Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSB-0203 0048 - 1991 Phase II Report ATECPHASE II PEP ATEC 3/18/91 LOT ONE AVANTI INITIAL PHASE IL FINAL REPORT LOT ONE STUrEBAKER CORRIDOR SOUTH BEND INDIANA ATEC PROJECT NUMBERS 21-07458 21-07460 AND 21-07461 MR K.C POCIUS DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNTY CITY BUILDING SOUTH BEND IN 46601 ATEC Environmental Consultants Division of AlEC Associates Inc Solid Hazardous Waste Site Assessments 5150 East 65th Street Remedial Design Construction Indianapolis Indiana 46220-4871 Underground Tank Management 3t7 849-4990 FAX 849-4278 Asbestos Surveys Asalysis Hydrogeotogic Investigations Monitoring March 18 1991 AnalyticalTesting/Chemistry tndastrral Hygiene/Hazard Communication Enorrnnmental Audits PermittingMrKCPocitisEaptordtoryDrillingMonitoring Wells Department of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Re Initial Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Final Report Groundwater Monitoring Underground Storage Tanks Soil Sampling and Testing and Interior Inspection Lot One Studebaker Corridor Former Avanti Plant Site South Bend Indiana ATEC Project Numbers 21-07458 21-07460 and 21-07461 Dear Mr Pocius ATEC Environmental Consultants ATEC has completed an initial groundwater and soil sampling and testing study and visual interior inspection at the subject property referenced above The objective of this project was to determine if contamination or other environmental concerns may be present at the project site ATEC report Number 21-17060 is included as Appendix and includes analytical data from second round groundwater samples at L.ot One The following report provides information obtained as result of work performed during this study We trust this submittal is responsive to your needs If you have any questions or comments regarding this report or if we can be of any further service to you in the future please do not hesitate to contact us Very truly yours ATEC Associates Inc Kurtis Gilliam Staff Environmental Scientist jJL atthew Stokes C.H.M.M Project Manager/Environmental Scientist MCS/ca Su/ickiry Amer ices Tesiirirj arid Errgriieerrrig Curtiora/iiii CoiisullriiiOf/risers Mo/or US Cilies/Siriec MilrriilF TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCrION 2.0 SITE AND REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS 2.1 Site History 2.2 Physical Characteristics 2.3 Regulatory Review 3.0 GROUNDWATER MONITORING PROGRAM 3.1 Work Performed 3.2 Analytical Results 3.2.1 Soil Analysis 10 3.2.2 Groundwater Analysis 11 3.3 Evaluation Criteria 12 3.3.1 Soil 12 3.3.2 Groundwater 13 4.0 SOILS SAMPLING AND TESTING 13 4.1 Work Performed 15 4.2 Analytical Results 16 5.0 INTERIOR VISUAL INSPECTION 16 5.1 Main Level 17 5.2 Second Level 19 5.3 Third Level 19 5.4 Fourth Level 20 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 21 6.1 Groundwater Monitoring Program 21 6.2 Soil Sampling and Testing 23 6.3 Interior Visual Inspection 23 7.0 QUALIFICATIONS 24 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Upon review of groundwater analytical results as shown in Table total of three monitoring well locations revealed VOC concentrations above detection limits for certain chlorinated hydrocarbons Groundwater sample MW-2 showed 37 ppb Trans-l2-Dichloroethene DCE 10 ppb Tetrachioroethene PCE and detected Trichloroethene TCE below the quantitation limit of ppb The groundwater sample from MW-3 revealed 111-Trichloroethane TCA at 10 ppb and detected Trans-12-Dichloroethene below the quantitation limit of ppb Groundwater sample MW-4 showed only that Tetrachioroethene was detected below quantitation limits of ppb In downgradient groundwater sample MW-2 PCE and vinyl chloride were detected abov the action levels The action levels are based on the Maximum Contaminant Level MCL for drinking water sources Analytical results from both rounds of groundwater samples collected show similar results regarding the presence of low concentrations of volatile constituents In each case monitoring well location MW-2 revealed concentrations of volatile compounds above the MCLs for drinking water for certain contaminants Verification of groundwater flow direction indicate this well is at downgradient location with respect to Lot One ATEC recommends that this information be provided to Indiana Department of Environmental Management IDEM due to the Avanti site being listed as CERCUS site by the IDEM and the confirmed presence of low concentrations of contamination in the groundwater ATECs recommendation to the IDEM is to perform an initial risk assessment to determine possible impact of groundwater users in the area The groundwater sources used as drinking water supplies may or may not be hydrogeologically interconnected with the aquifer sampled through these monitoring wells Demonstration of low possible impact of downgradient receptors and further verification of possible off-site sources may act to decrease concerns that this site could be adversely affecting drinking water supplies It should be noted that TCA and PCE were detected in groundwater samples collected at location on Lot One through study conducted by EIS Environmental Engineers Inc of South Bend Indiana The client provided ATEC data concerning this matter With regard to test results collected from soil borings B-I through B-5 no concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons TPH were detected These boriligs were located near two USTs at the west side of the Avanti building Based on the lack of TPH detected in these borings gross contamination was not discovered as result of these USTs It should be noted that one UST is also located at the southeast corner of the Avanti building The exact location of this UST could not be confirmed Also electrical overhead lines cross this immediate area ATEC was unable to place any drill borings near this UST All three USTs have been out of service for more than 12 months and have not been closed per industry standards based on information obtained to date therefore exceed temporary closure requirements As result of this and based on the Code of Federal Regulation CFR Part 280 for Underground Storage Tanks the owner and operators of this property are required to permanently close each UST system per the regulatory standards ATEC recommends that closure be performed to include complete removal of these USTs from the subsurface Upon request ATEC can provide you with full description of closure activities and associated costs In general debris scrap material machinery and equipment do not present substantial environmental concerns requiring special action It is recommended that these items be removed from the facility to prevent any contamination For example equipment and machinery should be removed in manner to prevent leakage of hydraulic fluids or oils and gasoline Concerning liquid materials identified in drums or smaller containers ATEC recommends that proper care be taken in choosing remedial procedures Liquid chemicals should be removed and disposed of off-site in accordance with applicable regulations Upon request ATEC can provide you with full description of removal transportation and disposal procedures and associated costs INITIAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FINAL REPORT GROUNDWATER MONITORING SOIL SAMPLING AND TESTING AND INTERIOR INSPECTION Lot One Studebaker Corridor Former Avanti Plant Site South Bend Indiana ATEC Project Numbers 21-07458 21-04760 and 21-07461 1.0 INTRODUCTION ATEC Environmental Consultants ATEC was retained by the South Bend Department of Economic Development ATEC Proposal Number PE-90607 PE 90609A and PE-90609B to conduct subsurface investigation at the above site as shown in Figure The scope of this project included placement of four monitoring wells one hydraulically upgradient and three hydraulically downgradient In addition five soil borings were advanced at locations within proximity of two underground storage tanks UST5 total of five water samples and nine soil samples were collected preserved and transported to the ATEC laboratory in Indianapolis Indiana for subsequent analysis Also as part of this study for work conducted at the Avanti plant an interior examination of the existing structure was made to inspect for possible environmental concerns 2.0 SITE AND REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS 2.1 Site History The Avanti plant site is located at 765 South Lafayette Street on the northwest corner of Sample Street and South Lafayette Street in Portage Township South Bend Indiana The immediate area is primarily industrial and commercial with residential to the south The project site boundary and associated buildings are illustrated in Figure Review of written documents and maps aerial photographs and interviews with personnel associated with Studebaker history was conducted during the interim Phase environmental site assessment ATEC Project Number 21-07262 Based on this 2_.__i Litnsi sthosI P0 12 1r2T SM IN I. Itndi La -- Thf.l Si -.--1-.-a-..1u IL __ 01 1r rc 7f PROJECT NO VICNI MAP 21O7458fl pJDrHA LPRRtDCk IF NCALE ND IN 2uu 1CURE LAFayETTE SI-- -- ROOM OR II Ii INDUSTALAL ROOM 03 CONCRETE PAVEUES1 II _______ ii ROOM 35 COMMERCIAL mA LE CE ND CE NCE x------R OVERHEAD POWLR SHE ROUNDRE PROJECT NO SITE PLAN 2107458/61 STUDEBAKER CORRIDOR PROJECT SCALE LOT SOUTh BEND IN FIGURE NO ________ information the study site was developed into wagon manufacturing plant by two Studebaker brothers from vacant land in the late 1800s During the early 1900s the facility was converted to automotive manufacturing as part of the Studebaker complex located in South Bend Indiana The facility continued to function as an automotive manufacturing facility through the mid 1900s with the addition of Room 108 shown in Figure added in 1942 The Avanti automobile manufacturing initiated operations in the 1960s and continued until 1988 Operations of the Avanti manufacturing were sporadic between 1986 and 1988 No manufacturing operations were on-going at the time of this investigation however Room 108 was used for storage of some automobiles and parts 2.2 Physical Characteristics The Site has level topography with an elevation of approximately 725 ft above mean sea level MSL based on information provided by the South Bend West Indiana 7.5 Minute Quadrangle published by the U.S Geological Survey in 1969 Photo Revised in 1986 Regional topography slopes gently to the northeast toward the St Joseph River Jefferson Avenue at the St Joseph River has an elevation of 701 ft MSL The river flows from southeast to southwest and is located approximately 3/4 mile northeast of the project site Drainage at the site is controlled by infiltration in open and grassed areas and by gutters and curbing Construction grading and filling have altered the original surface soil characteristics at most of the study site The U.S Department of Agriculture Soil Survey for St Joseph County Indiana classifies the soil as Urban-land-fox complex The boring logs compiled by the ATEC field geologists during the on-site drilling activities indicate the subsoil at the site is predominantly silty with fine to coarse sand throughout copy of each boring log is provided in Appendix Groundwater depth in the monitoring wells ranged from 24.61 ft to 23.21 ft below ground surface The boring logs in Appendix provide the water level in each well After completion of the monitoring well installation and sampling the top of the casing from each monitoring well was surveyed to determine the direction of groundwater flow Table provides data on groundwater elevation for each well using an arbitrary benchmark of 100 ft MSL located at the site Figure illustrates monitoring well locations and the potentiometric surface of the groundwater based on data shown in Table As shown the groundwater elevation decreases across the site from southwest to northeast This indicates that groundwater flow direction is generally to the northeast toward the St Joseph River Table Groundwater Elevations Monitoring Well Location Elevation MW-i 75.85 MW-2 76.44 MW-3 76.56 MW-4 77.18 Groundwater elevation in ft based on an arbitrary benchmark of 100 ft 2.3 Regulatory Review The Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 CERCLA was enacted to clean up orphan hazardous waste dump sites as well as attempting to cover compensation for environmental and public health damages and to assist in assessing liability The Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Inventory System CERCLIS is list of sites to be investigated and assessed for possible inclusion on the National Priorities List NPL established by the Environmental Protection Agency EPA Superfund program Once site is placed on the CERCLIS List series of investigations is conducted to determine the extent of contamination at the site Once these investigations are complete score or rank is assigned to the T1 ___ 60017108SS// -7 -7 -7- INDUSTRIAL .7 __7-8001733 CONCRETE PAVEMENT 7- II 600834 765 7- 76 56 0360 COADERCIAL GRASSED 7-ADEA AMI 77 IC LEG END 170000015/4011 FENCE OVERHEAD POWER GDO0UDATI IA 1/100 ETA IT SITE DOUNDF7V PROJECT NO MOHCOHNC WELL LOCATIONS 21 _O7458/lC1 SUDLL3AKER CORRIDOR PROJLCT SCALE BEND IN 000RE NO site The high ranking sites are subject to inclusion on the NPL The low ranked sites or those deemed no immediate concern remain on the CERCLIS List ATEC has reviewed records located at the Indiana Department of Environmental Management