DO NOT USE”.
storage tanks are located
approximately
The fire training
training
separator
separator,
Locally,
exercises and storm water that falls into the pit.
product collected in the oil/water
25OOgallon
storage buildings
pit, an oil/water
in
part
1.2.1.2
Site 6 Descriution
Site 6 is located north of and adjacent
to Site 9. Site 6 is bounded on the north by Site 82, by
Piney Green Road on the east, by Site 9 on the south, and by Holcomb
Site 6 covers an area of approximately
the wooded area behind
Site 82. Three
Wallace
the storage
lots, and a ravine,
surface water bodies are associated
Creek, Bear Head Creek, and a ravine
the wooded area north
individual
177 acres that incorporates
of Lot 203 that
Storage
which begins
on the west.
Lots 201 and 203,
at Site 6 and bisects
with Site 6 for the purpose of this RI:
(intermittent
drains
Boulevard
surface water body) located
to Wallace
Creek.
Specific
details
in
of the
areas that make up Site 6 are described below.
Open Storage Lot 201
Open Storage Lot 201 (Lot 201) is a fenced lot located in the south-central
is a flat area with sparse vegetation
around
Lot 201 is bordered
the fence lines.
portion
The ground
surface is densely
compacted
soil.
Boulevard
to the west, and Piney Green Road to the east. The lot is approximately
size. It is currently
hydraulic
by woods with Bear Head Creek to the south, Holcomb
being used for the storage of military
oils and lubricants,
of Site 6. It
non-PCB
transformers,
vehicles
25 acres in
and equipment,
lumber,
and other supplies (ESE, 1991).
Ouen Storage Lot 203
Open Storage Lot 203 (Lot 203) is a fenced lot located in the northern
fenced area of the lot encompasses
with elevation
naturally
differences
existing
of approximately
soil and fill material.
surface with no vegetation
by woods to the north
Holcomb
Boulevard
stored scrap materials
material,
location
46 acres. Lot 203 is a relatively
Lot 203 varies in vegetation
(Site 82) and south,
to the west. Lot 203 is currently
from former
parts, empty
shredded
activities
ammunition
tires,
metal
flat area
five feet. The ground surface is comprised
Piney
inactive,
such as rubber
debris,
kit training
and 55gallon
of the debris in Lot 203.
l-4
of both
from a hard compact
Lot 203 is
Green Road to the east, and by
but it still contains
rafts,
boxes, spent ammunition
barbed wire fencing, used demolition
wooden pallets,
of Site 6. The
to areas with loose sandy soil and dense vegetation.
bordered
communications
approximately
portion
materials,
drums.
shredded
randomly
tires,
radio/
casings, fiberglass-like
a non-PCB
Figure
transformer,
l-4
shows the
The F&gallon
drums
The majority
of the drums,
products,
or corrosives.
drum sampling
a non-time
Empty
found on Lot 203 were observed in small
if labeled,
Drum
are provided
critical
removal
groupings
were identified
as containing
was conducted
as part of this RI.
sampling
in Section 4.0 of this report.
and kerosene
critical
removal
Ravine
Area
the lot.
lubricants,
petroleum
The results
The drums will be removed
of the
as part of
action.
storage tanks were also found on Lot 203. They were labeled
gasoline,
throughout
(Baker,
1992).
as containing
These tanks will also be removed
diesel fuel,
during
the non-time
action.
A ravine is located in the northwest
section of Site 6. The ravine begins “inside”
203 and bisects Site 82. The elevation
of Storage
Lot
ranges from 25 feet above msl at the north boundary
Lot 203 to 5 feet above msl where the ravine
ravine
area is littered
drums,
wire cables, commercial
labeled
“DDT”
“DDT”.
The date on the canisters was marked
drains
with various debris including
ovens, commodes,
was also found in the ravine
into Wallace
batteries,
The surface of the
fencing, tires, empty unlabeled
and respirator
cartridges.
area, as were small
November,
Creek.
of
canisters
An empty
labeled
drum
to contain
1957.
Wooded Areas
Woods and open fields surround
both Storage
area of Site 6. The topography
and mounding
with
is visible
debris including
of the wooded areas is relatively
west of Piney
Green Road.
spent ammunition
flat, but localized
or rusted drums.
of drums. (Baker,
Many
littered
of the
1992)
Site 82 Descrintion
Site 82 is situated
at the northern
end of OU No. 2. It is bordered
Creek, to the east by Piney Green Road, to the west by Holcomb
Site 6.
trenching
The wooded areas are randomly
casings, and empty
drums observed were only shells or fragments
1.2.1.3
Lots 201 and 203 and make up the remaining
Site 82 encompasses
approximately
woodlands.
The site is randomly
ammunition
casings, and empty
littered
to the north
Boulevard,
and to the south by
30 acres and is predominantly
with debris including
or rusted drums.
l-5
Markings
by Wallace
communication
covered
by
wire, spent
were observed on a few drums,
however, most of the drums did not contain
the drums were marked
as “lubrication
The topography
Site 82 is relatively
within
markings
near the southern
portion
and age. Some of
oil” and “anti-freeze”.
flat near the southern
becomes very steep near the bank of Wallace
visible
due to their condition
Creek.
of the site.
Localized
The ravine
portion
of the site, but
trenching
bisects
and mounding
is
the site, as shown
on
Figure 1-3.
1.2.2
Site History
The following
paragraphs
disposal activities
1.2.2.1
describe the documented
at the individual
of OU No. 2. Waste storage
and
sites are described below.
Site 9
Site 9 has been used as a fire fighting
training
extinguishing
activities
The training
fires in the pit were started
(unleaded).
proprietary
pit.
mixtures
used to extinguish
1.2.2.2
area from the early 1960s to the present.
took place in an unlined
Approximately
the fire training
pit.
with
retardants
of hydrocarbons,
the training
and contaminated
fuels
of JP-4 and JP-5 fuel were also burned
containing
Diethylene
fluorosurfactants
fires. (Baker,
Fire
In 1981 the pit was lined with asphalt.
used oil, solvents,
30,000 to 40,000 gallons
Chemical
Glycol
and inorganic
Monobutyl
in
Ether,
salts were occasionally
1992).
Site 6
Site 6 has a long history
supplies.
history
of various
This section on the
uses including
history
the disposal
of Site 6 has been broken
Storage Lot 203, and the wooded and the ravine areas to simplify
and storage
of wastes and
down into Storage
the historical
Lot 201,
descriptions
of
these areas.
Storage Lot 201
Currently,
Lot 201 is used to store military
“non-hazardous”
supplies.
Pesticides
southeast
corners of the lot.
southwest
corner of the lot (Water
equipment,
were reportedly
Transformers
containing
and Air Research,
l-6
vehicles,
hydraulic
oils, and other
stored at one time in the northeast
PCBs were reportedly
1983).
and
stored in the
No storage or disposal
activities
have supporting
prepared
documentation
other than what is reported
in the Initial
Assessment
Study,
in 1983 by Water and air Research.
Storage Lot 203
Storage
Lot 203 has been used as a disposal
documentation
on the disposal
activities
area
at this lot.
storage or disposal area, but the ground surface is littered
reported
to have been stored in a trailer
(Memo:
Past Disposal
Practices
found in the southwestern
DDT
and
55gallon
Lot 203. 12 January
drums
1989).
and disposed of (Memo:
1940s.
There
Lot 203 in not currently
with various debris.
Lot 203, 17 January
of the lot in 1989 (Memo:
of unknown
Five 55-gallon
12 January
the
on Lot 203 as well as in the southeast
at DRMO
portion
since
substance
drums
1989).
ordnance,
drums
petroleum
sheet metal
were
of the lot
of DDT were
Unearthed
55gallon
at
Lejeune
and surrounding
as a
drums
of
DRMO
soil were containerized
1989).
products,
corrosives,
expended demolition
debris, wire cables, and wooded pallets.
were found at various
Pesticides
portion
Lot 203 was also used for the storage and disposal of radio and communication
tires, lubricants,
active
Drums
Camp
is little
locations
parts, shredded
kit training
Empty
and full
on Lot 203. A drum survey was conducted
materials,
%-gallon
as part of
this RI and the results are located in Section 4.0 of this report.
Lot 203 is currently
boundaries
reported
fenced.
From
historical
photographs,
have changed since the lot was in operation.
disposal
used batteries,
of various
chemicals
including
it appears
Former
employees
PCBs, cleaning
solvents,
that
the fenced
at Lot 203 have
electrolytes
from
and waste oils.
Wooded and Ravine Areas
The surface of the wooded areas around
including
drums,
operations
are documented
of Lot 203.
metal
As previously
From the deposition
Lots 201 and 203 is randomly
storage containers,
disposal
for the wooded areas. The ravine begins at the northern
boundary
of the debris in the ravine,
cartridges.
with debris
No organized
stated, the ravine
and rocket
littered
is also currently
littered
it appears that trucks
contents into the ravine from Lot 203.
1-7
with
various
may have dumped
debris.
their
1.2.2.3
Site 82
As described
in Section
disposal operations
1.2.1.3, Site 82 is also randomly
are documented
littered
for the site. Prom the deposition
appears that the area was used for disposal
of miscellaneous
the name of the site refers to VOCs (the site is named “Piney
no documents
1.3
or memorandums
Previous
which indicate
Pollutants
(NACIP)
of Initial
Assessments/Site
RI/FS.
program
Assessment
Investigations
When the Superfund
sections summarize
Initial
Assessment
(IAS),
Camp
discussed in this RI.
performing
sites on MCB
Camp
1.3.2
Confirmation
of
to the
Studies,
by the DON
EPA’s
Preliminary
similar
to the EPA’s
Act (SARA)
was passed in
Restoration
Program
procedures.
investigations
performed
at OU No. 2.
as potential
and personnel
Lejeune.
Inc., in 1983. The IAS identified
sources
historical
of contamination,
including
records and aerial
photographs,
interviews
to evaluate
The IAS recommended
the necessity of conducting
potential
performing
mitigating
a number
of
the sites
as well as
hazards at various
confirmation
studies
at
actions or clean-up operations.
Study
A confirmation
study was conducted by Environmental
1984 through
1987. The purpose of this investigation
areas identified
similar
conducted
in favor of the Installation
the previous
The IAS reviewed
Sites 6 and 9 to evaluate
and Control
and clean up past hazardous
and Reauthorization
program
and
Study
Lejeune
field inspections
Assessment
investigations
and Confirmation
An IAS was conducted Water and Air Research,
sites at MCB
Response Compensation
investigate,
The NACIP
Amendment
(IRP), which adopted the EPA Superfund
1.3.1
Green Road VOC Area), there are
the Navy
to identify,
Studies
(PA/SI)
1986, the DON aborted the NACIP
The following
debris from Lot 203. Although
Environmental
the DON initiated
waste disposal sites at Navy installations.
consisted
of the debris at Site 82, it
Investigations
Act of 1980 (CERCLA),
Installation
No organized
any disposal of VOCs or solvents.
In response to the passage of the Comprehensive
Liability
with debris.
in the IAS. Sites 6 and 9 were identified
l-8
Science and Engineering,
was to investigate
in the IAS.
Inc. (ESE) in
the potential
source
The Confirmation
Study
was divided
into two separate
Step done in 1986 through
reports:
a Verification
Step done in 1984 and a Confirmation
1987. The work that was performed
at OU No. 2 is summarized
by
site and media below.
1.3.2.1
Site 6
Soil Investigations
In August
1984, as part of the Verification
Lot 201. The sampling
locations
the O-to-3 foot depth range.
are unknown.
DDT,pp
concentrations
(0.0320 pg/g);
DDT,pp
In August,
DDT,op
Control
locations
Two duplicate
and DDT were predominant
12 samples;
DDD,pp
concentrations
for
(0.01580
(0.1600 pg/g);
was not detected
each
pg/g);
of the
DDD,pp
and DDE,pp
were
The maximum
(0.03640
DDE,pp
l.&g>;
(0.7700
to assess the analytical
Step, ESE drilled
DDE,op
pg/g);
methods
and
employed
and sampled
samples were also collected.
in these samples.
DDE,pp
(0.0048
five
isomers
pg/g);
were:
DDE,pp
at
from
The samples were only
The p,p-isomer
was detected
and DDT,pp
in any of the samples.
other
10 soil borings
Each of the 10 samples was composited
was detected in 7 of the 12 samples;
DDE,op
were analyzed
that
DDD,pp;
DDD,op
of
results indicate
of DDD, DDE, and DDT (ESE, 1991).
DDD,DDE,
from
(QA/QC) protocols used in the field or laboratory.
are unknown.
for the o,g and p,pisomers
12 samples.
was composited
in 6 of the 10 samples.
were:
is available
1984, as part of the Verification
the O-to-3 foot depth range.
DDT,op
DDD,pp
No information
Quality
ten soil borings at
for the o,p- and p,p-isomers
DDT,op;
was detected
(0.3240 pg/g);
Assurance
Lot 203. The sampling
analyzed
DDE,op
DDD,op;
for each of the isomers
(0.1400 lrg/g).
or the Quality
Each of the 10 samples
stored at Lot 201. The analytical
in all ten samples.
detected in 8 of the 10 samples.
detected
and sampled
It is not known why only these pesticides
were reportedly
was detected
drilled
The samples were only analyzed
DDD, DDE, and DDT (ESE, 1991).
except that pesticides
Step, ESE
of
in 10 of the
was detected in 6 of the
The maximum
DDD,op
(0.0016
detected
(0.00137
pg/g);
and
pg/g);
DDT,pp
(0.0490 pg/g).
Groundwater
Sampling
In November
1986, as part of the Characterization
6GW4,6GW5,6GW6,
Figure
and 6GW7) were installed
2-8). Table l-l provides
a summary
Step, four shallow monitoring
and sampled
of well construction
l-9
in the vicinity
details
wells
(wells
of Lot 201 (see
for existing
site wells.
TABLE
SUMMARY
OF EXISTING
REMEDIAL
MCB CAMP
Well No.
Date
Installed
GGWlS(2)
[email protected]
6GW3(2)
lo/21186
10/21/86
10/24/86
6GW7(2)
6GW8(2)
10124186
10123188
06/17/91
06/17/91
06/18/91
-45)
--
82Mw1(3)
82Mw2(3)
[email protected])
32MW30(3)
M-W-2(4)
Notes:
l-l
WELL CONSTRUCTION
SITES 6 AND 82
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
DETAILS
Top of PVC
Casing
Elevation (1)
(feet, above m81)
35.18
38.37
31.32
27.99
25.67
26.74
17.83
22.35
8.58
6.03
24.31
32.19
29.68
30.73
30.62
39.98
37.41
(1) msl - mean sea level
(2) Monitoring well installed
(3) Monitoring well installed
---
---
50.0
50.0
50.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
by ES&E - Site 6
by NUS - Site 82
-__
*__
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
- 25.0
- 25.0
- 25.0
- 25.0
12.3
13.0
11.9
13.0
(4) Monitoring
well installed by SM&E
(5)
-- Information
unavailable
- 25.0
- 25.0
- 25.0
- 25.0
-__
9.4 - 12.3
11.2 - 13.0
9.9 - 11.9
11.0 - 13.0
- East of Site 6
__
-2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
A second sampling
analyzed
round
for volatile
and DDT.
was conducted
organic
in January
compounds
1987.
Both rounds
of samples
(VOCs) and the o,p- and p,p-isomers
DDD, DDE, and DDT were not detected in any groundwater
One VOC was detected in the first round of sampling:
were
of DDD, DDE,
sample in either round.
chloromethane
(6.5 pg/l) was detected in
well 6GW6 (ESE, 1990a).
In January
1991, the four existing
parameters.
This
Characterization
sampling
monitoring
was conducted
Investigation
No semivolatile
any of the groundwater
samples.
exceeding
manganese,
chromium,
by ESE
compounds
The following
the North
Carolina
lead, and barium.
and analyzed
as part
(ESE, 1991). Carbon disulfide
of 10 pg/l in well 6GW6.
concentrations
wells were sampled
of the
Supplemental
was detected at a concentration
(SVOCs) or pesticides
inorganic
Water
for full TCL
parameters
Quality
were detected
in
were detected
Standards
in
(NCWQS):
iron,
constituents
were
One or more of these inorganic
observed in all four shallow wells.
In November
1986, as part of the Characterization
6GW1,6GW2,6GW3,
,-,
near Lot 203.
samples
Step, four shallow monitoring
and 6GW4) were installed
A second sampling
were analyzed
round
and sampled
was conducted
in the first
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
In January
sampled
quality
could not be sampled
Compound
List (TCL) parameters.
trichloroethene
1987.
in well
of DDD, DDE,
6GWl:
quality
Both rounds
sample in either round.
monitoring
DDT.
of
DDD,
Only two VOCs
benzene
(3.1 pg/l)
and
wells and two water supply wells were
at Lot 203. The fourth monitoring
(ESE, 1991).
Characterization
the water supply wells:
The sampling
Investigation.
Detectable
was conducted
well was dry and
by ESE as part of
The samples were analyzed
concentiations
acetone (12 pg/l); vinyl chloride
(TCE) (13 pg/l,; and tetrachloroethene
for full Target
of VOCs were identified
(70 pg/l); 1,2-dichloroethene
(PCE) (53 pg/ll.
only in
(75 [email protected]);
The water supply wells
and HP-6531 are located across Piney Green Road, east of Lot 203 and north of Site 6.
No SVOCs or pesticides
samples
of sampling
groundwater
(63 pg/l) (ESE, 1990a).
to assess groundwater
the Supplemental
(HP-651
round
1991, three of the four existing
therefore
in January
for VOCs and the o,p- and p,p-isomers
DDE, and DDT were not detected in any groundwater
were detected
to monitor
wells (wells
collected
detected
were detected
from the potable
in concentrations
manganese,
more elevated
chromium,
inorganic
in any of the groundwater
water supply wells.
exceeding
lead, cadmium,
the NCWQS.
Several
These
inorganic
compounds
and zinc. Every monitoring
compound.
l-11
samples,
including
those
parameters
were
included:
iron,
well had at least one or
Surface Water Sampling
As part of the Characterization
Step in November
1986, one upstream
and one downstream
(from OU No. 2) surface water sample were collected in Bear Head Creek.
analyzed
for VOCs, and the o,p- and p,p-isomers
analyzed compounds
of DDD, DDE, and DDT (ESE,
were detected in the surface water samples collected
As part of the Characterization
Step in November
analyzed
for VOCs, and the o,p- and p,p-isomers
following
VOCs were detected:
chloride
higher
The downstream
concentrations.
No
and one downstream
Creek.
of DDD,DDE,
trans-1,2-dichloroethene
(1.9-3.6 pg/l).
than the upstream
in Wallace
1991).
in Bear Head Creek.
1986, one upstream
(from OU No. 21 surface water sample were collected
vinyl
These samples were
These samples were
and DDT (ESE, 1991).
The
(6.4-35 pg/l), TCE (< 3-26 pg/l), and
concentrations
of each of these VOCs were
DDD, DDE, and DDT were not detected
in any
sample.
As part of the Supplemental
Characterization
water samples were collected from Wallace
Road, and the downstream
for full TCL parameters.
temperature
(5 pg/l).
Creek.
1991, two surface
location
was at Piney Green
The upstream
was at Holcomb
In addition,
in January
Boulevard.
field measurements
The samples
were analyzed
of pH, specific conductance,
were made (ESE, 1991). One VOC was detected in the downstream
SVOCs and pesticides
inorganics
(aluminum,
concentration
calcium,
from upstream
decreased in concentration
Sediment
location
Investigation
were not detected
magnesium,
potassium,
to downstream.
upstream
in any sample.
sodium,
Most
and
sample:
TCE
of the detected
and zinc) all increased
Iron was the only detected
inorganic
in
which
to downstream.
Sampling
As part of the Characterization
Step in November
sediment
in Bear Head Creek.
sample were collected
and the o,p and p,p-isomers
any sample.
The p,p-isomers
1986, one upstream
and one downstream
These samples were analyzed
of DDD, DDE, and DDT (ESE, 1991). VOCs were not detected in
of DDE, and DDT were detected in the sediments
Bear Head Creek at levels of 0.0758 pg/g (or ppm) and 0.0131 pg/g, respectively.
concentrations
of these two isomers
source of upstream
sediment
for VOCs,
were higher
contamination
than the downstream
was not reported
1-12
collected
The upstream
concentrations.
and is presently
from
The
unknown.
Historical
mosquito
control practices
may have resulted
in the presence of these pesticides
in
Bear Head Creek sediments.
As part of the Characterization
Step in November
1986, one upstream
sediment
in Wallace
These samples were analyzed
sample were collected
and the o,p- and p,p-isomers
of DDD,
Creek.
DDE, and DDT (ESE,
and one downstream
1991).
for VOCs,
No compounds
were
detected in either of the samples.
As part of the Supplemental
Characterization
samples were collected from Wallace
and the downstream
location
TCL
In addition,
parameters.
temperature
were made
methylene
chloride)
the upstream
chrysene
(420 pg/kg),
and benzo(a)pyrene
detected
The upstream
was at Holcomb
field
(ESE,
sample.
measurements
1991).
location
Boulevard.
In the downstream
(460 pg/kg).
in the upstream
In general,
specific
solvents
(acetone
sediments.
of these, calcium
concentrations
and
were detected:
benzo(k)fluoranthene
chromium,
and
SVOCs were not detected in
(510 pg/kg),
were not detected in either sample.
calcium,
for full
conductance,
sample, four semivolatiles
aluminum,
the upstream
was at Piney Green Road,
laboratory
(600 pgkg),
Pesticides
1991, two sediment
The samples were analyzed
of pH,
Two common
benzo(b)fluoranthene
compounds,
downstream.
Creek.
in January
were the only VOCs detected in the samples.
sediment
to inorganic
Investigation
iron, manganese,
and manganese
were higher
With respect
and zinc were
were not detected
than
the downstream
concentrations.
1.3.2.2
Previous
Site 9
investigations
supplemental
at Site 9 only focused on groundwater.
investigations
No soil investigations
of Bear Head Creek (i.e., over and above the studies conducted
or
on
Bear Head Creek that were associated with Site 6) have been conducted.
Two monitoring
quality
wells (9GWl
(see Figure
2-16).
these wells are unknown
and 9GW2) were installed
Well
construction
but are believed
details
in 1984 to characterize
(e.g., screen lengths
to be installed
Road was also included
in the investigation.
were sampled
5, 1984 and analyzed
volatile
on July
organics,
and intervals)
at 25 feet below ground
screen between 15 and 25 feet. A water supply well (HP-635)
groundwater
for
surface and
located just east of Piney Green
The two shallow wells and the water supply wells
for cadmium,
and total phenols.
1-13
chromium,
lead, oil and grease,
In November
1986, a third
shallow well was installed
downgradient
of the pit.
Samples
November
isobutyl
were collected
18 and 19, 1986 and analyzed
ketone, ethylene
Chromium,
dibromide,
lead, and phenols
sampling
round.
northeastern
from
for total
and hexavalent
were detected
As shown on Figure
this well.
9GW3
exhibited
9GWl
No target
between
ethyl
ketone,
methyl
and 9GW2
analytes
were detected
the presence of these contaminants
phenols
in January
low levels of chromium
during
the 1984
and
in the water
in 1984.
level); however, both chromium
sampled
wells
lead above 22 pg/l (it is not known whether
Well 9GW3 exhibited
was again
shallow
2-16, these wells are located in the southeastern
round of 1986 also exhibited
or the method detection
methyl
corner of the site
chromium.
supply well. The water supply well was only sampled
Well 9GW2 did not exhibit
all three
xylenes,
in wells
corner of the site, respectively.
The sampling
at the northeastern
and phenols
and 1,2dibromoethane
1987 (the other
and lead (below Federal
this is the instrument
were detected
(ethylene
two wells
in well 9GWl.
again in
dibromide).
Well
were not sampled)
or State water quality
and
standards)
(ESE, 1990).
The analytical
therefore
methods
are currently
1.3.2.3
or quality
of data were not reported
documents
and
unknown.
Site 82
A site investigation
was conducted
Environmental
Corporation
Environmental
Science and Engineering
(NUS).
at Site
82 in June,
The investigation
(ES&E)
collected from Wallace
in Wallace
Creek contained
Creek most likely
did not originate
Site 82, was created to investigate
The investigation
conducted
monitoring
sampling
(Wallace
organic contamination
endosulfan
VOCs.
by Halliburton
NUS
based on results
from an
in 1986 (the investigation
this investigation,
surface water samples
that the source of the VCCs
from Site 6 (Lot 203). Subsequently
a new site,
the source of the VOCs (NUS, 1992).
by NUS consisted of installing
Results
six shallow soil borings
sampling,
from the investigation
in all of the media
II, and dieldrin)
was initiated
It was determined
wells, soil and groundwater
Creek).
1991
field investigation
was conducted as part of a study for Site 6). During
shallow
in the reference
were detected
sampled.
Pesticides
and surface water
indicated
(4,4’-DDD,
in soil (33 to 110 pg/kg)
1-14
positive
and three
and sediment
detections
4,4’-DDE,
and sediment
of
4,4’-DDT,
(12 to 69
pg/kg)
samples
PCB-1242)
with
lower levels in surface water and groundwater.
contamination
was also present
surface water (80 pg/l), and sediments
1,2dichloroethene
samples.
1.3.3
in soil (150-1,900
(220-700 pg/kgJ.
(6 to 64 pg/l), and vinyl
Note that concentrations
Site Assessment
A Site Assessment
(ESE) in March
Report
(15 pg/l),
levels of TCE (3 to 74 pg/l),
(11 pg/l) were detected
in surface water
of VOCs were not detected in any of the wells sampled.
was prepared
This report
by Environmental
contained
date and a preliminary
Report recommended
Further,
groundwater
and
Report
1992.
ESE at an earlier
chloride
pg/kg),
PCB (PCB-1260
that a full human
a summary
Science and Engineering,
of the Confirmation
risk evaluation
health
Inc.
Study done by
for Site 6. The Site Assessment
and ecological
risk assessment
be performed
at
Site 6.
1.3.4
Additional
Studies
at OU No. 2
Site Survev Report - Februarv
1989
The purpose of this investigation
using soil gas analysis
that may potentially
The results of the testing
tests were negative
was to identify
affect personnel
found that “no imminent
except for a localized
the presence of volatile
Report
The following
soil stain from a former spill.
portion
Organization
sections are presented
in this RI report.
l
Section 2.0 Study Area Investigation
a
Section 3.0 Physical
l
Section 4.0 Nature
a
Section 5.0 Contaminant
l
Section 6.0 Baseline
l
Section 7.0 Summary
Characteristics
and Extent
of the Study Area
of Contamination
Fate and Transport
Human
at Storage Lot 203.
hazards were observed” and that all of the
The area of stained soil is located near the north central
1.4
working
organic compounds
Health
Risk Assessment
and Conclusions
1-15
of Lot 203 along the fenceline.
a
Section 8.0 References
Section
2.0 describes the Phase I and II field sampling
activities
OU No. 2. This section describes the purpose of the sampling
sampling
locations
for all media.
Figures
logs and well installation
information.
this report,
in two separate
presented
are provided
in Volume
features,
meteorology,
features
grids, and
locations,
drilling
(figures
for Sections
the sampling
in
1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 are
in Volume
II).
This
events.
of OU No. 2. This section discusses the surface
geology, soils, hydrogeology,
demography
OU No, 2, and water supply wells identified
and
within
the
of OU No. 2.
Section 4.0 presents the nature
and the extent of the contamination
section presents the results of the Phase I and II field sampling
this RI.
the RI at
sampling
to show sampling
4.0 and 6.0 are presented
surface water hydrology,
land use, the ecology in and around
vicinity
volumes
control conducted during
3.0 addresses the physical
procedures,
during
These figures, along with all other figures presented
I; figures for Sections
section also discusses quality
Section
are included
conducted
The results of the sampling
activities
Also included
in this section is a discussion
contaminants
detected and a discussion
Section 5.0 characterizes
potential
routes
activities
conducted
a summary
of the
sources.
found at OU No. 2. This characterization
migration,
as part of
in the first part of this section.
of the extent of contamination,
of the potential
the contaminants
of contaminant
are presented
found at OU No. 2. This
contaminant
persistence,
includes:
and contaminant
migration.
Section
6.0 contains
contains
a human
assessment
the Baseline
health
has bee provided
Section
7.0 includes
extent
of contamination,
conclusions
Risk
evaluation
Assessment
(RA) conducted
and an environmental
for the site.
evaluation.
The RA
An ecological
risk
under separate cover.
the Summary
and Conclusions.
contaminant
address any data limitations
This section summarizes
fate and transport,
and recommended
Section 8.0 includes references cited in this report.
1-16
and the RA.
remedial
the nature
In addition,
action objectives.
and
the
This RI report is being submitted
the figures are presented
in eight volumes:
in two volumes;
the RI report is presented
and the appendices
1-17
are presented
in two volumes;
in four volumes.
2.0
STUDY
AREA
2.1
Introduction
The field programs
characterize
previous
INVESTIGATION
at Sites 6,9, and 82 [Operable
potential
storage,
environmental
operation,
impacts
and disposal
Unit
and threats
activities.
each area investigated,
site-specific
investigative
for OU No. 2. Specific field
methods
Sections 2.3 through
known
in the Final
as “Site
previously
RI/l%
area is referred
health
The following
criteria
for meeting
investigative
Creek and the northern
Work Plan as the“‘wooded
82” (also referred to as “The Piney
investigated
investigative
objectives,
to human
resulting
to
from
are brief descriptions
the objectives,
methods
of
and general
are discussed
in
2.7.
The wooded area between Wallace
described
No. 2 (OU No. 211 were initiated
at MCB Camp Lejeune
is combined
of Lot 203 was originally
area north of Lot 203”.
This area is
Green Road VOC Site”), which is a site
(described
to as Site 82 for this RI investigation.
methods
boundary
in Section 1.0). Accordingly,
Note that the discussion
this
of the field
for Sites 6 and 82 because these two sites are essentially
continuous.
2.1.1
Site Descriptions
2.1.1.1
and Objectives
Site 6
Sites 6 is located approximately
on the Mainside
Holcomb
portion
Boulevard,
1.75 miles east of the New River and 2 miles south of Route 24
of Camp Lejeune
(refer to Figure l-3).
Site 6 is bordered to the west by
to the north by Site 82, to the east by Piney Green Road, and to the south
by Site 9 (Fire Training
surrounded
- Sites 6 and 62
Area).
by woodlands.
Site 6 comprises
The combined
two storage lots, Lot 201 and 203, which are
area of Site 6 encompasses approximately
17’7 acres.
Onen Storage Lot 201
Open Storage Lot 201 (Lot 201) is located in the south-central
which is actively
lubricants,
used to store military
non-PCB
with Holcomb
transformers
Boulevard
Head Creek further
further
equipment
(e.g., vehicles,
and other supplies),
to the west, Piney
portion
is bordered
of OU No. 2. This lot,
lumber,
hydraulic
by woods on all directions
Green Road further
to the east, and Bear
to the south (refer to Figure l-3). This lot is approximately
2-1
oils and
25 acres in size
(ESE, 1991) as shown on Figure
from text).
The former
southeastern
portions
southwestern
portion
The objectives,
RI performed
2-1 (note that all figures
pesticide
storage
of Lot 201.
Further,
are provided
areas are located
the former
near
in separate
volumes
the northeastern
and
PCB storage area is located near the
of the lot.
criteria
for meeting
these objectives,
at Lot 201 are presented
and general
investigative
methods
for the
on Table 2-1.
Onen Storage Lot 203
Gpen Storage
Lot 203 (Lot 203) is situated
Lot 201. Lot 203 is bordered
south by woodlands,
Figure
in the northern
to the west by Holcomb
portion
Boulevard,
the north
and to the east by Piney Green Road (refer to Figure
2-2, a fence is present around the lot; however, the actual
slightly
exceed the fenceline.
The project objectives,
for the RI performed
of Site 6, just north
This lot is approximately
criteria
for meeting
(at Site 82) and
l-3).
As shown on
area of the storage lot may
46 acres in size (ESE, 1990).
these objectives,
at Lot 203 are presented
of
and general
investigative
methods
on Table 2-2.
Wooded Area and the Ravine
Woodlands
and open fields which
surround
remaining
areas of Site 6 (Figure
2-3).
(randomly)
with debris including
5, and %-gallon
their condition
Discarded
northwestern
Most of the drums,
(e.g., foot lockers).
however,
for the RI performed
criteria
throughout
could not be identified
for meeting
rusted
due to
pails,
battery
packs, and
pails were noted along the
as “DDT.”
these objectives,
and general investigative
in the wooded areas and the ravine are presented
2-2
oil”
as opposed to “whole” drums.
such as drums,
Some 5gallon
bank of the ravine which were marked
The project objectives,
are littered
up the
were noted on some of the drums such as “lubrication
was also noted in the ravine,
garbage
area make
casings, and empty and rusted drums (l-,
and age. Many of the drums were only fragments
material
miscellaneous
agents”.
and the ravine
The fields and woodlands
spent ammunition
in size). Markings
and “decontamination
both lots,
on Table 2-2.
methods
TABLE
SUMMARY
OF REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
REMEDIAL
MCB CAMP
Medium or Area
of Concern
1. Soil
RI Objectives
la.
lb.
lc.
Id.
Assess the extent of soil
contamination
at former
pesticide storage areas
(Grids A and B).
Assess the extent of soil
contamination
at the former
PCB storage area (Grid 0.
Assess human health and
ecological risks associated
with exposure to surface
soils.
Assess areas of surface soil
contamination
due to site
rUnOff.
!.
Groundwater
2a.
2b.
2c.
2-1
Assess health risks posed by
future usage of the shallow
groundwater near Lot 201.
Assess potential impact to
groundwater from pesticidecontaminated
soil or
unknown releases.
Evaluate hydrogeologic
characteristics.
OBJECTIVES
FOR STORAGE
SITE 6
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
Criteria
for Meeting
Objectives
LOT 201
Proposed Investigation/Study
Determine pesticide levels in
surface and subsurface soils at
former storage areas.
Soil Investigation
Determine PCB levels in surface
and subsurface soils at the former
storage area.
Determine contaminant
levels in
surface and subsurface soils.
Soil Investigation
Soil Investigation
Risk Assessment
Characterize contaminant
levels in
surface soils at downslope drainage
areas.
Soil Investigation
Evaluate groundwater quality and
compare to ARARs and healthbased action levels.
Characterize on-site groundwater
quality and groundwater quality
downgradient from Lot 201.
