ANALYSIS OF BROWNFIELDS CLEANUP ALTERNATIVES

Transcription

1 ANALYSIS OF BROWNFIELDS CLEANUP ALTERNATIVES BLUE ISLAND NORTHEAST MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL PARK 119TH STREET & VINCENNES AVENUE BLUE ISLAND, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS LPC # WEST PARCELS PARCEL D (TPH CLEANUP AREA) USEPA 2009 BROWNFIELDS CLEANUP GRANT #BF-00E PREPARED FOR: CITY OF BLUE ISLAND SOUTH GREENWOOD AVENUE BLUE ISLAND, ILLINOIS PREPARED BY: V3 COMPANIES 7325 JANES AVE. WOODRIDGE, ILLINOIS JANUARY 2014 Public Comment Period: January 29, 2014 to February 28, 2014 You may provide your written comments by or mail. brownfields@cityofblueisland.org Mail: City of Blue Island, Attn: Jodi Prout South Greenwood Avenue 60406

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND Site Description Site History Proposed Redevelopment SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERIZATION Prior Investigations Site Geology and Hydrogeology CLEANUP ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Cleanup Goals Soil Cleanup Alternatives Analysis Alternative 1: No Action Alternative 2: Source Removal Alternative 3: Capping Alternative 4: Ex-Situ Soil Treatment Proposed Remedial Action Cleanup Schedule...9 FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Site Location Map Site Vicinity Map D (TPH Cleanup Area) Petroleum Impacts Remediation TABLES Table Investigations on West s - D Summary of Soil and Groundwater Tier 1 Exceedances Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park-West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area) January 2014 i

3 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Analysis of Brownfield Cleanup Alternatives (ABCA) was prepared by V3 Companies (V3) on behalf of the City of Blue Island (the City), Illinois. As used in this document, the Cleanup Area is defined as the Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area), as part of IEPA LPC No This ABCA report was prepared to identify and evaluate cleanup alternatives to mitigate potential risks to human health and the environment from identified environmental impacts at a remediation area. The specific remediation area addressed under this report is the cleanup of the total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) impacts within the localized Cleanup Area of the Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park West s, D, which is also outside of the identified landfill limits. Potential cleanup of other areas within the West s may occur at a later date and will be addressed under a separate report. D is located on the east side of Division Street, south of 119 th Street in Blue Island, Cook County, Illinois (refer to Figure 1 Site Location Map and Figure 2 Site Vicinity Map attached). The purpose of the cleanup is to meet environmental regulatory requirements and to position the property for redevelopment as industrial-commercial property. The initial step in the remediation process is to prepare a list of suitable cleanup alternatives and evaluate these alternatives based on a number of factors, including cost. Cleanup alternatives are provided in this report, and are based on previous site assessment data and assumptions noted herein. The City and City s environmental consultant shall consider all comments received and provide responses to those comments at the end of the public comment period. Comments that may change or supplement the Remedial Action Plan will be provided to the Illinois EPA Site Remediation Program Project Manager for review. All public comments will be documented / summarized and included in the Administrative Record, as well as any responses to public comments. 2.1 Site Description 2.0 BACKGROUND The D (TPH Cleanup Area) was enrolled in the Site Remediation Program (SRP) in August 2006 as part of a larger property under the name Vulcan Materials, commonly referred to as the Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park (the Site ), to secure a comprehensive No Further Remediation (NFR) letter. D is approximately 4.2 acres in size and contains a smooth gravel ground surface and crushed concrete stockpiles. The southeastern portion of the parcel comprises the outer edges of the former landfill, under the gravel ground surface. The current use of the Site is undeveloped and used to store crushed concrete. The City of Blue Island acquired the Site after having completed appropriate environmental due diligence. 2.2 Site History The history of the entire Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park was evaluated and is documented in a 2006 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). A general summary is provided herein. Review of historical aerial photographs, topographic maps, agency records and interviews indicated the following: Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park-West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area) January