IDEM in the Office of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management OSHWM concerning the regulatory status of the Avanti facility The Avanti site is listed as CERCLIS site based on an IDEM report dated March 1990 At that time an EPA identification number was not assigned to this facility Also based on report from the IDEM Commissioners Office dated December 10 1990 the IDEM has re-evaluated many CERCLIS sites through the state of which the Avanti site was included The IDEM generated score of 27.6 based on the new CERCLIS site scoring methods and procedures copy of this procedure and listing of the CERCLIS sites scored is found in Appendix 3.0 GROUNDWATER MONITORING PROGRAM 3.1 Work Performed On November 26 and 28 1990 ATEC personnel from the Indianapolis Drilling and Consulting Divisions performed subsurface investigation consisting of the installation of four monitoring wells The purpose of the investigation was to collect samples to determine if previous activities at the site adversely impacted the quality of soil or groundwater Photographic documentation of drilling activities can be found in Appendix ATEC advanced all borings using truck-mounted rotary drill rig equipped with 3- 3/8 in diameter hollow stem augers Soil samples were collected at 2.5 ft intervals using decontaminated carbon steel split-spoon sampler to the base of the wells Each split-spoon sample was physically inspected by the field geologist for signs of contamination such as staining or hydrocarbon odors The samples were also field screened for Total Flame-ionizable Vapors TFVs with Porta FID II The Porta FID detects TFVs emitted from the soil in parts per million ppm The operating procedures regarding the Porta FID are provided in Appendix All pertinent information collected by the geologist for each boring including soil classification physical observations and TFV readings were recorded on the ATEC boring logs in Appendix One soil sample exhibiting the highest potential for contamination based on visual observations and field screening was collected from each monitoring well for Volatile Organic Compounds VOCs and total heavy metals analysis ATEC considered MW-4 an upgradient well and therefore the soil from this boring was assumed to be representative of background conditions All four soil samples were collected preserved and transported to ATECs laboratory in Indianapolis Indiana for analysis following all chain-of-custody procedures During the drilling of each boring water was noted on the drilling rods at depth between 22.5 ft and 25.0 ft Each boring was advanced to 7.0 ft below groundwater for well installation ATECs standard well construction consists of 7.0 ft length of in diameter PVC slot screen extending below the groundwater surface and 3.0 ft of screen above to allow for seasonal fluctuations in the water table The boring annulus was filled by naturally occurring sand and by adding silica sand where needed bentonite seal was placed above the sand pack to prevent vertical migration of surface water into the well The remaining annular space was grouted and the wells completed and secured with either flush-mounted manhole cover or protective cover stick-up The wells were developed by over pumping to cleanse the well screen of fine-grained material and ensure good hydraulic conductivity with the surrounding aquifer Complete well construction details are provided in Appendix On November 30 1990 groundwater samples were collected from the four monitoring wells Before obtaining the samples each well was purged of minimum of three well volumes to ensure representative groundwater sample Teflon bailer with polypropylene rope was utilized for purging and the collection of the samples Between monitoring well samples the bailer was decontaminated with an on-site tap water and Premier detergent wash tap water rinse followed by triple distilled water rinse The groundwater samples collected were analyzed for VOCs and total heavy metal All four groundwater samples were collected preserved and transported to the ATEC laboratory following appropriate chain-of-custody procedures On November 29 1990 the four monitoring wells were surveyed The top of the casing of each well was surveyed into an arbitrary benchmark with an assigned elevation of 100.0 ft The groundwater elevations collected on November 30 1990 using Solinist water level indicator were used in conjunction with the survey data to determine water table elevations groundwater table map including flow direction is shown in Figure as discussed in Section 2.2 of this report 3.2 Analytical Results total of four soil and four groundwater samples were collected from the Avanti site and submitted to the ATEC laboratory for analysis Each soil and groundwater sample submitted to the laboratory was tested for Total Heavy Metals THMs and Volatile Organic Compounds VOCs THM analysis includes testing for total arsenic barium cadmium lead mercury selenium and silver Analysis for VOCs includes testing for total of thirty-five 35 various organic compounds including certain petroleum constituents and several chlorinated hydrocarbons Complete documentation of laboratory analytical reports is provided in Appendix Soil metals were analyzed on Perkin-Elmer 5100 Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer according to the 7000 Series of the methods outlined in SW 846 and Thermo Jarrell Ash ICAP-61 according to SW 846 Method 6010 Groundwater metals were analyzed on Perkin-Elmer 5100 Atomic AbsorptiorSpectrophotometer and Thermo Jarrell Ash ICAP-61 according to EPA-600/4-79-020 Method 200 The soil volatile samples were analyzed on Finnigan 1020 OWA GC/MS/DS System complete with Superincos Software via SW 846 Method 8240 for Purgeable Organic Compounds The groundwater volatile samples were analyzed on Finnigan Incos 50 GC/MS/DS System complete with Superincos Software via U.S EPA Method 624 for Purgeable Organic Compounds Prior to soil or groundwater analysis the system was tuned against Bromofluorobenzene and calibrated with the appropriate standard 3.2.1 Soil Analysis Total heavy metals analysis of soils samples revealed three metals barium chromiufn and lead detected at concentrations above quantithtion limits The quantitation limit is the minimum concentration in which the laboratory instrument can assign value for each individual test performed As shown below Table summarizes test results of soil samples collected from monitoring well MW locations and the depth from which each soil sample was collected Table _________________Total Heavy Metals THMs in Soils _____________ Sample Location Barium Chromium Lead Depth ft MW-i 6.1 4.1 3.5 23.5 25.0 MW-2 4.4 4.7 2.2 23.5 25.0 MW-3 6.7 5.2 2.6 23.5 25.0 MW-4 3.7 5.8 2.9 21.0 22.5 Quantitation Limit 2.0 2.0 2.0 Evaluation Criteria 117 13 30 _____________ All test results are reported as parts per million ppm PPM is equivalent to milligrams per kilogram mg/kg in soils and milligram per liter mg/L in water Volatile Organic Compounds VOC5 analysis of soils detected VOC constituents at sample locations MW-2 and MW-4 summary of these test results is provided in Table The client should note that methylene chloride is reported as being detected in many samples Methylene chloride as well as acetone and toluene are used as laboratory extraction solvents for various organic analyses Although the extraction and preparation processes are all performed by trained personnel in separate rooms under vented fumehood some vapors escape and are released into the laboratory 10 atmosphere The release of these vapors into the laboratory atmosphere is basically random process dependent upon daily usage and the care and diligence of laboratory personnel involved in handling the solvents Once these compounds are released into the atmosphere they can contaminate any sample once it is removed from the sample container and exposed to the atmosphere Given the extreme sensitivit of the analytical instrumentation these compounds are often detected in low levels in environmental samples The U.S EPA1 recognizes concentrations of these contaminants up to five times the quantitation limit as laboratory artifacts The quantitation limit for methylene chloride in these sample tests is ppm Therefore ATEC believes these concentrations are result of laboratory artifacts and not due to on-site activities All VOCs detected in soils are shown in Table with the exception of methylene chloride Table Volatile Organic Compounds VOCs in Soils Monitoring Well Sample Locations Sample I..ocations Constituent MW-i MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 111-Trichioroethane ND ND ND Constituent not detected Constituent detected but concentration present is less than quantitation limit All results reported in ppm 3.2.2 Groundwater Analysis Analytical results for Total Heavy Metals show that one constituent barium was detected above quantitation limits at three sample locations Sample Location MW-2 contained 0.059 ppm MW-3 contained 0.055 ppm and MW-4 contained 0.064 ppm of bariuhi The MW-i soil sample did not show any concentrations for THMs above quantitation limits 1Verbal statement made by the U.S EPA to ATEC at pre-bid conference September 1988 11 The VOC analyses are summarized in Table for groundwater samples All VOCs detected are shown in Table with the exception of methylene chloride ATEC believes that this compound is introduced during laboratory analysis as explained in Section 3.2.1 Complete documentation of laboratory reports can be found in Appendix Table Volatile Organic Compounds in Groundwater __________________Monitoring Well Sample Locations ______ ______Sample Locations Constituent MW-i MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 Evaluation Criteria Trans-12-ND 37 ND 100 Dichloroethene 111-Trichloroethane ND ND 10 ND 200 TCA _____ _____ _____ _____ _____________ Trichloroethene ND ND ND TCE _____ _____ _____ _____ _____________ Tetrachloroethene ND 10 ND PCE _____ _____ _____ ___________________ Constituent detected but concentration present is less than quantitation limit Represents proposed Maximum Contaminant Level MCL ND Constituent not detected All results reported in parts per billion ppb This is equivalent to micrograms per liter mg/L in water 3.3 Evaluation Criteria 3.3.1 Soil Total heavy metals occur naturally in soils and geologic formations Acceptable background concentrations of total metals in soils are provided by the U.S Geological Survey USGS The source used by ATEC for this project is the USGS professional paper 1270 by Shacklette and Boerngen Acceptable concentrations are determined by using statistical methods on data from multiple sampling points The acceptable background concentrations for various metals are calculated and provided in the USGS paper The actual background concentrations are then calculated by adding the mean of the sample concentration to three times the standard deviation of the sample concentrations The calculated sample values and acceptable 12 concentrations are shown in Table In each case the sample values are below the acceptable concentrations Therefore it is assumed that actual total metals concentrations found in samples collected during this report are within acceptable background ranges Table Total Metals Calculated Values and Evaluation Criteria for Soils Barium Chromium Lead Sample Concentrations 9.45 7.12 4.44 Acceptable 297.00 33.00 14.00 Concentrations tValues calculated by adding mean to times standard deviation Soil VOC evaluation criteria used in this report are based on the proposed concentrations requiring corrective action at solid waste management units Federal Register/Vol 55 No 145/Friday July 27 1990 As shown in Table VOCs detected in soils are below both the quantitation and action levels 3.3.2 Groundwater The Maximum Contaminant Level MCL of particular substance represents the maximum permissible level of contaminant in the drinking water which is delivered to the consumers tap and used by the general public for drinking MCLS are legally enforceable and are used as the evaluation criteria of the groundwater analysis for this project The MCI_S for the VOCs detected in the groundwater are provided in Table Only barium was detected above the quantitation limit in any groundwater sample The MCL for barium is 5.0 mg/L 4.0 SOILS SAMPLING AND TESTING Soil borings were advanced at five locations near two underground storage tanks USTs as illustrated in Figure The presence of these USTs was based on visual indications such as fill ports and vent pipe however the exact location of these USTs is unknown The borings were placed as close to these USTs as possible to determine if gross contamination may have resulted from past use of these USTs 13 LAFAYETtE St -7 ____ ROOM 108... II II Ii IN500TRIA ________ ROOM 33 CONCRETE PAVEMENT ii ROOM 35 COMMERCIAL POLT VES1 LL_____.T_____r1 LEGEND FENCE -X- 800150 OVERHEAD POWER SITE BOON001 PROJEOT NO BORFNJN PLAN 2107458/hi ETUDEBAKER CORRIDOR PROJECT SOW BEND FI000E NO _____ 4.1 Work Pºformed On November 29 1990 ATEC personnel from the Environmental and Drilling Divisions arrived on-site to perform subsurface investigation around the USTs on site The objective of the investigation was to determine if soil contamination was present as result of former USTs located on the site Photographic documentation of these drilling activities can be found in Appendix ATEC utilized truck-mounted rotary drill rig equipped