Groundwater Investigation
Risk Assessment
Estimate hydrogeologic
characteristics of the surlicial
water-bearing zone (flow direction,
groundwater gradient, etc.).
Groundwater
Investigation
Groundwater Investigation
Surface water level measurements
Bear Head Creek
in
TABLE
SUMMARY
OF REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
OBJECTIVES
FOR STORAGE
SITE 6
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
REMEDIAL
MCR CAMP
-.---
Medium or Area
of Concern
1. Sediment
3b.
i. Surface
Water
---.--
RI Objectives
3a.
Assesshuman health and
ecological risks associated
with exposure to contaminated sediments.
Assesspotential ecological
impacts posed by
contaminated sediments.
3c.
Determine the extent of
sediment contamination for
purposes of identifying areas
of remediation.
4a.
Assessthe presence or
absenceof surface water
contamination in Bear Head
Creek.
Assessimpacts to Bear Head
Creek from groundwater
discharge from Site 6, Lot
201 and wooded areas.
4b.
2-1 (Continued)
LEJEUNE.
------.-
NORTH
I-.------
LOT 201
CAROLINA
----_----.--
Criteria for Meeting Objectives
Proposed Investigation/Study
Evaluate the nature and extent of
contamination in sediment.
Sediment Investigation in
Bear Head Creek
Risk Assessment
Evaluate stress to benthic and fish
communities.
Identify the presence or absence of
contaminants in fish tissue.
Identify extent of sediment
contamination where contaminant
levels exceedrisk-based action
levels or EPA Region IV TBCs for
sediment.
Aquatic Study in Bear Head Creek
Fish Collection and Tissue Analysis
Risk Assessment
Sediment Investigation
(Bear Head Creek)
Risk Assessment
Determine surface water quality
along Bear Head Creek.
Surface Water Investigation
Determine surface water quality in
Bear Head Creek.
Assessgroundwater quality from
Site 6 or EPA Region IV TBCs for
sediment.
Surface Water Investigation
Groundwater Investigation
TABLE
SUMMARY
Medium or
Area of Concern
.. Surface
la.
lb.
!. Buried Waste
and/or Drums
Determine appropriate
treatment/disposal
methods
of all surface drums.
Assess potential impact to
soils in drum storage areas.
Criteria
for Meeting
Objectives
LOT 203, THE
Proposed Investigation/Study
Identify waste type, contents, and
hazardous waste characteristics.
Drum Investigation
Characterize surface and
subsurface soil contaminant
levels
in the storage area.
Characterize on-site surficial
groundwater quality.
Soil Investigation
Groundwater
(Test Pits)
Investigation
lc.
Assess potential impact to
shallow groundwater in
drum storage areas,
2a.
Determine and confirm the
locations where drums or
wastes may be buried.
Pending the identification
of
potential buried drums or
bulk wastes, determine
appropriate treatment/
disposal methods.
Identity subsurface anomalies
associated with drums or bulk
wastes.
Identify waste types, contents, and
hazardous waste characteristics.
Review of Historical Photographs
Geophysical Investigation
Test Pit Investigation
Drum/Waste Sampling Program
Assess human health and
ecological risks associated
with exposure to surface soil.
Assess the potential extent of
surface soil contamination
due to potential surface
Characterize the nature of soil
contamination
at Lot 203.
Soil Investigation
Risk Assessment
Determine the presence or absence
of soil contamination
in downslope
or drainage areas.
Soil Investigation
Sediment Investigation
Characterize the nature and extent
of subsurface contaminant
levels at
drum/waste disposal areas.
Characterize the nature and extent
of soil contamination
at Lot 203.
Test Pit Investigation
Soil Investigation
2b.
1. Soil
OF REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
OBJECTIVES
FOR STORAGE
WOODED AREAS, THE RAVINE
AND SITE 82
SITES 6 and 82
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
RI Objectives
DlWllS
2-2
3a.
3b.
rUnOff.
3c.
3d.
Pending the presence of
buried drums/waste, assess
the impact to subsurface soil.
Assess potential impacts to
soil from past disposal/
storage activities.
Soil Investigation
)
TABLE
SUMMARY
Medium or
Area of Concern
1. Groundwater
4b.
4c.
4d.
i.
Sediment
OF REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
OBJECTIVES
FOR STORAGE
WOODED AREAS, THE RAVINE
AND SITE 82
SITES 6 and 82
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
RI Objectives
4a.
5a.
5b.
5c.
‘)
2-2 &ntinued)
Assess human health and
ecological risks posed by
potential usage or migration
of shallow groundwater near
Lot 203.
Determine the presence or
absence of off-site groundwater contamination.
Assess on-site groundwater
quality at both known and
unsuspected disposal areas.
Assess the extent of vertical
contaminated groundwater
quality in areas where the
shallow aquifer has been
impacted.
Assess human health and
ecological risks posed by
sediment contamination
in
Wallace Creek.
Assess potential ecological
impacts posed by
contaminated
sediment.
Identify possible source of
semivolatile contamination
in Wallace Creek sediments
and delineate areas of
remediation, ifnecessary.
Criteria
for Meeting
Objectives
LOT 203, THE
Proposed Investigation/Study
Evaluate on-site and off-site
groundwater quality.
Groundwater Investigation
Risk Assessment
Characterize off-site groundwater
quality between Lot 203 and
Wallace Creek.
Characterize on-site groundwater
quality where disposal practices are
known to have occurred.
Determine the quality of
groundwater in the deeper aquifer.
Groundwater
Investigation
Geophysical Investigation
Groundwater Investigation
Groundwater
Investigation
Characterize areas of sediment
contamination
in Wallace Creek.
Sediment Investigation
Risk Assessment
Evaluate stress to benthic and fish
communities.
Aquatic Survey (Wallace Creek)
Identify extent of sediment
contamination
in Wallace Creek.
Sediment Investigation
(Wallace
Creek and the Ravine Area)
TABLE
SUMMARY
Medium or
Area of Concern
3. Surface
Water
(Wallace
Creek)
6b.
1. Surfaceor
Subsurface
Ordnance
Debris
OF REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
OBJJiXTIVES
FOR STORAGE
WOODED AREAS, THE RAVINE
AND SITE 82
SITES 6 and 82
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE.
NORTH CAROLINA
RI Objectives
6a.
7a.
2-2 (b.mtinued)
Criteria for Meeting Objectives
LOT 203, THE
Proposed Investigation/Study
Assesshuman health and
ecological risks associated
with exposure to surface
water.
Assessecological impacts
from contaminated surface
water.
Evaluate surface water quality
throughout Wallace Creek.
Surface Water Investigation
Risk Assessment
Determine stress to fish or benthic
communities.
Aquatic Survey
Define areas where ordnance
is located and notify DON for
subsequent removal by CLEJ
personnel.
Visual inspection by qualified
ordnance specialist.
Review of Historical Photographs
Site Reconnaissance
Geophysical Investigation
2.1.1.2
Site 82
Site 82 [referred to as “The Piney Green Road VOC Site,” (NUS, 1991-199211 is situated
wooded area between Lot 203 and Wallace
site was identified
cover of this area.
drums/drum
It is estimated
by results from a field investigation
of the site may have been disturbed
vegetative
Creek.
fragments)
by excavation
The debris (which
in 1986 by ESE).
Portions
(based on the topography
included
were noted to be protruding
to be 30 acres in size. This
(conducted
activities
in the
spent ammunition
from the ground
and
casings
and
surface in some of the
areas.
The project objectives, criteria
for the RI performed
criteria
for meeting
for meeting
these objectives,
at Site 82 are presented
these objectives,
and general
investigative
methods
on Table 2-2. Note that the project
objectives,
etc., for Site 82 are presented
Lot 203) because these two sites are essentially
continuous
together
with Site 6 (e.g.,
(i.e., both sites share a common
boundary).
2.2
Aerial
In August
USEPA’s
Photographic
of 1992, an interim
Environmental
of the Advanced
performed
document
photographic
Systems
investigation
Interpretation
Division
of the Super-fund
detail operations
Support
supplied
the occurrence
such activities
Center (EPIC)
IV identified
of waste handling,
disposal,
within
aerial
photographs
from
was
The aerial
and to
the study area.
within
and storage activities.
each site and
Where
possible,
on the photographs.
1938, 1944, 1949, 1952, 1956, 1960, 1964, 1970,
1980,1988,
and 1990 were used for the analysis
established
a basis of comparison,
prior
IV.
sources of contamination,
areas of concern
were noted in the EPIC report and annotated
Black-and-white
Virginia,
The investigation
Section of EPA Region
and assess potential
by EPA Region
in Warrenton,
by the
the period from 1938 to 1990. Investigation
at OU No. 2 during
to locate
report was completed
in Las Vegas, Nevada.
past waste disposal and storage activities
Information
veriSed
Monitoring
were employed
aerial
Photographic
at the request
photographs
results
InvestiPation
of OU No. 2. The 1938 round of photographs
to development
Reservation.
2-8
of the Camp
Lejeune
Military
The analysis
was performed
a stereoscope.
by viewing
Stereoscopic
three-dimensional
backlit
viewing
effect which
transparencies
of aerial
enables
photographs
the analyst
size, shape, and pattern).
permit
to be recognized
The following
subsections
investigation.
Appendix
illustrate
2.2.1
conditions
Aerial
describe
selected
V contains
and delineate
Photograph
refuse, material,
characteristics
in the northern
the photographic
photographs
corner of the cleared area.
A building
cleared area at the terminus
of the railroad
and possible
of Site 6 (see Appendix
probable
2.2.2
housing
dark-toned
stain are noted within
Aerial
Photograph
1949 photograph.
and equipment.
201. Probable
203.
Trenches,
containers,
along the four parallel
V.2, shows a marked
areas that
and dark-toned
probable
surround
material
refuse, and debris
storage area. An excavated pit is also noted immediately
2.2.3
Aerial
Photograph
A dark-toned
material,
see Appendix
V.3.
- November
probably
Trenches
roads east of Lot 201.
increase in activity
since the
of the cleared area is now fenced and used to store military
The cleared
stacked containers
objects (not further/andannotated)
1956
see Appendix
A large portion
A graded area
of the study area may have been used for
rectangular
arranged
- February
The 1956 aerial photograph,
vehicles
Numerous
housing units are uniformly
the
spur.
This portion
prior to 1949.
V.l).
spur that extends into the northwest
The open storage area of Lot 201 is fenced and noted in the 1949 photograph.
temporary
that best
the study area.
portion
and debris line the railroad
east of Lot 201 is also indicated.
1992).
1949
The cleared area of Lot 203 is visible
Probable
of those annotated
a perceived
(EPIC,
from
through
characteristics
These visible
photographs
areas of concern within
- October
visible
on aerial photographs
aerial
reproductions
creates
to identify
(e.g., color, tone, shadow, texture,
a specific object or condition
of aerial photographs
topsoil,
and linear
Lot 203 extend south toward Lot
have been noted to the north of Lot
are located
throughout
the open
to the south of Lot 203.
1960
has been noted to the north and southwest of Lot 203,
ground
2-9
scars have also been noted to the south and
southwest.
Probable
refuse and dark-toned
objects are located in the vicinity
of the railroad
spur that extends into the clear area.
Probable
staining
has been indicated
same dark-toned
material
within
the open storage area of Lot 201. Grading
found in the northern
portion
of the study area is evident
and the
to the east
of Lot 201.
2.2.4
Aerial
Numerous
Photograph
- December
1988
piles of refuse and raw materials
see Appendix
V.4.
Trenches,
study area, The disturbed
similar
grading,
in the northwestern
and other ground
areas are almost entirely
to those seen in earlier
storage area.
are visible
years, are visible
section of Lot 203,
scars are no longer evident
revegetated.
Rows of dark-toned
in the northeastern
Most of this area is now fenced, and vehicles,
equipment,
section
in the
objects,
of the open
and other materials
are stored in the open storage area of Lot 203.
Approximately
201.
40 cylindrical
Roads and buildings
objects and a debris pile are visible in the northern
(not further/and
annotated)
portion
are now seen in the formerly
of Lot
graded
area east of Lot 201.
2.3
Prior
Preliminarv
Site Survev
to initiating
the drilling
each site was conducted,
were surveyed.
and sampling
and the locations
The proposed
locations
program
at OU No. 2, a preliminary
of the proposed soil borings
were established
control
points near the site which are tied into the North
System
(NCSPCS).
State of North
Hoggard-Eure
Carolina,
completed
on September
Sampling
grids of boring
the areas within
distances
investigated,
was retained
Table
horizontal
Carolina
State Plane
a registered
the survey.
The preliminary
wells
and vertical
Coordinate
surveyor
in the
survey was
10,1992.
locations
for the soil investigation
points within
were established
2-3 summarizes
sampling
grid locations,
each of
of concern, and drilling
sample
of borings per grid, and the contaminants
2-10
within
each grid area were spaced at varying
on such factors as size of the area, contaminant
the number
and monitoring
by using
(Hoggard-Eure),
to perform
OU No. 2. The sampling
depending
accessibility.
Associates
survey of
spacings for each area
of concern.
TABLE
SOIL
2-3
INVESTIGATION
SAMPLING
GRID SUMMARY
OPERABLE
UNIT NO. 2
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
Number
of
Borings
in Grid
Sample Grid
Designation
Grid
Spacing
(feet)
Site G/Lot 201
201A
50/100
39
Pesticides
Site G/Lot 201
201B
50/100
39
Pesticides
Site G/Lot 201
201c
5OIlOO
41
PCBs
Site G/Lot 203
DDT
100
34
Pesticides
Site G/Lot 203
PCB
100
15
PCBs
Site G/Lot 203
OSA(l’,
300
44
OrganMInorganics
Site G/Ravine
R.AV
16
Organicsflnorganics
Site G/Wooded Area
201N
300
12
OrganicslInorganics
Site G/Wooded Area
201E
300
21
Organics/Inorganics
Site 61 Wooded Area
201s
300
12
Organics/Inorganics
OSA(2)
300
20
Organics/Inorganics
25
57
Petroleum
Hydrocarbons/
Organics/Inorganics
Site/Area
Site 82
Site 9
Notes:
Entire
Random
Site
Primary Contaminant
of Concern
(1) Lot 203 grid OSA soil borings SB21 through SB44
(2) Site 82 grid OSA soil borings SBl through SB20
Samples collected at soil borings SBll and SB12 (both located at grid “201N”)
are considered as background samples.
Refer to Figures 2-5,2-6,
Refer to Appendix
tested.
and 2-7 for soil sample locations.
C for summary
of sample depths and analytical
Note that soil borings for monitoring
this table.
2-11
well installation
parameters
are not represented
on
Selection
of the proposed soil boring
upon review
of several
investigations
(NUS,
sources of information.
from Camp Lejeune
handling
and disposal at the sites,
the EPIC were reviewed
2.4
Phase
Activity
activities
through
November
performed
geophysical
survey; a soil investigation
drum
including
waste sampling;
investigations;
investigative
monitoring
Unexploded
During
the pre-investigation
and small
from
at Sites 6 and 82
at Sites 6 and 82 commenced
including
drilling
well installation
(shallow
survey.
during
ordnance
21 and
the Phase I
(UXO) survey; a
and sampling;
a groundwater
and deep wells) and sampling;
and soil sampling;
and ecological
on August
implemented
site survey; an unexploded
Ordnance
surface water
The following
and sediment
sections discuss these
Survey
site visit
by the firm of Geo-Centers,
the drilling
(August,
arms expended cartridges
sections of Sites 6 and 82. Accordingly,
initiating
supplied
activities.
2.4.1
cartridges
photographs
waste
Site 6) as described in Section 2.2.
test pit excavations
and an aquatic
at OU No. 2, and records
aerial
10, 1992. The field program
consisted of a preliminary
of previous
areas which may have been used in the
Performed
investigation
investigation
historical
to identify
Investigations
results
and the Navy which describe previous
Additionally,
(i.e., Lot 203 within
I RI Field
for OU No. 2 was based
These sources included
personnel
and interpreted
The Phase I field investigations
continued
well locations
1992; ESE, 1990; and ESE, 1991) performed
obtained
past for disposal
and monitoring
large
caliper
expended
were noted exposed on the surface throughout
an unexploded
Inc., (Geo-Centers)
and sampling
1991), numerous
ordnance (UXO)
at several areas within
programs.
The UXO
survey was conducted
Sites 6 and 82 prior to
survey was conducted
within
Lot
203, areas south of Lot 203 (wooded areas), areas east of Lot 201 (wooded areas), and portions
of Site 82. The survey was performed
a UXO
geophysical
commenced
Investigation
presented
and a soil borehole/monitoring
on August 21,1992
Phase II was initiated
consisted
survey,
and were completed
on September
of test pit excavations.
and Removal
in Appendix
in two phases. Phase I included
Report,
27,1992,
A copy of Geo-Centers’
A.
2-12
well
UXO.
Phase
I tasks
in two weeks.
and continued
which includes
a UXO reconnaissance,
for one week.
UXO
the investigative
Surface
methods
Phase II tasks
and Subsurface
and results,
is
P-Y
2.4.2
Geophysical
A geophysical
Investigations
survey was conducted
Lot 203 on August
within
29 and 30, 1992. Originally
May 19921, the survey was planned
extensive
overgrowth
throughout
survey was conducted
firm of Weston Geophysical
of Hoggard-Eure
Corporation
Several
geophysical
electromagnetic
(GPR).
ETC profiling
identify
buried
complement
of parallel
were
conductivity
a widespread
Enried
of the survey indicate
areas
of the site, inside
for disposal of
spaced approximately
the
investigation
and ground
extent
The
loo-feet.
the perimeter
including
penetrating
of buried
material
radar
and to
survey was performed
objects and debris.
Lastly,
view of subsurface
stratigraphy
area containing
within
geophysical
buried
to
GPR techniques
metal
fence and approximately
and buried
exists
in the
parallel
to the
measurements
the woods.
presence of surface metal
were generally
of the site, as shown
lines of coverage were added to better define potential
One
15 + OOE/6 + OON, and its shape is characteristic
Magnetic
It was
road as shown on Figure 2-4.
2-4. Additional
of disposal
by EPIC.
the survey.
metal was also detected in the wooded area on the eastern portion
on Figure
to have been
Lot 203 by the surveying
The magnetometry
cross-sectional
Results
perimeter
within
magnetometry,
of subsurface
and tanks.
southern
supplied
to perform
during
to map the lateral
objects such as drums, pipelines,
portion
traverses
objects and other debris.
to reveal a graphic
southern
appeared
The
while the storage area was active.
employed
(ETC),
the ETC interpretation
wereinitiated
in
of Site 82. Because of
may have been utilized
(Weston) was retained
was performed
metal
Plan (submitted
of the survey grid.
techniques
terrain
portion
aerial photographs
survey grid was established
that consisted
Figure 2-4 shows the location
Study Work
Lot 203 that
drums of pesticides)
Prior to the survey, a geophysical
firm
areas within
observed in the photographs
wastes (possibly
of the wooded area north of
Site 82, however, most of the area was not investigated.
as depicted on historical
that the trenches
miscellaneous
in the RI/FS
to extend into the southern
to investigate
excavated and backfilled
believed
Lot 203 and portions
area
is centered
near
grid
coordinates
site,
due in part
of a trench.
erratic
objects and scattered
across the entire
scrap metal
2-13
and debris.
Areas of buried
to the
metal
delineated
on Figure
indicating
measurements
extend beyond the perimeter
Appendix
B contains
high
magnetic
intensities,
objects.
indicate
that fill
fence in the northeast
the report prepared
Inc.) for the geophysical
materials
fence. As shown on
or buried
debris
may
corner of the lot.
by Weston
(a subsidiary
of Baker
Environmental,
survey at Site 6.
Soil Investigation
The soil investigation
concern
[i.e.,
distribution
associated
implemented
pesticides,
at Sites 6 and 82 was intended
polychlorinated
biophenyls
at the site (refer to Tables
investigation
was performed
2.4.3.1
within
Analvtical
procedures
accordance
procedures
chain-of-custody
Region
methods
human
procedures.
Specific
of analytical
inorganics
and EPA Methods
operating
handling
and
sampling
data, performed
reviewing
technical
and a site-specific
evaluation
criteria
Guidelines
Moreover,
risks and ecological
2-3, several
study
procedures
the
impacts
sample
grids
were implemented
in
(USEPA,
preservation,
DQO
1991).
These
documentation,
are outlined
Level
601 and 6021 was performed
process involved
data validation
for this
procedures
under
The data validation
Functional
health
their
and
in the Final
RYFS
1992).
Validation
set of established
and evaluate
of
Control
employed
IV standard
sample
Work Plan for Site 6 (Baker,
The technical
etc.]
contaminants
Sites 6 and 82 to assist in sample collection.
include
evaluation,
(PCBs),
As shown on Table
Seuuences and Quality
EPA
also
potential
of concern.
and sampling
with
to identify
2-l and 2-2 for specific objectives).
to evaluate
with the contaminants
were established
Field
anomalously
lines were extended to the north beyond the perimeter
2-4, conductivity
2.4.3
with
the presence of buried ferrous metallic
Several geophysical
Figure
2-4 were coincident
is a systematic
by an independent
to determine
procedure
Inorganic
CLP
the data for completeness
set froth in the USEPAs
for Evaluating
IV, (i.e.,
of reviewing
Laboratory
and Organic
2-14
the usability
analytical
organics,
subcontractor.
of submission,
a
of the data.
data against
Data Validation
Analyses.
CLP
National
a
As a result of validation
there were no analytical
considered
to be estimated
commonly
encountered
Jqualified
data are to be used as positive
Blank
inorganic
data qualifier
of the containment
detected in any blank.
chloride,
toluene
maximum
detected
to blank
investigation
For common
and phthalate
amount
attributable
and have been assigned J qualifiers.
and air monitoring.
following
sections.
Drilling
November
drilling
services.
lab contaminants
with
USEPA
guidance,
as positive
only
amount
methylene
concentration
must
be ten times
the
contaminants
with
a B-qualifier
are
and have not been incorporated
shallow
as data points.
soil borings,
and analytical
at Sites 6 and 82 commenced
Hardin
The drilling
chemical
(i.e., contaminant
Site 6 was subdivided
and Huber,
and sampling
shallow
and deep physical
distribution)
into three
of Lot 203).
20 sample locations
Inc., (HHI)
programs
The soil
soil sampling,
field
sequences are discussed in the
through
into grid areas based on the suspected contaminants
locations
(i.e., geologic
to perform
the
at Sites 6 and 82 were
and hydrogeologic)
for the drilling
program,
and
including:
east, and south of Lot 201) along
Site 82 was considered
operations)
24 and continued
was retained
implemented
areas (grid locations)
(soil borings OSA-SBl
and previous military
on August
conditions.
Lot 201; Lot 203; and the wooded areas (north,
depict drilling
Consistent
are
is the most
(i.e., acetone, 2-butanone,
Organic
These activities
7, 1992.
to investigate
(north
The J qualifier
in the site sample is five times the maximum
in any blank.
activities
intended
ravine
values,
Procedures
The Phase I drilling
through
Several
detected in a sample are considered
at Sites 6 and 82 included
screening
“IV’.
data that are unqualified.
esters), the sample
contamination
conducted
2.4.3.2
in CLP packages.
or organic contaminants
if the concentration
values rejected
as one entire
OSA-SBBO).
grid area and consisted
of
These areas were subdivided
of concern (from past disposal
and their geographical
with the
locations.
Figures
2-52-6,
for Lot 201; Lot 203; and the wooded areas, (the ravine,
activities
and 2-7
and Site 82,
respectively.
The following
sections describe the drilling
procedures
employed
(i.e., less than 35 feet) and deep (greater than 100 feet) boreholes.
2-15
for advancing
the shallow
Shallow
Drilling
Shallow
boreholes
(HSA).
During
boreholes.
Method
Procedures
were advanced
drilling,
Split-spoon
inch inside diameter
samples
D 1586-84 (ASTM,
contained
and handled
sampling
activities
were collected
1984).
according
hollow-stem
auger
(ID) augers were used to advance
obtained
to the procedures
the augers according
during
outlined
using Level D personal
the drilling
in Section
the
to ASTM
program
were
Drilling
and
2.8.
[Note that upgraded
protection.
(e.g., Level D to Level C personal protection)
schemes were employed
borings advanced for monitoring
borings were collected
two-foot intervals
(i.e.,perched
were not required
Samples
collected
an additional
depth.
sample was retained
Soil samples obtained
surface to six-inches)
during
the
soil borings
and
potential
split-spoon
from borings
continuous
two-foot intervals
approximate
&foot intervals
advanced
for monitoring
(from the ground
thereafter
is provided
Each split-spoon
sample
the field using
a general
descriptions
until
Unified
content,
relative
density,
Lithologic
Appendix
D (D.l
through
Appendix
E (E.l and E.2).
included
plasticity,
were suspected
below the water table
to ensure a sufficient
well installation
the borings were terminated
to
quantity
of
were obtained
at
C (C.l through
visually
characterization
System
depths, and
Soils were classified
(USCS)
lithologic
and later transferred
of soil type, grain
information
of site soils are provided
and the Test Boring
boring
20
C.11).
by the site geologist.
in a field logbook
2-16
[approximately
of the sample numbers,
and other pertinent
descriptions
D.lO)
fronts
surface) to just below the water table, then at
Soil Classification
were recorded
Soil classifications
contamination.
in Appendix
was classified
records.
at the approximate
analysis and classification.
to 35 feet below ground surface (bgs)]. A summary
intervals
was collected
from soil
and then at continuous
wetting
Two-foot samples were obtained
for laboratory
exploratory
the borings were terminated
in some cases where
water table),
collected from exploratory
well installation.
at one-foot) until
table;
confirm groundwater
for samples
from the surface (ground
(starting
depth of the water
Lithologic
rig using
program.]
Two different
sampling
drill
from inside
Soil cuttings
were performed
levels of protection
drilling
3-l/4
using a truck-mounted
description.
onto boring
log
size, color, moisture
such as indications
on the Test Boring
and Well
in
Construction
of
Records in
Records
in
Additionally,
some samples
access with a drill
sampling
(e.g., ravine
area) were obtained
rig was not possible.
The
depth and a new, decontaminated
were also decontaminated
procedures outlined
in Section 2 .‘7.
(6GWlD,
from 107 feet (6GW7D)
6GW2D,
advanced using mud rotary
drilling
was employed
of augers.
Continuous
fluid
Potable
drilling
until
water from a nearby fire hydrant
on Investigative
2.4.3.2
wells.
Mud rotary
was terminated.
and the drilling
samples were collected
B-foot intervals.
depth
to just below the
Soils were visually
consisted
of a mixture
of sodium
at Site 9 was used to mix the materials.
fluid,
and mixing
for quality
fluids (along with the soil cuttings)
drums and later emptied
were advanced
into deep monitoring
soil conditions
(i.e., mud) used for the deep borings
were collected
tube (collected
control/quality
assurance
were temporarily
after the
(QA/QC)
stored in %-gallon
into rolloff boxes staged on site at a secure area (see Section
2.8 for
Derived Wastes).
Soil Sampling
The following
sections summarize
soil sampling
locations,
procedures,
and analytical
methods
for the soil investigation.
Locations
Soil samples
analytical
to the
as described in the previous paragraph.
tube was decontaminated)
Sampling
according
and 6GW28D)
the borehole
then at approximate
water source, drilling
employed
to collect the grab sample.
collection
bgs and converted
Field blanks of the potable
Drilling
6GW27D,
two-foot split-spoon
analysis),
classified by the site geologist
The drilling
6GW’7D,
because of the unconsolidated
water table (for laboratory
details
to the desired
advanced with 3-l/4 inch ID HSA to just below the water table, then
further
purposes.
was advanced
prior to sample
to 122 feet (6GW2D)
The borings were initially
bentonite.
a hand auger where
Procedures
Five deep soil borings
limitations
auger bucket
bucket was installed
The auger buckets
Deep Drilling
utilizing
were collected
testing.
Figures
throughout
2-5,2-6,
and the wooded areas, the ravine,
Sites 6 and 82 for soil classification
and 2-7 depict soil sample
and Site 82, respectively.
2-17
locations
purposes
and
for Lot 201; Lot 203;
Table 2-3 summarizes
the sample
,<-.
locations,
grid designations,
contaminant
grid spacings,
the number
of borings
per grid,
and primary
of concern for each area.
Sampling
Procedures
Surface (0 to 6 inches bgs) and subsurface (deeper than one foot) soil samples were collected
laboratory
analysis.
Surface
samples
subsurface samples were collected
impacted
soils.
Appendix
numbers,
and parameters
sampler
to the procedures
samples retained
sample
(i.e., elevated
to advancing
sample
samplers
outlined
for laboratory
D 1586-84 as detailed
were decontaminated
advanced
were collected
was also submitted
for monitoring
with soil conditions.
for analysis
collected
for volatile
organic
different
sections of the split-spoon
were prepared
analysis
according
were extracted
or auger bucket,
parameters
leaching
(TCLP)
[i.e., semivolatiles,
compounds,
mixed and then placed in the appropriate
laboratory
2-18
volatilization.
parameters]
containers.
of
from
was implemented
so
IV SOPS. Samples
spoon from
the entire sampling
PCBs, pesticides,
and engineering
were collected
a stainless-steel
representing
if evidence
was deeper than 10 feet.
to EPA Region
with
In
for analysis).
for analysis
methodology
were taken not to aerate the sample, to minimize
for other analytical
from the surface and just
well installation
that groundwater
Soil samples retained
to sample
in Section 2.7.
was noted or if the boring
results could be correlated
in Section
prior
two samples per borehole were submitted
PID readings)
from borings
The first few inches
grab soil samples were collected
Method
analysis
from a borehole
six
the augers (some areas were
This sampling
procedure
depths,
the HSA to approximately
just above and just below the water table.
Precautions
extent of potentially
for the grab sample.
in accordance with ASTM
according
retained
while
samples) or hand auger as described
Deeper subsurface
collection
Samples
prior
material).
Both the HSA and split-spoon
contamination
evaluation
the sample
by advancing
could be retained
2.4.3.1.
some cases, a third
and vertical
C.11) summarize
roots were removed
above the water table (i.e., typically
i-
through
via a drill rig (i.e., split-spoon
covered with grass or humus
In general,
the horizontal
Surface samples were obtained
of top soil or matted
for risk assessment
analyzed.
inches bgs so that the soil cuttings
with a split-spoon
to evaluate
C (C.l
Soil samples were obtained
in Section 2.4.3.1.
were collected
for
Samples
toxicity
interval.
retained
characteristic
were first thoroughly
Samples
on which grain-size
analysis
were performed
were collected
by advancing
the hollow-stem
augers and retaining
the soil cuttings.
Following
sample collection,
in a cooler.
location,
Sample
preparation
date, time,
documentation,
each sample retained
also included
and analytical
which included
and sampling
personnel,
information
accompanied
log book.
number,
(Ceimic)
number,
depth,
Chain-of-custody
date, time of sampling,
the samples to the laboratory.
methods are summarized
respectively.
to Table
Samples
in Narragansatt,
were shipped
RI.
on Tables 2-4 and 2-5 for organic and inorganic
Samples were analyzed
2-3).
Accordingly,
For example,
for contaminants
in grid
most of the samples
201A,
PCBs) and Target Analyte
within
nitrogen,
waste characteristics
potential
List (TAL) inorganics
treatment
(i.e., flashpoint,
grid or in areas where indications
were noted.
grain-size
of the analytical
Quality
and Quality
Assurance
Field quality
sampling
assurance
program.
procedures
total
These
(i.e., duplicate
Control
blanks);
and 4) evaluate
(i.e., PID readings
shipping
(i.e., trip blanks).
hazardous
soil conditions
or analytical
(generally
conditions.
for
results)
near center of grid) for
Appendix
C (C.1 through
C.ll)
for the various grid areas.
(QA/QC)
samples were also collected
were obtained
implemented
whether
and RCXA
organic
Samples
control
samples);
and
(from grids
fluoride,
general
and
These samples were collected near the center of each
program
samples
total
TCLP,
etc.) to evaluate
of contamination
and quality
were properly
methodology
parameters);
subsurface physical
provides a summary
other
pesticides,
Selected samples
chloride,
Samples were also collected at selected locations
analysis to evaluate
pesticides;
semivolatiles,
(total metals).
ignitability,
and disposal options.
(volatiles,
for residual
(engineering
for TCL
are pesticides.
at sample points located on the perimeter
for full TCL organics
alkalinity
analyses,
each grid area (refer
of concern
from this grid were analyzed
Lot 201) were also analyzed
and total
of concern within
the contaminants
samples from this grid (i.e., generally
center of grid) were analyzed
located
of sample
in a field
such as sample
was stored with ice
Requirements
Analytical
random
analysis
documentation
parameters
via Federal Express to Ceimic Corporation
Analytical
for laboratory
to:
(i.e., equipment
3) establish
cross-contamination
Data Quality
Objectives
2-19
1) ensure
rinsate
field
samples);
background
occurred
that
during
decontamination
2) evaluate
conditions
during
the
(i.e., field
sampling
(DQCs) for the QA/QC
field
samples
and/or
were
TABLE
SUMMARY
Volatiles
OF METHOD
PERFORMANCE
OPERABLE
UNIT NO.
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
by CLP Protocol
L
1
I
I
Note:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
Chloromethane
Bromomethane
Vinyl Chloride
Chloroethane
Methylene Chloride
Acetone
Carbon Disulfide
l.l.-Dichloroethene
l.l-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethene
(total)
Chloroform
1,2-Dichloroethane
2-Butanone
l,l,l-Trichloroethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
Bromodichloromethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
Trichloroethene
Dibromochloromethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Benzene
trans-1,8Dichloropropene
Bromoform
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
2-Hexanone
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Chlorobenzene
Ethyl Benzene
Styrene
Xylenes (Total)
*
2-4
I
I
!
I
Water
Pa
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
LIMITS
- ORGANICS
2
CTO-0133
CAROLINA
Quantitation
Limits*
Low Soil
Med. Soil
ugl/Kg
uglKg
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
I
1200
I
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
I
1200
I
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
!
I
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
I 1200
I
10
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
10
1200
Quantitation
limits listed for soil/sediment
are based on wet weight. The
quantitation
limits calculated by the laboratory for soil/sediment,
calculated
on dry weight basis, will be higher.
2-20
TABLE
SUMMARY
Semivolatiles
64.
65.
66.
Notes:
2-4 (Continued)
OF METHOD
PERFORMANCE
OPERABLE
UNIT NO.