4 Purington-Kimbell Brick Company owned the property from and operated a brick manufacturing facility. The property was occupied by two clay pits, one on each side of the railroad that separates the West and East s. Illinois Brick Company conducted brick-making operations from and excavated feet of clay. The extent of the clay borrow excavations at the conclusion of brick manufacturing is shown in the 1948 topographic map and 1952 aerial photo (see Phase I ESA for historical mapping). John Sexton Contractors Company acquired and operated an open dump from Both the aforementioned clay pits were filled with refuse during this timeframe. The open dump was capped and landfill operations ceased. The Site was vacant from The City of Blue Island received the property by donation from Eileen Sexton in Between , the West s were was occupied by the following users (see Figure 2): City of Blue Island soccer fields, GE Kloos Material (sewer and water main piping supply company), Christy Webber Landscapes (landscaping company soil pulverizing/recycling, salt and soil storage, nursery plant stock, and equipment storage), Vulcan Materials (concrete and asphalt recycling company), and Prairie Concrete (ready-mix concrete batch plant). Vulcan Materials utilized D until late 2013 to store crushed concrete. The Site and surrounding land use is light industrial and commercial. Adjacent properties include commercial/retail properties. See Figure 2 Site Vicinity Map for aerial of Site, general site properties and adjacent properties. 2.3 Proposed Redevelopment The future use of the Cleanup Area is intended to be light industrial/mixed-use commercial. Specific redevelopment plans have not been determined. 3.1 Prior Investigations 3.0 SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERIZATION Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park Site investigations have been completed at various times from 1989 through the Summer of The investigations consisted of Phase I and Phase II assessments, soil borings and monitoring wells. Information regarding historical operations and data regarding site conditions was obtained from previous investigations. Previous Investigations: Screening Site Inspection Report for Illinois Brick Company-Yard # 17, Chicago, IL, January 9, 1989, Ecology and Environment. Focused Site Inspection Prioritization Report for the Illinois Brick Company-Yard #17, Chicago, IL September 1995, USEPA V ARCS Contractor. Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park-West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area) January

5 Record of Subsurface Exploration, Blue Island/Rock Island, 119 th Street (East of Vincennes Avenue),, March 22, 1988, Schleede-Hampton Associates. Blue Island/Rock Island Future Use, 119 th Street,, May 31, 1989, Eldredge Engineering Associates. Report of Soils Exploration, Division Street Reconstruction,, May 2, 2005, Testing Services Corporation, Inc. Site Development Engineering, 119 th Street at Vincennes Property,, October 24, 1995, Weaver Boos Consultants, Inc. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Blue Island Industrial Park, 119 th Street and Vincennes Avenue,, October 12, 2006, V3. Soil Boring Report, Blue Island Industrial Park, 119 th Street and Vincennes Avenue, Blue Island, IL, July 31, 2008, HH Holmes Testing Laboratories, Inc. Comprehensive Site Investigation Report, Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park, 119th Street and Vincennes Avenue,, V3 Companies, March Remedial Investigation, Remediation Objectives Report and Remedial Action Plan, Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park, Former Landfill West s, 119th Street and Vincennes Avenue,, V3 Companies, August 8, Collected soil and groundwater samples were analyzed for one or more of the following: volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), target analyte list (TAL) metals, total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) cyanide, sulfide, ph, and total organic carbon. All analytical data was compared to 35 IAC Part 742: Tiered Approach to Remediation Objectives (TACO) Tier 1 industrial-commercial soil and groundwater remediation objectives (ROs) for the ingestion, inhalation and soil component of the Class II groundwater ingestion pathways, and direct ingestion Class II groundwater pathway. A summary of sample analysis and exposure pathways identified at D are located in Table Investigations on West s, D Summary of Soil and Groundwater Tier 1 Exceedances. Based upon site information and analytical data, the Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) being addressed under this report is as follows: REC 2 Historical ASTs/USTs: An iron crude oil tank (identified as not used), oil pump, and crude oil underground tanks are depicted on the Vulcan Materials lot ( D) in an 1897 Sanborn Map. Additionally, a 40,000-gallon fuel oil tank and fuel oil pump are located approximately in the same location in the Vulcan Material lot in a 1949 Sanborn Map. The tanks were located in an area that was not excavated for clay materials or filled, so there is a possibility that impacts remain. Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park-West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area) January