with 3-3/8 in I.D hollow stem augers Three borings designated B-I through B-3 were advanced to depth of 15.0 ft and two borings designated B-4 and B-5 were advanced to depth of 25.0 ft Soil samples from borings B-I through B-3 were collected at 2.5 ft intervals using carbon steel split-spoon sampler Soil samples from borings B-4 and B-5 were collected at 5.0 ft intervals to depth of 18.5 ft and at 2.5 ft intervals to groundwater The boring locations are shown in Figure During drilling operations decontamination procedures were performed on the split- spoon samplers and the auger head drill bit Between each sample collection and each boring the split-spoon and auger head respectively were decontaminated using tap water and concentrated detergent All visible soils adhering to the equipment were removed and tap water and final distilled water rinse was performed The soil from each split-spoon sampler was visually inspected by an ATEC geologist for indications of contamination i.e staining and odor The lithology of the soil in each boring was classified by the field geologist utilizing the Unified Soil Classification System USCS The samples from each interval were monitored for fotal Flame-ionizable Vapors TFV5 utilizing Porta-FID and readings were recorded in parts per million ppm description of the Porta-FID and the procedures used in this investigation are provided in Appendix All information concerning the borings was recorded on an ATEC boring log Complete boring logs are provided in Appendix 15 The soil sample exhibiting the highest TFV reading or most potential for contamination was placed into sample jar for laboratory analysis All appropriate chain-of-custody procedures were followed in the transportation of the samples to ATECs laboratory in Indianapolis Indiana 4.2 Aiialyticl Results total of five soil samples identified B-i through B-5 were collected from the Avanti site for analysis Each of the five soil samples were tested for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons TPH based on the suspected contents and use of the USTs containing or having contained petroleum products Complete documentation of laboratory analysis is provided in Appendix Total hydrocarbons analyses were performed on Perkin-Elmer 727B Infrared Spectrophotometer according to EPA-600/4.79-020 Method 418.1 Soil samples from locations B-i B-2 and B-3 were collected at depth ranging from 13.5 to 15.0 ft Sandy soils were encountered during drilling which indicates increased vertical movement of contaminants is possible Based on this soil samples from locations B-4 and B-5 were collected at depth ranging from 21.0 to 22.5 ft Concerning analytical laboratory results obtained from each soil boring sample submitted for TPH no sample revealed concentrations above the quantitation limit of i.0 ppm Based on this information it is not believed that gross contamination has resulted from the past use of these USTs 5.0 INTERIOR VISUAL INSPECTION On November 27 1990 visual inspection and walk-through was conducted by Matt Stokes Project Environmental Scientist and Chuck Cashman ATEC Environmental Geologist This inspection included an examination of the interior structure at the Avanti location 16 The site consists of former automobile manufacturing facility with one structure on approximately acres The structure consists of 4-story brick building with concrete floors on the main level and hardwood floors on each upper level The structure was divided into four rooms on the main level and three rooms each on the upper levels Room 108 at the east end of the structure was added on after original onstruction and only occupies the main level Generally all rooms have been cleared of machinery equipment and debris sometime prior to this inspection with some exceptions Lighting was very poor due to lack of interior lights and inclement weather The majority of the visual inspection was made using hand-held flashlights and lighting from windows Also during this interior inspection heavy rains were on-going and due to apparent roof damage or deterioration severe leaking was occurring through all three upper levels to the main level Wet floors and standing water were prevalent throughout the structure It should be noted that an asbestos sampling and testing program was performed and will be submitted to you by ATECs Industrial Hygiene Division under separate cover 5.1 Main Level 5.1.1 Room 108 This room is located at the east end of the structure and is currently used for storage of some automobiles and parts The southeast portion of this room consisted of the office/showroom area No visual signs of environmental concerns were noted in this area The north portion of this room was apparently used for automotive repair and painting Three below grade sumps were discovered in this area One small sump was 6.0 ft long by 6.0 ft wide with approximately 3.0 ft of waste oil at the base of the sump The two large sumps were 12.0 ft long by 12.0 ft wide with approximately 1.0 ft of an oil/water mixture Photographic documentation of this area can be found in Appendix 17 paint booth located immediately west of these large sumps had an associated sump or basin which was covered with wood and filled with plastic sheeting and some liquid At this time the contents and depth of this sump could not be determined The size of this sump was approximately 6.0 ft by 4.0 ft long Photographic documentation of these sumps is provided in Appendix The west portion of this room consisted of drive-through car wash booth Immediately south of this several automobiles were being stored In general some debris and large sign was noted in this same area Minor staining of floors was noted due to normal automotive leakage 5.1.2 Room 33 Based on visual inspection only debris such as scrap wood and boxes were remaining in this room on the main level It should be noted that capped metal riser approximately in in diameter is located along the north wall near the center of this room The function of this riser is unknown based on visual inspection 5.1.3 Room 34 Floors were extremely wet in this area with standing water at the time of the inspection One large paint booth is located along the south wall of this room near the center Severe staining was not observed in this area The north portion of this room consists of numerous partitioned rooms apparently used for painting In general this area had been cleaned and no obvious signs of environmental concerns were noted 5.1.4 Room 35 Located in the center of this room is one large paint booth and adjacent to this is another booth possibly used as test chamber for parts The southeast corner of this room is occupied by an enclosed maintenance room which contained several feed lines possibly for transfer of bulk liquids It is possible that aboveground storage tanks may have been located in this room at one time 18 Along the west wall of Room 35 were approximately fifteen i5 lift trucks and several electrical generators At the north center part of this room were entrance ways to the stairwell leading to upper levels and freight elevator 5.2 Second Level 5.2.1 lom 33 The only items noted in this area were metal racked shelving located at the north portion of this room Only paper goods with some boxes were stored there No visual evidence of environmental concerns were noted in this room 5.2.2 Room 34 paint booth is located at the north center area of this room This paint area may have been for smaller parts based on the small entrance way into the paint booth 5.2.3 Room 35 No visual indications of debris or scrap materials were observed in this room No evidence of environmental concerns were noted 5.3 Third Level 5.3.1 Room 33 No visual evidence of debris or scrap materials were observed in this room No evidence of environmental concerns were noted 5.3.2 Room 34 One 55-gallon open top drum was located near the center portion of this room This drum contained some paper scrap however approximately 1.0 ft of an oily liquid was present in the bottom of the container No other debris or scrap materials were noted in this area 19 5.3.3 Room 35 One 55-gallon open top drum was located toward the south end of this room very heavy oily substance along with some debris was observed present in the container One large wood crate contained scrap metal parts near the soUthwest corner of this room At the north end of this area were several large boxes storing various scrap parts These boxes covered an area of approximately 20.0 ft by 30.0 ft 5.4 Fourth Level 5.4.1 Room 33 This room was occupied by large amount of scrap metals stored in boxes and various machinery located near the east center portion of this room Most of this machinery and equipment was clean and did not appear to have oils or lubricants associated with them 5.4.2 Room 34 No visual evidence of debris or scrap materials were observed in this room No evidence of environmental concerns were noted 5.4.3 Room 35 One paint booth was noted in this area located at the north end Various scrap equipment and machines were located throughout the center along the west wall Also along the west wall were several mechanical hand lift trucks The entrance to the elevator shaft is located at the north end this room near the center The level at the upper part of the staircase to the elevator shaft contained several small containers of liquid chemicals as shown in the Photographic Documentation in Appendix 20 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Groundwater Monitoring Program Upon review of groundwater analytical results collected in November 1990 as shown in Table total of three monitoring well locations revealed VOC concentrations above detection limits for certain chlorinated hydrocarbons The second round of analysis also showed low concentrations of volatiles in fourth well at this site Groundwater sample MW-2 showed 37 ppb Trans-12-Dichloroethene DCE 10 ppb Tetrachioroethene PCE and detected Trichloroethene TCE below the quantitation limit of ppb The groundwater sample from MW-3 revealed 111- Trichloroethane TCA at 10 ppb and detected Trans-12-Dichloroethene below the quantitation limit of ppb Groundwater sample MW-4 showed only that Tetrachloroethene was detected below quantitation limits of ppb The second round of testing showed MW-2 with 18 ppb DCE ppb PCE and 33 ppb vinyl chloride The groundwater sample from MW-3 showed similar concentrations in each sampling event for DCE and TCA with the detection of 11- Dichloroethane at less than the quantitation limit MW-4 revealed the same results in both sampling events The second round of sampling and testing however revealed ppb DCE in the sample from MW-i The chlorinated hydrocarbons detected in these samples are not naturally occurring in the environment and are generally present due to manufacturing or other man made operations Many organic solvents are used in automotive and various machining industries as degreasers paint solvents and cleaners The compounds TCA TCE mid PCE are very common solvents used in heavy industry for degreasing and various cleaning operations The DCE is chemical degradation product of TCE and generally is found when concentrations of TCE are present PCE has many uses in industry one of which includes dry cleaning operations Downgradient monitoring well location MW-2 shows concentrations of these solvents at low levels however the PCE and vinyl chloride is above the action levels of ppb 21 and ppb respectively Sample location MW-3 revealed that TCA was present with this the only sample showing any concentration of this compound The concentration of TCA is below the action level Based on the proximity of monitoring well MW-4 and the groundwater flow direction to the northeast this location is considered upgradient and contamination from this well migit be considered from an off-site source The detection of PCE at this location may indicate that concentrations in wells further downgradient are also due to off-site sources In order to make preliminary assessment of groundwater conditions and based on economic reasons the scope of this study was recommended The groundwater monitoring study conducted during this investigation must be considered an initial assessment of groundwater conditions at this site Analytical results from both rounds of groundwater samples collected show similar results regarding the presence of low concentrations of volatile constituents In each case monitoring well location MW-2 revealed concentrations of volatile compounds above the MCLs for drinking water for certain contaminants Verification of groundwater flow direction indicate this well is at downgradient location with respect to Lot One ATEC recommends that this information be provided to Indiana Department of Environmental Management IDEM due to the Avanti site being listed as CERCLIS site by the IDEM and the confirmed presence of low concentrations of contamination in the groundwater ATECs recommendation to the IDEM is to perform an initial risk assessment to determine possible impact of groundwater users in the area The groundwater sources used as drinking water supplies may or may not be hydrogeologically interconnected with the aquifer sanijled through these monitoring wells Demonstration of low possible impact of downgradient receptors and further verification of possible off-site sources may act to decrease concerns that this site could be adversely affecting drinking water supplies It should be noted that