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
by CLP Protocol
10
25
10
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
3-Nitroaniline
Acenaphthene
*
#
LIMITS
- ORGANICS
2
CTO-0133
CAROLINA
330
800
330
10000
25000
10000
Quantitation
limits listed for soil/sediment
are based on wet weight. The
quantitation
limits calculated by the laboratory for soil/sediment,
calculated
on dry weight basis, will be higher.
Previously known by the name bis (ZChloroisopropyl)
ether
2-21
TABLE
SUMMARY
Semivolatiles
Notes:
*
#
2-4 (Continued)
OF METHOD
PERFORMANCE
OPERABLE
UNIT NO.
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
LIMITS
- ORGANICS
2
CTO-0133
CAROLINA
by CLP Protocol
Qua&it&ion
limits listed for soil/sediment
are based on wet weight. The
quantitation
limits calculated by the laboratory for soil/sediment,
calculated
on dry weight basis, will be higher.
Previously known by the name bis (2Xhloroisopropyl)
ether
2-22
TABLE
SUMMARY
2-4 (Continued)
OF METHOD
PERFORMANCE
OPERABLE
UNIT NO.
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
LIMITS
- ORGANICS
2
CTO-0133
CAROLINA
Quantitation
Pesticides/l?CBs
by CLP Protocol
Water
P&L
0.05
L
98.
alpha-BHC
99.
100.
101.
beta-BHC
delta-BHC
gamma-BHC
102.
103.
104.
105.
Heptachlor
Aldrin
Heptachlor
epoxide
Eudosulfan
I
Notes:
*
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
(lindane)
Limits*
Soil
W/Kg
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
Quantitation
limits listed for soil/sediment
are based on wet
weight. The quantitation
limits calculated by the laboratory
for soil/sediment,
calculated on dry weight basis, will be
higher.
There is no differentiation
between the preparation
of low and medium
samples in this method for the analysis of Pesticides/Aroclors.
2-23
soil
TABLE
2-5
SUMMARY
OF METHOD
PERFORMANCE
LIMITS
- INORGANICS
OPERABLE
UNIT NO. 2
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
Contract Required
Detection Limit
Analyte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
200
60
10
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
200
5
5
I
Calcium
Chromium
t
!
I
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
.
!
0.2
40
5000
5
10
5000
I
10
50
20
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Notes:
I
I
100
3
5000
15
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
t
5000
10
50
25
\
*
Quantitation
limits listed for soil/sediment
are based on wet
weight. The quantitation
limits calculated by the laboratory
for soil/sediment,
calculated on dry weight basis, will be
higher.
#
Previously
known by the name bis (2Chloroisopropyl)
2-24
ether
implemented
Branch
in accordance with DQO Level IV as defined in the Environmental
Standard
Operating
EPA Region IV (1991).
Support
samples,
l
and
Quality
to Naval
Agency DQO Level D, as specified in the “Sampling
types of field
equipment
for the Navy Installation
QA/QC
rinsates,
listed below (USEPA,
l
(SOPS)
This DQO Level is equivalent
Assurance Requirements
Several
Procedures
samples
were collected
field blanks,
Energy
and analyzed
Manual,
and Environmental
Analysis
Programs”
and trip blanks.
document
(1988).
including
These sampling
Quality
duplicate
definitions
are
1991):
Dunli’cate
Sample:
containers
from the same source under identical
Eauinment
Two or more samples
Blanks:
obtained
Assurance
and Chemical
Restoration
Compliance
by running
collected
simultaneously
into
conditions.
Equipment
field
organic-free
water over/through
blanks
are defined
as samples
sample
collection
after it has been cleaned.
These samples
will
procedures
(The equipment
could have been cleaned
were adequate.
prior to the field operation.)
Equipment
separate
are collected
are
equipment
be used to determine
blanks
which
if cleaning
in the field or
daily but only samples
collected on every other day are analyzed.
l
Field Blanks:
Organic-free
into the appropriate
sample
determine
if contaminants
integrity.
Field blanks
where volatile
water is taken to the field in sealed containers
organic
containers
present
should
at designated
locations.
This
and poured
is done to
in the area may have an affect on the sample
be collected
contamination
in dusty environments
is present
and/or from areas
in the atmosphere
and originating
from a source other than the source being sampled.
l
Triu
Blanks:
sample
sampling
Trip blanks
container
and are kept
with
prior
to the sampling
the investigative
event. They are then packaged for shipment
for analysis.
At no time after their preparation
before they return
blanks
are prepared
to the laboratory.
to determine
back to the laboratory.
each shipment
samples
Field sampling
for each cooler.
the
with the other samples and sent
teams utilize
during
volatile
to be opened
organic trip
storage and transportation
If samples are to be shipped, trip blanks
2-25
throughout
are the sample containers
if samples were contaminated
but not necessarily
event in the actual
are to be provided
for
TABLE
SUMMARY
OF FIELD QUALITY
ASSURANCE/QUALITY
CONTROL
PROGRAM
FOR THE PHASE I SOIL INVESTIGATION
SITES 6 and 82
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
&A/&C Sample (1)
Trip Blanks (2)
Field Blanks
Equipment
Rinsates (5)
IField
Field Duplicates (6)
Notes:
2-6
Number
of
Of
Samples
Frequency
of Collection
One per Cooler
One per Event (4)
One per Day
10% of Sample
1
Frequency
1
48
3
Analytical
TCL
TCL
TCL
TCL
SAMPLING
Parameters
Volatiles
Organics/TAL
Organics/TAL
Organics/TAL
(3)
Inorganics
Inorganics
Inorganics
(1) &A/&C sample types defined on pages 2-12 and 2-13 in text.
(2) Trip blanks submitted with coolers which contained samples for volatile
analysis. Samples analyzed for TCL Volatiles only.
(3) Parameters analyzed according to procedures outlined on Tables 2-5 and 2-6.
(4) An event is defined as one 14 day period. Field blank includes a sample of
drilling mud (SGWlD-FB-03).
(5) Equipment
rinsates collected from various sampling equipment
(e.g., split
spoons, stainless steel spoons, hollow stem augers, etc.). Note that samples
were collected daily but were analyzed every other day of the sampling event.
Accordingly, the number of samples presented represents the number of
samples analyzed.
(6) Field duplicate samples collected from soil borings presented in Appendix N.
2-26
Table 2-6 summarizes
samples,
field QA/QC
and analytical
laboratory-prepared
collecting
collected
daily
(USEPA,
1991J.l
containers
vicinity
in laboratory
Field blanks
and “PCB”
Field Screening
Several air monitoring
containers.
activities
ambient
air monitoring
radiation
meter
in the vicinity
particles,
Measurements
log books and on calibration
were calibrated
forms (retained
sampling
and
samples
were
every
other
by filling
day
sample
were collected
in the
during
monitoring.
was performed
Samples
meter
During
detector
PID/l?ID
and Well Construction
drilling,
(PID),
(i.e., split-spoon
and a
samples)
for volatile
organic
were not suspected
and documentation
by Baker).
and
with a lower explosive
to measure
particles
drilling
at site)
Prior
to
was recorded in field
measurements
are provided
Records in Appendices
D
Investigation
investigation
implemented
of concern and evaluate
are summarized
the field
procedures
in accordance
sample handling
sampler)
in the field was recorded in a field log book.
and E (E.l and E.2).
implemented
contaminant
(note that radioactive
(D-1 through
In general,
were implemented
and the radiation
Records, and Test Boring
this investigation
procedures
contaminants.
on the Test Boring
contaminants
The field blanks
detector (FID) or photoionization
obtained
the instruments
The groundwater
were analyzed
the soil investigation
of the borehole
for airborne
vapor and radioactive
Groundwater
rinsate
water.
and safety and initial
a PID or FID,
2.4.4
device (e.g., split-spoon
by pouring
grids.
a flame ionization
D.lO)
were collected
of QA/QC
and Air Monitoring
to monitor
daily monitoring,
during
deionized
were screened with
respectively.
the number
[Note that equipment
were collected
sampling
for health
(LEL) meter,
samples
but the samples
team),
and field screening
sampling
rinsate
water over the sampling
(from each field
of “DDT”
types, sample frequencies,
Equipment
with laboratory-prepared
2.4.3.3
limit
methods.
deionized
the sample
sample
with
and preservation,
procedures
are outlined
at Sites
their distribution
on Tables 2-l through
and sampling
EPA
Region
6 and 82 was intended
at the site. The primary
IV SOPS.
employed
for this
These procedures
and chain-of-custody
in the Final RI/FS Work Plan for Site 6.
2-27
objectives
of
2-2.
methods
documentation,
to identify
study
were
also included
procedures.
Specific
The following
sections describe monitoring
well development,
2.4.4.1
groundwater
MonitorinP
The following
sampling,
Nineteen
shallow Type II (i.e., monitoring
confining
layer) monitoring
6GW28S,
and 6GW3OS) were installed
evaluate
wells
During
well was installed
installed
through
for both the shallow
investigation
impacted
for the rationale
and to
of the wells
and historical
of the well locations.
monitoring
five existing
by SM&E
were
wells.
shallow
wells
in April
19921, were
wells (25 feet in depth) were installed
as part of a
for a proposed landfill
wells were substituted
the locations
2-8.
for
groundwater
background
the RI investigation)
and 6BP6 installed
Accordingly,
samples
wells, 6GW24 and 6GW29,
Green Road to serve as site-specific
1992).
6GW26,
shown on Figure
data, past disposal practices,
a summary
of the area (during
6GW25,
groundwater
at the site. As stated previously,
noted east of Piney Green Road. The SM&E
investigation
outer casing to seal off a
6GW23,
surficial
extent of potentially
(denoted as 6MW2,6MW3,6MW8,6MW9,
the five existing
without
RPFS Work Plan two other monitoring
a reconnaissance
and Davis, September
as 6GW9
to collect
and horizontal
of previous
east of Piney
preliminary
procedures
at Sites 6 and 82 at the locations
Table 2-7 provides
in the Final
proposed
well installation
(denoted
flow patterns
were based on review
aerial photographs.
wells
were
the nature
groundwater
Initially
procedures.
wells.
Well Installation
characterizing
and deep wells,
Well Installation
Shallow
monitoring
for both shallow
and water level measurement
sections describe monitoring
and deep monitoring
The
well installation
in the area (report submitted
wells 6GW29
in their
by Dewberry
and 6GW24 were not installed
place to serve as site-specific
and
background
wells.
Additionally,
several other monitoring
6GW16
and 6GW23
were proposed in the wooded areas south and east of Lot 201, and east of Piney
Green Road.
Monitoring
wells 6GWll,6GW15,
was relocated
wells including
and 6GW23
6GWl1,
were relocated
6GW15,
within
Lot 203 while
6GW16
to the wooded area between Lots 201 and 203. These wells were moved to new
locations
during
the investigation
revealed
past activities
(e.g., ground
because aerial
photographs
(acquired
in September
scars) in some of these areas. Additionally,
2-28
1992)
well 6GW16
TABLE
PHASE
I MONITORING
REMEDIAL
MCB CAMP
Site
No.
Well Designation
General
2-7
WELL SUMMARY
SITES 6 AND 82
INVESTIGATION
LEJEUNE,
NORTH
AND RATIONALE
CTO-0133
CAROLINA
Location
Purpose
82
GGWlS*, 82MWl*,
82MW2*, 82MW3*,
6GW26,6GW27S,
and 6GW28S
Site 82
Monitor shallow groundwater
downgradient from Lot 203.
82
6GWlD, 6GW27D,
and 6GW28D
Site 82
Monitor deep groundwater
from Lot 203.
6
6GW3*
Lot 203 near the
Ravine Area
Monitor shallow groundwater
sides of the ravine Area.
6GW30
North
Monitor groundwater quality across Wallace
Creek to assess other potential contaminant
plumes from other unknown sources or to assess
the extent of horizontal migration
from Lot 203.
6GW2S*, 6MW3*,
82MW30*, 6MW9*,
6MW2*, 6MW8*, and
6BP6*
East of Lot 203Piney
Green Road
Monitor
quality.
upgradient
shallow groundwater
6GW2D
East of Lot 203IPiney
Green Road
Monitor
upgradient
deep groundwater
6GW4*, 6GW20,
6GW21,6GW25,
6GW19, and 6GW16
South of Lot 203 and
North of Lot 201 in a
wooded portion of
Site 6
Monitor groundwater quality in this portion of
site where random disposal of wastes may have
occurred. These wells also will assess upgradient
conditions with respect to Lot 201.
6GW5* and 6GW22
Area A, Lot 201
Monitor upgradient and downgradient
groundwater quality in the surficial aquifer.
6GW14,6GW18,
6GW6*, and 6GW17
East of Lot 201 in a
wooded portion of
Site 6
Monitor groundwater quality in the surficial
aquifer upgradient of Lot 201 and monitor
groundwater quality in this portion of the site
where random dumping has occurred.
6GW8*, 6GW7S*,
6GW12, and 6GW13
Downgradient
from
Area B and Area C,
Lot 201
Monitor shallow groundwater quality
downgradient
of the former pesticide and PCB
storage areas.
6GW7D
Downgradient
of
Lot 201 and Area C
Monitor deep groundwater
of Lot 201.
6GW9, and 6GWlO
South of Bear Head
Creek
Monitor shallow groundwater quality in this
wooded portion of Site 6 where random disposal
has occurred. These wells will also serve to
assess groundwater quality downgradient
from
Site 9.
Lot 203
Monitor shallow groundwater quality within Lot
203 where random disposal of wastes may have
occurred.
6GWl1,
6GW23
Note:
*
_
GGWlS,
and
Denotes existing
of Site 82
monitoring
well.
2-29
quality
quality
downgradient
quality
quality
on both
quality.
downgradient
was repositioned
because indications
suspected solvent material)
were uncovered
Prior to well installation,
a permit
from the North
Environmental
and Natural
provided
of shallow
Carolina
The shallow
of Raleigh,
of
of a Well or Well System was obtained
Department
North
of Environmental,
Carolina.
upon completion
procedures).
inch ID HSA prior to well installation.
interception
pails
test pit activities.
Commission,
wells were installed
(refer to Section 2.4.3.1 for drilling
table encountered
(i.e., 5-gallon
Health
A copy of the permit
is
F.
monitoring
feet bgs (6GW28S).
during
for the Construction
Resources (NC DEHNR)
in Appendix
soil contamination
Each borehole
intervals
initial
drilling.
sufficient
the boreholes
was over-drilled
with 8-l/4
Well depths ranged from 17.6 feet bgs (6GW17)
In general, the wells were installed
during
of advancing
Further,
to compensate
approximately
15 feet below the water
the wells were installed
for seasonal
to 32
at depths and with
variations
in the water
table
(known to range from 2 to 4 feet).
Well construction
details for the Phase I shallow wells are summarized
construction
diagrams
are shown on the Test Boring
in Appendix
E. Note that well construction
details
on Table 2-8, and well
and Well Construction
for existing
Records provided
site wells are summarized
on
Table l-l in Section 1.0.
The wells are constructed
of 4-inch nominal
diameter
Schedule
40, flush-joint
and threaded
PVC casing with 15-foot long No. 10 slotted screen sections (note that a 5- and lo-foot
of screen were screwed together
to make up the 15-foot long screen). Four-inch
were selected so that the wells could also be used to extract
necessary.
A 15-foot long screen was used to compensate
2 to 4 feet) in the water table.
approximately
the annulus
the HSA.
a-feet (where conditions
permitted)
A l-to 2-foot sodium bentonite
surface water run-off
(approximately
for construction
if
(ranges from
2 silica sand), extending
wall (12-inch borehole
diameter)
with potable
onto the sand pack.
of the pad.
cap were fitted at the top of each well.
2-30
the material
to prevent
The remaining
with a mixture
An above ground
from inside
water (from the same
The seal was instaIled
one to two feet in most cases) was backfilled
and 5 percent bentonite
and PVC locking
from intruding
for treatment,
pellet seal was then placed (by dropping
in Section 2.4.3.1).
wells
above the top of the screen, was placed in
above the sand pack and hydrated
source as described
diameter
for seasonal variations
sand pack (Number
between the screen and the borehole
down the borehole)
water
A medium-grained
groundwater
section
cement
annular
of Portland
steel protective
Well 6GW22 was completed
or
space
cement
casing
with
a
TABLE
SUMMARY
Well No.
Date
Installed
OF PHASE
I SHALLOW
WELL CONSTRUCTION
SITES 6 and 82
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-6133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
Top of PVC
Casing
Elevation (1)
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(feet, above mal)
(feet, above ml)
6GWQ
9124192 1
6GWlO
Q/23/92
21.11
19.88
6GWll
10/10/92
35.05
6GW12
9124192
6GW13
6GW14
6GWlSS
1
Well Depth
(feet, below
ground eurface)
(feet, below
ground mrfaee)
Screen
Interval
Depth
(feet, below
ground mu-face)
I
Stick-Up
(feet, below
ground surface)
(feet, below
ground surface)
(feet, above
ground surface)
3.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.6
I
19.5
18.7
4.0-18.4
2.5
18.29
17.0
18.5
18.0
3.8-17.6
2.4
9124192
20.10
18.1
18.5
18.0
3.8-17.6
2.0
1016192
28.49
25.5
23.0
22.0
7.5-21.7
5.0
3.2
3.0
lOlll/Q2
29.07
26.1
20.5
20.0
5.4-19.7
3.0
1.5
2.9
6GW16
lOllll92
27.63
24.9
20.0
20.0
5.4-19.8
3.0
6GW17
9125192
28.10
25.7
18.5
17.6
2.3-17.1
1.5
0.5
6GW18
9125192
29.70
26.5
19.5
18.5
3.9-18.1
2.0
1.0
3.2
6GWlQ
lOl6l92
27.95
25.2
20.5
20.0
5.2-19.3
3.0
1.6
2.75
6GW20
1018192
25.08
22.5
24.0
19.7
4.8-19.4
2.1
1.1
6GW21
6GW22
9124192
30.30
27.9
24.0
22.5
8.0-22.0
6.0
4.5
2.4
9124192
24.13
24.5
20.0
19.5
4.5-19.0
3.0
2.0
NA (2)
26.96
24.5
22.0
21.0
8.4-22.7
5.0
3.0
I
2.56
I
5.3-18.7
3.8-17.5
Depth to
Bentonite
32.4
20.0
I
Depth to
Sand Pack
18.5
lOl12l92
18.6
17.2
Boring Depth
DETAILS
19.1
18.0
6GW23
I
2-8
2.5
2.6
1
I
2.4
2.58
6GW25
6GW26
1018192
34.30
32.1
24.0
23.5
8.9-23.2
6.0
4.2
1
2.2
lOlQl92
23.66
20.9
20.0
20.0
5.0-19.7
3.0
1.4
I
2.7
6GW28S
10/10/92
30.20
27.6
32.5
32.0
17.5-31.7
15.0
13.3
1
2.6
6GW3OS
lOllOl92
3.0
1.0
I
2.7
Notes:
1
12.60
I
9.9
I
21.0
(1) msl - mean sea level
(2) NA = Not Applicable; flush-mounted
well
Horizontal positions are referenced to N.C. State Plane Coordinate
datum NGVD 29.
I
20.0
1
5.3-19.7
1
System (NAD 27) CF = 0.9999216 from USMC Monument
Toney. Vertical
flush-mounted
cover because of the high traffic conditions
with the North
Carolina
Typical
well permit
well construction
information
in Lot 201. The wells were tagged
and marked
“Caution
-- Not Potable
Water”.
details are shown on Figure 2-9.
Deep Well Installation
Five deep monitoring
installed
to investigate
contaminant
whether
main
wells
impact
contaminants
water supply
(GGWlD,
6GW2D,
deep hydrogeologic
6GW7D,
and geologic
on the deeper water-bearing
have migrated
aquifer
Lejeune
(Castle
at depths ranging
selection
of well depth was based on geologic conditions
contain
Lejeune (Harned,
The locations
from 100.5 feet bgs (6GW7D)
the upper portion
the upper portion
the site [i.e., to evaluate
aquifer)].
encountered
in the field.
limestone
of the deep wells were selected based on the results of previous
relating
adjacent
to shallow well locations
activities
materials)
of deep well locations.
The deep monitoring
were reported.
The locations
for Camp
diameter
off the borehole
at a minimum
wall).
(via a tremmie
pipe) with
bentonite.
An above ground steel protective
well construction
2-9).
2.4.3.1.
a mixture
Table
bentonite
borehole diameter)
pellet seal was then placed
The remaining
of Portland
cement
casing and PVC locking
2-9 provides
details.
2-32
by
in place because of the
above the sand pack and hydrated
in Section
backfilled
of each well (refer to Figure
A sodium
A medium-grained
of 2-feet above the top of the screen,
(sand pack was not tremmied
down the borehole)
(same source as described
for the rationale
Schedule 40, flush-joint
between the screen the borehole wall (1Pinch
the material
(i.e., well clusters)
Table 2-7 provides a summary
of 4-inch nominal
2 silica sand) extending
the sand down the borehole
of bridging
investigations
of these wells are shown on Figure 2-8.
wells are constructed
was placed in the annulus
monitoring
to
disposal (or storage of
PVC casing with a lo-foot long No. 10 slotted screen section.
sand pack (Number
water
These wells
to past disposal or storage activities.
hazardous
(by dropping
The
et al., 1989).
was noted in the past, or in areas where previous
possibility
were
which is considered
where contamination
pouring
The wells
of the main water supply aquifer (Castle Hayne Aquifer)
the deep wells were installed
and threaded
zones to the
to 119 feet bgs (6GW2D).
of a sandy-gravelly
(ESE, 1986; and NUS, 1992) and on information
In general,
Hayne
were
and to evaluate
from the shallow water-bearing
installed
were screened within
and 6GW28D)
conditions,
zones underlying
downward
for Camp
6GW27D,
a summary
annular
with potable
space was
and 5 percent
sodium
cap were fitted at the top
of the Phase
I deep
i
>
TABLE2-9
SUMMARYOFPHASEIDEEPWELLCONSTRUCTIONDETAILS
SITES6AND82
REMEDIALINVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCBCAMPLEJEUNE,NORTHCAROLINA
Y
Ground
Top of PVC
Surface
Casing
Elevation
Elevation (1) (feet, above
Depth of
Boring Depth ~Outer Casing
Well
Depth
Screen
Interval
Depth
Depth to
Sand Pack I
(feet, below
ground
aurface)
(feet, below
ground surfaces
(feet, below
ground surface)
Depth to
Bentonite
Stick-Up
Well No.
Date
Installed
6GW 1D
1017-8192
35.31
32.8
117.0
NA (2)
112.5
102.7-111.7
99.5
6GW2D
10/10/92
10/13-14i92
37.61
35.1
122.0
26.0
119.0
108.1-118.1
105.0
6GW7D
10/6-7192
20.08
17.4
107.0
NA
100.5
90.5-99.5
86.5
I
83.0
I
2.6
6GW27D
lO/ll-12/92
24.47
22.5
112.0
NA
110.0
100.1-109.1
97.0
94.5
31.74
28.7
115.0
NA
114.5
104.0-113.6
99.0
I
I
1.9
10/20-21/92
I
I
O” 6GW28D
(feet, above melI
IId)
(feet, below
ground surface)
I
(feet, below
ground surface)
(feet, below
ground
eurface)
I
I
96.0
(feet, above
ground
surface)
I
I
101.0
I
2.5
2.5
I
95.0
3.0
Notes: (1) msl - mean sea level
(2) NA = Not Applicable; outer casing not installed
Horizontal positions are referenced to N.C. State Plane Coordinate System (NAD 27) CF = 0.9999216 from U.S.M.C. Monument Toney. Vertical datum
NGVD 29.
One of the deep wells, 6GW2D,
a Type III well).
more durable
was constructed
As illustrated
on Figure
in a different
2-10, an &inch
than PVC) outer casing was installed
casing was installed
approximately
manner
as described above (i.e.,
steel (steel was used because it is
and grouted
in place (at 26 feet bgs). This
because a clay layer (i.e., layer of lower hydraulic
two-feet in thickness
was cased-off to minimize
was encountered
the possibility
conductivity
material)
from 25 feet to 27 feet bgs. This layer
of cross-contaminating
the deeper drinking
water
aquifer.
2.4.4.2
Well Development
Following
well construction
Procedures
and curing of the bentonite
deep well was developed
to remove fine-grained
interconnection
the well and the formation.
combination
between
of surging
evacuated
and pumping
(centrifugal
from the wells, followed by 10 minutes
wells were developed
by forcing
seal, each newly installed
sediment
from the screen and to establish
Shallow
pump).
wells were developed
Typically,
of surging,
temporarily
stored
air into the well using an air compressor
(constructed
of flexible
the well.]
in drums
50 gallons
then continued
water to flow to the surface. [Note that an air filter was installed
oil and grease from entering
then
Groundwater
transferred
PVC) were dedicated
recovered
into
shallow and
of water were
pumping.
an on-site
Deep
and allowing
on the compressor
during
for each well to minimize
the
to prevent
well development
tanker.
by a
Pumping
was
hoses
the potential
for cross
contamination.
Three to five well volumes
were removed
the water was essentially
sediment-free.
temperature
volume
were recorded
measurements
shallow
were also recorded
and deep water-bearing
zones.
are provided
2.4.4.3
Water Level Measurements
water level
points (marked
Measurements
to assist in determining
information
Static
from each well (where conditions
in Appendix
measurements
of pH, specific conductance,
well stabilization.
during
development
Well
Development
Periodic
to evaluate
Forms
until
and
flow and
flow rates of the
summarizing
this
G (G. 1 and G.2).
were collected
on PVC casing) at each existing
and 3-10 in Section 3.7.2 for results).
permitted)
from top-of-PVC
and newly installed
Phase I groundwater
2-34
casing
(TOC)
reference
well (refer to Tables 3-5
data was collected from the shallow
wells on September
30, October 26, and November
wells on October 26 and November
Groundwater
measurements
7,1992;
data was collected
from the deep
7,1992.
were recorded using an electric
measuring
tape. Measurements
were recorded to the nearest O.Ol-foot from TOC. Water level data were collected within
hour period.
a 24-hour
Additionally,
period
groundwater,
All newly
with
the water level was monitored
a data logger
installed
and existing
in relationship
retained
for the survey,
established
Vertical
Carolina
monitoring
wells
in the shallow
were surveyed
over
and deep
State Plane
and vertical
Coordinate
temporary
to establish
control.
accuracy of each well (established
to 0.01 feet and horizontal
by using horizontal
not be established,
vertical
Hoggard-Eure
was
to TOC at each well or top
accuracy within
0.1 foot. Control
was
control points near the site which are tied into the
System (NCSPCS).
benchmarks
In cases where the points
could
from the closest United
States
were established
Survey (USGS) benchmark.
2.4.4.4
Three
changes
to mean sea level (msl) and horizontal
of staff gauge) was measured
Geological
daily
and 6GW28D
respectively.
elevation
North
to evaluate
at wells 6GW28S
a two
Staff Gauge Installation
staff gauges (BHSGl,
BHSG2,
and BHSGS)
were installed
in Bear Head
evaluate
surface water fluctuations
and to assist in determining
patterns
in the area. The locations
of the gauges are shown on Figure
were surveyed
installation.
(both horizontal
Measurements
and vertical
surficial
groundwater
to
flow
2-8. The staff gauges
from top of staff gauge)
were recorded by reading
Creek
in place following
the stream levels on the calibrated
(O.l-
feet) gauges (refer to Table 3-7 in Section 3.7.2).
2.4.4.5
Groundwater
Samnling
This section
describes the sampling
groundwater
sampling
Sampling
procedures
and analytical
methods
employed
for the
shallow
(17), and
program.
Locations
Groundwater
newly installed
samples
(Phase I - Round
One) were collected
from existing
shallow (19) and deep (5) wells at Sites 6 and 82. Monitoring
2-35
well 82MW30
(background
well for the Site 82 investigation)
was encountered
sampled.
inside
Rationale
the well.
Figure 2-8 shows the locations
for the well locations
Sampling
Procedures
Samples
were collected
evaluate
overall
sampling
procedures
to confii
groundwater
could not be sampled
are summarized
because an obstruction
of the monitoring
on Table 2-7.
the presence or absence of contaminants
chemistry
were performed
wells
of concern
in the shallow and deep groundwater.
and
Groundwater
in accordance with EPA Region IV SOPS and as outlined
in the Final RI/FS Work Plan.
Prior
to groundwater
procedures
outlined
purging,
water
in Section 2.4.4.3.
to the nearest
O.l-foot
measurements
were used to calculate
volume
levels from
using
each well were measured
according
to
The total well depth was also recorded from each well
decontaminated
a steel tape.
the volume
Water
level
and well depth
of water in each well and the minimum
of water necessary to purge the well.
Following
well volume
calculations,
from each well prior to sampling.
a minimum
Water
pump
and teflon
hoses.
maintained
during
purging.
Measurements
groundwater
to purging
was stabilized
A flow rate of 1 to 2 gallons
Groundwater
and after each well volume
before sampling.
was removed
These measurements
samples were collected
equipped
bailer
into laboratory-prepared,
with a teflon-coated
Samples
semivolatiles,
(GPM)
was
and temperature
to ensure
that
the
were recorded in a field log
Purge water was containerized
as described in the Section 2.7.
bailer)
on ice.
per minute
of pH, specific conductance,
book (refer to Tables 4-25 and 26 in Section 4.1.2.2 for results).
and handled
were purged
was purged from each well using a decontaminated
submersible
were made prior
of three to five well volumes
bottles
using decontaminated
leader.
preserved
TAL
were collected
(i.e., bottom
loading
directly
from the
The samples were introduced
sample
for the volatile
PCBs, pesticides,
teflon bailers
containers
organic
metals
analyzed
for volatiles
(acidified
with HCl) to minimize
volatilization.
collected
in laboratory-prepared
bottles
(acidified
to pH <2 with HNOs).
(total
analysis
first,
analyzed
followed
by
Samples
into 40 ml vials
for dissolved
prior to placement
The samples were filtered
and stored
and cyanides.
water from the bailer
Samples
2-36
were filled
and dissolved),
by slowly pouring
and filtered
(where appropriate)
metals
in preserved
in the field through
were
bottles
a disposable
0.45 micron
membrane
the filtering
procedure.
Preparation
of groundwater
soil samples.
Sample
time, date, samplers,
recorded
which was attached
collection
including
parameters,
and required
EPA Methods
sample
was collected
of biological
oxygen demand
(BOD),
chemical
(TSS), total dissolved
for
identification,
turnaround
Chain-of-custody
time
were
documentation
Several types of field
investigation,
chemistry
QA/QC
including
These sample
samples
duplicate
following
was collected in the vicinity
Table 2-10 summarizes
of volatiles.
well 6GWlD
for analysis
(COD), total
equipment
in Section
2.4.3.2.
decontamination
rinsates,
during
during
the groundwater
field blanks,
Equipment
procedures.
well 6GWlS
solids
solids (TVS) to evaluate
and analyzed
and the water was collected
of monitoring
suspended
options.
field QA/QC sample types, frequencies,
rinsate
Laboratory
and trip blanks.
samples
prepared
in sample bottles.
the groundwater
and analytical
were
deionized
A field blank
investigation.
parameters.
Waste Sampling
1992, Baker
personnel
waste at Site 6 (including
completing
treatment
were collected
samples,
water was poured into the bailer
In September
oxygen demand
for potential
types were defined
collected from a bailer
Drum
from monitoring
(total and dissolved
for analysis
solids (TDS), total solids (TS), and total volatile
the general groundwater
a majority
containing
should be noted that above-ground
In addition,
performed
Lot 203, the ravine
the investigation,
as potentially
limitations
laboratory
601 and 602 were implemented
a groundwater
study.
sample
for TCL organics and TAL inorganic
Additionally,
identified
as to those described
well number,
labels.
pump was used for
the samples to Ceimic.
samples were analyzed
and cyanide).
2.4.5
procedures
information
S) accompanied
A peristaltic
Requirements
Groundwater
metals,
similar
log book and on the sample
(provided in Appendix
Analytical
samples incorporated
analytical
in a field
to teflon tubing.
containers
a preliminary
investigation
area, the wooded areas, and Site 82).
of drums and miscellaneous
materials
which would require
containers
sampling
Upon
at Site 6 were
for disposal.
It
storage tanks in Lot 203 were not addressed as part of this
in the ravine area were only preliminarily
imposed by the terrain
of containerized
and thick vegetation.
2-37
classified
due to the
TABLE
SUMMARY
Notes:
Z-10
OF FIELD
PROGRAM
QUALITY
ASSURANCE/QUALITY
CONTROL
FOR THE GROUNDWATER
INVESTIGATION
SITES 6 and 82
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
SAMPLING
(1) QA/QC sample types defined on pages 2-12 and 2-13 in text.
(2) Trip blanks submitted with coolers which contained samples for volatile
analysis. Samples analyzed for TCL Volatiles only.
(3) Parameters
analyzed according to procedures outlined on Tables 2-5 and 2-6.
(4) An event is defined as one 14 day period.
(5) Equipment
rinsates collected from various sampling equipment (e.g., bailer).
Note that samples were collected daily but were analyzed every other day of
sampling event. Accordingly,
the number of samples presented represents the
number of samples analyzed.
(6) Field duplicate sample locations are summarized in Appendix N.
2-38
Drums
classified
residual
material
material
and were sampled
elements
as “RCRA
empty”
in the bottom.
were deemed to contain
less than one inch of material
All other drums were classified
accordingly.
as having
Many of the drums/containers
and were in very poor condition
(i.e., corroded,
rusty,
or
known or unknown
had been subject to the
over-pressurized,
missing
bungs and lids etc.).
2.4.5.1
Sampling
Drums/containers
Locations
203, the ravine
area,
and Site 82.
Additionally
drums were located in the wooded area south of Lot 203.
Figure
2-11 presents
approximate
locations
clusters within
2.4.5.2
Prior
were scattered
to opening
Baker
any containers,
logs.
Standard
Many
of the drums
were located
in
areas.
was performed
with drum sampling
The drums
Operating
were sampled
Procedure
Drum
with
a radiation
documentation
activities.
was performed
See Appendix
in the following
meter,
manner
a
via
H for a complete
(in compliance
with
for Drum Sampling):
was opened utilizing
extracted from the container
Liquid
monitoring
(CGI) and OVA or PID.
drum logs concurrently
1. The container
2.
storage areas.
Procedures
gas indicator
list of drum
Baker’s
of drum/container
Lot
Lot 203; however, some were also found in isolated
Sampling;
combustible
throughout
a bung wrench
in level B personal
or drum deheader,
and a sample
protection.
sample collection
a.