6 REC 2 is being addressed under this report for cleanup. Any RECs associated with the historical landfill operations or site wide groundwater will be handled separately. Results of previous investigations on D indicate that soil contaminants are present in the southeastern portion of the parcel due to fuel oil spills from the historical tanks and former operations. The contaminants are petroleum-related VOCs and PAHs that resulted from the release of fuel oils that were historically used. The area of soil impact to be addressed under this report is located at the southeast corner of D, and consists of soil that exceeds Illinois EPA remediation objectives. 3.2 Site Geology and Hydrogeology Soils consist of three basic soil units are present within the upper 60 feet of the Site s subsurface. Fill (varied, silt and clay matrices typical). This can be urban fill or landfill cap and can be up to 15 feet thick. Landfill Material (clay, wood, plastic, metal, paper) for areas within the former landfill boundaries and may be present to depths up to 60 feet bgs in the West s. Native Gray silty Clay with sand and gravel (underlying and beyond the landfill limits) at depths ranging from feet bgs. The groundwater levels within and immediately around the landfill are affected by the elevated landfill materials, surrounded by native clay soils, which act like a bathtub. Groundwater levels within D were measured in a monitoring well at depths ranging between 15 and 22 feet below grade. Based on measured water levels of landfill perimeter wells, the groundwater flow within the near surface sediments trends to south towards the Cal Sag Channel, located approximately 1.5 miles south of the site. Site geology and hydraulic conductivity testing designates the Site to be underlain by Class II Potable Groundwater. Based on a water well survey, records search and interviews, the Site is not located within the setback of any potable water supply well. In conjunction with the well survey, the City of Blue Island municipal groundwater ordinance (Ordinance No ) prohibits the installation of potable water wells within the municipal limits for potable water use which eliminates the possibility that a contaminant source area is, or will be in the future, within a potable well setback zone or within a regulated recharge area for potable water. Therefore, in accordance with 35 IAC Section , installation of potable water supply wells will not occur within the ordinance area. 4.0 CLEANUP ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Future land use at the Cleanup Area is planned to be light industrial/ mixed-use commercial. The remediation goals reflect the objective of minimizing the environmental considerations that respective end-users may need to consider during development and construction, and subsequent operation and maintenance of facilities. A TPH soil attenuation exceedance (23,000 mg/kg) is present at the Cleanup Area at borehole BI-GP-318 (12-13 feet deep), and must be remediated since it is considered a contaminant source under TACO Section A deeper sample (15-16 feet) has a TPH concentration of 2,598 mg/kg, which is less than the site-specific soil attenuation limit of 4,900 mg/kg. Based upon neighboring sample concentrations, the elevated TPH level is an isolated hotspot. The proposed remediation area measures approximately 30 by 30 surrounding boring BI-GP-318 Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park-West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area) January

7 (Figure 3 - D (TPH Cleanup Area) Petroleum Impacts Remediation). The remediation target interval is the approximate depth interval of below ground surface. However, the final size and shape of the remediation area depends on conditions encountered in the field during the soil remediation activities, and will also depend on verification sampling analytical results. 4.1 Cleanup Goals Based on the above objective and the described area of soil impacts, the proposed remedial goals for D (TPH Cleanup Area) are summarized as follows: Perform soil remediation at and in the vicinity of soils with exceedances of Subpart C source material (organic concentrations are greater than the soil attenuation capacity) resulting from elevated TPH concentrations (see Figure 3 D (TPH Cleanup Area) Petroleum Impacts Remediation). The site-specific fractional organic carbon content (4,900 mg/kg) will be used as the remediation objective (RO) for TPH and the Illinois EPA Tier 1 ROs for VOC or PAH contaminants of concern (COC). The intent of these remedial measures are to reduce TPH concentrations in impacted soils that could act as a source for further contamination to soil and groundwater, and which may be encountered by end users during redevelopment. Any remaining exposure route Tier 1 soil RO exceedances may be addressed through engineering and institutional controls (barriers, construction worker notification and groundwater use restriction). 4.2 Soil Cleanup Alternatives Analysis The alternatives considered for mitigating the risks associated with the contaminated soil are discussed below Alternative 1: No Action A no-action alternative was considered as part of the ABCA process and would be the least expensive alternative. Under this scenario, the subsurface conditions would remain as-is. A no-action alternative that could be applied is presented below to illustrate the cost that would be incurred. Task Unit Cost Quantity Unit Type Estimated Costs No-Action Alternative No tasks proposed $0 4.2 Acres $0 Total Activities Estimated Cost $0 No-Action Alternative costs assume the site is not redeveloped. Although no action is the most affordable, this alternative does not meet the City s plan to redevelop the property, create jobs and bring the property back to productive use. It also does not address potential exposure to the impacted soils. State regulations (35 IAC b and 35 IAC ) state that soil concentrations of any organic constituent cannot exceed the soil saturation limit. The limit is based on the combined concentration of each specific organic constituent in the remediation area which currently exceeds the limit for total petroleum Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park-West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area) January