TCA and PCE were detected in groundwater samples collected at location on Lot One through study conducted by ELS Environmental Engineers Inc of South Bend Indiana The client provided ATEC data concerning this matter 22 6.2 Soil Sampling and Testing With regard to test results collected from soil borings B-i through B-5 no concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons TPH were detected These borings were located near two USTs at the west side of the Avanti building Based on the lack of TPH detected in these borings gross contamination was not discovered as result of these USTs It should be noted that one UST is also located at the southeast corner of the Avanti building The exact location of this UST could not be confirmed Also electrical overhead lines cross this immediate area ATEC was unable to place any drill borings near this UST All three USTs have been out of service for more than 12 months and have not been closed per industry standards based on information obtained to date therefore exceed temporary closure requirements As result of this and based on the Code of Federal Regulation CFR Part 280 for Underground Storage Tanks the owner and operators of this property are required to permanently close each UST system per the regulatory standards ATEC recommends that closure be performed to include complete removal of these USTs from the subsurface Upon request ATEC can provide you with full description of closure activities and associated costs 6.3 Interior Visual Inspection In general debris scrap material machinery and equipment do not present substantial environmental concerns requiring special action It is recommended that these items be removed from the facility to prevent any contamination For example equipment and machinery should be removed in manner to prevent leakage of hydraulic fluids or oils and gasoline Concerning liquid materials identified in drums or smaller containers ATEC recommends that proper care be taken in choosing remedial procedures Liquid chemicals should be removed and disposed of off-site in accordance with applicable regulations Upon request ATEC can provide you with full description of removal transportation and disposal procedures and associated costs 23 Concerning oily liquids identified in three sumps located in Room 108 ATEC recommends that complete chemical characterization of the samples be made to determine appropriate off-site disposal procedures Efforts concerning removal transportation and off-site disposal of containers of liquids and oily liquids is recommended to be coordinated through ATEC ATEC will utilize reputable waste disposal contractor to analyze and determine proper off-site disposal methods Complete documentation of all activities would be provided Upon request ATEC can provide you with complete description of activities required for off-site disposal and associated costs 7.0 QUALIFICATIONS Our professional services have been performed our findings obtained and our recommendations prepared in accordance with customary principles and practices in the fields of environmental science and engineering This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties either express or implied This company is not responsible for the independent conclusions opinions or recommendations made by others based on the field exploration and laboratory test data presented in this report The work performed in conjunction with this assessment and the data developed are intended as description of available information at the dates and locations given This report does not warrant against future operations or conditions nor does it warrant against operations or conditions present of type or at location not investigated The present study included limited number of borings across the entire project site The conclusions drawn from the investigation are considered reliable however there may exist localized variations in subsurface conditions that have not been completely defined at this time It should be noted that subsurface conditions may be better delineated with increased subsurface exploration including test pits soil borings with sample collection and laboratory testing and surface geophysical survey techniques 24 APPENDICES Appendix Boring Logs and Construction Diagrams Appendix CERCLIS Score Procedures Appendix Photographic Documentation Appendix Screening Equipment Appendix Analytical Results Appendix ATEC Report Number 21-17060 APPENDIX BORING LOGS AND CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAMS ATEC Associates Inc LOC BORING NO.______ cfrGeotechnI Maedo onO ErwronnenloI Erineeo CLIENT OBpartmont of Economic Development JOB NO 21-07458 PROJECT NNIE Subsurface Investigation START DATE 11/26/90 PROJECT LOCATION Stgdebaker Corridor South Bend Indiana BORING TRODHSA BORING LOCATION Nhrtheast corner of property ROCK CORE DIAlS FOREMAN West SHELBY TUBE DIAlS INSPECTOR Cashman SOIL/ROCK DESCRIPTION STRATW TFV DEPTH DEPTH SANPLE SPT REC ppm REMARKS Surface Elevation ft ft NO ___________________ Brick and concrete O.5...._ Dark brown slightly moist loose SILTY fine to coarse SAND SM-SP 6/3/3 50 ND 3/3/3 75 ND LI __l 4/3/3 103 ND HBrown below 8.5 1O-_J4 2/4/4 75J ND 1Trace Gravel below 13.5 2/4/4 75 ND ldium dense below 16.0 1i6 3/4/6 103 ND 4/7/10 75 5/5/7 751 NDI 3/5/8 103 ND1 110.25 black Stain 25.0 Wet below 25.0 10 6/6/6 103 ND 11 4/6/10 75 ND II ISample obtained foriilaboratory analysis II II Botton of test boring @32.75 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING METHODS NOTES8L045/6 in In Three NGTEO ON RODS 25.0 FT HSA-I-IQLLCW STEM AUGERS in Increments AT CcWLETION FT CFA-CONT.FLIGHT AUGERS REC SamplRETERHRS.FT HA-I-lAND AUGER TFV_Total Fl Vapors ppm parts per million MW-i CONSTRUCTION DETAILS DEPTH FT SOIL PROFILE MANHOLE AND LOCKING CAP I/A \V f/7\fV Brick and concrete0.5_________________ Dark browr slightly moist loose SILTY fine to coarse SAND SMSP RISER 0.2 22.6 Brown below 8.5 Trace Gravel below 13.5 GROUT 0.44 15.4 Medium dense below 16.0 BENTONITE SEAL 15.4 19.0 0.25 black stain 25.0 Wet below 25.0 SAND PACK SCREEN 22.6 32.6 NATURAL PACK 19.0 32.75 Bottom of Test Boring 32.75 Construction Material Schedule 40 PVC Groundwater Level Observations Well Diameter inches Elev Screen Length 10.0 ft Date ft Slot Size 0.010 11/28/90 24.33 Development Method Rig pump 11/30/90 24.21 DevelopmenL Duration 30 minutes MONITORING WELL DETAILS SCAIF 2i-074FORD001686 ATEC Associates Inc LOR OF BORING NO Corll1r GoatethrIcaI Material ord Enaronriertol Errrrroeri CLIENT Departniant of Economic Develoiant ________ PROJECT NAME Subsurface investigation STPAT DATE 1128/90 PROJECT LODATION Studebaker Corridor South Bend Indiana BORING FUHODHSA BORING LODATION North of north side of building in center RDEK CORE DIAIN FOREMAN West SHELBY TUBE OIAIN INSPECTOR Cashman SO1L/RODK DESCRIPTION STRATLI TFV DEPTH DEPTH S1IIDLE SPT REC ppn REMANKS Surface Elevation ft ft NO __________________ concrete Coarse Gravel brick cinder debris fill 5/5/6 67 ND ___________________6.5 I2 2/3/5 10 ND Browyinicist loose SILTY fine to coarse SAND SM-SP with trace fine Gravel r3 3/3/3 75 ND Iii 10__14 2/2/3 67 dense increasing Gravel below 13.5 3/4/5 25 ND 8/6/7 75 ND 6/10/11 901 NO Ii 6/9/11 1O3 ND HWet below 24.0 HH 3/5/7 1O3 ND Li Ii 10 6/6/10 1ODI NDI _.J Sample obtained for _________________________________laboratory analysis IlBottom of test boring 32.0 -ti i_I WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING METHODS NOTESBLOJS/6 in In Three NOTED ON RODS 24.0 FT HSA-HOLLO.4 STEM AUGERS in Increments Al CctLET1ON_______FT CFA-CONT.FLIGHT AUGERS REC SI Sample AFTER HRS FT FiAHOND AUGER TFV..Total Flam or-s parts per million MW-2 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS DEPTH FT SOIL_PROFILE MANHOLE AND LOCKING CAP I/A /7r%\WfVV I/ concrete Coarse Gravel brick cinder debris fill 6.5 __________Brown moist loose SILTY RISER 0.55 22.0 fine to coarse SANDSMSPwithtrace fine Gravel GROUT 0.7 16.5 Medium dense increasing Gravel below 13.5 BENTONITE SEAL 16.5 18.5 Wet below 24.0 SAND PACK 18.5 23.0 SCREEN 22.0 32.0 NATURAL PACK 23.0 32.0 Bottom of Test Boring 32.0 Construction Material Schedule 40 PVC Groundwater Level Observations Well Diameter inches Elev Screen length 10.0 ft Date ft Slot Size 0.010 11/28/90 23.31 Development Method Rig pump 11/30/90 23.21 Development Duration 30 minutes MONITORING WELL DETAILS AL NO 21-07458 ATEC Associates Inc L03 BORING NO CoruIflng GoothricoI MotoloI ord Eror rogoI ErOheer CLIENT partnent of Econoniicveloprent ___________JOB NO._ip745_ PROJECT NPIIE Subsurface Investigation START DATE 11/28/90 PROJECT LOCATION Studebaker Corridor South Bend Indiana BORING IITHODHSA KRING LOCATICeI Ngth of northwest corner of building ROCK CORE DIA.IN FOREMAN West SHELBY TUBE DIAIN INSPECTOR Cashman SOIL/ROCK CSCRIPTIC STRATLJ TFV DEPTH DEPTH SNRE SPT REC ppn REMARKS Surface Elevation ft ft NO __________________ 0.1 Asalt 0.5 concrete 0.6 L-..-f Sand and Gravel and concrete debris fill _________35 Brosnmost loose SILTY fine to coarse SMSP with trace fine Gravel 10/7/3 1O3 ND I_I _....._12 3/4/4 103 ND iiI 3/4/4 103 ND Ligfit browr below 13.5 3/3/4 NDiI_I__3/5/5 751 ND i_I .......__........I 2/2/3 67 ND1 Medium dense below 21.0 20.17 4/4/3 67 NDI iWet below 24.0 5/8/9 103 ND 5/7/7 103 ND Sample obtained for ________________________________________ ._.J laboratory analysis Bott of test boring 32.0 TI li __-___ WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING METHODS NOTES BLORS/6 in In Three NOTED CM PODS 24.0 FT HSA.-HDLLO.4 STEM AUGERS in Increments AT CCePLETIONFT CFA-CONT.FLIGHT AUGERS REC Sample AFTER MRS FT I-tA-EiAHD AUR TFV_Total Fla srs ppn parts per million MW-3 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS DEPTH FT SOIL PROFILE MANHOLE AND LOCKING CAP /J7 l/V // 0.1 Asphalt 0.6 0.5 Concrete Sand and Gravel and con- Crete debris fill RISER 0.51 21.9 3.5 _________ _________Brown moist loose SILTY fine to coarse SAND SM-SP with trace fine Gravel GROUT 0.6 16.5 Light brown below 13.5 Medium dense below 21.0 BENTONITE SEAL 16.5 18.2 Wet below 24.0 SAND PACK 18.2 21.1 SCREEN 21.9 31.9 NATURAL PACK 21.J 32.0 Bottom of Test Boring 32.0 Construction Material Schedule 40 PVC Groundwater Level Observations Well Diameter inches Elev Screen Length 10.0 ft Date ft Slot Size 0.010 11/28/90 23.30 Deveopment Method Rig pump 11/30/90 23.32 Development Duration 30 minutes ATEC PROJECT NO 21-07458 MONITORING WELL DETAILS SCALE None ATEC Associates Inc BORING NO Cothr Geo caracaS MoterloS ord Erclrovrenfol Ere.a CLIENT Departomnt Of Economic Develorent __________________JOB NO.21-07458 PROJECT MOViE Subsurface Investigation ______________________START DATE 11/28/90 PROJECT UXATIOR Studebaker Corridor South Bend Indiana BORING HS.A BORING LOBATICJ iest of southwest corner of building RUGK CORE DIA.IN FOREMAN West SHELBY TUBE OIAIN INSPECTOR Cashman SOIL/ROOK DESCRIPTION STRATW TFV DEPTH DEPTH SPVLE SPT REC ppan REMARf Surface Elevation ft ft NO JBlacksli ghtly moist loose Sand and Gravel 11 Br sUghtly moist loose SIL fine to course SANO 91-SP with trace Gravel 4/4/5 106 NOl 3/5/3 Light brown modium dense below 11.0 2/2/2 1061 MD I_I I_I 3/7/9 751 MDI LI 3/5/5 103 ND1 LI 3/5/7 l06 ND Llwet below 22.5 Ll I_I Ilp-3/5/8 1031 10 3/3/7 50 NDI Bottom of test boring 29.0 Sample obtained for laboratory analysis HII WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING lTHODS NOTES BLONS/6 In Three NOTED ON ROBS 22.5 FT HSA-HOLLO.J STEM AUGERS in Increnmnts AT CcaLET1ON FT CFA-CONT.FLIGHT AUGERS REC Sampl AFTER HRS.FT HA-HAND AUGER TFV_Total F apors ppn parts per million ATEC Associates Inc Lt BORING Coraflr GeotechnI Moterlols 000 E00rooroeoIoI Emereers CLIENT epartment of Economic velorent JOB NO 21-07458 PROJECT NAIIE Subsurface Investigation START DATE 11/28O PROJECT LODATION Studebaker Corridor South Bend Indiana BORING METHOD NSA BORING LODAT1Ct kst of Avanti building ________________RIXK CORE DIA.IN FOREMAN st SHELBY TUBE DIR IN INSPECTOR Cashrnan SOIL/ROTh DESCRIPTION STRATIBI TFV DEPTH DEPTH SAILE SPT REC pii REMARLS Surface Elevation ft ft NO ______________ At/concrete brick and Sand fill __I_______ ______________ siim im1 Auger refusal 4.0 50 01 I_I I_I I..............._l I__I i_i I_I I_...I I_I WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING METHODS NOTESBLCIiS/6 in In Three NOTED ON RODS FT HSA-HOLLO.J STEM AUGERS in Increments AT C.1DLETION________FT CFA-CONT.FLIGKT AUGERS REC Sample Recovery AFTER HRS.FT NAHAND AUGER TFV_Total Fl pors ppn parts per million MW-4 CONSTRUCTiON DETAILS DEPTH Ir- FT SOIL PROFILE PROTECTIVE COVER Black slightly moist loose Sand and Gravel fill 3.0 _________Brown slightly moist loose SILTY fine to coarse SAND SMSP with trace RISER 2.5 19.0 Gravel Light brown medium dense below 11.0 GROUT 0.0 15.0 BENTONITE SEAL 15.0 16.9 Wet below 22.5 SAND PACK SCREEN 19.0 29.0 NATURAL PACK 16.9 29.0 Bottom of Teat Boring 29.0 Construction Material Schedule 40 PVC Groundwater Level Observations Well Diameter inches Elev Screen length 10.0 ft Date ft Slot Size 0.010 11/30/90 24.61 Development Method Rig pump Ievelopment Duration 30 minutes PROJECT NO 21-07458 MONITOHING WELL DETAILS SCALE None AlECAssociates Inc Coruthrg Geotechraod MofedoI ood ErrornontoI __________308 NO 21-07458 PROJECT N1E Subsurface Investigation __________________________START DATE 11/28/90 PROJECT 1cxA110l Studebaker Corridor South Bend Indiana BORINO rFTHOD NSA BORING LDEATION West