A clean glass tube (drum thief) was inserted
b.
The liquid
utilizing
in the drum represents
the glass tube.
Phase
into the opening of the container;
a core of the drum
separation/differentiation
contents,
and was extracted
was described
where
applicable.
c. The liquid
in the tube was transferred
approximately
d.
The mouth
three-quarters
repeatedly
into an &ounce jar until
full.
of the jar was then sealed with a teflon lid and securely tightened.
2-39
it was
e.
3.
The outside of the jar was then wiped clean of any gross contamination.
The container
was then resealed
wrap if the bung was missing
4.
(i.e., bung replaced)
or covered with polyethylene
or lid damaged.
Each sample was noted on a chain-of-custody
form and reported
in the appropriate
drum log sheet and/or field log book.
5.
The samples were then sent to the laboratory
blanks,
equipment
rinsates,
field blanks,
for analysis.
and duplicates)
QA/QC samples
(e.g., trip
were not submitted
for this
part of the study as they were not applicable.
It should be noted that solid samples were collected
in a similar
manner
utilizing
a stainless
steel trowel to extract the sample.
In order to properly
were performed
conducted
classify and composite
on all samples
using a IIAZCATe
kit.
Liquid
Combustible
Liquid
Base Neutral
Liquid
Base Neutral
Liquid
Flammable
Corrosive
with Solids
Solid
Solid
Base Neutral
materials
The materials
classifications:
Flammable
waste, field compatibility
from drums/containers.
to separate and classify the drum/container
tests were performed
general
obtained
containerized
Solid
2-40
analyses
Compatibility
testing
was
into compatible
groups.
The
were separated
into the following
Compatibility
testing
unknown
containerized
chemical
characteristics.
reactivity)
was performed
waste materials
Following
during
tested and the corresponding
the physical/chemical
testing
same/similar
waste stream
were combined
cornpositing,
a controlled
combined
in a separate
observations,
Forty-eight
reactions)
drums/containers
the laboratory.
resampling
physical
and
corrosivity,
and
I provides
a complete
result.
KIT)
aliquots
in a documented
each sample
from samples
sequence.
within
of the
For purposes
a compatible
of
grouping
and observed closely for a reaction.
or phase separation)
were sampled
Per laboratory
and temperature
and cornposited
requirements,
two quarts
One quart was utilized
(for 1 year) for future
for disposal
various
was
Visual
measurements
were performed.
sample) were required.
was archived
qualitative
one at a time,
(i.e., color, precipitation,
(to test for chemical
composite
container,
(ignitability,
these tests. Appendix
(via the HAZCAT
from
and classifying
groups based on their
waste characteristics
at a minimum
amount
separating
into compatible
RCRA hazardous
were identified
list of parameters
on each drum,
analyses,
analysis,
provided
into 11 samples for shipment
of liquid/solid
for sample analysis
if required.
disposal
material
This methodology
occurs within
to
(64 oz. of
and one quart
will eliminate
the one year statute
of
limitation.
2.4.5.3
Analvtical
Reauirements
Many of the 48 drums were determined
performed
Samples
for compositing
samples to limit
collected during
the field program
Alert Laboratories
USEPA
to be l/4 to 3/4 full.
Contract
Environmental
located in Canton,
Laboratory
Support
Program
Activity
the amount
of laboratory
Ohio.
Wadsworth
(NEESA).
(ignitability,
Sample
RCRA characteristics
evaluate
the nature of the wastes and to evaluate
analysis
corrosivity,
cost.
is a member
by the Naval
performed
reactivity
were
analysis to Wadsworth
Alert Laboratories
(CLP) and is also certified
field analyses
analytical
were shipped for laboratory
included
2.4.6
Therefore,
Energy
by Wadsworth
and full TCLP
of the
and
Alert
analysis)
to
possible disposal options if required.
Test Pit Activities
Based on studies by EPIC,
aerial photographs
areas were surveyed by Hoggard-Eure.
indicate
Excavations
2-41
potential
disposal and till areas. These
were then performed
perpendicular
to the
transect
(surveyed trench and fill locations)
to ensure trenches were properly
identified
and to
allow for error in surveyed points.
In general,
test pit operations
were performed
contents of past disposal/burial
Test pits varied in length
l
as an exploratory
to assess the
operations.
and depth, and were primarily
Space limitations
excavation
imposed
by the site (i.e.,
dependent
on:
wooded areas limited
movement
of
backhoe).
l
The capabilities
and limitations
of the excavation
equipment
was limited
to the length
l
The amount
and type of debris excavated (i.e., large amount
l
The depth of the water table.
Air monitoring
operations
was performed
were modified
of containerized
2.4.6.1
(i.e., depth of excavation
of the boom on the backhoe).
with
a radiation
due to the potential
meter,
of communication
CGI, and FID or PID.
of unexploded
wire).
Test pitting
ordnance or the potential
rupture
waste.
Sampling
As stated previously,
Locations
studies by EPIC
and aerial
photographs
were analyzed,
and transects
surveyed at suspected trench and fill areas.
A surface geophysical
to delineate
detected
survey was also conducted
areas of suspected disposal
as part of the geophysical
operations
and to identify
investigation
from the aerial photographs
A total of 29 primary
excavations
were obtained
excavations
were also performed
for laboratory
from August
24 through
locations
which
were also examined
of buried
during
along
from primary
(total of 35 excavations).
2-42
3,1992,
Anomalies
to trench
and fill
the test pit investigation.
as part of this study.
analysis
debris.
did not correlate
were performed
transects
September
In addition,
excavations
six extra
where samples
Sampling
locations
monitoring
results.
were determined
Samples
bottom
of the trench.
2.4.6.2
Samuling
Exploratory
based on visual
observation
were collected at areas suspected to be contaminated
Trench locations
and air
and at the
are depicted on Figure 2-12.
Procedures
trenching
1992, throughout
in the field
operations
were performed
Site 6. Exploratory
trenching
from
September
operations
2’7 through
focussed primarily
October
1,
on Lot 203 (the
Open Storage Area).
Before any excavation
began, a specialized,
with a magnetometer
and provided
ordnance
(UXO).
photographs
Upon delineation
equipped
guidance
The magnetometer
by confirming
crew performed
a survey of the area
with respect to potentially
survey correlated
buried
the interpretations
unexploded
of the aerial
the presence of buried debris.
of work zones, activities
with a three-foot
and 9 feet in depth.
two-person
bucket.
After
commenced
with a Case 580 backhoe
Test pits were excavated
visual
inspection
and sample
approximately
collection,
(excavator)
20 feet in length
a sample
number
was
affixed to each sample container.
Grab and composite
based
on visual
sampling
observation
instrumentation.
observations
samples
also had soil samples
sample
transcribed
to test pit logs.
depth
Appendix
and approximate
on test pits, as several soil borings
detailed
subsurface description.
geologic classification
Excavated
and findings
Test pit soil samples were chosen
from
obtained
and well installation
air
monitoring
based
from the bottom
were recorded
No geological
time
obtained
of containing
D (D.12) provides
depth.
real
had samples
from each test pit suspected
regarding
encountered
obtained
test pits which
or air monitoring
were obtained
were implemented.
or readings
In addition,
information
material
methods
of the pit. Two
contaminants.
in a field
and
test pit logs with descriptions
of
characterization
boreholes
However, soil samples were collected
on the side and the trench backfilled
2-43
All
log book
was performed
in the area provided
every two feet for future
purposes.
soil was stockpiled
on visual
upon completion.
a
2.4.6.3
Analvtical
Samples
collected
Laboratory.
reactivity)
2.4.7
Requirements
during
Sample
the field program
analysis
included
were shipped
RCRA
characteristics
analysis
(ignitability,
to Ceimic
corrosivity,
and
and full TCLP analysis.
Surface
Water and Sediment
Investigations
This section discusses the surface water and sediment
Included
in this section are the sampling
the surface water and sediment
2.4.7-l
water
attributable
and sediment
methodologies,
Samplincr
sampling
four stations
tributary
to Wallace
information
Project location,
and results
of
Methodology
to determine
if contamination
Surface water samples were collected
samples
were collected
of the samples were collected
with one sample collected on October 23,1992
The following
locations,
at OU No. 2.
Creek, Bear Head Creek, or the ravine which had
Creek.
at OU No. 2, while sediment
2-13). The majority
conducted
procedures,
was conducted
to OU No. 2 exists in Wallace
an intermittent
investigations
sampling.
Surface Water and Sediment
Surface
Figure
for laboratory
at twenty-six
from August
at twentystations
22 to August
(see
30,1992,
due to site access problems.
from each station was recorded in the field logbook:
date and time
Weather
Sample
location
Flow conditions
number
description
Description
number
(i.e., high, low, in flood, etc.)
On-site water quality
Visual
and identification
measurements
of water (i.e., clear, cloudy, muddy,
of biotic community
etc.)
(i.e., flora, fauna, etc.)
Sketch of sampling
location
including
(and depth), relative
position
with respect to the site, location
Names of sampling
Sampling
technique,
boundaries
of the water body, sample location
personnel
procedure,
and equipment
/-
2-44
used
of wood identifier
stake
The on-site water quality
salinity,
and dissolved
measurements
oxygen.
consisted
of temperature,
These measurements
pH, specific conductance,
were collected
immediately
following
water
sediment
sample collection.
Field
QA/QC
samples
investigations.
were
collected
surface water and sediment
the surface
Table 2-11 summarizes
and
frequencies
the &A/&C
are the same as
sampling
program
for the
samples.
Water
The following
sections describe the stations
the procedures
used for collecting
Station
where surface water samples
were collected
and
the samples.
Locations
Forty-eight
Figure
during
The QA/QC sample types and sample collection
those described in Section 24.3.
Surface
also
surface water samples
2-13 for station
Wallace
locations).
Creek, fourteen
six samples
Twenty-eight
samples
(six stations)
were collected
numbers
(seven stations)
were collected
were collected from the ravine
and locations,
stations
samples (eleven stations)
were dry at the time samples were collected).
of the station
from twenty-four
were collected
from Bear Head Creek,
(two other ravine sampling
Tables 2-12,2-13,
and sample numbers
at OU No. 2 (see
and 2-14 contain
for surface and sediment
from
and
stations
a summary
collected
at those stations.
The surface water sample numbers
the samples
were collected
were designated
as 6-WC”X”-SW-OGB;
at OU No. 2, WC stands for Wallace
Head Creek and RV stands for the ravine),
the 6 indicates
Creek (BH stands for Bear
“X” stands for the station
number,
SW stands for
surface water, 06 stands for a sample collected at the surface (312 for a sample collected
surface water/sediment
interface),
and B stands for a sample
stands for a sample collected in the middle
Sampling
At stations
that
collected
at the
at the creek bank (M
of the creek).
Procedures
where the water was more than three feet deep, samples
surface by dipping
the sample
sediment
a kemmerer
by using
bottles
directly
sampler.
into
the water
To determine
2-45
were collected
at the
and at one foot above the
the designated
depth,
a marked
TABLE
SUMMARY
SAMPLING
2-11
OF FIELD
PROGRAM
QUALITY
ASSURANCE/QUALITY
CONTROL
FOR THE SURFACE
WATER
AND SEDIMENT
INVESTIGATIONS
SITE 6
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
Analytical
Notes:
Parameters
(3)
(1) QA/QC sample types defined on pages 2-12 and 2-13 in text.
(2) Trip blanks submitted
with coolers which contained samples for volatile
analysis, Samples analyzed for TCL Volatiles only.
(3)
Parameters analyzed according to procedures outlined on Tables 2-5 and 2-6.
(4)
An event is defined as one 14 day period. Field blanks collected during surface
water and sediment investigations
in the vicinity of sample stations BH06
(Bear Head Creek) and WC04 (Wallace Creek).
(5) Equipment
rinsates collected from various sampling equipment
(e.g., stainless
steel spoons, sediment cores, etc.).
(6) Field duplicate samples presented in Appendix N.
2-46
TABLE
2-12
BEAR HEAD CREEK
SURFACE
WATER
AND SEDIMENT
STATION
AND SAMPLE
NUMBERS
AND LOCATIONS
SlTE 6
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
Station
Number
Station
Location
&BHOl-SW/SD
Headwaters of
Bear Head Creek
6-BHOQ-SW/SD
Upstream
6and9
of Sites
Surface Water
Sample Number
Sediment
Sample Number
6-BHOl-SW-06B
6-BHOl-SW-06M
6-BHOl-SD-06B
6-BHOl-SD-612B
6-BHOl-SD-06M
6-BHOl-SD-612M
6-BH02-SW-06M
(A)
6-BH02-SD-06M
6-BH02-SD-612M
(A)
6-BHOS-SW/SD
Approx. 100 feet
upstream of
Piney Creek
Road
6-BH03-SW-06B
6-BH03-SW-06M
6-BH03-SD-06B
6-BH03-SD-612B
6-BHOS-SD-06M
6-BH03-SD-612M
6-BHOCSWSD
Adjacent
6and9
to Sites
6-BH04-SW-06B
6-BH04-SW-06M
6-BH04-SD-06B
6-BH04-SD-612B
6-BH04-SD-06M
6-BH04-SD-612M
6-BHO&SW/SD
Between Lejeune
Railroad and
Holcomb
Boulevard
6-BH05SW-06B
6-BH05SW-06M
6-BH05-SD-06B
6-BH05-SD-06M
(B)
(B)
6-BHOG-SW/SD
Approx. 1000 feet
Downstream of
Holcomb
Boulevard
6-BH06-SW-06B
6-BH06-SW-06M
6-BH06-SD-06B
6-BH06-SD-06M
(B)
(B)
6-BH07-SW/SD
Downstream of
Sites 6 and 9
6-BH07-SW-06B
6-BH07-SW-06M
6-BH07-SW-312M
6-BH07-SD-06B
6-BH07-SD-06M
(B)
(B)
Notes:
B - Sample was collected from the north bank
M - Sample was collected from the middle of the creek
SW-06 - Sample was collected from the water surface (or mid-vertical
point if a
deeper water sample was not collected at this station>.
SW-312 - Sample was collected from the water/sediment
interface
SD-06 - Sample was collected from the top six inches of the sediment
SD-612 - Sample was collected from six to twelve inches of the sediment
(A) - Creek was narrow and shallow; only middle sample was collected
(B) - Sediments were flocculant; 6-12 inch sample could not be collected
2-47
TABLE
2-13
WALLACE
STATION
CREEK SURFACE
WATER AND SEDIMENT
AND SAMPLE
NUMBERS
AND LOCATIONS
SITE 6
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
Station
Number
?-WCOl-SW/SD
3-WCOB-SW/SD
5-WCOSSW/SD
&WC04SW/SD
&WCO$SW/SD
&WC06SW/SD
Station
Location
North Branch of
Wallace Creek
South Branch of
Wallace Creek
Approx. 2000 feet
downstream of north
and south branch
Approx. 250 feet
upstream of Piney
Creek Road
Approx. 250 feet
downstream of Piney
Creek Road
Adjacent to Sites 6
and9
&WCO?-SW/SD
Adjacent
and 9
6-WC03SW/SD
Between Lejeune
Railroad and
Holcomb Boulevard
Approx. 1000 feet
Downstream of
Holcomb Boulevard
6-WCOS-SW/SD
to Sites 6
6-wc1o-sw/sD
Downstream
6and9
6-WCll-SW/SD
Approx. 500 feet
Downstream of
Confluence with Bear
Head Creek
Notes:
of Sites
Surface Water
Sample Number
6-WC01-Sw-06B
6-WCOl-SW-06M
(A)
6-WC02-SW-06B
(B)
6-WC03-SW-06B
6-WC03-SW-06M
6-WC03-SW-312M
6-WCO4-SW-06B
6-WC04-SW-06M
6-WC05-SW-06B
6-wc05-sw-06M
6-WC05-SW-312M
6-wc06-sw-06B
6-wc06-sw-06M
6-WC07-Sw-06B
6-WC07-SW-06M
6-WC07-SW-312M
6-wc08-sw-06B
6-WCOS-SW-06M
6-WC08-SW-312M
6-WCO9-SW-06B
6-WC09-SW-06M
6-WC09-SW-312M
6-WClO-SW-06B
6-WClO-SW-06M
6-WClO-SW-312M
6-WCll-SW-06B
6-WCll-SW-06M
6-WCll-SW-312M
Sediment
Sample Number
6-WCOl-SD-06B
6-WCOl-SD-612B
6-WC02-SD-06B
6-WC02-SD-612B
6-WC03-SD-06B
6-WC03-SD-612B
6-WC03-SD-06M
6-WC04-SD-06B
6-WC04-SD-612B
6-WC04-SD-06M
6-WC05SD-06B
6-WC05-SD-612B
6-WC05-SD-06M
6-WC06-SD-06B
6WC06-SD-612B
6-WCO6-SD-06M
6-WC06SD-612M
6-WC07-SD-06B
6-WC07-SD-06M
6-WC07-SD-612M
6-WC03SD-06B
6-WC08-SD-612B
6-WC08-SD-06M
6-WC09-SD-06B
6-WC09-SD-612B
6-WC09-SD-06M
6-WC09-SD-612M
6-WClO-SD-06B
6-WClO-SD-06M
6-WClO-SD-612M
6-WCll-SD-06B
6-WCll-SD-06M
(B)
(B)
(Cl
(D)
(D)
,
(D>
.
1
(D)
(D)
(D)
B - Sample was collected from the south bank
M - Sample was collected from the middle of the creek
SW-06 - Sample was collected from the water surface (or mid-vertical
point if a
deeper water sample was not collected at this station).
SW-312 - Sample was collected from the water/sediment
interface
SD-06 - Sample was collected from the top six inches of the sediment
SD-612 - Sample was collected from six to twelve inches of the sediment
(A) - Samples were collected from shore; depth sample could not be collected
(B) - Samples were collected from shore; middle samples could not be collected
(C) - Sampler refusal at 3-4 inches; 6-12 inch sample could not be collected
(D) - Sediments were flocculant; 6-12 inch sample could not be collected
2-48
TABLE
2-14
RAVINE
STATION
AREA SURFACE
WATER
AND SAMPLE
NUMBERS
SITE 6
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
Station
Number
Station
location
AND SEDIMENT
AND LOCATIONS
CTO-0133
CAROLINA
Surface Water
Sample Number
Sediment
Sample Number
6-RVl-SD
Ravine
6-RV2-SW/SD
Ravine
6RV2-SW-06
6-RV3-SW/SD
Ravine
6-RV3-SW-06
6-RV4-SD
Ravine
6-RV!%W/SD
Ravine
6-RV5-SW-06
6-RV5-SD-06
(B)
6-RVG-SW/SD
Ravine
6-RV6-SW-06
6-RV6-SD-06
(B)
6-RV7-SW/SD
Ravine
6-RV?-SW-06
6-RV&SW/SD
Ravine
6-RV8-SW-06
Notes:
(A)
(A)
6-RVl-SD-06
(B)
6-RV2-SD-06
(B)
6-RV3-SD-06
6-RV3-SD-612
6-RV4-SD-06
6-RV4-SD-612
6-RV7-SD-06
6-RV7-SD-612
6-RV8-SD-06
SW-06 - Sample was collected from the water surface
SD-06 - Sample was collected from the top six inches of the sediment
SD-612 - Sample was collected from six to twelve inches of the sediment
(A) - No water was present at this station; water sample was not collected
(B) - Sampler refusal at 6 inches; 6-12 inch sample was not collected
2-49
(B)
weighted
stations
line was lowered
where the water
approximate
vertical
into the water with the depth to the sediments
was less than
mid-point
three
by dipping
feet deep, samples
the sample bottles directly
Care was taken when collecting
samples for analysis
could result
Samples
collection
of the samples for analysis
The samples
Sampling
already
in loss of VOCs.
were collected
personnel
container
containers
provided
(e.g., sulfuric
water samples
upstream.
were collected
Any sediment
were collected
that
prior
to the
acid),
by the analytical
station.
the water
laboratory.
For those sample bottles
was collected
All sample containers
in a clean
not containing
were taken
while
that might
were marked
Photographs
taken
resuspension
The sampling
the nearest bank or shore.
samples
samples were collected after the water samples
sediment
locations
first, with subsequent
or biological
were taken to minimize
sampling
into the water.
were rinsed at least once with the sample water prior to sample collection.
The downstream
moving
for the VOC analysis
and then slowly poured into the sample bottle.
preservative
at the
of the other parameters.
in clean
preservative
were collected
At
of VOCs to avoid excessive agitation
wore clean PVC gloves at each sampling
containing
recorded.
by placing
The sample number
to document
contaminate
the water samples.
a wooden stake and bright
was marked
the physical
colored flagging
on the stake with indelible
and biological
characteristics
at
ink.
of the
location.
Sediment
The following
sections describe the stations
procedures used for collecting
Station
where sediment
samples were collected
and the
the samples.
Locations
Sixty-three
sediment
samples
were collected
Figure 2-13 for station locations);
thirty-two
Creek, twenty samples (seven stations)
(eight stations)
and locations,
stations
samples (eleven stations)
at OU No. 2
(see
were located in Wallace
were located in Bear Head Creek, and eleven samples
were located in the ravine.
the station numbers
from twenty-six
Tables 2-12,2-13,
and sample numbers
2-50
and 2-14 contain
a summary
collected at those stations.
of
The sediment
sample numbers
for to designate
were designated
samples were collected
as 6-WC’X”-SD-OGB;
the 6 indicates
at OU No. 2, WC stands for Wallace
that the
Creek (BH stands
for Bear Head Creek and RV stands for the ravine),
“X” stands for the station
stands for sediment,
from the top six inches of the sediment
06 stands for a sample
collected
(612 stands for a sample collected from six to twelve inches of the sediment),
SD
and B stands for a
sample collected at the creek bank (M stands for a sample collected in the middle
Samnling
number,
of the creek).
Procedures
At each station,
sediment
inches) using a stainless
samples were collected
at the surface (O-6 inches) and at depth (6-12
steel hand-held
instrument.
liner tube, fitted with a disposable
coring
eggshell
A new disposable
catcher to prevent
sample
clear plastic
loss, was used at each
station.
The coring device was pushed into the sediments
inches, or until
extruded
refusal.
The liner
into the appropriate
to a maximum
was removed
depth of fifteen
from the sampler
sample jars using a decontaminated
to twenty
and the sediments
extruder.
not cut in half as stated in the work plan because the plastic shavings
The liners
were
were
may have contaminated
the sediments.
2.4.8
Ecological
Biological
and Aquatic
samples
collected
macroinvertebrates.
information
Prior
describing
Survey
at OU
to initiating
No.
2 consisted
the sampling
crabs
event at each station,
and
benthic
the following
the site was recorded in the field log book:
l
Average width, depth and velocity
l
Description
of substrate
l
Description
of “abiotic”
of the water body
characteristics
of the reach such as pools, riffles, runs, channel
shape, degree of bank erosion, and shade/sun
l
of fish,
Description
of “biotic”
vegetation
and wetlands
Water quality
measurements
at a minimum,
and during
characteristics
were collected
collection
exposure
of the reach including
during
the benthic
and riparian
macroinvertebrate
of some of the fish samples.
2-51
aquatic
On-site
sampling,
water
quality
measurements
at these stations
and dissolved oxygen.
The Remedial
consisted
These measurements
Investigation/Feasibility
Study,
the sampling
Basin
One of the stations
1992).
pH, specific conductance,
were conducted
6,9,48, and 69 limited
(Baker,
of temperature,
Sampling
references
sites to two stations
reference
stations were selected to be as ecologically
48, and 69. The reference fish and benthic
established
Figure
in Pettiford
4-l in the Ecological
The White
Risk Assessment).
and empties
within
development,
development
Pettiford
station.
to the sampling
macroinvertebrate
station
stations
The
for Sites
for OU No. 2 was
Oak River Basin (see
than the New River watershed
It begins in the Hoffman
Ocean.
National
with Swansboro being the largest
in this watershed,
77 percent
Forest.
town.
(see Figure
4-l in
Forest and flows approximately
Approximately
Forest and the Croatan
of the watershed
This watershed
Therefore,
48
is
has very little
because there is not much
it was chosen as a good reference station.
Creek was chosen as the location
the stations in Wallace
similar
Oak River
for the marine
for the freshwater
which is located in the White
is smaller
into the Atlantic
the Hoffman
in the White
Risk Assessment).
Oak River watershed
the Ecological
miles
Creek (freshwater)
Plan (SAP) for Sites
was to be used as the reference
and the other was to be used as the reference
6,9,
prior to sample collection.
and Analysis
stations,
salinity
for the reference station.
Creek in that it has a salinity
gradient
This station
is similar
from fresh to mesohaline
to
at its
mouth.
2.4.8.1
Fish and Crabs
This section discusses collection
Creek, and Pettiford
A literature
of the fish and crab samples
exposed to contaminants
compiling
addition,
Baker’s
Creek, Bear Head
Creek.
review was conducted
included
in Wallace
to determine
the fish species that
in the surface water/sediment
information
experience
from
State
in sampling
and Federal
similar
may potentially
exposure
pathway.
natural
resources
areas formed
This
be
review
agencies.
In
a basis for a database
of
with each species being a representative
of
expected species for the area.
Originally,
three species of fish were to be sampled,
one of three trophic
(feeding)
groups, which
included
2-52
a first order predator,
a second order
predator,
and a third
available,
of adult fish of preferably
body burden
and fillet
each station.
satisfied.
order predator.
In addition,
uniform
of ten individuals
size were to be composited
burden of chemicals,
per specie, if
and analyzed for whole
with the same species of fish being sampled
A fish species was successfully
These requirements
a minimum
were identified
collected
to Baker
if the above
from
requirements
were
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service
as part of the Work Plan review.
Sampling
variability
can prevent
because either the preferred
individuals
the same species of fish from being sampled
species was not captured,
Therefore,
were not captured.
collected to satisfy the above requirements,
exhibiting
Wallace
a similar
trophic
position
Station
locations
and sampling
in the estuarine
that, if possible,
ecosystem.
in Wallace
Creek including
the
Locations
from four stations
of OU No. 2 (6-WC4A),
6-WC4A
Green Road.
the Sampling
was located
This station
one station
the time
on Wallace
Plan [SAP]
of sampling.
between Piney Green Road and Holcomb
Creek approximately
1000-1500
was located on Wallace
in Wallace
Creek.
was located adjacent
of OU No. 2 (6-WC9A
was relocated
and Analysis
boat access during
WCllA
was not successfully
species was collected
of the fish and crab samples
two stations were located downstream
Station
a substitute
species
of uniform-size
procedures.
Fish and crabs were collected
upstream
if the preferred
numbers
Creek
This section discusses collection
station
or adequate
at each station
maker,
Boulevard.
Station
feet downstream
Creek approximately
;-
2-53
station
of Holcomb
was located
6-WC9A
of Piney
location
19921) because debris obstructed
6-WC6A
and
(see Figure 2-13).
100 feet upstream
from the proposed
Station
with Bear Head Creek.
was located
to OU No. 2 (6-WC6A),
and 6-WCllA)
Creek approximately
downstream
One station
(see
upstream
on Wallace
Creek
was located on Wallace
Boulevard,
500 feet downstream
while
Station
6-
of it’s confluence
Sampling
Procedures
Fish were collected
electrofisher
in Wallace
Creek using gill nets and a boat-mounted
was used when the salinity
in the Ecological
Risk Assessment
The fish sampling
for a listing
via electroshocking
powered by a 5,000-watt
portable
cathode and a hand-held
electrode
dip nets handled
of the sampling
was conducted
generator.
current.
by members
strength
shown on Figure
2-13. Weights
stream and yellow bouys marked
utilizing
the boat as a
time per subsection
team.
square mesh and an approximate
approximately
at the locations
to the nets to secure them on the bottom
with “Baker Environmental”
nets. The nets were deployed in the morning
Inc. electrofisher
of shocking
The nets were deployed
were attached
See Table 41
fish were collected with one-inch mesh or
of the field sampling
of 29 pounds,
The
used at each station.
was applied
The gill nets were six feet deep by 50 feet long with two-inch
twine break
range.
procedure
The length
Stunned
salinity
using a Smith-Root,
A DC current
as the anode.
was recorded as seconds of applied
smaller
was in the appropriate
electrofisher.
or evening,
were attached
of the
to the tops of the
and they were checked for fish within
twelve hours after deployment.
The collected
fish species were identified,
measured,
and counted.
The small fish (less than 20
mm) were weighed in groups of 10 or 20 because of their low individual
were weighed
collected,
individually.
measured,
of individuals
In addition,
and weighed.
with disease, tumors,
weight;
blue crabs that were captured
The proportion
of individuals
fin damage,
and skeletal
in the gill nets were
as hybrids
anomalies
the larger fish
and the proportion
was recorded at each
station.
Most of the fish species were processed in the field and returned
specimens
that
presented
transported
to the Baker Ecological
one representative
taxonomic
difficulties
alive to the creeks.
were preserved
Services Laboratory
for taxonomic
fish from each species was preserved
in 10% formalin
work.
in 10% formalin
Some
and
At a minimum,
as a voucher
specimen.
An attempt
was made to collect ten individuals
being a representative
of one of the three trophic
success rate was not achieved
clean ziploc or plastic
from three different
species with each species
groups for the tissue analysis.
at any of the stations.
The fish were placed individually
garbage bags and stored on ice for whole body or fillet
2-54
However this
into
tissue analysis.
The blue crabs were placed individually
analysis.
into clean ziploc bags and stored on ice for whole-body
The bags were labeled with the date and station
frozen prior to being shipped to Ceimic,
Risk Assessment
shows the number
Inc. for chemical
location.
analysis.
The fish and crabs were
Table 4-2 in the Ecological
and total weight of the fish and blue crab samples sent to
Ceimic.
Bear Head Creek
This section discusses collection
station
of the fish and crab samples
locations and sampling
Station
in Bear Head Creek including
procedures.
Locations
Fish and crabs were collected from three stations in Bear Head Creek.
upstream
of OU No. 2 (6-BH2A),
one station
and one station was located downstream
Station
6-BH2A
plan (Baker,
to vegetation
of OU No. 2 (6-BH6A)
was located further
downstream
overgrowth.
Creek approximately
Station
Boulevard.
6-BH4A
One station was located
to site OU No. 2 (6-BH4A),
(see Figure 2-13).
1,000 feet upstream
of Piney
than proposed in the sampling
1992) because the proposed sampling
Green Road and Holcomb
Sampling
was located adjacent
was located on Bear Head Creek approximately
Green Road. This station
analysis
the
location
and
could not be accessed due
was located on Bear Head Creek between Piney
Finally,
Station
1,500 to 2,000 feet downstream
6-BH6A
was located on the Bear Head
of Holcomb
Boulevard.
Procedures
Fish were collected
electrofisher
in Bear Head Creek using gill nets and a backpack
was used when the salinity
was in the appropriate
salinity
electrofisher.
The
range for use of the
electrofisher.
The fish sampling
via electroshocking
powered by a 300-watt
portable
the cathode and a hand-held
and upstream
time
of the shocking
per subsection
was conducted
generator.
A DC current
areas to aid in the collection
dip nets handled
Inc. electrofisher
utilizing
a “rattail”
as
seines were placed downstream
of the fish. The length
current.
by members
2-55
a Smith-Root,
was applied
electrode as the anode. Blocking
was recorded as seconds of applied
with one-inch mesh or smaller
using
Stunned
of shocking
fish were collected
of the field sampling
team.
Gill nets, similar
to those used in Wallace
The same sample
conducted
i
statistics
collection
in Bear Head
and sample
Creek.
Creek, were used to collect fish in Bear Head Creek.
processing
procedures
Fish that were collected
used in Wallace
were processed
Creek were
for population
and tissue analysis.
Ravine
The ravine
nature.
Pettiford
receives only runoff
No fish collection
from Sites 6 and 82 and therefore,
was proposed for this area in the SAP (Baker,
station
locations
Station
Location
The fish station
Several locations
and sampling
of the fish and crab samples
1992).
in Pettiford
Creek including
the
procedures.
was located upstream
on Pettiford
with good electrofishing
Creek where the salinity
potential
(based on salinity)
the yield was very low. Gill nets were not proposed for this station
was close to zero.
were shocked, however,
in the SAP (Baker,
1992).
Procedures
Fish were collected
in Pettiford
collection
and sample
Pettiford
Creek station.
no fish at this station
2.4.8.2
in
Creek
This section discusses collection
Sampling
it is only intermittent
Benthic
processing
Creek using a boat-mounted
procedures
used in Wallace
All fish that were collected
electrofisher.
Creek
The same sample
were conducted
were processed for population
at the
statistics;
were collected for tissue analysis.
Macroinvertebrate
This section discusses collection
Head Creek, and Pettiford
of benthic
macroinvertebrate
Creek.
2-56
samples in Wallace
Creek, Bear
Wallace
Creek
This section discusses collection
including
the station locations
Station
Locations
Bent&c
macroinvertebrates
was located upstream
of the benthic
and sampling
were collected
samples
in Wallace
Creek
procedures.
from four stations
of OU No. 2 (6-WC3A),
(S-WCSA), and two stations
macroinvertebrate
one station
were located downstream
in Wallace
One station
Creek.
was located adjacent
of OU No. 2 (6-WC9A
to OU No. 2
and 6-WCllA)
(see Figure 2-13).
Station
6-WC3A was located on Wallace
Piney Green Road.
obstructed
Creek approximately
At the time this sample was collected,
as it was when the fish sample
Wallace
Creek, between Piney
located on Wallace
and Station
6-WCllA
was collected.
l,OOO-1,500
was located on Wallace
of
the path in the water was not being
Green Road and Holcomb
Creek approximately
3,000 to 4,000 feet upstream
Station
6-WC6A
Boulevard.
Station
feet downstream
Creek approximately
was located
6-WC9A
of Holcomb
on
was
Boulevard,
500 feet downstream
of its
confluence with Bear Head Creek.
Sampling
Benthic
Procedures
macroinvertebrates
dimensions
were collected
from a boat using a standard
of the ponar are 23 x 23 cm (9 x 9 in.) for a sampling
ponar grab.
The
area of 529 cm2 or 0.0529 m2
(81 in2).
The ponar was deployed from the boat, which was positioned
each replicate
to prevent
the ponar from re-sampling
in slightly
the same area.
different
After retrieving
ponar with a sediment
sample, it was opened into a clean tub and the sediments
with a teflon spatula.