8 hydrocarbons at one location. Therefore, the soil must be remediated to protect human health and the environment, and thus the no-action alternative was eliminated from further consideration Alternative 2: Source Removal Source removal includes the excavation, loading, transportation and off-site disposal of contaminated soils in the Cleanup Area. This alternative is proven, provides 100 percent certainty in its effectiveness and allows for safe reuse of the property. The associated cost of implement the Source Removal alternative is provided below. Tasks Remediation Implementation for Source Removal Alternative Estimated Costs Contractor Bidding/Selection/Contract Execution $9,500 Mobilization Activities /Field Oversight/Verification Sampling $43,000 Contracted Services (Soil Excavation/Disposal/Transportation/Laboratory Analysis) (300 tons) Clean Soil Backfill (300 tons) Total Remediation Activities Estimated Cost $52,500 Assumes 300 tons of a limited area of impacted soil removed. Actual costs will be based upon remediation contractor proposals to be obtained prior to implementation. The alternative costs do not include regulatory reporting requirements, post-remediation monitoring, programmatic and general project management, field contingencies and applicable IEPA review fees. Costs for removing all of the impacted soils to clean conditions are not included. Source removal will ensure that the end user will not encounter elevated TPH levels during redevelopment. During placement of future building foundations, this area could be disturbed, which may spread the contamination to a larger area, if not remediated. In addition, once any contaminated material is excavated and moved during construction, it is considered a solid waste and requires proper handling, which still requires the need to clean up the TPHcontaminated materials before proceeding with site development work. Source removal is deemed appropriate to address contaminated soils at the Cleanup Area, and is discussed further in Section 4.3 below Alternative 3: Capping Capping of contaminated soil is often a viable remedial alternative that addresses direct contact, inhalation and ingestion risks posed by contaminated soil. Capping can be used on its own or in concert with source treatment or removal methods when residual concentrations remain. Capping materials can vary depending on site considerations, and can include asphaltic paving, layers of geotextile materials, clean fill materials consisting of clean imported soils, or concrete slab building foundations. The placement of a cap over contaminated soil minimizes the surface exposure to the soil and prevents the vertical migration of water through contaminated soil, which minimizes the generation of contaminated leachate that may migrate to groundwater. Capping also creates a land surface that safely supports other uses. Capping acts as an engineered barrier and is often an integral component in Brownfield remedial actions. Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park-West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area) January

9 For the Cleanup Area, an area covering the approximate soil impacts would be proposed. An example of a typical capping method that could be applied is presented below to illustrate the cost that would be incurred. Tasks Remediation Implementation for Capping Alternative Estimated Costs Contractor Bidding/Selection/Contract Execution $9,500 Mobilization Activities/ Field Oversight $5,000 Asphalt barrier ($5/sq ft, area of 900 sq ft) $4,500 Total Remediation Activities Estimated Cost $14,000 Alternative cost assumes at-grade cap section is approximately 2 feet thick. Assumes no structures or utilities within area of barrier. Actual costs would be based upon remediation contractor proposals obtained prior to implementation. The alternative costs do not include regulatory reporting requirements, programmatic and general project management, field contingencies and applicable IEPA review fees. A parking lot or building can be a cap for any impacted soils, but a building may also require a building control technology to mitigate any potential vapor intrusion and deep foundations to prevent settling (which may encounter soil impacts). Although a cap will minimize human contact, State regulations (35 IAC b and 35 IAC ) state that soil concentrations of any organic constituent cannot exceed the soil saturation limit. The limit is based on the combined concentration of each specific organic constituent in the remediation area, which currently exceeds the limit for TPH at one location. Therefore, the impacted soil must be remediated to protect human health and the environment. In addition, the cannot obtain an IEPA NFR letter if the elevated TPH is not reduced below the soil saturation limit. Based on the regulations indicated above and the desire to obtain an NFR letter and redevelop the parcel, the capping alternative was eliminated from further consideration Alternative 4: Ex-Situ Soil Treatment There are multiple types of ex-situ soil remediation alternatives for petroleum soil impacts (e.g., soil washing, chemical extraction, chemical oxidation, bioremediation, biological treatment, thermal desorption and land farming). Out of these alternatives, an effective and affordable option for mitigating high concentrations of petroleum fuel oil, is land farming. This option allows for the reduction of high TPH concentrations in soil. Land Farming (ex-situ) involves spreading excavated contaminated soils in a thin layer on the ground surface and stimulating aerobic microbial activity within the soils through aeration and/or the addition of minerals, nutrients, and moisture. It is useful in treating aerobically degradable contaminants, such as middle and heavier TPH compounds. Land Farming is suitable for nonvolatile contaminants at sites where there are sufficiently large areas for treatment cells. Land treatment of contaminated soil typically involves the periodic tilling of an 8- to 12-inch layer of soil to provide aeration and the addition of moisture. In some cases, amendments may be added to improve the efficiency of the remediation process, and to supply nutrients or moderate ph. Typically, a full-scale land treatment would be conducted within a prepared-bed land treatment unit, such as an open, shallow reactor with an impermeable lining on the bottom and sides to contain leachate, control runoff, and minimize erosion (and constructed with a leachate collection system under the soil layer). Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park-West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area) January

10 An estimate for typical costs for land farming is presented below to illustrate the cost that would be incurred prior to redevelopment. Tasks Remediation Implementation for Ex-situ remediation-land farming Estimated Costs Contractor Bidding/Selection/Contract Execution $9,500 Mobilization Activities/Field Oversight/Verification Sampling/Laboratory Analysis Contracted Services (soil excavation, addition of soil amendments, labor and equipment) ($115/cy for 160 cy) $20,000 $ 18,400 Total Remediation Activities Estimated Cost $47,900 Assumes 160 cy of a limited area of impacted soil treated. Actual costs would be based upon remediation contractor proposals obtained prior to implementation. The alternative costs do not include regulatory reporting requirements, programmatic and general project management, field contingencies and applicable IEPA review fees. Costs for treating all of the impacted soils to clean conditions and providing clean excavation backfill materials are not included. The effectiveness of land farming treatment varies, depending on the contaminants to be treated. In the case of a fuel oil spill (such as we are addressing at the site), land farming is an appropriate treatment method and can reduce TPH concentrations encountered at the site to levels below the site-specific cleanup objective (4,900 mg/kg). However, the length of time required to reach cleanup goals can be several months to a year, depending on initial TPH concentrations, types of TPH present and the physical characteristics of treated soils. In addition, the soil may need to be transported to an area that could accommodate the area of land needed to perform the treatment. Based on the grant timeframe, land requirements for treatment and redevelopment schedules, the land farming ex-situ method was eliminated from further consideration. 4.3 Proposed Remedial Action On the basis of effectiveness, costs, time constraints, future land use goals and site plans, regulatory criteria and technical feasibility, V3 recommends source removal (dig and haul) as the most appropriate alternative to remediate impacted soils. Under V3 s direction, the remediation contractor will excavate, transport and appropriately dispose of TPH-impacted soil off-site as depicted in the general area shown in Figure 3 D (TPH Cleanup Area) Petroleum Impacts Remediation. The work will be conducted in accordance with an October 2012 Health and Safety Plan. Air monitoring and dust control procedures will be utilized during excavation activities. Following soil removal, verification soil samples will be collected and analyzed along excavation sidewalls and bottom. Down-gradient monitoring of the groundwater for TPH and PAHs are also proposed. The excavation will be backfilled with engineered clean clay fill or other suitable material. The proposed remediation area measures approximately 30 by 30 around boring BI-GP-318 (Figure 3: D (TPH Cleanup Area) Petroleum Impacts Remediation). The remediation Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park-West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area) January

11 target removal interval is approximately deep. V3 estimates that approximately 160 cubic yards (about 300 tons) of TPH-impacted soil will be removed and disposed. Groundwater and/or seepage water may enter the excavation during soil excavation and removal. If any water comes in direct contact with the impacted soils within the remediation excavation, it will be pumped out and disposed off-site by a licensed liquid waste hauler/disposal company. A Remedial Action Plan was provided to Illinois EPA for approval, contains further information and is also available for public review. Refer to the August 8, 2013 report titled Remedial Investigation, Remediation Objectives Report and Remedial Action Plan, under Section 4.4. See Section for associated estimated costs. 4.4 Cleanup Schedule Pending USEPA and public approval, V3 and the City tentatively plan on conducting the remediation in early During the USEPA 30-day public review process, the City will obtain Request for Proposals/Qualifications from multiple remediation contractors. Once selected, contract negotiations will commence and a contract will be finalized. The USEPA Brownfields Grant Project Officer will be contacted once a remediation contractor has been selected. It is anticipated that remediation will begin within two to three weeks following the finalized contract and all approvals are received. Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park-West s, D (TPH Cleanup Area) January

12

13 ± 119th St. Vin ce nne s Rd. East Marshfield Ave. West s rd St. Legend Blue Island City Boundary Feet V3 Companies 7324 Janes Ave. Woodridge, IL phone fax Calument Park City Boundary Chicago City Boundary TITLE: Site Location Map BASE LAYER: DigitalGlobe (2012) CLIENT: City of Blue Island City Hall S. Greenwood Avenue Blue Island, Illinois PROJECT AND SITE LOCATION: Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park 119th Street and Vincennes Avenue Blue Island, Illinois FIGURE: SHEET: PROJECT NO. 1 OF: QUADRANGLE: N/A DATE: 02/12/13 SCALE: See Scale Bar

14

15 119th St. ± I B Division St. Railroad Vincennes Rd. Railroad A E C D J G H F 123rd St. Legend Feet V3 Companies 7324 Janes Ave. Woodridge, IL phone fax Approximate Extent of Landfill Remediation Area Property Boundary s TITLE: PROJECT AND SITE LOCATION: Blue Island Northeast Mixed-Use Commercial Park Site Vicinity Map 119th Street and Vincennes Avenue Blue Island, Illinois BASE LAYER: PROJECT NO. FIGURE: SHEET: OF: 1 DigitalGlobe (2012) CLIENT: City of Blue Island QUADRANGLE: DATE: SCALE: City Hall S. Greenwood Avenue Blue Island, Illinois /12/12 See Scale Bar East West

16

17 FIGrem_D_NE06039.dgn 11/22/2013 2:08:27 PM

18

19 ANALYSES PERFORMED SUBPART C EVALUATION EXCEEDANCE TABLE INVESTIGATION ON WEST PARCEL, PARCEL D - SUMMARY OF SOIL AND GROUNDWATER TIER 1 EXCEEDANCES BLUE ISLAND NORTHEAST MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL PARK BLUE ISLAND, IL TIER 1 REMEDIATION OBJECTIVES EXCEEDANCES OUTSIDE LANDFILL Native Soil or Fill Material Grab Soil Sample Depth (feet) Soil Sample Collected Above Seasonal Water Table (Y/N) Soil Sample GW/Leachate Sample VOCs BTEX SVOCs PNAs RCRA Metals Total Metals Lead Mercury SPLP Metals TCLP Metals Pests PCBs ph Cyanide/Sulfide (Reactive) TPH BOD COD OM / FOC Soil Attenuation NAPL / Free Product Soil Saturation Limit RCRA Hazardous Waste PCBs > 50 ppm EXCEEDANCES OF TACO TIER 1 REMEDIATION OBJECTIVES Soil Component of the Groundwater Ingestion Exposure Route Groundwater / Leachate SAMPLE I.D. Ingestion Inhalation Ingestion Inhalation Class II Class II BI-GP-22 (10-12) Y X X X X X X X Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Y Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)flourene, Benzo(b)flourene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Carbazole, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, Dibenzo(a,h)anthr Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, BI-GP-24 (10-12) X X X X X X X X 7 SVOCs Indeno(1,23-cd)pyrene acene Napthalene Dibenzofuran D Adjacent to D V3 Proposed Pathway Resolution Engineered barrier, construction worker notification, use site specific foc, Tier 3 Groundwater Pathway Exclusion BI-GP-25 (10-12) Y X X X X X BI-GP-44 (14-16) Y X X X X X X BI-GP-311 (8-10) 8-10 Y X X X X X X X X 1 Metal Mercury Construction worker notification BI-GP-311 (12-14) Y X X BI-GP BI-GP-317 (15-17) Y X X BI-GP-318 (12-13) Y X X X X X X X X X BI-GP-318 (15-16) Y X X X X X BI-GP-45 (16-18) Y BI-GP-46 - X X X X 3 VOCs, 5 SVOCs, High TPH Industrial-Commercial Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene Construction Worker Xylenes, Naphthalene Benzene, Ethylbenzene, Carbazole, Benzo(a)anthracene, Naphthalene, 2-Methylnaphthalene, N-Nitrosodiphenylamine Hot spot cleanup for TPH, and if needed, engineered barrier, construction worker notification, Tier 3 Groundwater Pathway Exclusion OUTSIDE LANDFILL Native Groundwater Soil or CAP DATA Perimeter Wells Perimeter Wells D Adjacent to D BI-GP-319 (12-13) Y X X X X X BI-GP-319 (38-40) N X X X X X X 3 VOCs Chlorobenzene, Xylenes Benzene Construction worker notification, Tier 3 Groundwater Pathway Exclusion BI-GP-319/MW-15 N X X X X X X 10 Metal Aluminum, Arsenic, Chromium, Copper, Iron, Lead, Manganese, Nickel, Thallium, Vanadium Resampled for COCs 11/21/12, except for aluminum BI-GP-319/MW-15 (Re-sampled) N X X 1 Metal Aluminum Tier 2 and groundwater use restriction BI-GP-44(2-4) 2-4 Y X X X BI-GP-181(2-4) 2-4 Y X X X 2 Metals Arsenic Mercury 95% UCLs or engineered barrier, construction worker notification BI-GP-182(7-9) 7-9 Y X X X X X X 7 SVOCs, 1 Metal BI-GP-183(2-4) 2-4 Y X X X BI-GP-185(7-9) 7-9 Y X X X 4 SVOCs Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Benzo(a)pyrene Naphthalene, Mercury Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Carbazole, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Benzo(a)anthracene 95% UCLs or engineered barrier, construction worker notification, Tier 3 Groundwater Pathway Exclusion 95% UCLs or engineered barrier, Tier 3 Groundwater Pathway Exclusion 95% UCLs or engineered barrier, Tier 2 and groundwater use restriction BI-GP-186(0-3) 0-3 Y X X X X X X 4 SVOCs Benzo(a)anthracene BI-GP-187(7-8.5) Y X X X BI-GP-188(4-6) 4-6 Y X X X BI-GP-191(5-7) 5-7 Y X X X 1 SVOC Benzo(a)pyrene 95% UCLs or engineered barrier BI-GP-190(4-6) 4-6 Y X X X X X X BI-GP-192(3-5) 3-5 Y X X X 1 Metal Arsenic 95% UCLs or engineered barrier BI-GP-193(3-5) 3-5 Y X X X BI-GP-194(7-9) 7-9 Y X X X 1 Metal Mercury Construction worker notification OSE Fieldwork Completed OSE Fieldwork Completed 2010 V3 Fieldwork Completed 2012 Monitoring Wells Note: Chemicals with detection limits greater than ROs are not listed here. \\ILWD-ITFS03\v3il_p\2006\06039\Calculations & Data\Environmental\Tables\ABCA- D\1- D Summary Table.xlsx Page 1 of 1 11/18/2013