of Avanti building RIXK CORE DIA.IN FOREMAN West SHELBY TUBE DIAIN INSPECTOR Cashman _________________ SOIL/RDEK DESCRIPTIOB STRATEfI TFV DEPTH DEPTH SP1PLE SPT REC pxn REMARKS Surface Elevation __________ft ft NO __________________ Asphalt/concrete cobble stone and Sand fill I_S-i flAuger refusal 3.5 WATEP LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING METHODS NOTES BLCEJS/6 in Three NOTED CR RODS FT HSA-HOLLOB STEM AUGERS in Increments AT Ctl1PLET1ONFT CFA-CONT.FLIGHT AUGERS REC Sam AFTER MRS FT HA-RND AUGER TFV_Tota Vapors pps parts ger million ATEC Associates Inc LOB BORING Co gO oleceracol Moleriols orid Er lrorirrrerrtol Erigfrreors CLIENT Oepartmont of Economic DeveloRrent 306 NO.21-07461 PROJECT NPIE Studebaker Corridor Project START DATE 11/29/90 PROJECT LOBATJOl SQuth Bend Indiana BORING METHOD HSA BORING LOBATICR Northwest corner of building ROCK CORE DIA.JN FOREMAN West SHELBY TUBE DIAl INSPECTOR Cashman SOIL/RODE DESCRIPTIOR STRATLB1 TFV DEPTH DEPTH SP1IPLE SPT REC ppe REMARCS Surface Elevation ft ft NO __________________ Asphalt concrete brick and Gravel fill Brown slightly moist loose SILTY fine to coarse SAND SM-SP with trace Gravel 2/2/2 67 ND 23/4/4 75 NO IiI LI I_I._i135/5 67 ND ND iii 3/4/7 67 ND Bottom of test boring 15.0 II Sanple obtained for laboratory analysis Boring backfilled with auger cuttings and capped upcn completion I_I I_ I_I I_I _._....._ WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING METHODS NOTES8LC545/6 is In Three NOTED ON RODS _______FT HSA-HOLLCkJ STEM AUGERS in Increments AT COBPLETION FT CFA-CONT.FLIGHT AUGERS REC Samp AFTER HRS FT HA-HAND AUGER TFV_Total Fl pors ppe parts per million ATEC Associates Inc LECOF NDRING Cith-gGeotechruce Matertoa ed EvrOflrentaIFr9Ineer CLIENT Departnnt of Economic Development 306 NO 21-07461 PROJECT NAME Studebaker Corridor Project START DATE 11/29/90 PROJECT LECATION South Bend Indiana BORING METHOD HSA BORING LECATION Northwest of corner of building RECK CORE DIA.IN FORENWI Il West SHELBY TUBE DIAIN INSPECTOR Cashrnan SOIL/RECK DESCRIPTION STRATLtI TFV DEPTH DEPTH SPILE SPT REC ppm REMS.RKS Surface Elevation ft ft NO Asphalt and road base 1.0 Black slightly moist medium dense SILTY fine to coarse SAND StI-SP with trace _P1P5/8/6 1CC ND Gravel JBrown below 4.0 24/5/5 103 ND 103 ND Li iii P3/4/5 67 NDI 103 ND ____________iI 4/7/10 1031 ND Bottom of test boring 05.0 P__P I_P Sample obtained for laboratory analysis Boring backfilled with auger cuttings and capped upon Li completion P._______.______._P P_P P____._____ II P-H WATER LEVEL OBSERVATiONS BORING METHODS r4OTE5BLO4S/6 in In Three NOTED ON RODS FT HSA-HOLLO4 STEM AUGERS in Increnmnts AT CtWLETIONFT CFA-CONTFLIGHT AUGERS REC Sample Recovery AFTER HRS.FT IA-HAND AUGER TFV_Total upors ppm parts per ATEC Associates Inc LW OF BORNIG NO.6-3 Corhng Geotethnlcol MoterloC ond Endo ewe EngInoo CLIENT Department of Economic Development JJ6 NO 21 0746 PROJECT NAME Studebaker Corridor Project STRAT DATE__I1/29/9Q... PROJECT LODATION South Bend Indiena BORING METHOD HSR 1NG LODATION Jest of building through concrete RODE CORE DIA.IN FOREMAN West SHELBY TUBE DIR IN INSPECTOR Cashman IL/RODK DESCRIPTIOR STRATIJI TFV DEPTH DEPTH SPLE SRI REC ppe REMARKS Surface Elevation ft ft NO _Ico5e SAND SM-SRI with trace fine to 2/1/1 103 NDI 1nmdium Gravel 33/4/3 1W ND I_l-_j fllncreasing Gravel below 11.0 1412/5/S 67 NDI 67 ND1 2/4/6 103 NDI H60tt00 of test boring 15.0 JSample obtained for laboratory analysis Boring backfiled with auger cuttings and capped unori completion __1L___________ WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING METHODS NOTESBLCXJS/6 in In Three NOTED ON RODS FT HSA-IIOLLO4 STEM AUGERS in Increments AT CLETION FT CFA-CONTFLIGHT AUGERS REC Sam AFTER MRS FT HA-WAND AUGER TFV..Total apors ppn parts per million ATEC Associates Inc LOC OF BORING NO.8-4 CoangGoiethwoo Moojo5 od ErMrOnrron EnOiooe CLIENT Department of Economic Develorent JJ6 NO 21-07461 PROJECT NAME Studebaker Corridor Project _________________________START DATE 11/29/90 PROJECT LOCATIOR South Bend Indiana JRINS THO0 lISA BORING LOCATIOR West of building in grass north boring ROCK CORE CIA IN FMAN West SHELBY TUBE CIA IN INSPECTOR Cashman SOIL/ROCK DESCRJPTIDe STRATUB TFV DEPTH DEPTH SNLE SPT REC ppm REMARKS Surface Elevation ft ft NO ___________________ Jikmeist loose SILTY fine to coarse jS4D SM-SP with trace Gravel IBr below 4.0 2/3/4 67j ND 2/2/4 50 ND 190 ND 4/8/10 190 LtWet below 22.5 8/7/7 50 4/7/9 190 NDSample obtained for Bottom of test boring 25.0 __j laboratory analysis Boring backfilled I_30_j with auger Cuttings and capped upon completion WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING METHODS NOTESBLCI4S/6 in In Three NOTED OB RODS 22.5 FT HSA-HOLLCW STEM AUGERS in Imcrenmnts AT C8IPLETIODFT CFA-CONT.FLIGHT AUGERS REC Sample RecoveryGETERHRSFTHA-HAND AUGER TFV_Total Fl pors ppm parts per ATEC Associates Inc L03 BORING ___ CotI1rgGeoochnIccLMate5oI and EMronrnerdal Erreer CLIENT Degertrrent of Economic Develogeent XB NO 21-07461 PROJECT NPF1E Studebaker Corridor Project STPT DATE 11/29/90 PROJECT L00ATION South Bend Indiana B00ING METHOD HSA BONING L00ATION West of building south boring P00K CONE DIA.IN FONEMPJ West SHELBY TUBE DIAIN INSPECTOR Cashman SOIL/R00K DESCRIPTION STRATLeI TFV DEPTH DEPTH SAbLE SPT REC ppn REMARSS Surface Elevation ft ft NO ___________________ Black moist loose SILTY fine to coarse SD SH-11111 Brown below Li 2/4/6 100 ND 1O_i 4/5/3 50 ND ND ii lL._3/4/5 103 ND Wet below 22.5 4/7/11 103 5/6/7 67 ND Sanple obtained for liBottom of test boring 25.0 laboratory analysis ii Boring backfiled I_I L..3...J with auger cuttings and capped upon Icompletion 11 __ WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING METHODS NOTESBLCWS/6 in In Three NOTED ON RODS 22.5 FT HSA-HOLL0IJ STEM AUGERS in Increnwnts AT CcaPLETION________FT CFA-CONT.FLIGHT AUGERS REC Sample RecoveryPiTERRRS.FT HA-HAND AUGER TFV_Total Flarim Ionizable Vapors ppe parts per millionFORD001699 APPENDIX CERCLIS SCORE PROCEDURES Department of Environmental Management Camnissioners illetin No Date December 10 1990 Subject Scoring of hazardous substances response sites utilizing the Indiana Scoring Model ISM Authority Title 329 IAC 723 sets forth guidelines for publishing sites that have been scored utilizing the ISM File Repository The public may inquire at the Department of Environmental Managnent 105 South Meridian Street Indianapolis Indiana 46201 Roan 901 to review and/or obtain spacific information regarding particular sites scoring padcage For further details contact the Office of Environmental Response Site Investigation Section also located at the aforementioned address Introduction The Indiana Scoring Model ISM is method of prioritizing for state response actions those hazardous substances response sites which are not on the National Priorities List NPL The ISM serves as the Commissioners management tool to address those sites which pose the most significant threat to human health and the environment in addition to assuring the departments resources are allocated accordingly Hazardous substances response sites that are evaluated utilizing the ISM are assigned numerical score Site scoring will be dynanic process and scores may be subject to change based on significant changes in site circumstances receipt of additional Site information or other relevant factors The ISM combines three scores assigned to hazardous substance response site as follows 5M reflects the potential for harm to humans or the environment from the migration of hazardous substance away from the facility by routes involving groundwater surface water or air It is composite of separate scores for eamb of th three routes 5FE reflects the potential for harm from substances that can explode or cause fires reflects the potential for harm from direct contact with hazardous substances at the facility i.e no migration need be involved The score for each hazard mode migration fire arid explosion and direct contact or route is obtained by considering set of factors that characterize the potential of the facility to cause larm Each factor is assigned numerical value on scale of zero to three five or eight according to prescribed guidelines This value is then multiplied by ighting factor yielding the factor score The factor scores are then combined and scores within factor category are imiltiplied together to develop score for groundwater surface water air fire and explosion and direct contact In computing an individual migration route score the product of its factor category scores is divided by the maximum possible score and the resulting ratio is multiplied by one hundred 100 The last step puts all SFE or mode scores on scale of zero to ten 10 SM is composite of the scores for the three possible migration routes IT7 Sgw2 S2 Sa2 Where groundwater route score surface water route score Sa air route score The effect of this means of combining the route scores is to emphasize the primary highest scoring route in aggregating route scores while giving sane additional consideration to the secondary or tertiary routes if they score high The factor 1/1.73 is used simply for the purpose of reducing SM scores to one hundred 100 point scale The ISM does not guantify the probability of harm from facility or the magnitude of the harm that could result although the factors have been selected in order to approximate both those elements of risk It is procedure for ranking facilities in terms of the potential threat they pose by describing Huntington Terminals Huntington/Huntington 28.90 121090 Monon Well Field Monon/White 28.40 121090 Davenprt Dump Monrovia/Morgan 28.20 121090 Albany Sludge Pit Albany/Delaware 27.70 121090 Avanti South Bend/St Joseph 27.60 121090 Clayton Wells Clayton/Hendricks 27.00 121090 Texas Eastern ReddingtorVJadson 26.26 121090 Stout Storage Battery Muncie/Delaware 26.22 121090 Albany Battery Case Dump Albany/Delaware 25.87 121090 Universal Adhesives Middlebury/Elkhart 25.00 121090 Dugger Electric Dugger/Sollivan 20.07 121090 Energy Cooperative Inc East Chicago/Lake 19.87 121090 A1Da Lafayette/Tippecanoe 19.44 121090 Mud Lake Site Steuben County 18.30 121090 Calumet Containers Hammond/Lake 16.07 1210-90 Sthreiber Oil Cnpany Cedar Lake/Lake 13.48 121090 Midwest Plating KokQno/Howard 12.10 121090 Seal St Disposal Hamm3nd/Lake 1.55 121090 East Thcmpson Rd Indianapolis/Marion 0.00 121090 APPENDIX PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION Lot Studebaker Corridor South Bend Indiana A-i Drilling MW-3 facing east A-2 Drilling MW-4 facing east B-i Developing MW-4 B-2 Completed well MW-4 C-I Drilling boring B-3 east of UST in grassy area C-2 Drilling boring B-4 near UST in grassy area D-i Main level below grade oil pit D-2 Main level one of two large below grade sumps E-I Third level 55-gallon drum containing oil and garbage E-2 Elevator tower storage containers Ai 4-___ A2 PROJECT NO SITE PHOTO LOG 2107458/61 STUDEBAKER CORRIDOR PROJECT SCALE LOT ftl NONE SOUTH BEND IN FIGURE NO _________________________________ T. B- B2 PROJECT NO SITE PHOTO LOS 2107458/61STUCORRIDORPROJECTSCALE LOT NONE SOUTH BEND IN FIGURE NO ___________________________A________________________ IHI C2 PROJECT NO SITE PHOTO LOC 21 07458/61 STUDEBAKER CORRIDOR PROJECT SCALE LOT NONE SOUTH BEND IN FIGURE NO D2 LOJEOT NO SITE PHOTO LOC 2107458/611 /JjSTUDEBAKER CORRIDOR PROJECT SCALE LOT NONE SOUTH BEND IN FIGURE NO E-2 PROJECr NO SITE PHOTO LOG 2107458/61 STUDEBAKER CORRtDOR PROJECT SCALE cQ7/7LOTNONE SOUTH BEND IN FIGURE NO ___________________________ _____________________________________ APPENDIX SCREENING EQUIPMENT H-Nu ATEC used portable instrument called an H-Nu to measure TPVs emitted from the soil samples The H-Nu is equipped with small pump which continuously draws air samples into an ionization chamber which is flooded with ultra-violet light Ionization of the vapors within this chamber results in the generation of an electric current which relates to the concentration of vapors below this energy Most of the light permanent gases such as those in ambient air have ionization potentials at 12 eV or more while many organic chemicals benzene xylene toluene etc have ionization potentials below 10.5 eV For the purposes of this investigation the H-Nu was used as screening tool for the presence of photo-ionizable contaminants Following extrusion the sample was placed in plastic sample bag and the pump inlet for the H-Nu was placed in the bag for measurement The highest value recorded during this procedure was recorded on the boring logs For screening purposes ATEC relies on the calibration performed on the instrument at the factory The factory calibrates the instrument to 100 ppm benzene therefore values reported on the boring logs represent ppm as benzene In screening applications the actual numerical values recorded are of secondary importance especially since there are no established United States Environmental Protection Agency U.S EPA and the Indiana Department of Environmental Management IDEM standards for TPVs The relative magnitude of the values between sampling sites is considered to be of primary importance in screening for the presence of contaminated samples In general background levels of TPVs at an undeveloped site would be 25 ppm or less while background values at an industrial site or in this case gasoline station would be 50 to 100 ppm VAPOR SCREENING EQUIPMENT The Porta-FID utilizes the principle of hydrogen flame ionization for detection and measurement of total flame-ionizable vapors TFVs The instrument measures organic vapor concentration by producing response to an unknown sample which can be related to gas of knqwn composition to which the instrument has previously been calibrated During normal survey mode operation continuous sample is drawn into the probe and transmitted to the detector chamber by an internal pumping system The sample stream is metered and passed through particle filters before reaching the detector chamber Inside the detector chamber the sample is exposed to hydrogen flame which ionizes the organic vapors When most organic vapors burn they leave positively charged carbon-containing ions An electric field drives the ions to collecting electrode As the positive ions are collected current corresponding to the collection rate is generated This current is measured with linear electrometer preamplifier which has an output signal proportional to the ionization current signal conditioning amplifier is used to amplify the signal from the preamp and to condition it for subsequent meter or external recorder display The display is an integral part of the Probe/Readout Assembly and has 2700 scale deflection In general the hydrogen flame ionization detector is more sensitive for hydrocarbons than any other class of organic compounds The response of the Porta-FID varies from compound to compound but gives repeatable results with all types of hydrocarbons i.e saturated hydrocarbons alkanes unsaturated hydrocarbons alkenes and alkynes and aromatic hydrocarbons H-Nu ATEC used portable instrument called an H-Nu to measure TPVs emitted from the soil samples The H-Nu is equipped with small pump which continuously draws air samples into an ionization chamber which is flooded with ultra-violet light Ionization of the vapors within this chamber results in the generation of an electric current which relates to the concentration of vapors below this energy Most of the light permanent gases such as those in ambient air have ionization potentials at 12 eV or more while manyorganic chemicals benzene xylene toluene etc have ionization potentials below 10.5 eV For the purposes of this investigation the H-Nu was used as screening tool for the presence of photo-ionizable contaminants Following extrusion the sample was placed in plastic sample bag and the pump inlet for the H-Nu was placed in the bag for measurement The highest value recorded during this procedure was recorded on the boring logs For screening purposes ATEC relies on the calibration performed on the instrument at the factory The factory calibrates the instrument to 100 ppm benzene therefore values reported on the boring logs represent ppm as benzene In screening applications the actual numerical values recorded are of secondary importance especially since there are no established United States Environmental Protection Agency U.S EPA and the Indiana Department of Environmental Management IDEM standards for TPVs The relative magnitude of the values between sampling sites is considered to be of primary importance in screening for the presence of contaminated samples In general background levels of TPVs at an undeveloped site would be 25 ppm or less while background values at an industrial site or in this case gasoline station would be 50 to 100 ppm VAPOR SCREENING EQUIPMENT The Porta-FID utilizes the principle of hydrogen flame ionization for detection and measurement of total flame-ionizable vapors TFVs The instrument measures organic vapor concentration by producing response to an unknown sample which can be related to gas of known composition to which the instrument has previously been calibrated During normal survey mode operation continuous sample is drawn i1to the probe and transmitted to The detector chamber by an internal pumping system The sample stream is metered and passed through particle filters before reaching the detector chamber Inside the detector chamber the sample is exposed to hydrogen flame which ionizes the organic vapors When most organic vapors burn they leave positively charged carbon-containing ions An electric field drives the ions to collecting electrode As the positive ions are collected current corresponding to the collection rate is generated This current is measured with linear electrometer preamplifier which has an output signal proportional to the ionization current signal conditioning amplifier is used to amplify the signal from the preamp and to condition it for subsequent meter or external recorder display The display is an integral part of the Probe/Readout Assembly and has 2700 scale deflection In general the hydrogen flame ionization detector is more sensitive for hydrocarbons than any other class of organic compounds The response of the Porta-FID varies from compound to compound but gives repeatable results with all types of hydrocarbons i.e saturated hydrocarbons alkanes unsaturated hydrocarbons alkenes and alkynes and aromatic hydrocarbons APPENDIX ANALYTICAL RESULTS AlEC Environmental \/Consultants Division of ATEC Associates Inc Solid Hazardous Waste Ste Assessrnerr/s 5150 East 65th Street Remedial Design Construction Indianapolis Indiana 46220-4871 Underground Tank Management 13171 8494990 FAX 1317 849-4278 Asbestos Surveys Analysis Hydrogeologic Investigations Monitoring nalytical Tes ring iC he rn istry Industrial Hygiene/Hazard Communication Environmental Audits Permitting Eeploratorn Drilling Monitoring Wells December 11 1990 Mr Matthew Stokes ATEC Environmental Construction Div 5150 East 65th Street Indianapolis IN 46220 Re Four Soil/Four Water VOA Four Soil/Five Water RCRA Metals SW 846 Method 8240 7000 Series 6010 US EPA Method 624 EPA-600/4-79020 Method 200 Series Department of Economical Development City of South Bend ATEC Project Number 2107458 Dear Mr Stokes Enclosed are the results of the Chemical Analyses for the five water and four soil samples which were submitted to the ATEC Environmental/Analytical Testing Division on November 30 1990 on behalf of the City of South Bend The volatile samples were analyzed on Finnigari Incos 50 GC/MS/DS system complete with Superincos Software via SW 846 Method 8240 and US EPA Method 624 for Purgeable Organic Compounds Prior to analysis the system was tuned against Bromofluorobenzene and calibrated with the appropriate standard Metals were analyzed on PerkinElmer 5100 Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer according to the 7000 Series of the methods outlined in SW 846 and Thermo Jarrell Ash ICAP-6l according to SW 846 Method 6010 and EPA600/4--79020 Method 200 Series All associated Quality Control information will be maintained in the Testing Division files copy of which can be forwarded to you upon request After thirtyday period fee will be assessed for this additional information Suosidiory of ArnnricanTnsiing and Engrnnnnrng Corporation Consulting Envirnuinnta d Oftices or Maio US Cities/Since 1958 Mutnriau Engineers It has been pleasure serving you and as always if there are any questions concerning these results or the ATEC Policies please feel free to contact me Respectfully submitted ATEC Associates Inc Keith Kline Environmenta 1/Analytical Testing Division KS K/mw REPORT OT TEST RESULTS ATEC Project Number 21-07458 Date December 13 1990 Client S.B Redevelopment Commission Dept of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Sample Identification Studebaker Corridor Project Sample Matrix Water Sample Taken By ATEC Date Sampled November 26 to 30 1990 Date Received November 30 1990 Date Analyzed December to 12 1990 Analyst EVS MAV KEB Verified By KEB ATEC Lab Number 9011356 Quanti Parameter Sample I.D Number tation Method No units in mg/L Limit EPA 600/ unless noted MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 Blank mg/L 479-020 Total Metals Arsenic 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 206.2 Barium 0.05 0.059 0.055 0.064 0.05 0.05 200.7 Cadmium 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 200.7 Chromium 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 200.7 Lead 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 200.7 Mercury 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.002 245.1 Selenium 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 270.2 Silver 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 200.7 Respectfully submitted ATEC Associates Inc nvironmental/Xnaiytii Testing Divison REPORT OF TEST RESULTS ATEC Project Number 21-07458 tte December 13 1990 Jent S.B Redevelopment Commission Dept of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Lmple Identification Studebaker Corridor Project Lmple Matrix Soil Sample Taken By ATEC Pate Sampled November 26 to 30 1990 tte Received November 30 1990 Late Analyzed December to 12 1990 Analyst EVS MAy KEB rified By KEB JDD EC Lab Number 9011356 Sample I.D Number Quanti Parameter tation Sw 846 units in mg/kg 23.525 23.525 23.525 2122.5 Limit na1ytim1 iless noted Mwl MW2 MW-3 MW4 mg/kg thxi Total Metals -senic 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 7060 Barium 6.1 4.4 6.7 3.7 2.0 6010 dmium 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 6010 Chromium 4.1 4.7 5.2 5.8 2.0 6010 ad 3.5 2.2 2.6 2.9 2.0 6010 Mercury 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 7470 lenium 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 7740 i1ver 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 6010 Respectfully submitted ATEC Associates Inc nvironmenta1/Analytic7q Divison Client S.B Redevelopment Commission Client Address Department of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Number 21-07458 Client Sample Identification MW-i 23.525 Sample Matrix Soil Date Sample Collected November 26 1990 Date Sample Received November 30 1990 Date Sample Analyzed December 1990 Analytical Equipment Incos BV VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 9011356-1 of Concentration Quantitation Analvte CAS Number up/kg Limit ug/ka Chioromethane 74873 10 10 Bromomethane 74-83-9 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 10 10 Chioroethane 75003 10 10 Methylene Chloride 75092 Acetone 67-641 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 11Dichioroethene 7535-4 1iDichloroethane 7535-3 Traris-12Dichloroethene 156605 Chloroform 67663 12Dichloroethane 107062 2Butanone 78933 10 10 il1Trichloroethane 71556 Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 12Dichloropropane 78-87-5 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 9011356i Concentration Quantitation Analvte CAS Number ug/kg Limit ug/kg Transi 3Dichioropropene 10061-026 Trichioroethene 79-016 Dibromochioromethane 124-48-i ii2Trichioroethane 79005 Benzene 71432 cisi3Dichioropropene 10061-01-5 2Chioroethyivinylether 110-75-8 10 10 Bromoform 75252 4-Methyl2Pentanone 10810i 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachioroethene 127184 1122-Tetrachioroethane 79-345 Toluene 108883 Chlorobenzene 108907 Ethylbenzene 100-414 Styrene 100425 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method SW 846 Method 8240 Analyst Harrison Verified McGill Date Reported December 1990 Respectfully submitted Environmental/Analytical Testing Division Client S.B Redevelopment Commission Client Address Department of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Number 21-07458 Client Sample Identification MW2 23.525 Sample Matrix Soil Date Sample Collected November 28 1990 Date Sample Received November 30 1990 Date Sample Analyzed December 1990 Analytical Equipment Incos BV VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 90113562 of Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number lug/kg Limit lug/kg Chloromethane 74-873 10 10 Bromoniethane 74839 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 10 10 Chloroethane 75-003 10 10 Methylene Chloride 7509-2 Acetone 67641 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 llDichloroethene 75-354 11Dichioroethane 75353 Trans-12Dichloroethene 15660-5 Chloroform 67-663 12Dichioroethane 107062 2Butanone 78933 10 10 1ll-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 Carbon Tetrachloride 56-235 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Broinodichloromethane 75274 12Dichioropropane 78-87-5 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 9011356-2 Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/kg Limit ug/kg Transi 3Dichioropropene 1006102-6 Trichioroethene 79-01-6 Dibroinochioroinethane 12448i 112Trichioroethane 7900-5 Benzene 71432 cis-13-Dichloropropene 10061015 2Chioroethylvinylether 110758 10 10 Bromoforin 75-252 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 108-101 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachioroethene 127184 1122Tetrachioroethane 79345 Toluene 108883 Chlorobenzene 10890-7 Ethylbenzene 10041-4 Styrene 100-42-5 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method SW 846 Method 8240 Analyst Harrison Verified McGill Date Reported December 1990 Respectfully submitted Environmental/Analytical Testing Division Client S.B Redevelopment Commission Client Address Department of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Nuiziber 2107458 Client Sample Identification MW-3 23.525 Sample Matrix Soil Date Sample Collected November 28 1990 Date Sample Received November 30 1990 Date Sample Analyzed December 1990 Analytical Equipment Incos BV VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 90113563 of Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/kg Limit ug/kg Chloromethane 74873 10 10 Bromomethane 7483-9 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 10 10 Chloroethane 7500-3 10 10 Methylene Chloride 7509-2 Acetone 6764-1 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 11Dichioroethene 75354 llDichloroethane 75-353 Trans12-Dichloroethene 156-605 Chloroform 67663 12Dichioroethane 107062 2Butanone 7893-3 10 10 l1lTrichloroethane 71556 Carbon Tetrachioride 56-235 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Bromodichioromethane 75274 12Dichioropropane 78-87-5 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 90113563 Concentration Quantitation AnalVte CAS Number ug/kg Limit ug/kg Transi 3Dichioropropene 10061026 Trichioroethene 79-016 Djbromochloromethane 124481 112Trichioroethane 79005 Benzene 7143-2 cisl3Dichloropropene 10061015 2Chioroethylvinylether 11075-8 10 10 Bromoform 75-25-2 4Methyl2Pentanone 10810i 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachioroethene 127-184 1122Tetrachioroethane 79345 Toluene 108883 Chiorobenzene 10890-7 Ethylbenzene 10041-4 Styrene 100425 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method SW 846 Method 8240 Analyst Harrison Verified McGill Date Reported December 1990 Respectfully submitted7L Environmental/Analytical Testing Division Client S.B Redevelopment Commission Client Address Department of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Nuiber 2107458 Client Sample Identification MW-4 21-22.5 Sample Matrix Soil Date Sample Collected November 28 1990 Date Sample Received November 30 1990 Date Sample Analyzed December 1990 Analytical Equipment Incos BV VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 90113564 of Concentration Quantitation Analvte CAS Number ug/kg Limit ug/kg Chioromethane 74-873 10 10 Bromomethane 74839 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 10 10 Chloroethane 75003 10 10 Methylene Chloride 75-09-2 Acetone 67-64-1 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 llDichloroethene 75-354 1lDichloroethane 75353 Trans-12Dichloroethene 156605 Chloroform 67663 12Dichioroethane 107062 2Butanone 78933 10 10 11lTrichloroethane 71-556 Carbon TetraChloride 56235 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Bromodichioromethane 75-27-4 l2Dichloropropane 78-87-5 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 90113564 Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/kg Limit uc/kg Transi 3Dichioropropene 10061026 Trichioroethene 79016 Dibromochioromethane 12448i 112Trichioroethane 79005 Benzene 71432 cisi3Dichloropropene 10061015 2Chloroethylvinylether 110-75-8 10 10 Bromoform 75-252 4Methyl2Pentanone 108101 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachioroethene 127184 1122-Tetrachioroethane 79345 Toluene 108883 Chlorobenzene 108907 Ethyibenzene 100-414 Styrene 100425 Totai Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method SW 846 Method 8240 Analyst Harrison Verified McGill Date Reported December 1990 Respectfully submitted Environmental/Analytical Testing Division Client S.B Redevelopment Commission Client Address Department of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Number 2107458 Client Sample Identification MW-l Sample Matrix Water Date Sample Collected November 30 1990 Date Sample Received November 30 1990 Date Sample Analyzed December 1990 Analytical Equipment Incos BV VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 90113565 of Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number u/L Limit ug/L Chloromethane 74873 10 10 Bromomethane 74-83-9 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 10 10 Chioroethane 75003 10 10 Methylene Chloride 75092 Acetone 67-64-1 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 llDichloroethene 75354 llDichloroethane 7535-3 Trans-l.2Dichloroethene 15660-5 Chloroform 67663 l2Dichloroethane 107062 2Butanone 7893-3 10 10 lllTrichloroethane 71556 Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Bromodichloromethane 7527-4 l2-Dichloropropane 7887-5 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 9011356-5 Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/L Limit ug/L Transi 3Dichloropropene 10061026 Trichloroethene 79016 Dibromochioromethane 12448i 112Trichioroethane 79005 Benzene 71432 cis13Dichloropropene 10061015 2Chioroethylvinylether 110758 10 10 Bromoform 75-252 4Nethyl2Pentanone 10810i 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 1122Tetrachioroethane 79345 Toluene 108883 Chlorobenzene 108-907 Ethylbenzene 100-414 Styrene 100425 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method U.S EPA Method 624 Analyst Harrison Verified McGill Date Reported December 1990 Respectfully submitted Environmental/Analytical Testing Division Client S.D Redevelopment Commission Client Address Department of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Number 21-07458 Client Sample Identification MW-2 Sample Matrix Water Date Sample Collected November 30 1990 Date Sample Received November 30 1990 Date Sample Analyzed December 1990 Analytical Equipment Incos By VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 90113566 of Concentration Quantitation Analvte CAS Number ug/L Limit ug/L Chloromethane 74-873 10 10 Bromomethane 74-839 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 10 10 Chloroethane 75-00-3 10 10 Methylene Chloride 7509-2 12 Acetone 67-641 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 ll-Dichloroethene 7535-4 11Dichloroethane 75-35-3 Trans-12Dichloroethene 156-60-5 37 Chloroform 67-66-3 12-Dichioroethane 107-062 2-Butanone 78-933 10 10 111-Trichloroethane 71556 Carbon Tetrachloride 5623-5 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 12-Dichloropropane 7887-5 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 9011356-6 Concentration Qiantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/L Limit ug/L Transi 3-Dichioropropene 10061026 Trichioroethene 79016 Dibromochioroinethane 12448i 112Trichioroethane 79005 Benzene 71432 cisi3Dichloroproperle 10061015 2-Chioroethylvinylether 110-758 10 10 romoform 75252 4Methyl-2-Pentanone 108101 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachioroethene 127-184 10 1122-Tetrachioroethane 79-345 Toluene 108883 Chlorobenzene 108-907 Ethylbenzene 100414 Styrene 100425 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method U.S EPA Method 624 Analyst Harrison Verified McGill Date Reported December 1990 Respectfully submitted Environmental/Analytical Testing Division Client S.B Redevelopment Commission Client Address Department of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Nuiiber 2107458 Client Sample Identification MW-3 Sample Matrix Water Date Sample Collected November 30 1990 Date Sample Received November 30 1990 Date Sample Analyzed December 1990 Analytical Equipment Incos BV VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTI CAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 90113567 of Concentration Quantjtation Analyte CAS Number ug/L Limit uq.LLI Chioromethane 74873 10 10 Bromomethane 74839 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 10 10 Chloroethane 75-00-3 10 10 Methylene Chloride 75092 14 Acetone 67641 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 11-Dichioroethene 7535-4 llDichloroethane 7535-3 Transl2Dichloroethene 156-60-5 Chloroform 67663 l2Dichloroethane 107-06-2 2Butanone 78933 10 10 lllTrichloroethane 71556 10 Carbon Tetrachioride 56-23-5 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 12Dichioropropane 78875 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 9011356-7 Concentration Quantitation Analvte CAS Number ug/L Limit ug/L Trans-i 3Dichioropropene 10061026 Trichloroethene 79016 Dibromochloromethane 124481 112Trichioroethane 79005 Benzene 7143-2 cis13Dichloropropene 10061015 2Chloroethylvinylether 11075-8 10 10 Bronioform 75-25-2 4Methyl2Pentanone 108101 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachioroethene 127184 1i22-Tetrachloroethane 79345 Toluene 108883 Chlorobenzene 108907 Ethylbenzene 100-414 Styrene 100425 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method U.S EPA Method 624 Analyst Harrison Verified McGill Date Reported December 1990 Respectfully submitted Environmental/Analytical Testing Division Client S.B Redevelopment Commission Client Address Department of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Number 21-07458 Client Sample Identification MW4 Sample Matrix Water Date Sample Collected November 30 1990 Date Sample Received November 30 1990 Date Sample Analyzed December 1990 Analytical Equipment Incos BV VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 90113568 of Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/L Limit ug/L Chioromethane 74873 10 10 Broinomethane 74-83-9 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 10 10 Chloroethane 75-003 10 10 Methylene Chloride 75092 13 Acetone 67641 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 l1Dichloroethene 75354 llDichloroethane 75353 Transl2Dichloroethene 156-60-5 Chloroform 67-66-3 l2Dichloroethane 107062 2Butanone 78933 10 10 l11Trichloroethane 71-55-6 Carbon Tetrachioride 56-235 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 12Dichloropropane 78875 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 9911356-8 Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/L Limit ug/L Trans-i 3Dichioropropene 10061-026 Trichloroethene 79-016 Dibromochioromethane 124481 112Trichioroethane 79-005 Benzene 71432 cis13Dichioropropene 10061015 2Chioroethylvinylether 110758 10 10 Bromoforin 75-25-2 4Nethyl2Pentanone 108101 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachioroethene 127184 1122Tetrachioroethane 79345 Toluene 108883 Chiorobenzene 108907 Ethylbenzene 100414 Styrene 100425 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method U.S EPA Method 624 Analyst Harrison Verified McGill Date Reported December 1990 Respectfully submitted 7LQ Environmental/Analytical Testing Division ATEC Environmental Consultants Division ot ATEC Associates Inc -.-.--..5150 East 65th Street 4_Indianapolis Indiana 46220-4871 317 8.49-4990 FAX 44 317 849-4278 oo ___ i6 ____ ___________ _____ 0331 031dl013v k- _____ ___iiiiiIiiiiiiiIiiILit_ 3ilSOdI40O------- zA ATEC Environmental Consultants Division of ATEC Associates Inc SeiHazoSWasre S/eAssessmerrts 5150 East 65th Street dat Co St to Indianapolis Indiana 46220-4871 Underground Tank Management 317 849-4990 FAX 1317 849-4278 Asbestos Surveys Analysis 1-lydrogeologic Investigations Monitoring Analytical Testing/Chemistry Industrial Hygiene/Hazard Communication Environmental Audits Permitting Eeploratorypnlling Monitoring Wells December 13 1990 Mr Matthew Stokes ATEC Environmental Services 5150 East 65th Street Indianapolis IN 46220 Re Five Soil TPH SW 846 Method 8015 California Modified City of South Bend Studebaker Corridor Project ATEC Project Number 2107461 Dear Mr Stokes Enclosed are the results of the Organic Analyses for the five soil samples which were submitted to the ATEC Environmental/Analytical Testing Division on November 30 1990 on behalf of City of South Bend Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon analyses were performed on Varian 3700 Gas Chromatograph using Flame Ionization Detection via Sw 846 Method 8015 California Modified All associated Quality Control information will be maintained in the Testing Division files copy of which can be forwarded to you upon request After thirtyday period fee will be assessed for this additional information It has been pleasure serving you and as always if there are any questions concerning these results or the ATEC Policie please feel free to contact me Respectfully submitted ATEC Associates Inc Donna Spyk Environmental/Analytical Testing Division DSS/mw Subsidiary 0/American Testing and Engineering Corporation Consulting Errviroiirneiitai 0//ions in Mainr US Cities/Since /958 Materials Engineers REPORT E8T R8ULTB ATEC Project Number 2107461 Date December 10 1990 Client City of South Bend South Bend Redevelopment Commission 1200 County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Analysis Information Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis SW 846 Method 8015 California Modified Sample Taken By ATEC CC Sample Matrix Soil Date Sampled November 29 1990 Date Received November 30 1990 Date Analyzed December 1990 Analyst LAA Verified By DSS ATEC Lab Number 9011355 Total Petroleum Quantitation Sample Identification Hydrocarbon Limit Bi 13.515 1.0 ppm 1.0 ppm B2 13.515 1.0 ppm 1.0 ppm B3 13.515 1.0 ppm 1.0 ppm B4 2122.5 1.0 ppm 1.0 ppm B5 2122.5 1.0 ppm 1.0 ppm Respectfully submitted ATEC Associates Inc L- Environmentai/Anaical Testing Division ATEC Environmental Consultants Division of ATEC Associates Inc 5150 East 65th Street Indianapolis Indiana 46220-4871 317849-4990.FAX317849-4278 oo 0411_IIII_I_IIIII__ I38V11N \- sIIiiiiIIiiiiI 0231 rX ajiIaiov O3t311l4____ 1100 l31VM 8VU0 3ilS0dVO3uJz.______ ATEC Environmental Consultants Inc Indianapolis Indiana 46220-4871 317849-4990FAX317849-4278 -- ____ iiIiiiIiIiIIiIIi1 ____ ____ 0831 claldloIOV 03lJ811l__LL____ ____liii iiiiiIii_L 3lISOdINOO _S_______f__________ o--.- Lii APPENDIX ATEC REPORT NUMBER 21-17060 March 18 1991 Mr K.C Pocius Department of Economic Development County City Building South Bend IN 46601 Re Groundwater Monitoring Program Lot One Studebaker Corridor Former Avanti Plant Site South Bend Indiana ATEC Project Number 21-17060 Dear Mr Pocius ATEC Environmental Consultants ATEC has performed second round of sampling and testing groundwater from four monitoring wells located at the above-referenced facility This work was recommended based on findings made during the initial Phase II environmental Site assessment of this property Upon approval from the client to continue this project ATEC proceeded On February 21 1991 ATEC persoimel collected groundwater samples from four monitoring wells at this site Before obtaining the samples each well was purged of minimum of three well volumes to ensure representative groundwater sample Teflon bailer with polypropylene rope was utilized for purging and the collection of the samples Between monitoring well samples the bailer was decontaminated with an on-site tap water and Premier detergent wash tap water rinse followed by triple distilled water rin.se The groundwater samples collected were analized for VOCs All four groundwater samples were collected preserved and transported to the ATEC laboratory following appropriate chain-of-custody procedures On November 29 1990 the four monitoring wells were surveyed The top of the casing of each well was surveyed into an arbitrary benchmark with an assigned elevation of 100.0 ft Groundwater elevations were also collected on February 21 1991 using Solinist water level indicator were used in conjunction with the survey data to verify water table elevations Groundwater depth in the monitoring wells ranged from 24.19 ft to 22.75 ft below ground surface Based on calculations of gr9undwater elevations using these recent groundwater depths groundwater flow direction to the northeast is confirmed by this data Findings The second round of groundwater analyses are shown in Table along with the first round of analyses Table Volatile Organic Componnds in Oroandwater Monitoring Weti Sanple Locations ________________________________________Sample Locations MW-i MW-2 MW-MW-4 avalaation Critena Constitaent 11/90 2/91 11/90 2/91 11/90 2/91 11/90 2/91 ____________ Traris.i2-Dtchtoroethene ND 37 18 ND ND 100 iii-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND 10 13 ND ND 200 Techloroethene ND NI ND ND ND ND NI Tnirachloroethene ND ND 10 ND ND -sY Vinyl Chloride ND NI ND 33 ND NO ND NI 1j-Dichloroethane ND NI ND ND ND c5 NI ND Constituent detected but concentration present is less than qnantitation limit Represents propened Matumam Contaminant Level CMCL ND Constituent not detected All reaultn reported in parts per billion ppb This is nqaisalent to micrograms per liter mg/L in waler Based on the groundwater test results from the second round of sampling downgradient well MW-2 remains the only well tested which showed concentrations of Volatile Compounds above the maximUm levels established by the EPA for Contaminant Levels MCLs for drinking water The groundwater sample collected from MW-2 shows Tetrachloroethene PCE at the MCL for this compound and vinyl chloride above the MCL Vinyl chloride was not shown in the first round of testing at this welt location Volatile constituents were also detected in downgradient locations MW-i and MW-3 however concentrations are below MCLS for drinking water Also test results from the second round of sampling confirm the presence of PCE in upgradient well MW-4 Conclusions Analytical results from both rounds of groundwater samples collected show similar results regarding the presence of low concentrations of volatile constituents In each case monitoring well location MW-2 revealed concentrations of volatile compounds above the MCLs for drinking water for certain contaminants Verification of groundwater flow direction indicate this well is at downgradient location with respect to Lot One ATEC recommends that this information be provided to Indiana Department of Environmental Management IDEM due to the Avanti site being listed as CERCUS site by the IDEM and the confirmed presence of low concentrations of contamination in the groundwater ATECs recommendation to the IDEM is to perform an initial risk assessment to determine possible impact of groundwater users in the area The groundwater sources used as drinking water supplies may or may not be hydrogeologically interconnected with the aquifer sampled through these monitoring wells Demonstration of low possible impact of downgradient receptors and further verification of possible off-site sources may act to decrease concerns that this site could be adversely affecting drinking water supplies Very truly yours ATEC Associates Inc Kurtis Gilliam Staff Environmental Scientist tthew Stokes C.H.M.M Project Manager/Environmental Scientist MCS/ca AlEC Environmental Consultants Division of ATEC Associates thc Solid Hazardoos Waste Site Assessments 5150 hast 65th Street Remedial DesignS Construction IndianapOlmo Indiana 46220-4571 Urrdergroond Tank Management 317 549-4990 FAX f317J 849-4278 Asbestos Surveys Analysis Hydrogeologic Investigations Monitoring Analytical Testing Chemistry Industrial HygieneHazard Communication Environmental Audrtg Permitting Eeploratoly Drilling Monitoring Wells March 1991 Mr Matthew Stokes ATEC Environstental Consultants 5150 East 65th Street Indianapolis IN 46220 Re Four Water VOA U.S EPA Method 624 City of South Bend Department of Economic Development ATEC Project Number 21-17060 Dear Mr Stokes Enclosed are the results of the Organic Analyses for the four water samples which were submitted to the ATEC Environmental/Analytical Testing Division on February 22 1991 on behalf of the City of South Bend The volatile samples were analyzed on Finnigan 1020 OWA GC/MS/DS system complete with Superincos Software via U.S EPA Method 624 for Purgeable Organic Compounds Prior to analysis the system was tuned against Bromofluorobenzene and calibrated with the appropriate standard All associated Quality Control information will be maintained in the Testing Division files copy of which can be forwarded to you upon request After thirtyday period fee will be assessed for this additional information It has been pleasure serving you and as always if there are any questions concerning these results or the ATEC policies please feel free to contact me hiRespectfully submitted ATEC Associates Inc Keith Kline Environmental/Analytical Testing Division KS/sdv Subnrdivry of Americanlnsting and Engineering Corporation Consalling Envronrrie nd ClImes in Major US CrImes/Since 1958 Mulormols Engineers Client City of South Bend Client Address City County Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Number 2117060 Client Sample Idntification MW-i Sample Matrix Water Date Sample Collected February 21 1991 Date Sample Received February 22 1991 Date Sample Analyzed February 28 1991 Analytical Equipment 10208 VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 91022541 of Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/L Limit ug/L Chioromethane 74-87-3 10 10 Broinometharie 74839 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 24 10 Chloroethane 75003 10 10 Nethylene Chloride 75092 Acetone 67641 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 ll-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 11Dichioroethane 75353 Trans12Dichloroethene 156-605 Chloroform 67663 12-Dichioroethane 107062 2Butanone 78933 10 10 111Trichloroethne 71556 Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Bromodichioromethane 75274 12-Dichioropropane 78875 Analyte detected but amount present is lees than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 91022541 Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/L I4mit ug/L Transi 3Dichioropropene 10061026 Trichioroethene 79016 Dibromochioromethane 12448-1 1.12Trichioroethane 79005 Benzene 71432 cis13Dichloropropene 10061015 2-Chloroethylvinylether 11075-8 10 10 Bromoform 75252 4Methyl2Pentanone 108101 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 1122Tetrachioroethane 79345 Toluene 108883 Chlorobenzene 108-907 Ethylbenzene 100414 Styrene 100425 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method U.S EPA Method 624 Analyst McGill Verified Reller Date Verified March 1991 Respectfully submitted Kr- Environmental/Analytical Testing Division Client City of South Bend Client Address City County Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Ntmber 2117060 Client Sample Identification NW2 Sample Matrix Water Date Sample Collected February 21 1991 Date Sample Received February 22 1991 Date Sample Analyzed February 28 1991 Analytical Equipment lO2OB VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 91022542 of Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/L Limit ug/L Cbloromethane 74-87-3 10 10 Bromomethane 74-83-9 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 33 10 Chloroethane 75-003 10 10 Nethylene Chloride 75092 Acetone 67641 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 ll-Dichloroethene 7535-4 11Dichioroethane 75353 Trans12Dichloroethene 156605 18 Chloroform 67663 l2Dichloroethane 107062 2Butanone 78933 10 10 1l1Trichloroethane 71556 Carbon Tetrachloride 56235 Vinyl Acetate 108OS-4 10 10 Bromodichioromethane 75-274 12-Dichioropropane 78875 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Lisit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 9102254-2 Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/L Limit ug/L Trans-i 3Dichioropropene 10061026 Trichioroethene 79016 Dibromochioromethane 12448-1 112Trichioroethane 79005 Benzane 71432 cis1.3Dichloropropene 10061-01-5 2Chloroethylvinylether 110758 10 10 Bromoform 7525-2 4Methyl2Pentanone 108101 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 11.22Tetrachioroethane 7934-5 Toluene 108883 Chlorobenzene 108-907 Ethylbenzene 100414 Styrene 100425 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method U.S EPA Method 624 Analyst McGill Verified Keller Date Verified March 1991 Respectfully submitted -i3- Environmental/Analytical Testing Division Client City of South Bend Client Address City County Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Nuber 2117060 Client Sample Identification MW-3 Sample Matrix Water Date Sample Collected February 21 1991 Date Sample Received February 22 1991 Date Sample Analyzed February 28 1991 Analytical Equipment 10203 VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 91022543 of Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS NuMber uc/L Limit ug/L Chloromethane 74873 10 10 Brornomethane 74839 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 10 10 Chloroethane 75003 10 10 Methylene Chloride 75092 Acetone 67641 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 l1Dichloroethene 75354 1lDichloroethane 75353 Trans12Dichloroethene 156605 Chloroform 67663 l2-Dichloroethane 107062 2Butanone 78933 10 10 lllTrichloroethane 71556 13 Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Bromodichloromethane 75274 12-Dichloropropane 78875 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 9102254-3 Concentration Quantitatjon Analyte CAS Number uc/L Limit ug/L Transi 3Dichioropropene 10061026 Trichioroethene 79-016 Dibromochioromethane 124-48-1 i.12Trichloroethane 79005 Benzene 71432 cis13Dichloropropene 10061015 2-Chioroethylvinylether 110-75-8 10 10 Nromoform 75-252 4Methyl2Pentanone 10810-1 10 10 2Hexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachioroethene 127-18-4 1122-Tetrachioroethane 7934-5 Toluene 108883 Ch1orobenene 108907 Ethylbenzene 100414 Styrene 100425 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method U.S EPA Method 624 Analyst McGill Verified Keller Date Verified March 991 Respectfully submitted Environmental/Analytical Testing Division Client City of South Bend Client Address City County Building South Bend IN 46601 Client Project Number 2117060 Client Sample Identification MW4 Sample Matrix Water Date Sample Collected February 21 1991 Date Sample Received February 22 1991 Date Sample Analyzed February 28 1991 Analytical Equipment lO2OB VOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 91022544 of Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/L Limit ug/L Chioromethane 74873 10 10 Bromomethane 74839 10 10 Vinyl Chloride 75014 10 10 Chloroethane 7500-3 10 10 Methylene Chloride 75092 Acetone 67641 10 10 Carbon Disulfide 75150 llDichloroethene 75354 llDichloroethane 75353 Transl2Dichloroethene 156605 Chloroform 67663 12Dichioroethane 107062 2Butanone 78933 10 10 ll1Trichloroethane 71556 Carbon Tetrachloride 56235 Vinyl Acetate 108054 10 10 Bromodichloromethane 75274 1.2-Dichioropropane 78875 Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit of ANALYTICAL RESULTS ATEC Lab No 9102254-4 Concentration Quantitation Analyte CAS Number ug/L Limit gL Transi 3Dichioropropene 10061026 Trichioroethene 7901-6 Dibromochioromethane 124-48-1 112Trichioroethane 79005 Bensene 71432 cisi3Dichloropropene 10061015 2-Chioroethylvinylether 110-75-8 10 10 Bromoform 75-25-2 4Methyl2Pentanone 108101 10 10 2Fexanone 591786 10 10 Tetrachioroethene 12718-4 1122Tetrachioroethane 79345 Toluene 108883 Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 Ethylbenzene 100-414 Styrene 100425 Total Xylenes Analyte detected but amount present is less than the Quantitation Limit Analytical Method U.S EPA Method 624 Analyst McGill Verified Keller Date Verified March 1991 Respectfully submitted Environmental/Analytical Testing Division ATEC Environmental Consultants Division of ATEC Associates Inc 5150 East 65th Street Indianapolis Indiana 46220-4871 ....Aj 317 849-4990 FAX 11317 849-4278 Iii iIIIIIIIIIIIII ____iiiiiiiiiiiiJ 02141a10V_____05 033flId .2 .2________aa0O__ 1106 _____ -.----_rcd__________