The sediments
were transferred
of water to remove the small particles.
sieve were transferred
into 16-ounce plastic
remainder
sediments
and buffered
formalin
of the jar to preserve the benthic
100% cotton paper label, marked
sample jars.
solution
The remaining
(10% by weight)
macroinvertebrates
contained
in pencil with the sample number,
2-57
were removed
contents
The jars were filled
for
the
to a 0.5 mm sieve that was agitated
hand) in a tub half-full
full with
locations
(by
in the
up to one-half
was added
to the
in the sediments.
A
was placed inside the jar.
The outside of the jar was labeled with the sample number
identify
using a black permanent
marker
to
the sample jars were transported
to
the sample containers.
After all the benthic
sampling
at OU No. 2 was completed,
the Baker Ecological
Laboratory
for sample processing.
each sample through
a 0.5 mm sieve, transferring
as a preservative,
Sample processing
included
washing
the washed sample back into the jar, and
adding
70% isopropyl
alcohol,
to the washed sample
amount
of rose bengal
was added to each jar to stain the benthic
in the jar.
A small
macroinvertebrates
a pink-
red color to aid in the sorting process. The rose bengal stains the tissue cells of the organisms
and helped to distinguish
The benthic
dissecting
them from plant and other materials
macroinvertebrates
microscope.
were stained
The benthic
for at least 24 hours prior to sorting
macroinvertebrates
were removed
using a pair of forceps, and placed into glass vials containing
cotton paper label marked
was multiplied
by four to obtain
the total number
vials were sealed with cotton and placed into a jar containing
sorting
time,
approximate
number
of benthic
aliquot
of individuals
of individuals
of sample
from that
in the sample.
70% isopropyl
macroinvertebrates
a
alcohol and a 100%
A one-fourth
The number
under
from the sediments
70% isopropyl
in pencil with the sample number.
6-WC3A was sorted because of its large sample volume.
aliquot
in the sediments.
alcohol.
collected,
The
The date,
and the name of
the person who sorted the sample were recorded on a sample processing log sheet.
The same sorting
additional
procedures
species identified
outlined
above were repeated
being placed into their respective
scientist
was employed
to perform
resorted.
If more than five percent of the individuals
than the rest of the sample
missed during the initial
The date, sorting
that was QA/QCed
benthic
as a QA/QC
this QA/QC
was resorted.
sorting,
time, number
measure.
vials.
measure,
any
A senior environmental
Fifty-percent
were missed during
If less than five percent
with
of a sample
the initial
was
sorting,
of the individuals
were
than the rest of the sample was not resorted.
and type of additional
organisms
found and percent of sample
were recorded on the sample processing log sheet. The vials containing
macroinvertebrates
were sent to RMC
identification.
2-58
Environmental
Services
for taxonomic
the
Bear Head Creek
This section discusses collection
including
the station
locations
Station
Locations
Benthic
macroinvertebrates
station
of the benthic
and sampling
from three stations
of OU No. 2 (6-BH2A),
and two stations
samples in Bear Head Creek
procedures.
were collected
was located upstream
No. 2 (6-BH4A),
macroinvertebrate
were located
in Bear Head
one station
downstream
Creek.
One
was located adjacent
to OU
of OU No. 2 (6-BH6A)
(see
Figure 2-13).
Station
6-BH2A
Green Road.
was located on Bear Head Creek approximately
This station
was located further
1992) because the proposed location
Station
6-BH4A
Boulevard.
Station
2,000 feet downstream
of Holcomb
Sampling
Procedures
Benthic
macroinvertebrates
The only deviation
individuals
Pettiford
Green Road and Holcomb
was located on Bear Head Creek, approximately
1,500-
Boulevard.
from the procedures
at these stations
occurred at Stations
were collected
6-BH2A
by standing
the ponar from the boat.
aliquot
of individuals
of sample
6-BH6A
used in Wallace
and 6-BH4A.
Creek.
The ponar
in the creek and releasing
The sample
processing
was sorted because of its large sample
from that aliquot
the
procedures
was multiplied
by four to obtain
volume.
The
the total number
of
in the sample.
Creek
This section discusses collection
including
overgrowth.
the same for these samples.
A one-fourth
number
Piney
were collected using the same procedures
ponar, as opposed to deploying
remained
could not be accessed due to vegetation
6-BH6A
of Piney
than proposed in the SAP (Baker,
was located on Bear Head Creek between
Finally,
samples collected
downstream
1,000 feet, upstream
the station location
of the benthic
and sampling
macroinvertebrate
procedures.
2-59
samples
in Pettiford
Creek
’
Station
Locations
Pettiford
Creek, located within
the White
Oak Watershed
was chosen as the location
for the
reference station.
Sampling
Procedures
Benthic
macroinvertebrates
were collected
from the boat. The same sample collection
Creek were conducted
at the Pettiford
RI Field Investigations
2.5
The field investigations
through
November
Preliminary
sampling;
in Pettiford
and sample processing
10, 1992.
at Site 9 commenced
The
field
program
on September
implemented
investigation
including
sampling.
criteria
and general
for meeting
the objectives,
Site 9. The following
Table
monitoring
investigative
sections discuss these investigative
of OU No. 2 (refer to Figure
l-3).
by unnamed
an area of approximately
This pit is currently
drilling
well installation
the project
training
separator
separator
is used to collect water from fire pit training
Two groups of above ground
of the training
collected
storage tanks
(shallow
objectives,
at
activities.
Boulevard
along the southern
border
500 feet to the
pit is present
exercises for extinguishing
is located just south of the pit as shown on Figure 2-14.
into the pit. The recovered product
and
methods for the RI performed
2.6 acres. An asphalt-lined
used to conduct
of a
streets (unpaved roads) to the east and west
oil/water
2.5.1
including
Bear Head Creek is located approximately
north of the site. The site is bordered
and encompasses
and continued
at Site 9 consisted
2-15 summarizes
Site 9 is located between Piney Green Road and Holcomb
northwest
lo,1992
Site Survey (discussed in Section 2.3); a soil investigation
and a groundwater
used in Wallace
at Site 9
and deep wells) and groundwater
site.
procedures
Creek station.
Performed
performed
Creek using the ponar grab deployed
fires.
An
The oil/water
exercises and storm water that falls
in the oil/water
(two tanks
at this
separator
is disposed of off site.
in each group) are located just west-
pit.
Soil Investigation
The soil investigation
(i.e., petroleum
performed
hydrocarbons,
at Site 9 was intended
solvents,
etc.) and evaluate
2-60
to identify
contaminants
their distribution
of concern
at the site.
The
TABLE
SUMMARY
OF REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
REMEDIAL
MCB CAMP
Medium or
Area of Concern
.. Soil
RI Objective
la.
lb.
lc.
Assess the extent of soil
contamination
at the
training pit and surrounding
area.
Assess human health and
ecological risks associated
with exposure to surface
soils.
Assess areas of surface soil
contamination
due to site
rUnOff.
!. Groundwater
2a.
2b.
2c.
2-16
Assess health risks posed by
future usage of the shallow
groundwater near Site 6.
Assess potential impact to
groundwater from fuelcontaminated
soil.
Evaluate hydrogeologic
characteristics.
OBJECTIVES
FOR FIRE
SITE 9
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
Criteria
for Meeting
Objective
FIGHTING
PIT
Proposed Investigation/Study
Determine contaminant
levels in
surface and subsurface soils at
former storage areas.
Soil Investigation
Determine contaminant
levels in
surface and subsurface soils.
Soil Investigation
Risk Assessment
Determine contaminant
levels in
surface soils at downslope drainage
areas.
Soil Investigation
Evaluate groundwater quality and
compare to AR.ARs and healthbased action levels.
Characterize on-site groundwater
quality and groundwater quality
downgradient from Site 6.
Estimate hydrogeologic
characteristics of the shallow
aquifer (flow direction, groundwter
gradient, etc.).
Groundwater Investigation
Risk Assessment
Groundwater
Investigation
Surface water level measurements
Bear Head Creek
in
investigation
impacts
performed
was also to evaluate
associated with previous
the specific RI objectives
2.5.1.1
Drilling
Drilling
shallow
The drilling
and deep physical
conditions.
and C.13) summarizes
Drilling
procedures
decontamination
the number
(including
and chemical
locations
through
to investigate
(i.e., contaminant
at Site 9. Appendix
C CC.12
of soil borings and depths.
sampling
handling
intervals,
air monitoring,
of investigative
derived
level of personal protection,
wastes, etc.) implemented
at
as those discussed for Sites 6 and 82 in Section 2.4.3.1 for both shallow
while deep drilling
was accomplished
D (D.ll)
was accomplished
using the mud-rotary
and Well Construction
in Appendices
using the
technique.
Records, describing
Test
soil conditions
and E (E.3).
Soil Sampling
Soil samples were collected
testing.
throughout
This sections provides
methods for Site 9 sampling
Sampling
Site 9 for soil classification
a summary
of sampling
locations,
purposes and analytical
procedures,
and analytical
activities.
Locations
2-15 depicts the sampling
were established
encompass
within
locations
the AST areas, the fue training
at 9GW4
specific background
at Site 9. As shown on Figure
Site 9 at approximate
selected since those structures
collected
and hydrogeologic)
As described in Section 2.4.3.1, shallow drilling
at Site 9 are presented
Figure
and ecological
Table 2-15 summarizes
at Site 9 was intended
2-15 depicts the drilling
Log Records and Test Boring
2.5.1.2
risks
16, 1992 and continued
implemented
(i.e., geologic
procedures,
and deep drilling.
Boring
activities.
on September
program
Figure
Site 9 were the similar
HSA technique
fire training
health
for the soil investigation.
at Site 9 commenced
26,1992.
distribution)
human
Procedures
activities
September
and ongoing
potential
(soil boring
samples.
Appendix
grids
25-foot centers (refer to Table 2-3). The grids
pit, and the oil/water
serve as potential
advanced
2-15, sampling
separator.
sources of contamination.
for monitoring
2-62
parameters
Note that samples
well installation)
C (C.12 and C.13) provides
of samples collected, their depths, and analytical
These areas were
tested.
a summary
served as siteof the number
originally
in the Final RVFS Work Plan, 39 soil borings
Site 9. Samples
were obtained
(TPH)
in September
concentrations
and TAL inorganics)
soils. These additional
training
1992, exhibited
(i.e., above 100 mg/kg).
soil samples collected and analyzed
organics
in order to further
evaluate
Accordingly,
total
petroleum
16 additional
the extent
borings are located south of the oil/water
detected in surface soils from the borings mentioned
of TPH
separator
surface
for full TCL
contaminated
and east of the fire
because the TPH were predominantly
above.
Procedures
Soil samples obtained
in Section 2.4.3.2.
(i.e.,inside
analyses
third
elevated
for TPH (selected samples were also analyzed
pit. Note that only surface soils were collected
Sampling
SB39) were proposed at
collected from soil borings SB18, SB19, SB23, SB26, SB29, SB33, SB37, SB38,
and SB39, which
hydrocarbon
(SBl through
at Site 9 were collected by employing
As mentioned
in Section
augers and split-spoons)
2.4.3.2,
or a hand
the same techniques
samples
auger.
were collected
Samples
retained
as described
via a drill
rig
for laboratory
from soil borings were collected from the surface and just above the water table
sample was also submitted
laboratory
analysis
if evidence of contamination
from soil borings advanced for monitoring
from just above and just below
Appendix
was noted); samples retained
C (C-12 and C.13).
the water
table.
well installation
Sampling
Note that the sample
depths
preparation
(a
for
were obtained
are summarized
procedures
in
implemented
at
Site 9 were the same as those described for Sites 6 and 82.
Analytical
Requirements
As shown in Appendix
for TPH
Tables
C (C.12 and C.13), 78 of the samples
and 30 samples
were analyzed
2-5 and 2-6 for analytical
for TPH or TCL organic&AL
advanced
for monitoring
only.
TPH
analyses
for full TCL organics
methods).
analyzed
Soil samples
inorganics,
well installation
were performed
were analyzed
using
EPA Method
(AST-SBlS)
for grain size analysis to evaluate
Quality
Assurance
and Quality
quality
sampling
assurance
program
and quality
Control
at Site 9 were analyzed
and TAL
collected
inorganic
Two samples
subsurface physical
were
from soil borings
for TCL organics/TAL
418.1.
(refer to
from soil borings
while samples collected
collected
Field
collected
inorganics
were also
conditions.
Samples
control
at Site 9. The frequencies
(QA/QC)
samples were also collected
and types of QA/QC samples obtained
2-63
during
the
were the
same as those described
summarizes
the QA/QC sampling
2.5.1.3
Air
Field Screening
monitoring
sampling
implemented
25.2
objectives
performed
contaminant
during
monitoring.
monitoring
procedures,
at Site 9 was intended
investigation
drilling
and
The procedures
as well as groundwater
to identify
well
of
flow patterns.
on Table
development,
sampling
contaminants
groundwater
are summarized
well installation,
2-15.
and water
The
level
activities.
Well Installation
Six shallow (denoted as 9GW4 through
installed
at Site 9 [three existing
locations
of the existing
wells were installed
9GW8) and one deep (6GW7D)
wells (9GW1,9GW2,
and newly installed
to collect shallow
and horizontal
groundwater
were implemented
at the site, and evaluate
of the groundwater
Monitoring
nature
for the soil investigation.
Investigation
their distribution
discusses
2.5.2.1
procedures
and safety and initial
investigation
concern and evaluate
measurement
implemented
were the same as those described in Section 2.4.3.3.
The groundwater
following
screening
for health
Groundwater
Specific
program
and Air Monitoring
and field
activities
2.4.3.2 (refer to Table 2-4). Table 2-16
for Sites 6 and 82 in Section
extent
flow patterns
wells are shown on Figure
of potentially
based on the results of a previous investigations
the site. Table 2-17 provides a summary
2-16. The monitoring
samples for characterizing
impacted
Location
well were
and 9GW3) are present at the site]. The
and deep groundwater
at the site.
monitoring
groundwater
selection
and to evaluate
of the newly installed
(ESE, 1991) and groundwater
of the rationale
the
for the monitoring
wells was
flow patterns
at
well locations
at
Site 9.
Monitoring
well installation
materials,
screen lengths,
procedures
well diameter,
(i.e.,
ranging
2-9 for typical
well completion
details).
summarized
construction
details
2-64
construction
and
2.4.4.1 for Sites 6 and 82 (refer to
The shallow
wells were installed
while deep well 9GW7D
for the newly
on Table 2-18 and well construction
well
at Site 9 for both the shallow and
in Sections
from 18.4 (9GW8) to 21.5 feet bgs (9GW7S)
110 feet bgs. Well
procedures,
etc.) implemented
deep wells were the same as those described
Figure
drilling
installed
diagrams
shallow
at depths
was installed
at
and deep wells are
are shown on the Test Boring
and
TABLE
2-16
SUMMARY
OF FIELD QUALITY
ASSURANCE/QUALITY
CONTROL
SAMPLING
PROGRAM
FOR THE SOIL INVESTIGATION
SITE9
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
Notes:
(1) QA/QC sample types defined on pages 2-12 and 2-13 in text.
(2) Trip blanks submitted with coolers which contained samples for volatile
analysis. Samples analyzed for TCL Volatiles only.
(3) Parameters analyzed according to procedures outlined on Tables 2-5 and 2-6.
(4) An event is defined as one 14 day period. Field blank collected from a potable
Source was a fire
water source used for decontamination
of heavy equipment.
hydrant located at Site 9.
(5) Equipment
rinsates collected from various sampling equipment (e.g., split
spoons, stainless steel spoons, hollow stem augers, etc.). Note that samples
were collected daily but were analyzed every other day of sampling event.
Accordingly, the number of samples presented represents the number of
samples analyzed.
(6) Field duplicate samples collected from soil borings presented in Appendix N.
2-65
TABLE
PHASE
I MONITORING
REMEDIAL
MCB CAMP
Site
No.
Well Designation
9
Note:
*
2-17
WELL SUMMARY
SITES 9
INVESTIGATION
LEJEUNE,
NORTH
General
Location
AND
RATIONALE
CTO-0133
CAROLINA
Purpose
9GWl*, 9GW6,
9GW7S, and
9GW8
Near the fire
training pit and oil
water separator
Monitor on-site groundwater quality
in the surficial/aquifer
where
ongoing fire training exercises occur.
9GW2*, 9GW3*,
and 9GW7
North of the fire
training area
Monitor downgradient
quality in the surficial
9GW7D
North of the
training area
Monitor downgradient
groundwater
quality in the deep aquifer.
9GW4
Southeast
Monitor upgradient
(site-specific
background well) groundwater
quality.
-
Denotes existing
of Site 9
monitoring
well.
2-66
groundwater
aquifer.
TABLE
SUMMARY
OF NEWT.,Y INSTALLED
REMEDIAL
MCB CAMP
Well No.
Date
Installed
2-18
WELL CONSTRUCTION
SITE 9
INVESTIGATION
CT0433
LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
DETAILS
Well Depth
Screen
Interval
Depth
(feet, above ml)
(feet, below
ground mu-face)
(feet, below
ground surface)
(feet, below
ground mrface)
(feet, below
ground surface)
(feet, below
ground muface)
(feet, above
ground eurface)
Top of PVC
Casing
Elevation (1)
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(feet, above maI)
Boring Depth
Depth to
Sand Pack
Depth to
Bentonite
Stick-Up
1
9GW4
1 9123192 1
30.70
1
28.3
21.3
21.0
6.3-20.3
4.0
2.3
2.4
1
9GW5
I g/22/92
I
30.81
I
28.0
19.5
18.9
4.2-18.5
2.2
1.0
2.8
i
9GW6
I g/23/92
I
31.31
I
28.7
20.2
19.7
4.9-19.3
2.9
1.9
2.6
9GW7S
1 g/23/92
1
28.76
I
26.2
22.0
21.5
7.1-21.0
5.0
3.0
2.56
29.10
I
I
26.6
110.0
110.0
100-109
98.5
93.0
2.5
26.0
19.0
18.4
3.5-18.0
2.0
1.0
2.4
1 9GW7D(2)
1 g/29/92
1
1 g/23/92
9GW8
Notes:
1
28.39
(1) msl - mean sea level
(2) Deep Monitoring Well
Horizontal positions are referenced to N.C. State Plane Coordinate
Vertical datum NGVD 29.
System (NAD27) CF = 0.9999216 from U.S.M.C.
Monument
Toney.
Well Construction
2.5.2.2
Records provided
Well Development
Following
well construction
deep well were developed
interconnection
in Appendix
E (E.3).
Procedures
and curing of the bentonite
to remove
fine-grained
seal, each newly installed
sediment
between the well and the formation.
shallow and
from the screen and to establish
Well development
procedures
employed
at Site 9 were the same as those described in Section 2.4.4.2.
Well Development
2.5.2.3
Forms summarizing
are provided
in Appendix
G (G.3).
Water Level Measurements
Static
water level measurements
points
at each existing
collected
were collected
and newly installed
from all site wells on September
measurements
All
this information
newly
were obtained
installed
relationship
wells
Groundwater
section
discusses
requirements,
QAlQC
samples
sampling
procedures
Sampling
Locations
Groundwater
samples
were surveyed
26, 1992.
reference
data were
Water
level
in Section 2.4.4.3.
to establish
vertical
control as described
elevation
in
in Section 2.4.4.3.
employed
sampling
locations,
for the groundwater
sampling
sampling
procedures,
program.
at Site 9 were the same as those employed
were collected
from all existing
(3 wells total)
wells (6 wells total) at Site 9. Figure 2-16 shows the locations
Note that monitoring
(TO0
Samnlinq
The following
monitoring
15 and 30, and October
using the same methods as described
monitoring
casing
well at Site 9. Phase I groundwater
to mean sea level (msl) and horizontal
2.5.2.4
from top-of-PVC
analytical
Note
rationale).
2-68
the
at Sites 6 and 82.
and newly
of monitoring
well 9GW4, located south of Site 9, served as a site-specific
well (refer to Table 2-17 for sample location
that
installed
wells.
background
Sampling
Procedures
Groundwater
sampling,
sampling
handling,
procedures
(i.e., including
etc.) implemented
bailing
procedures,
field measurements,
at Site 9 were the same as those described in Section
2.4.4.5.
Analytical
Requirements
Groundwater
metals,
samples were analyzed
cyanide).
Additionally,
BOD,
a groundwater
601 and 602 were implemented
treatment
Quality
Assurance
QA/QC
2.6
and Quality
samples
II Field
Control
in Section
Phase
hydrocarbons
significant
the Phase I investigation
than
Phase
Phase II also further
identified
during
and deep monitoring
II field
the
focused on the surkial
The Phase II field investigation
shallow
for
investigation
sampling
program.
the field QAQC
The
sampling
at Sites 6 and 82 in February,
based on the results
indicated
by chlorinated
are presented
in magnitude
contamination
chemistry
at Sites 6 and 82
was initiated
4.0).
groundwater.
and deep groundwater
investigated
potential
in the
(note that the results of the
Concentrations
of Site 82 in the surkial
deeper
of the Phase I field
that deep groundwater
hydrocarbons
in Section
are also present in the vicinity
investigation
and 82.
Table 2-19 summarizes
(Phase ID was initiated
of Sites 6 and 82 is impacted
I investigation
the groundwater
Performed
1993. The Phase II field investigation
vicinity
groundwater
of
investigation.
InvestiPations
In general,
during
2.4.3.
A second phase of field investigations
investigation.
well 9GW8 for analysis
Samples
were also collected
for the groundwater
Phase
of volatiles.
options.
sample types are defined
program
the general
(total and dissolved
for analysis
sample was collected from monitoring
COD, TSS, TDS, TS, and TVS to evaluate
potential
Field
p”\
EPA Methods
for TCL organics and TAL inorganic
of chlorinated
groundwater,
Accordingly,
quality
the
in the vicinities
source areas
associated
but less
Phase
II
of Sites 6
with
the
Phase I.
consisted of a soil gas survey, test pit sampling,
well installation,
commenced
and soil and groundwater
on February
2-69
soil borings,
sampling.
18, 1993 and continued
The
through
TABLE
SUMMARY
SAMPLING
Notes:
2-19
OF FIELD
PROGRAM
QUALITY
ASSURANCE/QUALITY
CONTROL
FOR THE GROUNDWATER
INVESTIGATION
SITE 9
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
(1) QAQC sample types defined on pages 2-12 and 2-13 in text.
(2) Trip blanks submitted with coolers which contained samples for volatile
analysis. Samples analyzed for TCL Volatiles only.
(3) Parameters analyzed according to procedures outlined on Tables 2-5 and 2-6.
(4) An event is defined as one 14 day period. Field blank was collected during
groundwater sampling activities at Site 6 (same 14 day period).
(5) Equipment
rinsates collected from various sampling equipment
(e.g., bailers,
etc.). Note that samples were collected daily but were analyzed every other day
of sampling event. Accordingly,
the number of samples presented represents
the number of samples analyzed.
(6) Field duplicate samples collected from monitoring
wells presented in
Appendix N.
2-70
May 3,1993.
The following
employed.
those
provide
a detailed
Note that many of the field methods
employed
summarize
2.6.1
sections
during
Phase
employed
Therefore,
I.
the Phase II field procedures
description
during
abbreviated
methods
Phase II are the same as
descriptions
may
be used
to
in some cases.
Soil Gas Survey
A soil gas survey was conducted
in portions
of Sites 6 and 82 from February
February
23,1993.
potential
source areas which may have contributed
the horizontal
The purposes of performing
extent and distribution
and 3) provide real-time
wells installed
during
Phase II.
is provided
in Appendix
procedures
and results.
2.6.1.1
Sampling
2-17.
(referred
migration
known contamination
in the area; 2) identify
if contaminants
direction.
Lastly,
established
to evaluate
grid
are migrating
C is located
potential
Creek from off-site.
to: 1) evaluate
Grid B is located
the extent and distribution
the source or sources of this contamination;
downgradient
contamination
into Wallace
upgradient
to
of
and
Creek from the south
Green
Road and was
from Sites 6 and 82. A total
headspace samples were collected during
each grid were established
the three sampling
at approximately
however, were placed at random
grids were laid out.
lOO-foot spacings.
locations
within
results from Phase I and from the preliminary
2-71
Sampling
points
The groundwater
within
sampling
grid B based on the groundwater
soil gas results.
of
the survey.
Procedures
to sample collection,
analytical
Creek and was established
east of Lot 203 across Piney
144 soil gas samples and six groundwater
points,
into Wallace
of Sites 6 and 82 and was established
shown on
at grids A, B, and Cl to assist in the
contaminant
Sampling
report
of the soil gas field
headspace samples were collected at the locations
evaluate
2.6.1.2
Environmental
Locations
Grid A is located north of Site 82 and Wallace
3) determine
monitoring
A copy of TARGET’s
description
sample collection.
in portions
shallow
by TARGET
provides a detailed
2) evaluate
soil and groundwater;
the additional
by Baker personnel.
Three grids were established
potential
contamination;
in the surficial
The survey was performed
U. The following
Soil gas samples and groundwater
Figure
to the surficial
of contaminants
and was supervised
18 through
the survey in these areas were to: 1) identify
data which were used to position
Services, Inc. (TARGET)
Prior
of the field
Soil gas samples were collected by employing
depth of approximately
several steps. A l/a-inch
six feet by using a drive rod and slide hammer
to as a “slam bar”).
The entire sampling
an organic vapor filter
cartridge,
and a stainless-steel
vial at two atmospheres
detached
of pressure
from the sampling
Sampling
depths varied
to the full length
system.
The self-sealing
teflon tubing.
glass
vial was
and stored for laboratory
analysis.
groundwater.
holes.
different
manner
than the soil gas samples.
rod was driven into the water table and a sample of groundwater
dedicated
of
A second
in a pre-evacuated
from two to six feet due to the presence of shallow
samples were collected in slightly
stainless-steel
through
[15 pounds per square (psi)].
the sampling
referred
air drawn through
air from the sampling
labeled,
to a
soil gas was then withdrawn
the probe and encapsulated
system, packaged,
Excess soil was used to backfill
Groundwater
through
probe was inserted
A sample of in-situ
the probe and used to purge atmospheric
sample of soil gas was withdrawn
(also commonly
system was purged with ambient
the hole and sealed off from the atmosphere.
through
hole was produced
The samples were collected in clean vials.
sample was then placed into a 30 ml vial and sealed with a teflon-faced
butyl
A
was extracted
Fifteen
ml of the
rubber
septum
for headspace analysis.
Prior to the day’s field activities,
probes
all sampling
were decontaminated
thoroughly
or filtered
with distilled
ambient
by washing
water.
Internal
air, and external
equipment
with
an Alconox
1 in Appendix
control
U.
samples,
indicating
cross-contamination
2.6.1.3
Analvtical
These QA/QC samples were obtained
results of the analysis
Concentrations
and rinsing
nitrogen
and end of each day’s field activities,
by a 20 psi flow of pre-purified
described above. The laboratory
soap solution
rods and
surfaces were wiped clean using clean paper towels.
soil gas sample.
probe tip into a tube flushed
the side hammer
surfaces were flushed dry using prepurified
Field control samples were collected at the beginning
after every twentieth
including
of all analytes
by inserting
and encapsulated
of these samples are reported
were below the reporting
that the QAJQC measures
of the samples during
nitrogen
employed
and
the
as
on Table
limit
in all field
were sufficient
to prevent
collection.
Reauirements
All of the soil gas samples and the headspace groundwater
phase of the survey were analyzed
according
samples collected
to EPA Method
2-72
during
the field
601 on a gas chromatograph
equipped
with an electron capture detector
prepared
headspace.
prepared
for analysis by pouring
10 minutes
As described
to volatilize
(ECD), and using direct injection
in the previous
section,
groundwater
15 ml of the sample into a 30 ml vial.
hydrocarbons
from the water.
of the soil gas or
samples
were
The vial was heated for
Specific analytes
standardized
for the
ECD analysis were:
1,l dichloroethene
methylene
(1,l DCE)
chloride
(CH2 Cl21
trans-1,2-dichloroethene
chloroform
(CHC13)
l,l-dichloroethane
(ll-DCE)
carbon tetrachloride
(CC141
cis-1,2-dichloroethene
(cl,2-DCE)
l,l,l-trichloroethane
(l,l,l
trichloroethane
tetrachloroethene
TCA)
(TCE)
1,1,2trichloroethane
The chlorinated
(tl,2-DCE)
(1,1,2-TCE)
(PCE)
hyrdocarbons
in this suite were chosen based on the analytical
results from
Phase I.
In addition,
Services,
selected samples
Inc.
(12, H2D, G3, H3, and 15) were submitted
(MSS) in Baltimore,
Maryland
for analysis
(GCiMS).
contaminant
levels were detected in them using the ECD in the field.
These samples were selected for laboratory
analysis
because elevated
Results
Results
of the soil gas sampling
summarized
on Table
(and samples
1 in Appendix
U.
Positive
submitted
for laboratory
detections
of volatile
(VOCs) were detected at 17 soil gas sample points within
from
Spectral
by gas chromatography/mass
spectroscopy
2.6.1.4
to Maryland
1.1 to 1,360 micrograms
commonly
per liter
fug/l).
detected VOC. Note that concentrations
0rC.
2-73
analysis)
organic
compounds
grid B. VOC concentrations
Tetrachloroethane
(PCE)
are
ranged
was the most
of VOC were not detected in either grids A
The distribution
of PCE detected during
the survey gas survey is presented
on Figure 2-18. A
major occurrence of PCE is centered at sample point 15 (1,360 ug/l) which is located near the
southern
portion
concentrations
exception
of Site 82 in the vicinity
generally
decreased
of well cluster
(to 1.1 ug/l)
of sample point G6 (81 ug/l).
north
GGWlS/lD.
(or downgradient)
South (or upgradient)
Overall,
(based on the soil gas results) appears to be limited
of the contamination
Based on TCE levels detected
impacting
Wallace
Groundwater
groundwater
(1.6 to 221 ug/l).
south of grid B toward Lot 203, however, was not defined.
in samples
screening
of l,l-DCE,
Kl
and Ll,
it appears that contaminants
results
t-1,2-DCE,
are also provided
c-1,2-DCE,
the detected VOCs, t-1,2-DCE
and c-1,2-DCE
(sum of all positively
on Table
TCE, 1,1,2-TCA,
samples W2, W3, and W5 (not all compounds
concentrations
to grid B. The
may be
Creek.
headspace
Concentrations
the
of 15, the TCE concentrations
somewhat
full extent
the TCE
of I5 with
also decreased but remained
TCE contamination
elevated
Overall,
volatile
U.
and PCE were detected in
were detected in all samples).
were the most commonly
detected
1 in Appendix
organic
detected.
compounds)
Total
ranged
Of
VOC
from not
detected to 792.8 ug/l (W5).
The distribution
The highest
northern
of total VOCs in headspace
concentration
portion
groundwater
groundwater
of VOCs were detected
of grid B, just south of Wallace
samples
in sample
Creek.
sample W4, which is located nearby
is shown on Figure
W5 which is located
2-19.
near the
Note that the soil gas samples
W5, did not contain
and
any VOC levels.
second major occurrence of VOCs is also present at sample W3 (324.8 ug/l of total VOCs).
sample is located in the vicinity
of sample 15 where elevated
A
This
levels of TCE were detected from
soil gas.
2.6.2
Test Pit Activities
Under
Phase II field investigation,
investigated.
photographs,
magnetometer
aerial
This investigation
information
was conducted
collected
during
after review
a reconnaissance
survey data conducted by Gee-Centers
photography
it was observed that activity
area to be investigated
January
an area near the southern
of 1993, revealed
(just north
numerous
of following:
(Baker’s
2-74
historical
UXO subcontractor).
once occurred in the general
containers
of Site 82 was
aerial
of a suspected source area, and
of Lot 203). Reconnaissance
&gallon
boundary
From the
vicinity
of the
of this area conducted
of unknown
material
(believed
in
to be
lubrication
oil).
In January
performed
a magnetometer
anomalies
present
identify
of 1993, Geo-Centers
survey of this area and discovered
at this area. Accordingly,
the source of the magnetic
On March 21993,
northern
Gee-Centers
and southern
were then marked,
operations
anomalies
(under
and perpendicular
for these seven locations
anomalies
transects
Space limitations
l
The capabilities
were staked
was limited
l
source.
identified
seven
Test pit
3, 1993 and were primarily
of past disposal/burial
upon the following
equipment
operations.
conditions:
movement
of backhoe)
(i.e., depth of excavation
to the length of the boom on the backhoe)
The amount
and type of debris excavated
during
(i.e., large amounts
of communication
wire
the excavations)
The depth of the water table
Air monitoring
was performed
PID meter. On site personnel
Health
area to
out at each location.
imposed by the site (i.e., wooded areas limited
were encountered
l
personnel)
on March
of the excavation
in this
in this area. These seven locations
to assess the contents
and limitations
magnetic
organic contamination
of Baker
Test pits varied in length and depth, and were dependent
l
at least seven distinct
and a potential
were conducted
excavations
of Baker personnel)
test pits were recommended
the supervision
poles of the magnetic
conducted as exploratory
(under the supervision
during
performing
and Safety Level of Protection,
overalls,
and Self Contained
conditions
warranted,
were
the teat pit operations
with a radiation
the test pit excavations
requiring
Breathing
at a minimum
Apparatus’s
to identify
were required
(SCBAs).
unexploded
chemical
Geo-Center
ordnance
meter,
and a
to maintain
resistant
Saranex
personnel,
unearthed
a
if the
during
the
excavations.
2.6.2.1
Samnlina
As stated previously,
magnetometer
Locations
the review
of aerial
photographs,
survey were the basis for both the investigation
locations.
2-75
a site
reconnaissance,
and the corresponding
and the
sample
A total
of seven trenches
Trenches
6-TB7)
locations,
observations
were identified
in the investigation
however, were joined
area.
into one long trench due to
to each other.
Soil sampling
within
each trench,
and PID air monitoring
PID readings
occurred.
in Figure 2-15.
2.6.2.2
Sampling
delineation
Samples
in the field based on visual
were collected
at areas were elevated
area and the corresponding
trench
locations
are
Procedures
of the buried
excavation
were determined
results.
The investigation
depicted
trench
through
6-TB5 and 6-TB6 when excavated,
their proximity
Upon
(6-TBl
activities
and the staking
were initiated.
Excavation
was conducted
a Case 580
back hoe access, trenches were no more than 10 feet in length and 10 feet in depth.
Samples
were collected
collected
from each of the following
duplicate
sample was collected from test pit 6-TP5, and was given the sample designation
staining
within
it and an additional
Information
regarding
transcribed
material
both grab and cornpositing
test pits: 6TP2,
was not collected
and/or contamination.
from 6-TPl
depth and findings
and approximate
Excavated
backhoe
Samples
6-TP5,
1 and &gallon
was
and 6-TP7.
A
of 6-
or no visible
containers
soil
buried
present in the container.
were recorded
in a field
log book
and
D (D.12) provides Test Pit Logs with descriptions
depth. No geological
characterization
boreholes
of
was performed
in the area provided
a
subsurface description.
soil was stockpiled
bucket
were initiated
2.6.2.3
One sample
because no PID readings
on test pits because several soil borings and well installation
detailed
6-TP4,
sample was taken of the waste material
sample
wooded area, which
methods.
6-TP3,
Test pit 6-TP5 had several,
onto Test Pit Logs. Appendix
encountered
Due to the heavily
with
restricted
utilizing
long bucket.
trench transects,
equipped
A sample
a three-foot
of perpendicular
backhoe,
TP5D.
with
material,
on the side and the trench backfilled
was decontaminated
and upon completion
Analvtical
collected
were analyzed
with high-pressure
steam
upon completion.
before excavation
Also, the
activities
of each trench.
Beauirements
from the trenches
were shipped for laboratory
for full TCL (i.e., volatiles,
semi-volatiles,
2-76
analysis
pesticides,
to Ceimic.
Sample
and PCBs) and full TAL
(i.e., total
Contract
TP5-02
metals)
parameters.
Laboratory
Protocol
Both the TCL and TAL parameters
and Level IV data quality.
was also sent to Ceimic,
analytical
2.6.3
but had an Infrared
results are presented
were performed
The second sample
Spectroscopy
in Appendix
L.
was initiated
to further
under
from test pit 6-
scan performed
on it.
All
Soil Investigation
The Phase II soil investigation
identified
during the Phase I investigation
and soil gas survey.
drilling/installing
five shallow soil borings
deep soil borings
which
installed
were completed
near the northern
downgradient
analytical
evaluate
wells.
of Site 82 to evaluate
from a suspected source area (area identified
results).
Sites 6 and 82.
The investigation
consisted
of
(less than 10 feet bgs), and four shallow and seven
as monitoring
boundary
areas of concern which were
The five soil borings
were
potentially
soils
from soil gas survey and Phase I
Moreover,
the monitoring
wells were installed
The following
sections
the field
describe
impacted
within
methods
and adjacent
employed
to
for the
investigation.
2.6.3.1
Drilling
Drilling
activities
through
April
according
install
Procedures
for the Phase II investigation
13, 1993.
The shallow
to the procedures
these borings
outlined
near the borings.
installation
were completed
as those described
Soil borings
Boring”
March 290 and 31,1993.
the drilling
attempts
boring
The initial
boring
borings
advanced
well
using
of augers and mud rotary
locations
are shown on Figure
C (C.6 and C.ll).
and GGWlDA,
well
installation,
experienced
for deep well 6GW15D
(referred
difficulties
was advanced
to as
drilling
to 52 feet on
however, could not be advanced below this depth because
mud could not be circulated
were made to advance
auger
due to the marshy
and deep monitoring
(i.e., shallow
for monitoring
E, 6GW15D,
The boring,
(referred to as “6GW15D
in Appendix
a hand
A hand auger was used to
for shallow
Phase II drilling
and continued
by using
advanced using a combination
advanced
in Appendix
and well installation.
advanced
in Section 2.4.3.1.
Two of the deep soil borings
2.4.3.1.
3,1993
rig was not possible
using the same methods
28 and the borings depths are provided
“6GW15D
a drill
on March
were advanced
in section Section
hollow stem augers and deep borings
drilling>
soil borings
because access with
conditions
commenced
in the borehole
this boring
(i.e., loss of circulation).
but were unsuccessful.
well” in Appendix
2-77
E) was advanced
Accordingly,
Several
a second
to a depth of 160 feet in
the vicinity
of the initial
boring was backfilled
boring for the installation
to ground surface with a be&mite/grout
A similar
situation
also occurred
Appendix
E). On April
3,1993,
127 feet but also experienced
(i.e., backfilled
well”
at boring
the initial
in Appendix
6GWlDA
slurry.
(referred
to as “6GWlDA
soil boring for deep well 6GWlDA
a loss of circulation.
with a bentonite/grout
Note that the abandoned
of well 6GW15D.
Accordingly,
E) was advanced
to a depth
in
was advanced to
this boring
slurry) and a second boring
Boring”
was abandoned
(referred
to as “6GWlDA
of 236.5 feet for the installation
of well
6GWlDA.
2.6.3.2
Soil Sampling
Soil samples were collected
advanced
Figure
from the shallow soil borings and the shallow and deep soil borings
for monitoring
well installation.
2-8. The sampling
procedures
same as those described
were obtained
collected
in Section
compounds
were the contaminants
2.6.4
field &A/&C
advanced
All samples were analyzed
Phase I investigation.
installation,
from the hand auger borings
Moreover,
for monitoring
Sample
samples
(i.e., trip blanks,
during
investigation
was initiated
The investigation
2.6.4.1
Monitoring
Additional
shallow
6GW15D,
well installation
only because these
the Phase I investigation.
field blanks,
equipment
rinsates,
and
as those described on Table 2-6.
employed
during
based on the analytical
consisted of monitoring
water level measurements,
describe the methods
samples
depths are summarized
for TCL volatiles
of concern identified
were the
Investigation
The Phase II groundwater
Sites
collected
samples) were collected at the same frequencies
Groundwater
6MW3D,
Samples
are shown on
the Phase II investigation
from just above and just below the water table.
C (C.6 and C.ll).
duplicate
2.4.3.2.
during
and deep soil borings
in Appendix
Additionally,
implemented
of the soil samples
from the surface and from just above the water table.
from the shallow
were obtained
The locations
and groundwater
results from the
well installation,
sampling.
staff gauge
The following
sections
the investigation.
Well Installation
(6GW31,
6GW35D,
6 and 82 to further
6GW32,
6GW36D,
evaluate
6GW33,
and 6GW34)
and 6GW37D)
the horizontal
2-78
and deep (GGWlDA,
monitoring
extent
6GW30D,
wells were installed
of surficial
VOC
impacted
at
groundwater,
Three
potential
and the horizontal
temporary
shallow
contaminant
Phase II monitoring
wells (TW-1,
migration
Wells
Shallow
monitoring
wells 6GW32,
Creek.
rational
6GW33,
surficial
groundwater.
were also installed
As stated previously,
to evaluate
the location
of the
data, and the soil gas survey.
Table
for the Phase II wells.
and 6GW34
groundwater
are located
within
Site 82 while
2-8. Wells 6GW32,6GW33,
quality
downgradient
and 6GW34
from
a suspected
to be located just north of Lot 203). Well 6GW31 was installed
surface spill (approximately
samples
of deep VOC impacted
and TW-3)
Lot 203 as shown on Figure
to evaluate
source area (believed
purge
TW-2,
into Wallace
of well location
6GW31 is located within
were installed
extent
wells was based on Phase I analytical
2-20 provides a summary
Shallow
and vertical
and development
were collected
500 gallons
due to a
was released) from a steel tank which contained
water from the Phase I groundwater
from this well to confirm
investigation.
well
Groundwater
the presence or absence of contamination
from the release.
The four shallow monitoring
wells were installed
by employing
and 8-l/4 inch HSA) as those described in Section 2.4.4.1.
the same materials
with the exception
in lieu of $-inch
groundwater
(i.e., Schedule
that 2-inch monitoring
wells because the purpose
samples,
and were not intended
and Well Construction
surflcial
wells were also installed
groundwater
quality
located just south of Wallace
location
of these temporary
and from analytical
The temporary
was backfilled
groundwater
during
representative
The wells range in
are summarized
in Appendix
the Phase II investigation
into Wallace
at approximately
to evaluate
as shown on Figure
obtained
on
E.
Creek. The temporary
from 6GW32 (Phase II monitoring
with a sand pack (Number
sample collection,
details
Records are provided
wells were based on information
of a-inch, screened PVC.
of
wells were installed
was to collect
Creek, and north of well 6GW32
wells were installed
were constructed
Two-inch
Well construction
prior to discharging
data obtained
the wells are constructed
to serve as recovery wells.
Table 2-21 and Test Boring
(i.e., 3-l/4
No. 10 slotted screen) as the Phase I wells,
of these wells
to 35 feet (6GW34).
temporary
Further,
wells were installed.
depth from 22 feet (6GW33)
Three
,-
40 PVC, X-foot
the same procedures
wells
2-8. The
from the soil gas survey,
well).
I-feet bgs with a hand auger.
The wells
The space between the well screen and borehole
2 silica sand) to the ground
the wells were removed
2-79
and backfilled
surface.
with sand.
Following
TABLE
PHASE
II MONmORING
REMEDIAL
MCB CAMP
Site
No.
Well Designation
Z-20
WELL SUMMARY
AND RATIONALE
SITES 6 and 82
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
General
Location
Purpose
I
6GW31
Western portion
Lot 203
82
6GW32,6GW33,
and 6GW34
Northern,
central
and eastern
portions of Site 82
Surfkial groundwater quality
downgradient from a potential
area
6
6GW15D
6MW3D
Northwestern
portion of Lot 203;
east of Piney Green
Road
Deep groundwater quality
upgradient - horizontal extent
82
6GW30D,
6GW35D,
6GW36D,
6GW37D
North, northwest,
and west of Site 82
Deep groundwater quality
downgradient - horizontal
Southeastern
portion of Site 82
Deep groundwater
extent
,@-
6
6GWlDA
and
of
Evaluate potentially
impacted
surkial
groundwater from surface
release
6
source
extent
and
2-80
quality
- vertical
TABLE
SUMMARY
OF PHASE
2-21
II SHALLOW
AND DEEP WELL CONSTRUCTION
SITES 6 and 82
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
REMEDIAL
MCB CAMP
DETAILS
Screen
Top of PVC
Casing
Elevation (1)
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(feet, above ml)
Boring Depth
Well Depth
Interval
Depth
Depthto
Sand Pack
* Depthto
Bentonite
(feet, below
ground surface)
(feet, below
ground muface)
(feet, below
ground surface)
(feet, below
ground surface)
(feet, below
ground
surface)
I
27.0
25.5
9.4
7.4
2.4
27.0
11.4 - 24.6
11.3 - 26.6
10.0
7.0
2.2
Stick-Up
(feet, above
ground surfaw
Well No.
Date Installed
(feet, above mid)
6GW31M
6GW32 (2)
03/02/93
30.26
6GW33 (2)
6GW34 (2)
03/03/93
22.42
20.0
22.0
22.0
6.2-21.6
4.5
I
3.0
2.4
03/03-03/05/93
32.01
29.0
35.0
35.0
19.3 -34.6
17.5
I
15.0
3io
35.23
32.7
236.5
230.0
220.1- 229.6
215.0
1
190.0
2.5
28.20
25.2
160.0
155.0
141.0
I
139.0
3.0
100.0
145.0 - 154.6
90 - 99.6
83.0
I
76.5
1.4
105.0
95.0-104.6
90.0
87.0
2.3
95.0
73.3 -94.6
66.0
62.0
2.0
6GWlDA
6GW30D (2)
6GW35D (3)
04113193
04/06/93
03/03- 03104l93
03/05-03lO7l93
6GW36D (3)
03/18- 03119193
6GW37D (3)
03lO9l93
6MW3D
(3)
27.8
1
03/06/93
(3)
6GW15D (3)
1
03/20;03/31/93
)
15.96
14.0
111.5
95.0
76.1- 94.6
73.0
I
70.0
1.9
35.18
34.2
201.5
118.0
97.5-117.6
94.0
I
88.0
1.0
Notes: (1) msl - mean sea level. Note that top of casing for well 6GWlDA was stainless-steel, not PVC.
(2) Shallow Well
(3) Deep Well
Horizontal positions are referenced to N.C. State Plane Coordinate System (NAD27) CF = 0.9999216 from USMC Monument Toney. Vertical datum
NGVD 29.
Deep Wells
Seven deep wells were installed
(upgradient
well),
(downgradient
installed
6MW3D
during
(upgradient
well), 6GW36D
to evaluate
area believed
the Phase II investigation.
well),
(downgradient
the horizontal
extent
The locations
from the Phase I groundwater
(downgradient
well), and 6GW37D
of contamination
to be near the contamination
extent of contamination.
6GW30D
Monitoring
wells 6GW15D
well),
(downgradient
while 6GWlDA
source) was installed
6GW35D
well) were
(installed
to evaluate
in an
the vertical
of these wells were selected based on analytical
investigation.
The locations
of these wells
data
are shown
on
Figure 2-8.
The Phase II deep monitoring
(i.e., combination
wells were installed
of hollow-stem
by employing
augers and mud rotary)
wells. Several items, however, were changed or modified
the same drilling
as implemented
regarding
of a-inch PVC with the exception
constructed
Stainless
of this well (stainless-steel
potentially
highly
contaminated
based on the analytical
slotted)
area (which may cause vinyl
results
zones. Table
of 6GWlD.
2-21 provides
and Well Construction
Determination
which
because of the greater
Note that
depth
thicknesses
in Appendix
screens (No. 10
of the higher
of the well construction
Records are provided
in a
to leach from the PVC)
lo- to 20-foot length
of the varying
a summary
chloride
is
details
waterand Test
E.
of the final well depth for the Phase II deep wells was based on several factors
which were evaluated
depth (bottom
of 6GWlDA
All
than PVC) and because the well was installed
were used to allow for monitoring
producing
Boring
is more durable
steel was utilized
for the Phase I deep
the well construction.
Phase II deep wells are constructed
of 2-inch stainless-steel.
techniques
in the field during
elevation)
of known
samples
(split-spoon
samples
following
provides
an explanation
the drilling
contamination;
collected
during
These factors included:
program.
and (2) volatile
drilling)
of the procedures
organic
(1) the
levels
in soil
based on PID measurements.
The
employed
for determining
the final
well
(i.e.,
installed
to evaluate
the
110 to 200 feet bgs. Split-spoon
soil
depth.
The borings
horizontal
samples
advanced
for the Phase
extent) were first advanced
were collected
II deep wells
from approximately
at approximate
wells
5 to 154% intervals
during
drilling.
Samples
were
collected to these depths because contamination
was known to exist at these depths based on
contaminant
well HP-651
levels exhibited
in former
supply
2-82
[which
is located
just
east of
Lot 203 (refer to Section
results
of the Phase I Investigation.
ounce jars,
sealed
approximately
with
these measurements
The following
explained
aluminum
10 minutes.
OVA meter to measure
l
3.10 for additional
information
on this supply
The soil samples
upon collection
foil
lid,
and the jar
The headspace
and heated
scenarios
were placed in eight
in a crock
of the sample was then screened with
for the presence or absence of volatile
were used to determine
well)] and from the
organic vapor.
pot for
a PID or
Subsequently,
the final well depth.
were encountered
with
the final
determination
of well depth
as
below:
In cases where volatiles
were not detected by PID or OVA screening
feet, the borings
were backfilled
bottom
of Phase I deep well 6GWlD
elevation
at this elevation).
(with a groutientonite
slurry)
to a depth of 200
to an approximate
(since contamination
is known to exist
The wells were then screened at the approximate
elevation
as
were detected below 200 feet by PID or OVA screening,
the
6GWlD.
l
In cases where volatiles
wells were installed
approximately
decreased to background
Selection
concentrations.
of the final well depth for monitoring
the vertical
extent
measurements
clay unit
10 to 15 feet below where the level of volatiles
of contamination,
and the lithology
which was encountered
well GGWlDA,
which was installed
was based on a combination
of the soils encountered.
of field
This well was installed
at 230 feet bgs. As described
to evaluate
screening
just above a
above, this well is constructed
of 2-inch stainless-steel.
2.6.4.2
Staff Gauge Installation
Two staff gauges (SGWCl
water fluctuations
and SGWCB) were installed
and to assist in determining
surficial
area. The gauges are located near the intersections
(SCWCl)
Further,
procedures
and Wallace
Creek and Holcomb
the gauges were surveyed
outlined
in Wallace
groundwater
of Wallace
Boulevard
2-83
surface
flow patterns
in the
Creek and Piney Green Road
(SGWCO)
in place (both vertical
in Section 2.4.4.3.
Creek to evaluate
as shown on Figure
and horizontal)
according
2-8.
to the
2.6.4.3
Well Development
The newly installed
construction
shallow
as those mentioned
Development
Appendix
and deep monitoring
and curing of the bentonitejgrout
the same procedures
Well
Procedures
Forms
following
seal. The wells were developed
in Section
summarizing
were developed
well
2.4.4.2 for both shallow
development
information
well
by employing
and deep wells.
in provided
in
G.
2.6.4.4
Water Level Measurements
Static water level measurements
wells 6GWlDA
and 6GW15D
were collected
shallow wells on April
also obtained
on April
1,1993
1, 1993.
from Wallace
were collected using the same procedures
Groundwater
2.6.4.5
Groundwater
Additionally,
II wells) from March 18 to May 3,1993.
analytical
staff gauge measurements
Creek and Bear Head Creek.
were
The measurements
as those described in Section 2.4.4.3.
from all Phase II monitoring
Additionally,
wells (round one for Phase
a second round of groundwater
samples
March 23,1993.
The Phase II wells (along the Phase I and existing
parameters
shallow and deep wells,
from all Phase I (Sites 6, 9, and 82 shallow and deep wells) and existing
wells from March 18 through
procedures
of
Sampling
samples were obtained
were also obtained
from the Phase I and II (with the exception
because these wells were not completed)
and existing
l
wells
as those described in Section 2.4.4.5.
based on the Phase
I groundwater
program:
Site 9 (round 2) - volatiles
-
semivolatiles
-
pesticides/PCBs
-
TAL total metals
-
TAL dissolved metals
(601 and 602):
2-84
wells) were sampled
The groundwater
results.
by employing
the same
samples were analyzed
The following
summarizes
for
the
l
Sites 6 and 82 (round 2) - volatiles
l
Sites 6 and 82 (Phase II wells):
l
Shallow
l
wells - volatiles
(601 and 602):
-
semivolatiles
-
pesticides/PCBs
-
TAL total metals
-
TAL dissolved metals
Deep wells - volatiles
-
Field
&A/&C
duplicate
program
Note that
volatiles
(601 and 602)
(601 and 602):
samples
samples)
(i.e., trip blanks,
were also collected
at the same frequencies
the groundwater
samples
because these compounds
6GWlDA
to evaluate
source bailer
from within
was used to obtain
distribution
intermixing
these samples
2.7
Decontamination
Decontamination
of groundwater
decontamination
field
of the well,
one from the
were collected
A teflon
which allowed for discrete
from
constructed
interval
discrete depths were sampled
depict contaminant
within
for
well
point
sampling
from this
levels at those depths because of the
the aquifer.
Procedures
procedures
IV guidelines.
II groundwater
note that two samples,
of contaminants.
the well. It should be noted that although
vertical
and
of concern in the deep groundwater
Additionally
and one from the bottom
the vertical
the Phase
rinsates,
as described in Section 2.4.4.5.
are the contaminants
well, the samples may not accurately
Region
during
equipment
from the Phase II deep wells were only analyzed
based on the based on the Phase I results.
top of the water column
field blanks,
performed
In general,
in the field were initiated
sampling
groups: heavy equipment
equipment
included:
the drill rig, hollow-stem
equipment
included:
split-spoons,
auger bucket, and sediment
and drilling
and routine
equipment
in accordance
were divided
sample collection
augers, and drill rods; routine
stainless-steel
corer, etc..
2-85
spoons and bowls, bailers,
equipment.
with
EPA
into two
Heavy
sample collection
bailer
wire, hand
For heavy equipment,
the following
procedures were implemented:
l
Removal
of caked-on soil with brush,
l
Steam clean with high-pressure
l
Airdry
steam; and
Note that the well screens for each well were also steam cleaned with
high-pressure
steam
prior to installation.
For routine
0
sample collection
Clean with
equipment,
potable
the following
water and laboratory
procedures
were implemented:
phosphate-free
detergent
(Alconox
soap
solution);
Rinse thoroughly
with potable water;
Rinse thoroughly
with deionized
Rinse twice with 10 percent nitric
Rinse thoroughly
with deionized
Rinse twice with pesticide-grade
water;
acid;
water;
isopropanol
alcohol;
Air dry; and
Wrap in aluminum
Temporary
decontamination
minimize
program
2.8
foil, if appropriate
spillage
Investigative
and handled
Derived
volume
of solids
excess split-spoon
(approximately
during
samples
Containerization
drilling
in 55gallon
drums.
during
to
the field
outlined
in Section 2.7.
liquids
(approximately
Handling
20 cubic
and drilling
yards)
and
at OU No. 2. Solid IDW included
mud; liquid
fluids (i.e., water,
IDW included
Alconox
soil
well development
soap solution,
isopropanol
acid).
and handling
activities,
were constructed
fluids generated
to the procedures
the field program
and purge water, and decontamination
alcohol, and 10 percent nitric
according
Waste (IDW)
6,000 gallons) were generated
cuttings,
of wood and plastic,
onto the ground surface. Decontamination
were containerized
A large
pads, constructed
of solids were performed
soils were temporarily
Afterwards,
stockpiled
the soils and drilling
2-86
in two phases.
on plastic
sheeting
At the completion
of
and covered or placed
mud were transported
and emptied
into
a roll-off
(staged on site in a secure area) box for final
were then collected
containerization.
from the roll-off box for disposal purposes.
Composite
samples
The analyses performed
were
full TCLP and RCRA hazardous waste characteristics.
Liquid
IDW generated
Liquids
were initially
containerization.
suspected
contained
Groundwater
acid content.
removed
characterization
then pumped
in the drums
fluids were also collected
at MCB Camp Lejeune the week of February
for final
contamination
until
final
was
disposal.
alcohol and nitric
and analyzed
disposal options are provided
2-87
in two phases.
into a tanker
wells in which
TCL organics and TAL inorganics
results and recommended
options were implemented
from monitoring
and handled
in drums because of the isopropanol
of the generated
These analyses included
steel drums,
or odor) remained
fluids also remained
Samples
were also containerized
in 55gallon
(based on PID readings
Decontamination
purposes.
the field program
for disposal
(total only).
The IDW
in Appendix
J. These
21,1993.
3.0
PHYSICAL
CHARACTERISTICS
This section contains
a discussion
Operable
Unit
geology,
soils, hydrogeology,
information
OF THE
of the physical
No. 2 or OU No. 2) including:
was obtained
STUDY
AREA
characteristics
surface
of Sites 6 and 9 (refer to as
features,
land use, ecology, and water
meteorology,
supply
from the RI field activities
and available
Camp Lejeune
flat
hydrology,
well inventories.
literature
This
pertaining
to
MCB Camp Lejeune.
3.1
Surface
Features
The topography
of MCB
ranging
is relatively
with
Coastal
Plain.
Intracoastal
Drainage
is generally
of Camp Lejeune
to the New River
is typical
elevations
Camp Lejeune
of the North
and the Atlantic
lies
Carolina
Ocean
via the
Waterway.
OU No. 2 is dominantly
portion
The terrain
surface
Most of MCB
from mean sea level (msl) to ‘72 feet above msl.
between 20 and 40 feet msl.
ground
a flat area with some elevation
of Site 82. Overall,
msl (Figure 3-l).
the surface elevation
The highest
where the elevation
elevations
occurring
portion
Creek located in the wooded area south of Lot 201. The terrain
that drainage
southern
of Site 6 (or northern
portion
in the vicinity
30 feet above msl. Elevations
Creek located along the northern
Site 82 indicates
near the northern
at OU No. 2 ranges between 5 to 30 feet above
of OU No. 2 are encountered
increases to approximately
at the banks of Wallace
variations
would be toward Wallace
portion
of Site 82
drop off sharply
of Site 82 and Bear Head
near the northern
portion
Creek while the terrain
of Site 9) indicates
of
near the
that drainage
would be
toward Bear Head Creek.
Several major land surface features
ravine
area, a smaller
The large ravine
ravine
are present at OU No. 2. These features
area, surface depressions,
area, which
has been discussed throughout
2.1.1.31, is located north of Lot 203. This larger ravine
widest point
(approximately
boundary
approximately
(southern
end) and extends
1,250 feet in length).
of Site
82, northeast
and mounds
from just
A smaller
of monitoring
ravine
well
this report
(refer
of Lot 203 to Wallace
ravine.
3-l
Creek
area is also located near the eastern
6GWlS.
Surface water was noted in the larger
surface water was not noted in the smaller
to Section
40 feet in width at its
This
smaller
20 feet in width at its widest point and extends approximately
north to south directions.
a large
as shown on Figure 3-1.
is approximately
north
include
ravine
ravine
is
600 feet in the
periodically
while
A series of depressions
82.
and mounded
Some of these features
depressions
associated
do not appear
appear to be former
with excavations.
MCB
areas while
land
the mounded
portion
of Site
features.
The
areas appear
to be
a large number
suspected solvents or lubrication
of &gallon
pails
oils.
Meteoroloa
Camp Lejeune
is located
within
Coastal Plain
generally
30 feet or less in areas of tidal
elevations
where Camp Lejeune
coastal North
variation
in average precipitation.
amounts
during
uncommon,
Carolina
summer
contribute
influence
months
storms.
Camp
lacks distinct
presents
a climatic
1982) of observations
Coastal Plain
effectively
occurs primarily
otherwise
Camp Lejeune
of the Coastal
during
on average.
the summer
are not
showers
the summer
Throughout
of migratory
and
months.
the winter
low pressure
52 inches.
27 years (January
Table
3-1
1955 to December
(MCAS) New River.
by the proximity
of the Atlantic
of temperature.
Current
and rainfall
Convective
is approximately
during
tends to have little
Lying
Ocean.
The ocean
50 miles offshore at its
direct effect on coastal temperatures.
offsets any warming
The
effect the Gulf Stream
provide.
experiences
hot and humid
produce a cooling effect. The winter months
Average
rainfall
reduces the average daily fluctuation
reaches of the cold Labrador
rain.
in the form
Corps Air Station
are moderated
nearest point, the Gulf Stream
southern
of precipitation,
of data collected
at Marine
temperatures
Daily showers during
of precipitation
yearly
to
wet and dry seasons, there is some seasonal
the greatest.
to the variability
average
of North
flat and swampy.
of one or two weeks without
summary
division
July tends to receive the most precipitation
precipitation
Lejeune’s
physiographic
to the east. The tidal portion
is generally
October tends to receive the least amount
and spring
Plain
range from 200 feet above msl at the western boundary
are generally
nor are periods
thunderstorms
the Coastal
is situated,
Although
might
occurring
some of these mounds,
Carolina.
Plain,
to be naturally
excavation
Within
were noted. These pails contain
3.2
areas are also present near the southern
daily temperatures
The average relative
humidity,
summers;
however,
ocean breezes
tend to be mild, with occasional
range from 38” F to 58” F in January
brief cold spells.
and 72” F to 86” F in July.
between 75 and 85 percent, does not vary greatly
to season.
3-2
frequently
from season
TABLE
S-1
CLIMATIC
DATA SUMMARY
FOR MCAS NEW RIVER
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
Mean Number of Days With
Precipitation
(Inches)
Maximum
Minimum
Relative
Humidity
(Percent) Maximum
Average
January
7.5
I
1.4
I
4.2
I
76
54
February
7.0
I
1.5
I
3.8
I
74
57
March
8.0
I
0.8
I
3.5
I
78
April
6.5
0.5
8.4
1.7
I
1
3.0
kiay
I
1
4.3
I
1
June
11.8
1
2.4
1
5.8
July
14.3
1
4.5
1
!hlgust
T--l.7
Temperature
(Fahrenheit)
I
Minimum
34
I
I
1
Average
44
I
I
46
42
53
I91
1
I
51
i
62
1
I
60
I
70
I
I
67
1
76
88
I
72
I
80
I
87
87
I
71
I
80
I
64
79
73
86
80
1
85
85
8.0
1
85
1
6.1
1
I
I
I
>=90F
I
>=75F
I
I
21
0 I
1 I
10
I
31
2
01
0
lllll
5
8
10
1
11
I
I
2
3
I
4161291
I
14
I
5
I
12
12
I
4
I
11
I
31
2
1111
I
September
12.2
1
1.4
1
4.7
1
87
83
I
66
I
75
I91
3ctober
6.5
1
0.7
1
2.8
1
82
74
I-
54
I
64
I
November
5.7
I
0.6
I
2.6
I
80
66
I
44
I
55
17111016141
December
6.1
0.4
4.0
77
58
37
dnnual
14.3
0.4
52.8
81
72
53
I
Temperature
> =0.5"
> =O.Ol"
I
1
I
1
36
Precipitation
7
48
9
2
63
117
33
i
I
-2
I
1
I
14
25
31
I
1
--
1
I
0
I
I
-_ I
01
0
I
31271
I
141
7
31
I
0
01
16
I
I
-- I
0
2
11
34
188
47
-- Lessthan 0.5 days
Source: Naval Oceanography Command Detachment, Asheville, North Carolina. Measurements obtained from January 1955 to December 1982.
I
I
I
I
<=32F
Observations
105 partly
of sky conditions
indicate
cloudy, and 148 cloudy.
the average.
Prevailing
yearly
Measurable
winds are generally
and from the north-northwest
during
averages
amounts
of approximately
of rainfall
occur 120 days per year, on
from the south-southwest
September
and October.
112 days clear,
10 months
The average
of the year,
wind speed for
MCAS New River is 6.9 m.p.h.
3.3
Surface
The majority
Water
Hydrology
of MCB Camp Lejeune
in which drainage
is nearly level with wide, undissected
is poor and water
movement
surface water feature
and receives drainage
direction
into the Atlantic
and empties
OU No. 2 is located approximately
New River’s
outlet
OU No. 2. Wallace
extensive
surface ponding.
empties
into Wallace
The NC DEHNR
Ocean.
Wallace
Two drainages
Creek
Wallace
Creek
propagation
and survival
Tide data was obtained
Hampton
associated tributaries.
from August
saltwaters
protected
A correction
1, 1992 to September
to
the southern
surface
for primary
that
portion
exhibits
of Site 6 and
from the site.
to their designated
waters.
recreation,
use.
from its source to
The Class SB NSW
fishing
and for the
life.
from the National
station
and adjacent
by marsh
and Bear Head Creek
as Class SB NSW
of aquatic
Roads, Virginia
is surrounded
the state according
Creek from its source to the New River
denotes tidal
exist within
0.75 miles downstream
Wallace
designation
It flows in a southerly
border of Site 82 and flows in a southwesterly
bodies of water within
are designated
is the dominant
the New River Inlet.
Bear Head Creek lies within
Creek approximately
classifies
areas
1.75 miles east of the New River and 12.5 miles north of the
Creek forms the northern
toward the New River.
The New River
from most of the base.
Ocean through
into the Atlantic
direction
is slow.
interstream
Oceanic and Atmospheric
in order to quantify
tidal
Administration’s
effects on the New River
factor for the New River was applied
18, 1992.
High
Table 3-2.
3-4
(NOAA)
and
to tidal data collected
and Low tide data are summarized
on
TABLE
TIDE
1 Higi
Tide
DATA
3-2
FOR THE NEW RIVER
IN JACKSONVILLE,
NORTH
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
1 LoiTide
1
1 Hig!
Tide
1 Lo\Tide
CAROLINA
1
IHeight
Date
09/02/92
15.6 1 1.59
1 22.8 1
NA
1 0.2
09/03192
1 NA
1 1.02
09/04/92
09/05/92
09/06/92
l
.
1 NA 1 NA
bpr?7/92
6.3
1.49
19.0
1.59
NA
NA
I 1.3
13.3
NA
1 2.0
1
1
I
I
09/07/92
1.04 Ji
1.04
NA
1.08 1
09/08/92
09/09/92
09/10/92
09/11/92
09/12/92
09113192
09/14/92
09/15/92
18115192
18116192
rrq
0.4
12.6
NA
1.0
13.0
NA
1.84
1.79
NA
1.76
1.73
NA
Source: NOAA Tide Station
NA - Not Available
NA
8.0
19.7
NA
7.7
19.9
NA
1.27
1.20
NA
1.22
1.16
in Hampton
08/30/92
08/31/92
0.9
12.9
NA
1.4
14.1
NA
1.74
1.75
NA
1.57
1.61
NA
NA
7.7
20.2
NA
8.5
21.0
NA
0.96
0.93
NA
0.84
0.91
09/16/92
09/17/92
09/18/92
Roads, Virginia
3-5
8.8 1 1.55
21.1 I 1.59
9.6
1.55
21.9
1.57
10.4
1.54
22.5
1.55
10.8
1.66
23.3
1.66
1 3.4 1 1.12
I 15.7 I 1.08
4.0
1.04
16.5
1.04
4.8
0.99
17.2
1.02
4.8
1.05
1 18.1
1.12
1
Geologlv
3.4
The following
sections contain the regional
geology of MCB Camp Lejeune
and the site-specific
geology of OU No. 2.
3.4.1
MCB
Regional
Geology
Camp Lejeune
sediments
is located
of the Atlantic
shell beds, sandstone,
in the Atlantic
Coastal Plain
and limestone.
lenses that gently dip and thicken
nine
confining
pre-Cretaceous
units
which
These sediments
to the southeast.
overlie
age. These sediments
United
column
is underlain
igneous
These include
upper
Cape Fear
aquifers
aquifers.
The
Less permeable
combined
units which separate the aquifers
cross-section
hydrogeologic
illustrates
the
North
beds and
10 aquifers
basement
or near-marine
Carolina
rocks
environments
by confining
Beaufort,
indicate
that the area
units of silt and clay.
Peedee, Black
thickness
of these
Creek,
and
sediments
is
as confining
and impede the flow of groundwater
relationship
of
(Harmed et al., 1989).
clay and silt beds function
cross-section
and
Table 3-3 presents a generalized
time.
Castle Hayne,
semi-confining
This
clays,
they comprise
in marine
separated
1,500 feet.
A generalized
sands, clays, calcareous
studies at MCB Camp Lejeune
approximately
aquifers.
The
metamorphic
to Quaternary
the water table (surficial),
and lower
province.
are layered in interfingering
and
were deposited
Survey (USGS)
by sand and limestone
physiographic
Regionally,
for Jones and Onslow Counties,
State Geological
Plain
consist of interbedded
and range in age from early Cretaceous
stratigraphic
Coastal
units
between
of this area is presented
in Figure
between
in this
the
aquifers
or
3-2.
area
(Harmed et al., 1989).
3.4.2
Site Geology
Numerous
soil borings
were advanced
in the surficial
(depth greater than 100 feet) soils within
detailed
description
of the surticial
3.4.2.1
Surficial
Surfmial
soil conditions
the vicinity
(depth less than 25 feet bgs) and deep
of OU No. 2.
The following
provides
a
and deeper subsurface soils.
Soil Conditions
consist of unconsolidated
are generally
uniform
throughout
OU No. 2. In general,
surficial
soils
deposits of silty and clayey sand, silt, and clay. These soils represent
3-6
TABLE
3-3
GEOLOGIC
AND HYDROGEOLOGIC
UNITS IN
THE COASTAL
PLAIN
OF NORTH
CAROLINA
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
Castle Hayne aquifer
Cape Fear Formation
Notes:
(1) Geologic and hydrologic units probably not present beneath Camp Lejeune.
(2) Constitutes part of the suriicial aquifer and Castle Hayne confining unit in the study
area.
(3) Estimated to be confined to deposits of Paleocene age in the study area.
Source: Harned
et al., 1989
3-7
the Quaternary
“undifferentiated”
are fine to coarse-grained
formation
and contain
Results
of standard
penetration
indicate
that the sands have a relative
SM and/or SC according
inorganic
tests (commonly
(ML) with the exception
amounts
varied amounts
referred
results
Silts are generally
near Wallace
Creek, Bear Head
Clays are plastic to nonplastic,
as CL (inorganic
for cohesive soils (clays and silts) indicate
15861,
the sands classify as
System (USCS).
of silt and sand (5% to 25 %), and classify
penetration
Sands
to as “blow counts,” ASTM
silts encountered
conditions).
aquifer.
of silt (5% to 50%) and clay (5% to 20%).
Soil Classification
of organic
(saturated
the surficial
density of loose to dense. Further,
to the Unified
Creek, and the ravine
which characterize
a relative
contain
varied
clays).
Standard
density
of medium
stiff to stiff.
Several
areas investigated
material.
These materials
Site 9. Historical
aerial
have been excavated
fill material
Geologic
within
were encountered
photographs
and reworked
cross-sections depicting
obtained
cross-section
cross-section
extensively
during
encountered
the shallow borings
are present
thin laterally
within
A to A’ traverses
or reworked
of
to the Lot 203
Soil boring data indicates
that
on Figure
on Figure
Thin
3-4. Surficial
uniform.
Thin
soils.
In
to 9GW4) while
soils encountered
This area is predominantly
laterally
discontinuous
boundaries
northwest
3-5. Soils encountered
traversing
underlain
laterally
of OU No. 2. Additionally,
3-8
a
of soils boring 9GW6.
to southeast
direction
across the site
are similar
the area with thin interbedded
to a depth of approximately
discontinuous
25 feet bgs where
layers of silt (1 to 3 feet
along the B-B’ traverse
sands underlie
The silty sands were encountered
were terminated.
6GW30
surface to approximately
and southern
along the general
Silty
for the surficial
As shown
6GW21 to 6GW25).
layer of clay is present in the vicinity
described for the A-A’ traverse.
programs.
layers of silt (ML or MH) and clay (CL). The sand was
were terminated.
discontinuous
OU No. 2 were developed
to south (soil borings
from just below the ground
near the northern
underlying
OU No. 2 were traversed
north
A-A’ is presented
soils encountered
are illustrated
borings
and adjacent
the Phase I and Phase II drilling
by silty sand (SM) with thin interbedded
silt.
of fill
Lot 201, Lot 203, and portions
over the years.
soil conditions
north to south across OU No. 2 are generally
Surficial
amounts
that soils within
B to B’ traverses west to east (soil borings
Geologic cross-section
thick)
throughout
revealed
surflcial
on Figure 3-3, two cross-sections
typically
large
exists in these areas to depths greater than five feet bgs in some cases.
based on information
general,
OU No. 2 contain
to those
layers of
25 feet bgs where the
layers of silt (approximately
1 to 2.5
feet thick)
were encountered
in soil borings
6GW21
(located
west of Lot 203) and 6GW18
(located in the wooded area east of Lot 201).
Overall,
the surficial
The dominant
soils encountered
soil type encountered
continuous
confining
migration
of contaminants
at OU No. 2 were generally
was a silty sand. Within
layer (i.e., one which displays
consistent
throughout.
the area investigated,
a laterally
a low enough permeability
to any stratigraphically
lower
water-bearing
to impede
the
zones) was not
encountered.
3.4.2.2
Deen Soil Conditions
Soils were classified
during the Phase I and Phase II drilling
236 feet bgs. Additional
also obtained
following
from boring
summarizes
Deeper subsurface
general,
logs of supply wells (Hadnot
subsurface
soils consist
to a maximum
soil conditions
Point
to 310 feet bgs was
fragments
(SM) of the deeper sands are similar
The
OU No. 2.
consistent
throughout
of fine to medium-grained
limestone
depth of
supply wells) in the area.
underlying
soils (below 25 feet) are also generally
clay, and sandy-marly
classification
on deep subsurface
deep subsurface soil conditions
the deeper
silty-sandy
information
programs
(gravel
size).
to that described
In
the site.
silty
sand,
silt,
The appearance
and
for the surfmial
sands.
Below a depth of 50 to 60 feet, however, the sands become very dense to hard (blow counts
above 50). Large amounts
of clay are interbedded
(10 percent
Limestone
of shell fragments
within
to 20 percent)
is interbedded
amounts
within
mixtures
of sand and limey
literature
as representing
Geologic
cross-sections
also developed
(supply
well
depicting
HP-653
cross-section
this traverse
trace (up to 10 percent)
the sands or occurs as separate units.
This sandy-marly
deeper subsurface
3-3). In general,
to HP-6351
(Harried,
C-C’ is shown on Figure
and marly limestone
to little
plastic.
contains
is reported
in the
et al, 1989).
underlying
OU No. 2 were
cross section C to C’ traverses north to south
while cross-section
to deep monitoring
to slightly
The limestone
limestone
soil conditions
D to D’ traverses
west to east
well boring 6MW3D).
3-6. In general,
consist of silty sand, clay, and limestone
sandy limestone,
in the sands. Thin lenses
of silt and sand, and are non-plastic
mud (marl).
(refer to Figure
borings
The clays contain
the Castle Hayne aquifer
(supply well borings HP-633
Geologic
the sands.
were noted frequently
deeper subsurface
fragments
because of its varied nature).
3-9
(referred
soils along
to as limestone,
The upper silty sand unit, which is encountered
from approximately
laterally
(boring HP-6351
discontinuous
are present.
while the limestone
Underlying
Silty
portion
of the site.
layers of clay (borings
from approximately
the upper silty sand is a limestone
5 feet near the southern
unit.
portion
in the southern
Within
HP-653
The clay varies in thickness
varies in thickness
from approximately
portion
surface, ranges in thickness
40 to 140 feet. This silty sand unit is thickest
the site and decreases toward the northern
unit, thin
from the ground
portion
of
the upper silty sand
and 6GW2D)
and limestone
from approximately
2 to 10 feet
3 to 5 feet.
The limestone
unit varies in thickness
of the site to 80 feet near the northern
of the site.
sands (lower unit)
depth).
At boring
feet thick)
underlie
location
the limestone
HP-651,
and limestone
laterally
(approximately
unit
to a depth
discontinuous
of 310 feet bgs (estimated
layers of clay (approximately
10 feet) are present
10
at 230 feet and 250 feet deep,
respectively.
Geologic cross-section
this traverse
D to D’ is shown on Figure
also consist of silty sand, silt, clay, and limestone.
unit), which are also encountered
the eastern portion
Within
3-7. In general,
from ground
of the site (I-E-651)
6GW28D
and HP-653
approximately
thick) are present.
ranging
The clay layer within
to partly
unit (upper limestone
unit
in thickness
varies
approximately
(boring
to 6GW2D
interbedded
6GWlD
20 feet just
Green Road.
westward across the site.
3-10
(HP-633).
layers of clay
1 to 20 feet), silt (boring
approximately
continuous
10 feet
across
and at boring 6GW 1D (very thin).
unit) is present underlying
140 feet just east of Piney
from 40 feet near
Boulevard
the upper silty sand unit is partly
from approximately
appears to decrease in thickness
continuous
from approximately
and limestone
the site since it is present from borings HP-653
A limestone
sands (upper silty sand
to 120 feet just west of Holcomb
in thickness
5 feet thick),
Silty
surface, range in thickness
the upper silty sand unit, discontinuous
(boring 6GWlD
deeper subsurface soils along
the upper silty sand unit.
west of Holcomb
Subsequently,
Boulevard
the limestone
This
to
unit
Underlying
the upper limestone
unit
are alternating
30 feet thick),
limestone
(approximately
80 feet thick)
to a depth of approximately
separates the silty sands is thinner
generally
becomes thinner
3.5
Test Pits
3.5.1
Phase
3 to 35 feet thick),
310 feet bgs. In general,
compared
several locations
excavations
debris.
“Military/Construction
to the silty sands. Moreover,
(test pits) completed
The
material
and consisted primarily
l
Spent casings (95 to 105 mm cartridges)
0
Scrap metal
l
l&bar
l
Battery
packs
l
B-gallon
Buckets
isolated
areas contained
identified
burned
in the geophysical
Buried
been
classified
as
debris was encountered
material/residue
were also investigated.
buried wood and trace amounts
be noted that
these areas were not surveyed
detected in the geophysical
and the approximate
Phase
within
survey, which did not correlate
depicted on aerial photographs,
survey.
depth is illustrated
at
the test pit.
with trench
Some
and fill
The test pits associated with
of scrap metal in some cases. It should
in and may have deviated
A detailed
from
the actual
description
of contents
encountered
on the test pit logs presented
in Appendix
D.12.
II Test Pits
The Phase II test pits completed
Communication
excavations.
has
the
and wire
revealed
3.5.2
unearthed
1992, revealed
wire
the anomalies
anomaly
unit
of the following:
Communication
locations
unit which
this limestone
in September
Debris” for purposes of this study.
0
anomalies
the limestone
20 to
I Test Pits
of buried
In addition,
and silty sand (approximately
eastward across the site.
The Phase I exploratory
presence
sequences of silty sand (approximately
wire
was noted
in April
1993, also revealed
in four (6-TPl,
In test pits 6-TP5 and 6-TP7, numerous
the excavations.
The
materials
present
6-TP2,
6-TP3,
l- and 5-gallon
in the containers
3-11
the presence of buried
and
6-TP4)
containers
appeared
debris.
of the
six
were noted in
to be grease
or a
lubrication
oil, which was greenish-blue
laboratory
analysis.
materials
encountered
Information
prepared
Appendix
regarding
D.12 contains
evaluated
site soil conditions
Carolina
System
survey results.
properties
(USCS).
(BaB) urban
unit have been altered through
for
describe
the
nature,
Excavated
according
activities
to the
Universal
Soil
were used to confirm
SCS
at OU No. 2, however, the soils
by a number
which underlies
of distinct
soil units.
Site 9 and Lot 201, is typically
soil has been cut, filled,
Baymeade
of soil samples were
site conditions.
OU No. 2 is underlain
slope modification
publication
Service (SCSI for Camp
number
of that evaluation
and excavation
urban areas. The soil series found within
areas.
which
from the Soil Survey
and classified
land complex,
found in areas where the original
excavated
were retained
Records
- Soil Conservation
may differ from current
to the SCS Soil Survey,
rate and well drained
was obtained
The findings
Due to past burial
The Baymeade
the Test Pit
of Agriculture
described in the SCS publication
According
of the material
(SCS, 1984). As part of the RI, a limited
for geotechnical
Classification
Samples
during the excavations.
by the U.S. Department
Lejeune, North
in color.
or graded.
and smoothing.
Soil properties
of this
Due to its rapid infiltration
soil tends to be used for parking
lots and light-duty
Lot 203 and extending
is characteristic
soils (Pt) commonly
southward
of
range from 5 to 15 feet in depth and are
subject to surface ponding.
The wooded areas that surround
Leon (Ln) fine sands.
drainages
Kureb
both Lots 201 and 203 are underlain
and Leon fine sands are typically
and on convex divides.
Kureb
slopes. The Leon fine sand unit, unlike
soils are well drained
the Kureb,
by either Kureb (KuB) or
found on uplands
near large
and range from 1 to 6 percent
is poorly drained
and tends to be nearly
level.
Wallace
and Bear Head Creeks are bordered
poorly drained
and found on flood plains.
periods and is subject to ponding.
Mu&lee
ranging
Marvyn
by Muckalee
The Muckalee
(Mac)
unit on side slopes near large drainages.
from 6 to 15 percent in slope.
3-12
loamy
(Mk)
loam
soils that
unit is frequently
tend to be
flooded for brief
fine sands are found upland
Marvyn
of the
soil areas are long and narrow,
Generally
soils identified
(see Table
3-4).
by the SCS at OU No. 2 are moderately
With
the exception
of the Mu&lee
classified
under USCS as SM or SP-SM
classified
as being
ML (loam).
collected
during
the
(see Appendix
3.7
(fine sand or loamy
Sieve analysis
investigation
results
acidic in nature
soils at the site are generally
fine sand).
Muckalee
from the limited
number
are consistent
with
the
SCS
and site-specific
hydrogeologic
soils are
of samples
Soil
Survey
PI.
Hydroaeolom
The following
sections
information
discuss the regional
presented
hydrogeologic
3.7.1
field
unit,
to strongly
on the regional
information
Regional
The surficial
presented
hydrogeology
is from
conditions.
literature;
The
site-specific
is from data collected during the field investigation.
Hydrogeology
aquifer
extend to depths
lies in a series of sediments,
of 50 to 100 feet,
This unit
primarily
sand and clay, which commonly
is not used for water
supply
at MCB
Camp
Lejeune.
The principal
water supply aquifer
for the Base lies in a series of sand and limestone
between 50 and 300 feet below land surface.
the Castle Hayne formation.
The Castle Hayne formation
area and contains
the most productive
(T) and hydraulic
conductivity
24,500feetVday
(32,200
This series of sediments
aquifer
in North
generally
Estimated
(K) values for the Castle Hayne Aquifer
to 183,300
gallons/day/feet)
is known as
is about 150 to 350 feet thick
Carolina.
beds
in the
transmissivity
range from 4,300 to
and 14 to 82 feet/day,
respectively
(Harmed et al., 1989).
Onslow County
freshwater,
and Camp Lejeune
although
the New River
Gverpumping
the proximity
estuary
lie in an area where the Castle Hayne
of saltwater
is of concern
contains water having
the Base (Hamed
less than 250 milligrams
contains
in deeper layers just below the aquifer
in managing
of the deeper parts of the aquifer
aquifer
water
withdrawals
could cause intrusion
per liter (mg/l) chloride
et al., 1989).
3-13
and in
from
the aquifer.
saltwater.
The aquifer
throughout
the area of
TABLE
3-4
SUMMARY
OF SOIL PHYSICAL
PROPERTIES
OPERABLE
UNlT NO. 2
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
Soil
Symbol
Soil Name
uses
ShrinkSwell
Potential
Organic
Matter
(percent)
4.5-6.5
LOW
0.5 - 1.0
Soil Reaction
Classification
(Pm
Baymeade
BaB
SM, SP-SM
Kureb
KIlB
SP, SP-SM
O-80
1.60-1.80
4.2x10-3-1.37x10-2
4.5-7.3
LOW
c2.0
Leon
Ln
SP, SP-SM
o-17
1.40-1.65
4.2x10-3-1.37x10-2
3.6 - 5.5
Low
0.5-4.0
Marvyn
MaC
SM
o-12
1
--
1
1.37x lo-3- 4.2x10-3
4.5-6.0
LOW
<2.0
Muckalee
Mk
ML
O-28
1
--
1
4.2x lo-4- 1.37x10-3
5.1- 7.3
Low
0.5 -2.0
Source: Soil Survey: Camp Lejeune, North Carolina,
Notes:
ML
SM
SP
--
-
Loam
Loamy Fine Sand
FineSand
Not Estimated
U.S. Department
of Agriculture
- Soil Conservation
Service
The aquifers
Although
that
lie below the Castle
saturate
thick
sequences of sand and clay.
some of these aquifers are used for water supply elsewhere in the Coastal Plain,
contain saltwater
Rainfall
in the Camp Lejeune
in the Camp Lejeune
and moves downward
In the saturated
until
the system to discharge
(Harried
et al., 1989).
levels in wells tapping
receives more recharge
or is transpired
generally
is highest
flows in the direction
areas like
areas, infiltrates
of lower hydraulic
the New River
the suriicial
in the winter
by plants
in recharge
the soil,
it reaches the water table, which is the top of the saturated
zone, groundwater
aquifer
vary seasonally.
than in the summer
months
zone.
head, moving
and its tributaries
or the ocean
The surficial
aquifer
when much of the water evaporates
before it can reach the water table.
in the winter
they
area and are not used (Harmed et al., 1989).
area enters the ground
through
Water
Hayne
Therefore,
and lowest in summer
the water
or early fall (Harmed
table
et al.,
1989).
In semi-confined
tightly
aquifers,
cased well
semi-confined
water
is called
is under
the potentiometric
Castle Hayne aquifer,
seasonal variation
excess head and the level to which
also is common
surface.
shows a different
pattern
in the potentiometric
but the changes tend to be slower and over a smaller
The
hydraulic
of variation
it rises in a
head
over time.
surface of the Castle Hayne
in the
Some
aquifer,
range than for water table wells (Harmed
et al., 1989).
3.7.2
Site Hydrogeology
As described
in Section
3.4.2, the OU No. 2 is underlain
silty sand, silt, clay, and limestone
fragments
bearing
are consistent
zones. These conditions
described in USGS publications.
surfmial
3.7.2.1
Surfcial
previously
The following
and deeper water-bearing
Surficial
which characterize
the surficial
with the regional
describes groundwater
deposits of sand,
and deep water-
hydrogeologic
conditions
framework
for both the
zones.
Groundwater
groundwater
flow patterns
existing
and newly installed
gauges installed
by unconsolidated
in the vicinity
in Bear Head Creek
of OU No. 2 were evaluated
shallow monitoring
and Wallace
3-15
Creek.
by a network
of
wells (less than 33 feet), and staff
The shallow
monitoring
well
network extends from north of Wallace
to Holcomb
Boulevard.
Groundwater
Monitoring
elevations)
well and staff gauge locations
was encountered
OU No. 2. This variation
changes.
near the banks
Creek to south of Site 9, and east of Piney Green Road
during
the drilling
in groundwater
of Wallace
Creek
to topographic
(i.e., land surface
and Bear Head Creek while a lower
GGWlS/D
and 6GW28S/D.
north
An average
(i.e., greater
of Lot 203 in the vicinities
depth
of groundwater
encountered
than
of well clusters
across
OU No. 2 is
8 feet.
Four rounds of groundwater
level measurements
wells at Sites 6 and 82 (September
1993), and Site 9 (September
1993) during
the Phase
respectively.
30,1992;
15,1992;
were obtained
October 26,1992;
September
I and II field
30,1992;
investigation
Groundwater
1,1993) and Wallace
elevations
feet [well 82MW2
(measured
(10/26/92)
November
7,1992;
and April
1,
and October 26,1992;
and April
1,
located
3-5 and
3-6,
from Bear Head Creek (September
30,
1,1993) are shown on Table 3-7.
near Wallace
Creek]
to 29.39 [well
Green Road] feet above msl.
over a seven month
in water level of 5.59 feet.
period.
In general,
Well
the highest
This very small
constant
6GW2S
(4/l/93)
levels fluctuated
exhibited
water
the largest
levels were noted on
7,1992.
Water level data was collected over a 24-hour period from monitoring
on Table 3-8, water levels were fairly
Water
6GWlS
1,1993 and the lowest water levels were noted on November
feet was observed.
on Tables
from top of PVC casing reference points) ranged from 1.03
located east of Lot 203 across Piney
between 0.7 and 5.59feet
Creek (April
from the shallow monitoring
as shown
Staff gauge surface water measurements
1992 and April
April
depths throughout
A high water table (i.e., less than 2 feet bgs) was typically
water table was encountered
fluctuation
at varying
depths is attributed
15feetbgs)
approximately
program
are shown on Figure 2-8.
well 6GW28S.
As shown
over a 24-hour period as a change of only 0.06-
change in water level is most likely
the result
of normal
daily fluctuations.
Sticial
groundwater
flow patterns
in the vicinity
depicted on Figure 3-8. As shown on Figure
of OU No. 2 on September
3-8, a groundwater
divide
30, 1992 are
occurs near the north-
central portion
of OU No. 2. Groundwater
on the north side of the divide
is flowing
northwest
toward Wallace
Creek while groundwater
on the south side of the divide
is flowing
southwest
toward Bear Head Creek.
influenced
The groundwater
by surface elevation
changes.
flow patterns
within
The data (i.e., ground
3-16
these areas appear to be
surface and groundwater
TA,
.e.’
2: 3-5
SUMMARY
OF WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
FROM SHALLOW
MONITORING
SEPTEMBER
30,1992, OCTOBER
26,1992, NOVEMBER
7,1992, AND APRIL
SITES 6 AND 82
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
WELLS
1,1993
ON
Well No.
Top of PVC
Casing
Elevation(l)
(feet, above
msl)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(9/30/92)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(10/26/92)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of easing)
(11/7/92)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(4/l/93)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(9/30/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(10/26/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(1 l/7/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(4/l/93)
GGWlS(2)
35.18
18.75
19.55
19.86
15.34
16.43
15.63
15.32
19.84
6GWZS(2)
38.37
13.98
14.57
14.91
8.98
24.39
23.80
23.46
29.39
6GW3(2)
31.32
14.84
15.37
15.68
13.03
16.48
15.95
15.64
18.29
6GW4(2)
27.99
7.53
7.85
8.27
4.48
20.46
20.14
19.72
23.51
6GW5(2)
25.67
6.18
6.77
7.01
3.31
19.49
18.90
18.66
22.36
6GW6(2)
26.74
7.70
8.56
8.76
4.45
19.04
18.18
17.98
22.29
6GW7S(2)
17.83
5.49
6.68
6.76
3.34
12.34
11.15
11.07
14.49
6GW8(2)
22.35
6.36
6.82
7.25
4.03
15.99
15.53
15.10
18.32
6GW9(3)
21.11
9.08
9.59
10.03
7.27
12.03
11.52
11.08
13.84
6GWlO(3)
19.88
7.30
7.75
8.12
6.22
12.58
12.13
11.76
13.66
6GW11(3)
35.05
--VII
18.16
18.47
16.88
__
16.89
16.58
18.17
6GW12(3)
18.28
6.45
6.67
6.73
6.30
11.84
11.62
11.56
11.98
6GW13(3)
20.10
5.70
7.56
7.65
4.21
14.40
12.54
12.45
15.89
Notes:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
- mean sea level
Existing monitoring well
Phasse I monitoring well
Phase II monitoring well
Existing monitoring well
Existing monitoring well
-- = Data not collected.
installed by ESE, Inc., November 1986.
installed by Baker Environmental,
Inc., September-October
1992.
installed by Baker Environmental,
Inc., February-March
1993.
installed by NUS Corporation, June 1991.
installed by S&ME, April 1992.
SUMMARY
OF WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
FROM SHALLOW
MONITORING
SEPTEMBER
30,1992, OCTOBER
26,1992, NOVEMBER
7,1992, AND APRIL
SITES 6 AND 82
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-9133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(10/26/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(11/7/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msll
(411193)
11.50
--
16.99
16.59
20.79
11.09
__
17.98
17.80
22.29
8.05
--
19.58
19.15
23.03
8.18
20.28
19.92
19.46
23.80
7.99
21.12
21.71
20.12
24.09
(10/26/92)
[email protected])
26.96
6GW25(3)
34.30
6GW26(3)
23.66
6GW28S(3)
30.20
[email protected])
12.60
6GW31(4)
30.26
Notes: (1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
--_*I
-*
--
ON
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(9130192)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(U/7/92)
WELLS
1,1993
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(411193)
7.49
7.90
3.95
--
20.46
20.05
24.00
6.28
6.67
2.61
--
18.80
18.41
22.47
13.30
13.63
10.74
17.48
17.00
16.67
19.56
5.84
--
3.00
17.81
18.29
--
21.13
7.56
--
19.40
19.03
22.36
11.88
--
22.42
22.06
26.20
10.28
__
13.38
13.13
14.57
21.63
__
8.57
8.36
12.27
_-
6.53
6.55
9.00
6.07
6.05
3.60
--
11.34
msl - mean sealevel
Existing monitoring well installed by ESE, Inc., November 1986.
Newly installed monitoring well by Baker Environmental, Inc., September-October 1992.
Newly installed monitoring well by Baker Environmental, Inc., February-March, 1993.
Existing monitoring well installed by NUS Corporation, June 1991.
Existing monitoring well installed by S&ME, April 1992.
-- = Data not collected.
TABLE34
. NTINUED)
Y
SUMMARY
OF WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
FROM SHALLOW
MONITORING
SEPTEMBER
30,1992, OCTOBER 26,1992, NOVEMBER
7,1992, AND APRIL
SITES 6 AND 82
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
Well No.
Top of PVC
Casing
Elevation(l)
(feet, above
msl)
6GW32(4)
21.79
6GW33(4)
22.42
__
6GW34(4)
32.01
--
82MW1(5)
8.58
82MW2(5)
6.03
82MW3(5)
24.31
82MW30(5)
32.19
6MW2(e)
29.68
6MW3S(e)
30.73
6MW8(6)
30.62
6MW9(6)
39.98
6BP-6(e)
37.41
Notes: (1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(9130192)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(10/26/92)
Depth to
Depth to
Groundwater Groundwater
(feet, below
(feet, below
top of casing> top of casing)
(11/7/92)
(4/l/93)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(9/30/92)
WELLS
1,1993
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(10/26/92)
ON
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(11/7/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(4/l/93)
sm
I
4.18
5.00
4.17
4.17
4.30
4.58
--
13.95
15.42
14.59
10.13
9.29
11.68
12.10
__
9.24
4.00
--
3.35
-
7.50
-Q-j-+
4.40
1.03
1.86
1.73
10.36
8.89
9.72
14.18
8.46
22.90
20.51
20.09
23.73
8.36
9.42
4.20
7.94
--
*-
--
-16.01
10.05
16.33
5.93
11.17
--
21.49
--
--
23.97
--
16.67
12.10
_-
--
msl - mean sea level
Existing monitoring well installed by ESE, Inc., November 1986.
Newly installed monitoring well by Baker Environmental, Inc., September-October 1992.
Newly installed monitoring well by Baker Environmental, Inc., February-March, 1993.
Existing monitoring well installed by NIJS Corporation, June 1991.
Existing monitoring well installed by S&ME, April 1992.
-- = Data not collected.
20.74
I
25.31
TABLE
SEPTEMBER
r
Well No.
3-6
SUMMARY
OF WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
15,1992, SEPTEMBER
30,1992, OCTOBER
26,1992,
SITE 9
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CT0433
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
ON
AND APRIL
1,1993
Top of PVC
Casing
Elevation(l)
(feet, above
msl)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(S/15/92)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(S/30/92)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(10/26/92)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(4/l/93)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(S/15/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(S/30/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above
msl)
(10/26/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above msl)
(411193)
30.70
8.85
9.41
10.03
7.18
21.85
21.29
20.67
23.52
27.82
8.45
8.97
9.57
6.25
19.37
18.85
18.25
21.57
26.42
30.70
9.72
--
10.40
9.20
10.99
9.69
8.40
4.96
16.70
--
16.02
15.43
18.02
21.50
21.01
25.74
30.81
--
10.24
10.81
8.10
ve
20.57
20.00
22.71
31.31
--
10.30
11.25
8.16
--
21.01
20.06
23.15
11.13
11.69
8.90
me
17.63
17.07
19.86
13.56
18.40
15.10
__
15.54
10.70
14.00
--
20.46
19.74
22.74
28.39
I
--
7.93
,
8.65
,
5.65
.
Notes: (1) msl - mean sea level
(2) Existing monitoring well installed by ESE, Inc., November 1986.
(3) Phase I monitoring well installed by Baker Environmental, Inc., September 1992. Note that no additional wells were installed during the Phase II
investigation.
(4) Deep monitoring well.
TABLE
3-7
SUMMARY
OF STAFF GAUGE READINGS
ON
SEPTEMBER
30,1992 AND APRIL
1,1993
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
Staff
Gauge
Reading
Staff
Gauge
Reading
Top of Water
Elevation
Top of Water
Elevation
Staff
Gauge
No.
Top of Staff
Gauge
Elevation(l)
Height
of Staff
Gauge
(feet)
(feet)
(feet, above md)
(feet)
(09/30/93)
(04/01/93)
(09/30/93)
BH-SGl(2)
8.1
2.5
0.30
0.60
5.90
6.20
BH-SG2(2)
7.5
2.5
0.20
0.20
5.20
5.20
BH-SG3(2)
6.4
2.5
0.25
_-
4.15
--
SGWCl(3)
2.5
2.5
--
1.20
--
1.20(4)
sGwc2(3)
2.5
2.5
--
1.00
__
1.00(4)
in Wallace
Creek
Notes:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
msl - mean sea level
Bear Head Creek staff gauge
Wallace Creek staff gauge
Elevations are direct readings
3-21
(feet, above ma11 (feet, above msl)
(04/01/93)
TABLE
OVER
SUMMARY
OF WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
A 24-HOUR
PERIOD
AT SHALLOW
MONITORING
SITE 6
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
TimeFrom
start (MiIl)
Depth to Water
(Feet, bgs.)
0.000
21.860(l)
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.891
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
~~~X~~
70:ooo
80.000
90.000
100.000
%8:
130:ooo
E8~8
16O:OOO
170.000
180.000
190.000
250.000
EEz
280:000
290.000
300.000
%!%i:
330:ooo
E*iiz
360:000
370.000
x%%
4oo:ooo
2EE
430:ooo
zE%i
460:000
470.000
480.000
3-8
%z
21:906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.891
21.906
21.891
21.891
21.891
21.891
21.906
21.891
21.891
21.891
21.906
21.891
21.891
21.906
21.891
21.891
21.906
21.906
fEz
21:891
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
Notes: (1) Minimum Water Level Recorded
(2) Maximum Water Level Recorded
Time From
Start (Min)
WELL
6GW28S
Depth to Water
(Feet, bgs.)
Time From
Start (Min)
490.000
500.000
510.000
520.000
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
2%~
550:ooo
XEZ
21:906
980.000
990.000
1000.000
1010.000
1020.000
1030.000
1040.000
1050.000
1060.000
1070.000
1080.000
1090.000
p;‘2
%%oo
58o:ooo
21:906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
EE%
610:000
620.000
%-Ei
650:000
660.000
670.000
680.000
690.000
TP8%z
720:000
Ebb
21:906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
%l%
750:ooo
E-E
;p;
21:906
21.906
810.000
820.000
830.000
840.000
E::
21:891
21.891
21.906
21.906
EE%z
870:000
fE
21:906
!zEi
9oo:ooo
%;:
21:891
21.906
21.891
21.891
;ii-::i
930:ooo
EE
21:906
21.906
3-22
:G%oo
1120:ooo
1130.000
1140.000
1150.000
1160.000
%E%
1190:ooo
1200.000
1210.000
1220.000
1230.000
1240.000
1250.000
1260.000
1270.000
1280.000
1290.000
1300.000
EiKE
1330:ooo
llI:*ooE
1360:000
1370.000
%%z
1400:ooo
1410.000
Depth to Water
(Feet, bgs.)
21.906
21.906
21.891
21.906
21.891
21.891
21.906
21.891
21.906
21.906
21.891
2%
;p;
21:891
21.891
Eif
21:906
21.906
xz
21:891
4%:
21.906
21.906
21.906
21.906
fE2
21:906
21.906
21.906
21.906
4%:
21:906
21.906
21.906
elevations)
also suggests that
discharging
in the vicinity
OU No. 2 indicate
that
groundwater
of Wallace
Creek.
groundwater
Surfcial
Figures
groundwater
flow patterns
on November
Generally,
to those described for September
Estimates
of groundwater
magnitude
estimated
portion
gradients
data.
across the site.
gradient
0.001 (average
reflects decreasing
groundwater
velocities
that K remained
Surficial
evaluated
(February,
elevations
Aquifer
pump
(75 feetz/day),
average
Creek
by
of Site
near Wallace
characteristics
indicate
an average K of 21 gallons/day/feet
S of 0.015 for the surficial
Creek,
the
In the north-central
gradient
is approximately
Creek and Bear Head Creek
the data
suggest
may be increasing
that
(given
surface.
[K, T, and storativity
investigation
(S) ] were not
conducted
by Baker
estimates
of T,
zones.
test results
during
Head
(less than l/2 miles from OU No. 2) provided
water-bearing
7,
varies by an order of
Moreover,
A recent hydrogeologic
Point
on these dates
30 and November
and Bear
Creek and Bear Head Creek
silty-sands
this test.
observed from shallow well development
3.7.2.2
of Wallace
in these areas.
hydraulic
and recovery
1.2 gpm was maintained
from September
because of the steeper groundwater
S, and K within the surflcial
as indicated
flow patterns
0.01 (range of 0.012 to 0.022).
during this investigation.
1993) at Hadnot
the groundwater
The steeper gradient
(and deep) aquifer
of
1, 1993 are shown on
As shown on Table 3-9, the gradient
near Wallace
constant)
7, 1992 and April
of Lot 201), however, the estimated
surface
portion
area appears to cover portions
(i) were calculated
is approximately
of 0.0042).
and
30,1992.
In the vicinity
of the site (northeast
near the southern
into Bear Head Creek
This drainage
are similar
elevation
well 6GWZS
and all of Site 9.
3-9 and 3-10, respectively.
1992 groundwater
in the vicinity
Flow patterns
is discharging
surface water staff gauge measurements.
6 (grid areas “201s” and “201E”)
is recharging
an average
T of 561 gallons/day/feet
(2.8 [email protected]/day or 8.0 x 10-4 cm/set), and an
(10 to 25 feet bgs).
Slightly
higher
A very low flow rate of
flow rates of 2 to 4 gpm were
during the field investigation
at OU No. 2.
Deep Groundwater
Deep groundwater
deep monitoring
flow patterns
wells (maximum
extends from north
of Wallace
in the vicinity
of OU No. 2 were evaluated
by a network
depth of 230 feet bgs). The deep monitoring
Creek to Site 9, and east of Piney
3-23
Green
well network
Road to Holcomb
of
TABLE
3-9
SUMMARY
OF ESTIMATED
GROUNDWATER
GRADIENT
VALUES
FOR SURFICIAL
AND DEEP WATER-BEARING
ZONES
OPERABLE
UNIT NO. 2
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
Surficial
Water-Bearing
General
Zones
Area
Date
Vicinity of
Wallace Creek
North-Central
Portion of Site
Vicinity of
Bear Head Creek
g/30/92
1.2 x 10-2
3.7x 10-3
2.2x10-2
1117192
1.2 x10-2
4.6x10-3
1.2 x 10-2
4.2x10-3
Average
Deep Water-Bearing
Not Determined
2.2x10-2
Zones
General
Area
.
Date
Vicinity of
Wallace Creek
North-Central
Portion of Site
10/26/92
3.5x 10-3
4.4x10-3
Not Determined
1 l/7/92
3.0x10-3
4.0x10-3
Not Determined
Average
3.3 x10-3
4.2x10-3
Not Determined
Notes:
Values expressed in feet/feet.
Values represent an average of three measurements.
3-24
Vicinity of
Bear Head Creek
Boulevard
(refer to Figure
deeper water-bearing
referred
2-8). Additionally,
aquifer
zones were obtained
hydraulic
characteristic
from well production
to as “well acceptance tests”) performed
data from the
tests (i.e., also commonly
on water supply wells HP-651
and HP-636
which are located along Piney Green Road.
Three rounds of groundwater
wells at Site 9 (September
82; (October 26,1992;
3-10, respectively.
level measurements
30,1992;
and October 26,1992;
and November
Groundwater
7,1992;
and April
elevations
(4/l/93)
[well 6GW2D
east of Piney
fluctuated
level
6GW28D.
Green
As shown on Table
figures,
the result of normal
7,1992;
and April
groundwater
over a 24-hour
toward
and Bear
November
7 exhibits
a similar
Most likely
Estimates
levels
exhibited
the
from
deep monitoring
constant
well
over a 24hour
change in water level is
flow patterns
on October
Head
trend
except
Creek.
that
zones. As shown on these
toward the general
The groundwater
flow toward
26, 1992;
flow pattern
the southeast
7 is the result of incomplete
on
is not as
water level (i.e.,
were not taken on this date) data from well 9GW7D.
Table 3-9. The estimated
gradient
groundwater
for the deep water-bearing
gradients
across OU No. 2. The average groundwater
north-central
portion
calculated
gradients
groundwater
are within
in the vicinity
flow patterns
this trend may suggest that the surfrcial
hydraulically
6GW2D
zones are presented
on
the same magnitude
of Wallace
Creek and the
of the site are 0.0030 and 0.0042, respectively.
the deep and surficial
Subsequently,
boring
Water
6GW2D
the west with local penetrations
this trend on November
of the groundwater
least partly
period
This very small
groundwater
is flowing
Creek
measurements
Well
1, 1993 for the deeper water-bearing
of Wallace
pronounced.
of Site 821 to 19.13
feet above msl.
period.
points)
daily fluctuations.
directions
Overall,
Road]
3-11, the water level was also fairly
3-11, 3-12, and 3-13 depict
November
and Sites 6 and
as shown on Tables 3-6 and
located near the western boundary
period as a change of only O-05-feet was observed.
Figures
1,1993)
in water level of 5.17 feet.
data were also collected
most likely
and April
from top of casing reference
between 2.20 and 5.17 feet over a six month
largest fluctuation
Water
located
from the deep monitoring
1,1993)
(measured
ranged from 9.06 [well 6GW37D
(4/l/93)
were obtained
interconnected.
Although
at OU No. 2 exhibit
trend.
and deeper water-bearing
zones are at
some clay layers underlie
the site (i.e.,
from 25 to 27 feet bgs) which may impede
3-25
a similar
vertical
groundwater
movement,
.
‘i
TABLE
SUMMARY
3-10
OF WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
FROM DEEP MONITORING
OCTOBER
26,1992, NOVEMBER
7,1992, AND APRIL 1,1993
SITES 6 AND 82
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
WELLS
ON
Well No.
Top of
PVC Casing
Elevation(l)
(feet, above msl)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(10126192)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(U/07/92)
Depth to
Groundwater
(feet, below
top of casing)
(04/01/93)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above msl)
(10/26/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above msl)
(11/07/92)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet, above msl)
(04/01/93)
6GWlD
35.31
23.07
23.32
19.90
12.24
11.99
15.41
6GW2D
37.61
22.15
22.27
18.48
15.46
15.34
19.13
6GW7D
20.08
10.89
8.94
5.72
9.19
11.14
14.36
6MW3D
35.18
--
.s
16.92
--
--
18.26
6GW27D
24.47
15.35
15.17
12.50
9.12
9.30
11.97
6GW28D
31.74
22.05
22.10
19.90
9.69
9.64
11.84
6GW30D
11.90
--
--
1.79
__
--
10.11
6GW35D
14.29
-_
--
5.18
--
--
9.11
6GW36D
17.61
--
--
5.67
--
--
11.94
6GW37D
15.96
--
--
6.90
--
__
9.06
Notes: (1) msl - mean sea water levels from Phase II
Note that deep wells 6GWlDA and 6GW15D were not obtained becausethey were installed after April 1,1993.
TABLE
OVER
Time From
Start (Mid
EKiz
SO:000
70.000
/+-
OF WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
PERIOD
AT DEEP MONITORING
WELL
SITE 6
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
CAROLINA
21.914 (1)
21.945
21.945
21.945
21.945
21.945
21.945
21.945
8x!:;
100:000
110.000
120.000
130.000
140.000
EZ
21:945
21.945
EEE
170:ooo
EZ
21:945
21.945
21.945
21.945
Et::
2oo:OOo
260.000
270.000
280.000
EE8
310:ooo
2zzi-88:
340:ooo
~x~:8~
370:ooo
E*:8:
4oo:ooo
~~E8~
430:ooo
440.000
450.000
460.000
470.000
480.000
Notes:
SUMMARY
A 24-HOUR
Depth to Water
(Feet, bgs.)
0.000
10.000
20.000
30.000
(1) Minimum
(2) Maximum
3-11
EE
21:945
EE
21:930
21.945
21.945
Etx
21:945
;;.;%8
21:945
21.945
21.945
21.945
21.945
21.945
21.945
%E
21:945
21.945
f EX
f;:;M;
;&
21:945
Time From
Start (Min)
Depth to Water
(Feet, bgs.)
490.000
500.000
510.000
520.000
530.000
540.000
550.000
EiE
58o:ooo
EEx:
610:000
620.000
630.000
640.000
650.000
660.000
670.000
:xEz
7oo:ooo
710.000
720.000
730.000
740.000
750.000
Time From
Start (Min)
Depth to Water
(Feet, bgs.)
21.961(2)
21.961
21.961
21.945
21.961
21.961
21.945
21.961
21.961
21.961
21.961
21.945
21.961
21.961
21.961
21.961
21.945
21.961
21.961
980.000
990.000
1000.000
1010.000
21.945
%E
21:945
21.961
21.945
:Ez
;;M&
f E%
21:945
21.945
21.945
21.961
%*~~8
78o:ooo
790.000
800.000
810.000
820.000
830.000
840.000
850.000
860.000
870.000
IKE
21:945
21.945
22%:
21:945
21.945
21.945
21.945
21.945
21.945
EEX
9oo:ooo
%-::8
930:ooo
940.000
950.000
960.000
970.000
EE
21:945
EE
21:945
21.945
Water Level Recorded
Water Level Recorded
3-27
6GW28D
%~-~~~
1040:000
E%E
1070:000
1080.000
1090.000
EEi8
1120:000
1130.000
1140.000
1150.000
1160.000
1210:ooo
1220.000
1230.000
1240.000
1250.000
1260.000
1270.000
1280.000
1290.000
EKi
1320:000
1330.000
~~~~~~~~
1360:000
E%:
1390:ooo
E!~%: .
EE
21:945
21.945
21.945
21.945
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.945
21.945
21.930
21.945
21.945
21.930
Ei
21:930
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.930
;:%!
21:930
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.914
21.930
21.930
21.930
21.914
21.914
21.914
these clay layers are laterally
Accordingly
migrate
groundwater
vertically
Groundwater
reference)
discontinuous
recharging
elevation
October 26,1992
differentials
groundwater
3-14. Negative
and positive
elevation
values represent
is discharging
this investigation.
82MW3/6GW27D
Section 3.10).
HP-651
Estimated
respectively
Land
(Hamed,
values
from
respectively.
(51,600
were not evaluated
flow rates (i.e., discharge
are shown
HP-651
water
on Table
and HP-636
Transmissivity
Lejeune
during
on water supply wells HP-651
to 54,600
Groundwater
3-15
values from HP-636
gallons/day/feet),
supply
and
in
are 3.8 and
and
respectively.
wells (in the Castle
(32,200 to 183,000 gallons/day/feet)
et. al., 1989).
flow rates within
Hayne
and 14 to
well HP-651
140 to
testing.
encompasses
several distinct
an area of approximately
areas of development
Geiger, French Creek, and Courthouse
in length,
heads
Use and Demography
MCB Camp Lejeune
and comprises
head
upward
from 50 gpm (screened from 189 to 194 feet bgs) to 150 gpm (screened from
155 feet bgs) during
3.8
characteristics
for these wells
range from 4,300 to 24,500 feetVday
82 feet/day,
ranged
(of drawdown),
of T and K from other Camp
aquifer)
a high downward
and 6GW28S/D,
tests performed
specific capacity
are 6,900 and 7,300 feetVday
Estimates
heads (at well clusters)
of specific capacity, T and groundwater
and screen intervals
6.8 gallons/minute/foot
are presented
heads at these clusters would be expected since
hydraulic
from well performance
depth
downward
the
in these areas.
Estimates
rates) are available
differentials
from
head would be expected at this cluster since groundwater
in Section 3.7.2.1, aquifer
(well
over time,
zones were evaluated
upward heads. At well cluster 6GW2S/D,
(+ 0.23 and + 1.12) are observed. Upward
HP-636
zones will,
data. These groundwater
in this area. At well clusters
As mentioned
semi-confining.
points were used as the datum
and deeper water-bearing
(-8.34) is observed. A high downward
groundwater
water-bearing
(top of casing reference
groundwater
values represent
is recharging
the surficial
as leaky
into the deeper soils.
between the surfrcial
on Figure
and are characterized
which includes
including
Bay. The installation
for human
provides
consumption.
3-28
Hadnot
Point,
MCAS/Camp
border is approximately
14 miles of ocean front and Intracoastal
The New River, which bisects the installation,
source of fish and shellfish
170 square miles (108,800 acres),
70 miles
Waterway.
both a commercial
The NC DEHNB
and recreational
reports that during
the
years 1989 and 1990 over 2.7 million
pounds of fish and shellfish
were caught commercially
in
the New River.
Land use within
established
Camp
Lejeune
environmental
most critical
is influenced
policy, and by base operational
factor which determines
land area found within
unsuitable
by the topography
the facility
for development.
the suitability
and regulations,
distances,
impact-weighted
also greatly
North
restrictions
constrain
Carolina,
and influence
and endangered
development
landing
(Master
quantity
and clearance
Plan,
and
species are to remain
such as explosive
and aircraft
estuary
Camp
Lejeune
safety
zones, may
Complex,
1988).
The vast majority
interspersed
noise thresholds,
is the
Much of the
3,000 acres of sensitive
undeveloped.
by
swamps that are wooded and largely
approximately
of threatened
itself,
Soil drainage
of a site for development.
other areas set aside for the protection
Operational
requirements.
consists of freshwater
In addition,
of the land
of Camp Lejeune
throughout
is used as training
the installation,
ranges and maneuver
these areas are generally
areas. Although
concentrated
between
Sneads Ferry Road and the eastern border of the base.
The combined
military
approximately
60,000.
resides within
urbanized
and adjacent
communities,
continues
3.9
and civilian
population
areas. As evidenced
particularly
North
Carolina,
area covered by forests (USMC,
including
Head Creek, Freeman
longleaf
hardwood
bottomland
of the surrounding
by the rapid population
during
the period
population
population
growth of Jacksonville
from 1940 to 1960, Camp Lejeune
growth and development.
Northeast
Creek, and Duck Creek.
pine in the drier upland
and pure hardwood
108,800 acres, with 84 percent
The base drains
Creek, Southwest
at MCB Camp Lejeune,
hardwoods
is approximately
1987).
sand and muck, with the dominant
Vegetation
90 percent
area is
Ecology
MCB Camp Lejeune,
tributaries
Lejeune/Jacksonville
At the present time nearly
to have a direct effect on regional
Regional
of the Camp
primarily
Creek, Wallace
or its
Creek, French Creek, Bear
The soil types range from sandy loams to fme
series being sandy loam (USMC,
North
to the New River
of the
Carolina,
includes
198’7).
pure pine stands of loblolly
and
soils, pure pond pine stands in high organic wet soils, pinestands in streamside
in the floodplains
of the major
3-29
zones and in more productive
creeks (USMC,
198’7). Wildlife
soils, and
on the
base includes
white-tailed
species (e.g., bobwhite
Wallace
deer, wild turkey,
quail, morning
dove, rabbit)
Creek and Bear Head Creek
Department
of Environment,
saltwaters
and black bear along with numerous
are designated
Health,
for primary
recreation
aquatic life including
propagation
and survival
as Nutrient
macroscopic
Sensitive
vegetation
requiring
upstream
from its mouth
as Inland
Waters at all the sample stations.
protected
survival
as Inland
(NCMFC,
for secondary
(NC DEHNR,
3.9.1
Sensitive
Waters
recreation,
which
are
basis), fishing,
1992a, 1992b).
and
These creeks are
inputs
1992a, 1992b).
Wallace
1992a, 1992b).
Creek and Bear Head Creek are classified
as Class SC: which are saltwaters
and aquatic
All saltwaters
(NC DEHNR,
Sensitive
(NC DEHNR,
or
above, and Coastal Waters below the first bridge
fishing,
life including
in North
1992a, 1992b).
Water (NC DEHNR,
propagation
Carolina
and
are classified
to
This section of the New River
1992a, 1992b).
Environments
This section describes the sensitive
sensitive
(NC DEHNR,
of OU No. 2, is designated
as a Nutrient
(NC DEHNR),
on a frequent
on nutrient
1992).
protect these uses at a minimum
also is classified
(swimming
limitations
Creek is classified
downstream
Resources
Carolina
Waters which are waters subject to growths of microscopic
Wallace
The New River,
1987).
as Class SB by the North
and Natural
protected
classified
(USMC,
small game
environments
include
environments
wetlands,
that were evaluated
protected
at OU No. 2. These
species, and other potentially
sensitive
environments.
3.9.1.1
Wetlands
The NC DEHNR’s,
pertaining
activities
Division
to activities
impacting
that may impact
for the Camp Lejeune,
photographs
Ecological
photographs
Management
wetlands
wetlands also are regulated
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
aerial
of Environmental
(USDI,
Risk Assessment
Carolina
1982).
(NC DEHNR,
a National
quadrangle
OU No. 2 is included
visible
19924.
hydrology,
3-30
Wetlands
by stereoscopic
for a copy of the NWI map).
based on vegetation,
has developed
guidance
In addition,
certain
by the U.S. Corps of Engineers.
Service (FWS) prepared
North
(DEM
Inventory
analysis
(NWI)
of high altitude
in this map (see Appendix
The wetlands
and geography
map
A in the
were identified
in accordance
on the
with
Classification
1979).
of Wetland
NWI
substituted
maps are intended
for an actual
local regulatory
Several
and Deep-Water
for a initial
wetland
Creek from the NWI
consisting
map.
The wetlands
of pond, longleaf
for the wetland classifications
3.9.1.2
Threatened
1988).
and Endangered
Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543),
under the North
Carolina
or candidate
state and/or
Creek and Bear Head
along
are palustine
with
map in Appendix
gum
A in the Ecological
and
Risk
Species
by the FWS under
Carolina
the Federal
Wildlife
status classifications:
Federal
actions,
or endangered
the other classified
Endangered
Resources Commission,
Species Act (G.S. 113-331 to 113-337).
or State threatened
from certain
forested
oaks, black
The protected
or State
species, State special concern, State significantly
endangered,
rare, or State watch
and State special
concern
species have the potential
for
in the future.
3-12 lists the protected
concern)
They cannot be
by Federal,
to Wallace
pines,
and/or the North
Endangered
only the Federal
species are protected
Table
et al,
and their locations].
protection
species fall into one of the following
protection
areas.
along the creeks primarily
[See the NWI
species have been granted
While
of wetland
adjacent
or loblolly
Assessment
list.
States (Cowardin,
that may be required
have been identified
(NC DNRCD,
threatened
identification
delineation
baldcypress
Certain
of the United
agencies.
types of wetlands
wetlands
Habitats
and the only federally
species (either
endangered
within
in previous
LeBlond,
1991; Fussell,
protected
species observed at MCB Camp Lejeune
1991; and Walters,
may inhabit
large foraging
range,
Black skimmers
Inlet
1991).
However,
(Fussell,
the boundaries
1991).
falcon was spotted approximately
These birds potentially
Camp
The following
or feed in areas surrounding
and piping
throughout
species were observed at OU No. 2 during
or special
species that
have been
Lejeune
paragraphs
(USMC,
1991;
discuss the
of OU No. 2 (Fussell,
1991).
OU No. 2 because of their
plovers were observed near the New River
inhabit
shore line areas and, therefore,
sparrows and Red-cockaded
southern
intensive
3-31
threatened,
previous studies.
five miles southeast
these birds primarily
locations
floral
of MCB
during
are not expected to be found at OU No. 2. Bachmans
were observed at numerous
endangered,
or threatened
identified
A Peregrine
studies
fauna1
MCB Camp Lejeune.
investigations
previously
woodpeckers
None of these
conducted
for
TABLE
3-12
OPERABLE
UNIT NO.
PROTECTED
SPECIES
WITHIN
MCB
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH
Protected
Classification
Species
American
Bachmans
alligator
(Rhvnochous
Green (Atlantic)
Loggerhead
Piping
turtle
TO, T(s)
aestivalis)
SC
(Chelonia
(Caretta
SC
niPer)
m. mvdas)
caretta)
(*I
woodpecker
loosestrife
SC =
TVA ‘Us)
T(D, T(s)
Falcon (*I
Red-cockaded
Legend:
turtle
plover (Charadrius
Rough-leaf
mississinpienis)
sparrow (Aimonhilia
Black skimmer
Peregrine
(Alligator
2
CAMP LEJEUNE
CTO-0133
CAROLINA
melodus)
T(D, T(s)
(Picoides borealis)
E(D, E(s)
(Lvsimachia
asnerulifolia)
EO, E(s)
State Special Concern
Et0 = Federal Endangered
*
E(s) = State Endangered
TO = Federal Threatened
T(s) = State Threatened
The observer did not differentiate
between the American eastern
peregrine Falcon [E (f), E ($1 or the Artic peregrine Falcon [T(f), TWI.
3-32
MCB Camp Lejeune,
1991; Walters,
therefore,
and sea turtle
on Onslow
Beach.
observed
Wallace
Camp
investigation
of the American
(LeBlond,
threatened
State endangered
MCB.
In addition,
1991).
or endangered
or threatened
upstream
been identified
(see Appendix
Community.
distichum,
Small
Nvssa biflora,
Stream
Fraxinus
Swamp
As
rubrum,
Community
uennsvlvanica,
Ulmus
3.9.1.3
Other Sensitive
In addition
to wetlands
Swamp
americana,
As
and protected
evaluated
when assessing potential
l
Marine
Sanctuary
landscape
Creek which is dominated
Small
pennsvlvanica.
distichum,
and Liauidambar
by a
Stream
by Taxodium
The Plain
Nvssa
biflora,
stvraciflua.
species, the presence of other sensitive
those listed in 40 CFR Part 300, were evaluated.
environments
area has
Environments
including
These sensitive
was located
The general
is dominated
by Taxodium
Several
resource
into a Coastal Plain
Community
rubrum,
was the only
Risk Assessment).
natural
Uhuus alata, and Fraxinus
is dominated
at
microcarna,
Risk Assessment).
which grades upstream
The Cypress-Gum
was conducted
Corp Base.
B in the Ecological
and former mill pond on Wallace
Swamp Community
in
species were found on the
Creek, a state registered
B in the Ecological
was
ramp
loosestrife
and State candidate
Creek (see Appendix
of OU No. 2 on Wallace
Swamp
this list, the Rough-leaf
plant species found on the Marine
Also upstream
Cypress-Gum
survey previously
by the state watch species Lugwiaia
of OU No. 2 on Wallace
consists of a broad floodplain
1992, an alligator
presence in the creek.
community
and Federal
A road meadow, inhabited
and September
1991). During
signs were posted at the boat launching
alligators
From
because of the low
areas of OU No. 2 (USMC,
in August
floral species and special-interest
Lejeune
Federally
conducted
Creek.
Creek warning
of OU No. 2 in the New River
do not swim very far up the New River
they are not expected to inhabit
in Wallace
A protected
nests have been observed downstream
Sea turtles
therefore,
the ecological
for them to exist at OU No. 2 (Fussell,
1991).
Sea turtles
salinity,
there is a low potential
hazardous
These sensitive
environments,
environments
waste sites using the Hazard Ranking
are
System.
and their presence or absence at OU No. 2 are discussed below.
- OU No. 2 is not located within
1992).
3-33
a Marine
Sanctuary
(NCMFC,
l
National
Park - OU No. 2 is not located within
a
Designated
Federal
Wilderness
Federal Wilderness
a
Areas Identified
Coastal
Area
Environmental
under
the Coastal
Management
Concern
Zone Management
Act
(CAMA)
including
and processes (CAMA,
methods,
of Wallace
through
The tidal
19’74).
portion
Areas Identified
Sensitive
Coastal Waters
identified
l
l
(NCWP)
Areas Identified
a Critical
National
Bear
of Wallace
the National
Head
associated
(USEPA,
public
policies,
of
trust
criteria,
the inland
with these waters are
under CAMA
Estuary
Carolina
of Areas
Creek,
Creek
along
with
75 feet
(NC DEHNR,
Program
within
1993a).
or Near
(NEP)
a Sensitive
Area
1993).
under the Clean Lakes Program
Area identified
Monument
of unified
- OU No. 2 is not located
under the NEP or NCWP
Critical
within
Program
under
types
coastal wetlands,
the establishment
adjacent to the mean water line also are regulated
l
various
waters,
Creek, and any coastal wetlands
CAMA.
Act - The North
regulates
estuarine
standards,
under
a Designated
Area (WS, 1989).
shoreline
regulated
Park (NPS, 1991).
Area - OU No. 2 is not located within
areas, and estuarine
portion
a National
- OU No. 2 is not located
under the Clean Lakes Program
- OU No. 2 is not located within
(NPS, 1991).
a National
Monument
(NPS,
1991).
l
National
Seashore
Recreational
Seashore Recreational
l
National
Lakeshore
Lakeshore
Area - OU No. 2 is not located
a National
within
a National
Area (NPS, 1991).
Recreational
Recreational
Area - OU No. 2 is not located
Area (NPS, 1991).
l
National
Preserve - OU No. 2 is not located within
l
National
or State Wildlife
Wildlife
within
a National
Preserve (NPS, 1991).
Refuge - OU No. 2 is not located within
Refuge (NC WRC, 1992).
3-34
a National
or State
Unit
l
of the Coastal Barrier
the Coastal Barrier
Administratively
l
Resource Program
Proposed
an Administratively
Spawning
l
Resource Program
Federal
- OU No. 2 is not located within
(USDI,
1993).
Wilderness
Area - OU No. 2 is not located within
Proposed Federal Wilderness
Areas Critical
for the maintenance
Area (WS, 1989,1993).
of fish/shellfish
lake, or coastal tidal waters - OU No. 2 is not located within
for the maintenance
Migratory
l
of fish/shellfish
pathways
and feeding
periods of time - OU No. 2 is not a migratory
for maintenance
population
areas utilized
fish species (NC DEHNR,
of anadromous
fish in Wallace
of Wallace
for breeding
probably
for breeding
river reach designated
the New River
Recreational
l
Federal
downstream
fish
waters in which fish
or feeding area
1993b).
There is not
Creek, Bear Head Creek, or the
by large or dense aggregations
species was not conducted
National
area critical
Creek,
study of the terrestrial
is not utilized
river,
of anadromous
pathway
of anadromous
military
activity
as Recreational
of Wallace
of animals
at OU No. 2. However,
by large or dense aggregations
the land is open and there is frequent
l
for maintenance
spend extended
Terrestrial
a spawning
reaches or areas in lakes or coastal tidal
New River downstream
a
areas critical
river
a significant
species within
species (Sholar, 1975).
species within
critical
a unit of
OU No. 2
of animals
because
on the land.
-Wallace
Creek
-A
Creek, Bear Head Creek, or
are not designated
as National
Rivers (NPS, 1990,1993).
designated
Scenic or Wild
New River downstream
River
- Wallace
Creek, Bear Head Creek,
or the
of Wallace
Creek are not Federally
designated
Scenic or Wild
for wildlife
or game management
- OU No. 2 is not located
Rivers (NPS, 1990,1993).
l
State land designated
within
l
a State game land (NC WRC, 1992).
State designated
River
downstream
Scenic or Wild
of Wallace
River - Wallace
Creek, Bear Head Creek, or the New
Creek are not State designated
(NC MFC, 1992).
3-35
Scenic or Wild
Rivers
State designated
l
Natural
Natural
Area or Area of Significant
State designated
l
Area - OU No. 2 is not located within
the boundaries
areas for protection
Areas of Significant
l
Value (LeBlond,
1991).
State Registered
Natural
Identification
Potable
recreational
existing
Supply
wells within
a one-mile
radius
intervals,
aquifer
significance
1992b).
a State Area of Significant
Creek Natural
Resource Area
characteristics
(specific capacity
of Sites 6 and 82, and Site
Information
was obtained
Report 894096”
(Harried,
in the report
and Tl, well distances
entitled,
“U.S.G.S.
and directions
and HP-636
approximately
within
80 feet east-southeast
upgradient
water
situated
approximately
across Piney
from Sites 6 and 82.
down
1,590 feet northwest
gradient
are currently
when HP-653
1,950 north),
personnel,
from
(located
and HP-637
out of service due to organic
and Sewer Department
Investigation
radius of Sites 6 and 82.
Green
Well
Sites
Road.
These
flow patterns
HP-633
wells
are
in the area, these
is the closest operating
6 and 82.
This
well
is located
and is screened between 55 and 205 feet bgs.
Three supply wells in the area, HP-651
(located approximately
well
are the closest active supply wells to Sites 6 and 82. These wells are
wells are generally
well
Resources
a one-mile
screened between 65 and 227 feet bgs. Based on groundwater
supply
Supply
is
et al., 1989).
As shown on Table 3-13, eight wells were identified
Wells HP-635
Water
9 were
on well depths, screen
on Tables 3-13 and 3-14 for Sites 6 and 82, and Site 9, respectively.
information
or
Wells
as shown on Figures 3-15 and 3-16, respectively.
located
or ecological
uses (NC DEHNR,
Resource Area - The Wallace
identified
provided
areas or are unique
of OU No.2.
of Water
water supply
to maintain
life - No areas within
nursery
Value - OU No. 2 is not located within
is located upstream
3.10
of aquatic
as primary
state or national
which require special protection
1991).
or maintenance
of OU No. 2 are designated
special waters of exceptional
a
Value (LeBlond,
a State designated
HP-651
approximately
80 feet east) and HP-653
(located approximately
contamination.
According
450 feet southwest)
to Camp Lejeune
was shut down in February
and HP-637 were shut down. Groundwater
3-36
quality
1985.
Water
It is unknown
data from well HP-651
(prior
TABLE
SUMMARY
OF WATER
3-13
SUPPLY WELLS WITHIN
A ONE-MILE
ReADIUS
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
OF SITES
Screen
interval
(feet)
Estimated
Transmissivities
(feetz/day)
Specific
Capacity
(gal/min./foot)
6 AND 82(l)
Approximate
Distance/Direction
from [email protected])
(feet)
Well No.
USGS Identification
Number
Total Depth
(feet)
HP-633
3441580772006.1
205
55-65
75-80
95-105
123-133
138-143
158-168
178-183
195205
.- (2)
..- (2)
1,39O/northwest
HP-635
3440550771933.1
215
65-75
93-108
122-127
136-146
150-155
170-175
185-190
210-215
-- (2)
.- (2)
80/southeast
HP-636
3441190771933s
227
go-100
115-125
130-135
140-150
158-163
170-175
185-190
200-210
222-227
6.8
6,900
80/cast
Notes:
(1) Information
obtained from “Assessment of Hydrogeologic and Hydraulic
Carolina,” 1989.
(2) Information
not available.
(3) Supply well currently not in service.
(4) Distance measured from closest boundary point at Site 6.
Data at Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base, North
TABLE
SUMMARY
OF WATER
Well No.
USGS Identification
Number
HP-637(a)
3440390771954.1
3-13 (CONTINUED)
SUPPLY
WELLS WITHIN
A ONE-MILE
RADIUS
REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
MCB CAMP LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
OF SITES
Screen
Interval
(feet)
Estimated
Transmissivities
(feetVday)
Total Depth
(feet)
172
Specific
Capacity
(gal/mtifoot)
90-98
-- (2)
-- (2)
--
6 AND 32(l)
Approximate
Distance/Direction
from [email protected])
(feet)
450/southwest
102-114
120-128
140-148
156-172
HP-641
3440390771954.1
178
108-118
128-150
158-168
--(2)
HP-651(3)
3442290771922.1
199
125-135
140-155
189-194
3.8
HP-653(s)
3442100771925.1
270
-- (2)
-- (2)
3442130771854.1
140
70-90
4.4
HP-709
(2)
7,300
--
4,1OO/north
SO/east
(2)
1,95O/north
8,500
2,38O/northeast
110-140
Notes:
(1) Information
obtained from “Assessment of Hydrogeologic and Hydraulic
Carolina,” 1989.
(2) Information
not available.
(3) Supply well currently not in service.
(4) Distance measured from closest boundary point at Site 6.
Data at Camp Lejeune Marine
Corps Base, North
‘3
TABLE3-14
SUMMARYOFWATERSUPPLYWELLSWITHINAONE-MXLERADIUSOFSITE9(~~
REMEDIALINVESTIGATIONCTO-9133
MCBCAMPLEJEUNE,NORTHCAROLINA
Well No.
USGS Identification
Number
Total Depth
(feet)
HP-601(3)
3440180772020.1
195
HP-602(3)
3440180772007.1
160
HP-634(a)
3440300771935.1
225
HP-642
3443040772100.1
210
Screen
Interval
(feet)
Specific
Capacity
(gaI/minlfoot)
Estimated
Transmissivities
(feetz/day)
Approximate
Distance/Direction
from [email protected])
(feet)
45-60
95-100
115-130
175-195
70-80
100-105
120-125
145-150
155-160
63-70
73-78
83-88
107-117
124-129
135-140
153-163
170-175
195-200
215-225
112-124
136-144
153-163
174-178
188-196
-- (2)
--(2)
3,960isouthwest
-- (2)
..-(2)
3,30O/southwest
4.5
4,300
2,3lO/south
-- (2)
-- (2)
5,20O/south
Notes: (1) Information obtained from “Assessment of Hydrogeologic and Hydraulic Data at Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base, North
Carolina,” 1989.
(2) Information not available.
(3) Supply well currently not in service.
(4) Distance measured from closestboundary point at Site 9.
i
SUMMARY
OF WATER
SUPPLY
REMEDIAL
MCB CAMP
WELLS WITHIN
A ONE-MILE
INVESTIGATION
CTO-0133
LEJEUNE,
NORTH CAROLINA
Well No.
USGS Identification
Number
Total Depth
(feet)
HP-635
3440550771933.1
215
HP-636
3441190771933.1
227
HP-637 (3)
3440390771954.1
172
HP-651 (3)
3442290771922.1
199
RADIUS
OF SITE 9(l)
Approximate
Distance/Direction
from [email protected])
(feet)
Screen
Interval
(feet)
Specific
Capacity
(gallmin/foot)
Estimated
Transmissivities
(feetz/day)
65-75
93-108
122-127
136-146
150-155
170-175
185-190
210-215
go-100
115-125
130-135
140-150
158-163
170-175
185-190
200-210
222-227
90-98
102-114
120-128
140-148
156-172
125-135
140-155
189-194
-- (2)
-- (2)
8OOleast
6.8
6,900
2,OOO/northeast
-- (2)
-- (2)
l,OOO/southwest
3.8
7,300
5,OOO/northeast
Notes: (1) Information obtained from “Assessment of Hydrogeologic and Hydraulic Data at Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base, North
Carolina,” 1989.
(2) Information not available.
(3) Supply well currently not in service.
(4) Distance measured from closestboundary point at Site 9.
to being shut down) indicated
18,000 micrograms
1,580 pg/l of 1,2-dichloroethene
(DCE), and 400 pg/l of tetrachloroethene
from HP-651
(ESE, 1991) indicated
pg/l), TCE (13 pg/l),
indicated
positive
and PCE (53 pg/l).
per liter
detections
of vinyl
Groundwater
quality
TCE levels of 9.0 pg/l in well HP-652.
these wells was not identified
Eight wells were identified
and HP-651
(pg/l) of trichloroethane
chloride
within
a one-mile
a one-mile
radius
radius
The source of the contamination
l
a
l
HP-601
HP-602
HP-634
Well HP-635
January
contamination.
by Camp Lejeune
HP-602,
personnel,
disposal activities
and HP-634
impacting
HP-636,
HP-637,
at the Hadnot
3-16.
have been shut down since
but it is believed
impacting
these wells
that the source may be
Point Industrial
Area (HPIA) . The
levels were detected:
- DCE
(8.8 to 99 pgn)
- TCE
(26 to 230 pg/l)
- PCE
(1.5 to 5.0 pg/l)
- DCE
(110 to 630 pg/l)
- TCE
(300 to 1,600 p&l)
- PCE
(24 p#
- toluene
(5.4 to 12 pgm
- vinyl chloride
(18 pg/l)
- DCE
(2.3 to 700 pgl)
- TCE
(10 l&l)
- vinyl chloride
(6.8
pgn)
is the closest active supply well to Site 9. This well is located
400 feet up gradient
1985
of Sites 6 and 82), as shown on Figure
1984 due to organic
contaminant
data from
of Site 9 (wells HP-635,
HP-601,
following
(70 pg/l), DCE (75
The source of the contamination
Three of these supply wells including
related to waste handling,
Recent data
by Camp Lejeune personnel.
were also within
was also not identified
(PCE).
(TCE),
(east)
approximately
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertisement