U.S. Army Corps of EngineersAlaska DistrictGAMBELL FUDS REMEDIALINVESTIGATIONGAMBELL, ALASKAContract No. W911KB‐05‐P‐0103FUDS No. F10AK069603AUGUST 2006 GROUNDWATERSAMPLING REPORTREVISED FINALJULY 2007111 W. 16th Avenue, Third FloorAnchorage, Alaska 99501-5109Phone (907) 743-9399Fax (907) 743-9398F10AK069603_03.10_0004_a200-1eAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016TABLE OF CONTENTSSECTIONPAGEACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................. iii1.0INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................11.1Objectives....................................................................................................................11.2Report Organization ....................................................................................................11.3Site Setting ..................................................................................................................21.3.1Site History .............................................................................................................21.3.2Chemicals of Concern .............................................................................................22.0GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING.................................................................32.1Physical Setting...........................................................................................................32.2Geology .......................................................................................................................33.0GROUNDWATER MONITORING ACTIVITIES........................................................53.1Groundwater Sampling ...............................................................................................53.2Quality Assurance/Quality Control Samples ..............................................................63.3Decontamination Methods ..........................................................................................63.4Investigation-Derived Waste Disposal........................................................................63.5Deviations From the Work Plan..................................................................................64.0FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................74.1Hydrogeology..............................................................................................................74.2Field Parameter Data.................................................................................................104.3Analytical Data .........................................................................................................124.3.1Groundwater..........................................................................................................124.3.2Quality Assurance/Quality Control Samples ........................................................184.3.3Data Verification Report .......................................................................................194.45.0USACE and Stakeholder Review..............................................................................19REFERENCES..............................................................................................................21July 2007iREVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016TABLESTable 1Water Level Measurements ....................................................................................8Table 2Well Depth Measurements......................................................................................9Table 3Groundwater Field Parameters .............................................................................11Table 4Groundwater Analytical Results ...........................................................................15Table 5Trip Blank Results ................................................................................................17FIGURESFigure 1Location MapFigure 2Vicinity MapFigure 3Remedial Action Sites LocationsFigure 4Groundwater Surface Contours – September 2005Figure 5Groundwater Surface Contours – July 2006Figure 6Groundwater Surface Contours – August 2006APPENDICESAppendix AGroundwater Sample Data SheetsAppendix BLaboratory Data Package (CD)Appendix CChemical Data Quality Review ReportAppendix DChemical Data Quality Assurance ReportAppendix EADEC Data Review ChecklistAppendix FUSACE and Stakeholder Comments and Contractor’s Responses to CommentsJuly 2007iiREVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS°CAKADECBristolBTEXCOCDODROEPAGROIDWMDLmg/LmVNTUORPPAHpptPQLPWSQAQCRROSGSdegrees centigradeState of Alaska MethodAlaska Department of Environmental ConservationBristol Construction Services, LLCbenzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenescontaminant of concerndissolved oxygendiesel-range organicsU.S. Environmental Protection Agencygasoline-range organicsinvestigation-derived wastemethod detection limitmilligrams per litermillivoltsnephelometric turbidity unitoxygen reduction potentialpolynuclear aromatic hydrocarbonsparts per thousandpractical quantitation limitGambell public water system wellquality assurancequality controlresidual-range organicsSGS Environmental Services, Inc.STLSWUSACESevern Trent LaboratoriesEPA Solid Waste MethodU.S. Army Corps of EngineersJuly 2007iiiREVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016(Intentionally blank)July 2007ivREVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 5601611.0INTRODUCTION2This Groundwater Monitoring Report has been developed for the U.S. Army Corps of3Engineers (USACE), Alaska District, under Contract No. W911KB-05-P-103, for the4Gambell Formerly Used Defense Site Remedial Investigation. Groundwater sampling was5scheduled to be performed three times during 2005-2006. By sampling in different months,6groundwater monitoring was planned to coincide with both high and low water events. This7report discusses the third of three groundwater sampling events. Groundwater sampling was8performed by Bristol Construction Services, LLC (Bristol), in Gambell, Alaska, during9August 2006. Field activities were conducted on August 16 and 17, 2006, in accordance with10the requirements in a work plan prepared by Bristol (Bristol, 2005a).111.112The primary objective of the groundwater sampling was to monitor the concentrations of13target analytes in the area adjacent the City of Gambell’s water supply (Site 5), groundwater14depths, and flow direction. Gambell’s water is supplied by a single infiltration gallery,15located approximately 2,000 feet east of the townsite, at the base of Sevuokuk Mountain.16Water derived from the gallery is considered to be surface-influenced and potentially17susceptible to contamination.181.219This report is organized into five sections, as described below:OBJECTIVESREPORT ORGANIZATION202122•Section 1.0 contains introductory information, and describes the objectives and theorganization of the report. The report also contains a discussion of the site setting,including the site history and potential contaminants of concern (COCs).2324•Section 2.0 contains information on the general physical setting, geology, andgroundwater hydrology.25262728•Section 3.0 contains information on the field procedures, including those forgroundwater sampling. Deviations from the work plan, quality assurance/qualitycontrol (QA/QC) samples, decontamination methods, and investigation-derived waste(IDW) disposal, are also discussed.29•Section 4.0 presents the analytical results.30•Section 5.0 contains the references used in this report.July 20071REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 5601611.3SITE SETTING2Gambell is located on the northwest tip of St. Lawrence Island, in the western portion of the3Bering Sea, approximately 195 miles southwest of Nome, Alaska. Gambell is approximately450 miles from the Siberian Chukotsk Peninsula (Figure 1). The village of Gambell is built on5a gravel spit, projecting north and west from the island (Figure 2). Gambell is located at an6elevation of approximately 30 feet above mean sea level. Native Yup’ik people, who lead a7subsistence-based lifestyle, inhabit the village.81.3.19The Gambell area was used by the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Air Force from10approximately 1948 until the late 1950s. Various facilities around the village of Gambell11were constructed to provide housing, communication, and other functions.121.3.213The potential COCs at Site 5 are dissolved petroleum hydrocarbons and metals. The main14COCs for groundwater are: gasoline-range organics (GRO); diesel-range organics (DRO);15residual-range organics (RRO); benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes (BTEX);16polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), and the metals arsenic, barium, cadmium,17chromium, lead, nickel, and vanadium.Site HistoryChemicals of ConcernJuly 20072REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 5601612.0GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING22.1PHYSICAL SETTING3The locations of the seven groundwater monitoring wells, and the public water system well4house at Site 5, are shown on Figure 3. Site 5 is the location of the village’s water supply.5Gambell’s water is supplied by a single infiltration gallery, located approximately 2,000 feet6east of the townsite, at the base of the Sevuokuk Mountain. The infiltration gallery was7constructed in 1996. Water derived from the gallery is considered to be surface-influenced,8and potentially susceptible to contamination.92.210St. Lawrence Island consists of isolated bedrock highlands of igneous, metamorphic, and11older sedimentary rocks, surrounded by unconsolidated surficial deposits, overlying a12relatively shallow erosional bedrock surface. The Gambell village area is underlain by highly13permeable unconsolidated gravels and coarse sands. The gravels have strong linear14topographic expressions, and were likely deposited as successive beach ridges. The gravels15may be deposited on an underlying wave-cut terrace of the same bedrock that comprises16Sevuokuk Mountain (Patton and Cjeltsey, 1980).17Sevuokuk Mountain is composed of quartz monzonite, a gray, coarsely crystalline rock, rich18in quartz and feldspars. The mountain is topped by a flat, wave-cut plateau. Beach material19is primarily cobble (one-inch stones) with some coarse sand.GEOLOGYJuly 20073REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-01031Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016(Intentionally blank)July 20074REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 5601613.0GROUNDWATER MONITORING ACTIVITIES2Fieldwork was performed on August 16 and 17, 2006. Fieldwork performed included the3following:4•Collecting groundwater samples from six monitoring wells for analysis,5•Collecting a sample from the Public Water System (PWS) well, and6•Measuring and recording the depth to groundwater and field parameters.7Water from the PWS well was collected from a tap prior to the village’s holding tank and8chlorination system. Water was collected downstream of the system’s “roughing filter” which9removes large particles.10Field activities are documented in the groundwater sampling forms (Appendix A).113.112Field parameters were measured from each well after purging a minimum of three well13volumes. Purging was continued until field measurements stabilized. Field measurements14were taken for temperature, specific conductance, conductivity, salinity, dissolved oxygen15(DO), pH, and oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), using a YSI 556 water quality meter.16Turbidity was measured using a Hach 2100P turbidimeter.17Samples were collected in accordance with the sampling procedures outlined in the sampling18and analysis plan prepared by Bristol (Bristol, 2005b), with the following exception: water19was purged and samples were collected via a peristaltic pump, not by bailers. This was done20because DO and ORP results were inconsistent during the September 2005 sampling event,21possibly due to aeration during bailing. Field personnel followed laboratory instructions for22field sample preservation. Analytical laboratory services were provided by SGS23Environmental Services, Inc. (SGS), in Anchorage, Alaska. QA samples were sent to Severn24Trent Laboratories, (STL) in Seattle, Washington.25During the August 2006 sampling event, six monitoring wells (MW-14, MW-15, MW-29,26MW-30, MW-31, and MW-32) and the PWS were sampled. Groundwater samples were27analyzed for GRO, using State of Alaska Method (AK)101; BTEX by U.S. EnvironmentalGROUNDWATER SAMPLINGJuly 20075REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 560161Protection Agency (EPA) Solid Waste Method (SW) 8260B; DRO by AK102; RRO by2AK103; PAH by EPA Method SW8270C selective ion monitoring; and arsenic, barium,3cadmium, chromium, lead, nickel, and vanadium, by EPA Method SW6020. MW-31 was4sampled only for GRO/BTEX and metals because of low sample volume. Groundwater5sample data sheets are presented in Appendix A.63.27QA/QC samples and trip blanks were collected as part of the groundwater sampling event.8Matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples were collected during the second round of9sampling. QA/QC samples were collected, using the same sampling techniques and flow10rates as primary samples. The QA/QC analytical results are discussed in Section 4.3.2.113.312The water level meter and YSI 556 meter were decontaminated between samples using an13Alconox® and distilled water solution, followed by a distilled water rinse. Each well was14purged using a new length of Teflon®/silicon tubing.153.416Investigation-derived waste (IDW) consisted of purge water, decontamination water, used17tubing, and personal protective equipment. As per direction from the USACE project18manager and Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) representative19during the first sampling event, and based upon the historically clean status of the wells, IDW20water was discharged to the ground. Used tubing, gloves, and miscellaneous sampling and21decontamination items, were disposed of as municipal waste.223.523There were no deviations from the work plan, with the exception of disposal of IDW and use24of a peristaltic pump for purging wells.QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL SAMPLESDECONTAMINATION METHODSINVESTIGATION-DERIVED WASTE DISPOSALDEVIATIONS FROM THE WORK PLANJuly 20076REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 5601614.0FINDINGS2Conditions observed at the site, measurements taken, and analytical results, are presented in3this section.44.15Groundwater levels in all monitoring wells at the site were measured by Bristol on August 16,62006. All water level measurements were performed within an 8-hour period. MW-28 was7dry and appeared to be filled with gravel to 3.75 feet below ground surface. Survey8information, water depth for the August 2006 sampling event, and water elevation data for the9September 2005, July 2006, and August 2006 sampling events are presented in Table 1.10For the September 2005 Groundwater Sampling Report, groundwater elevations were based11upon well casing elevations as presented in well boring logs. Because of the possibility that12seasonal frost action may have moved the well casings, introducing error into the elevation13data, the wells were surveyed by Mr. Scott McClintock, the registered surveyor, as part of14Bristol’s July 2006 scope of work. The data from these surveys was used to redraw the15groundwater elevation contours for September 2005. The corrected September 200516Groundwater Surface Elevation Contour is presented as Figure 4, the July 2006 Groundwater17Surface Elevation Contour is presented as Figure 5, and the August 2006 Groundwater18Surface Elevation Contour is presented as Figure 6.19The groundwater surface elevation data presented on Figures 4 through 6 indicate that:HYDROGEOLOGY202122•The predominant groundwater flow direction during the summer months in thevicinity of the village well is to the northeast, parallel to the toe of the SevuokukMountain;232425•The effects of pumping the village well can be seen on the groundwater surfaceelevation data. Pumping the village well results in the groundwater surface gradientbecoming steeper upgradient (southwest) of the village well; and262728•The groundwater table dropped approximately one foot between the July 2006 andAugust 2006 sampling events. This is probably a seasonal event caused by lowergroundwater recharge rates in late summer.July 20077REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-01031Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016Table 1Water Level MeasurementsLocation Coordinates234567Monitoring WellNorthing(feet)aEasting(feet)aSurveyedElevation(feetMSL)bDepth toWater(feet)TotalDepth(feet)WaterColumnDepth(feet)WaterElevationSept 2005(feet)WaterElevationJuly 2006(feet)WaterElevationAug 2006(feet)PWSc3575838.821364299.53--9.35d----------MW-143576453.511365197.1010.3110.3410.860.511.461.17-0.03MW-153576159.641364950.3510.119.8012.482.681.901.650.31MW-28e3576075.321364551.0013.03drydrydrydrydrydryMW-293575964.511364744.7812.3911.4615.003.542.572.350.93MW-303576382.911364939.0710.089.8411.301.461.781.520.24MW-313576201.861364658.0513.6012.3412.760.422.402.161.26MW-323576026.551364844.0913.2812.9015.022.121.961.780.38Notes:aLocation coordinates for all monitoring wells are in NAD 83 Zone SPC AK 9.bSurveyed elevations for monitoring wells are from top of casing.cLocation coordinates for PWS were collected from outside the fence on the north side of the well house by GPS and were converted to NAD 83 Zone SPC AK 9.dDepth to water information recorded by the City of Gambell.eMW-28 appeared to be filled with gravel.-=not availableNAD=North American Datum of 1983GPS=Global Positioning System PWS=Gambell Public Water System WellMSL=mean sea levelSPC=Alaska State Plane Coordinate SystemMW=Monitoring Well8July 20078REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 560161Well depth measurements from the original boring logs, as well as all three sampling events,2are presented in Table 2.3Table 2Well Depth MeasurementsWell Depth from Top of CasingMonitoring WellInitial Well DepthaSeptember 2005July 2006August 2006MW-1411.7510.7510.8610.86MW-1512.7512.2812.4012.48b16.023.37not measurednot measuredMW-2915.4114.9015.0415.00MW-3012.4810.9111.3611.30MW-3115.8012.3612.7812.76MW-3215.8914.4114.8215.02MW-284567Notes:aWell depth was obtained from boring logs. The length used was from the total depth of casing to top of casing.bMW-28 appeared to be filled with gravel during the September 2005 sampling event.MW = monitoring well8Well depth measurements appeared to change between the September 2005 and the July 20069sampling events. The total well depth, as measured during each of these events, was10compared to the original boring logs. With the exception of MW-28, which had been filled11with gravel sometime between development and the September 2005 sampling event, MWs12ranged from 0.47 feet to 3.44 feet shallower during the September 2005 sampling event than13is stated on the boring logs.14It is possible that sediment and small particles gathered in the bottom of the well between15their original development and the September 2005 sampling event. Some of this sediment16could easily have been displaced during sampling in September 2005 because of the use of17bailers for sampling. Because well depth was measured in all cases before field screening and18sampling, the change in well depth would not have been noticed until the next sampling event.19The lack of significant change in well depth between the July 2006 and August 2006 sampling20events supports this conclusion since a peristaltic pump, which causes less disturbance to21sediment at the bottom of the well, was used during the July 2006 and August 2006 sampling22events. Given this explanation, well depth measurements taken in August 2006 would not be23expected to be significantly different from those taken in July 2006: use of a peristaltic pump24for sampling in July 2006 would limit the amount of sediment and small particles disturbedJuly 20079REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 560161from the bottom of the well and removed during sampling. The short time between sampling2events would provide little opportunity for additional sediment to be laid down before the3August 2006 sampling event.44.25Groundwater samples were measured for the following field parameters: temperature,6specific conductance, conductivity, salinity, DO, pH, ORP, and turbidity. Field parameter7measurements are presented in Table 3. Because of the potential for bailing to allow the8sample to oxygenate, wells were purged using a peristaltic pump. The water was put through9a flow-through cell where field parameters were taken. Field parameters and samples for10PWS were collected from a tap in the well house because collection directly from the well11was not possible with the existing plumbing. PWS samples were collected from the same tap12during all sampling events. The samples were collected after the roughing filter, which may13decrease turbidity measurements.14Temperature results ranged between 0.82 degrees centigrade (°C) and 4.02°C. For all15sampling locations DO ranged from 7.87 milligrams per liter (mg/L) to 13.12 mg/L. One16hundred percent saturation at 1.0°C occurs at 14 mg/L. MW-31 DO is very close to complete17saturation. Normally, a well is purged until at least three well volumes is removed (and field18measurements equalize) before a sample is collected to make sure that the water being tested19is representative of the water in the aquifer surrounding the well, and not the water that had20been sitting in the well. The water sitting in the well has been exposed to different conditions,21for example, it is exposed directly to the atmosphere (via the open well casing). This can22affect field measurements (such as DO and redox), as well as analytical measurements. For23example, water that may have DRO and be exposed to air (thus a higher DO than otherwise24found in water in the aquifer) may be biodegraded and, therefore, have lower levels of DRO25than is found in the surrounding aquifer.26Because MW-31 could not be purged adequately, the oxygen measurements from the well did27not reflect the water in the aquifer as much as it reflected water sitting in the well (which had28been exposed to air and was probably fully oxygenated because of that). Because MW-31 did29not recharge quickly enough to allow three well volumes to be purged (or to allow the fieldFIELD PARAMETER DATAJuly 200710REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 560161parameters to equalize) before water samples were collected, the DO levels measured in MW-231 must be considered questionable.3The field parameter data for most sampling locations are consistent with some variations; the4specific conductance, conductivity, salinity, and turbidity for MW-31 are much higher than5for other locations. Specific conductance, conductivity, and salinity measurements are6related. The relatively high levels of salinity in MW-31 may cause the high specific7conductance and conductivity results. Groundwater was field-screened for salinity to8determine if saltwater intrusion was an issue. Salinity results for all monitoring wells, with9the exception of MW-31, were between 0.08 parts per thousand (ppt) (80 mg/L) and 0.15 ppt10(150 mg/L). This is below the ADEC drinking water criteria of 250 mg/L for sodium and11chloride. Salinity results for MW-31 were 0.30 ppt (300 mg/L), which is higher than the12ADEC drinking water criteria of 250 mg/L for sodium and chloride.13Table 3UnitsPWSaMW-14MW-15MW-29MW-30MW-31bMW-32°C1.742.674.025.330.823.072.46Specific ConductanceµS/cm10510399166176367140ConductivitymS/cm0.1880.11800.1650.2670.3260.6300.245Salinityppt0.090.080.080.130.150.300.12Dissolved Oxygenmg/L10.5610.838.467.8712.6413.129.30pHpH units5.815.674.985.007.056.384.82ORPmV142.4253.8298.2294.6183.5225.2283.7TurbidityNTU0.340.360.950.130.721760.33ParameterTemperature1415161718192021Groundwater Field ParametersNotes:Wells were purged until field parameters stabilized, with a minimum of three well volumes purged from each well. Finalfield parameter results are presented.a = PWS samples were collected from within the well house and after a roughing filter; turbidity results may be biasedlow.b = MW-31 contained approximately 0.5 liter of water. The lowest pump setting was used, and the well was allowed torecover. Water level recovered 1.5 inches within eight hours. Groundwater field parameters were taken from initialpumping before well stabilization.°C=degrees centigradeNTU=nephelometric turbidity unit(s)µS/cm=microsiemens per centimeter, adjusted for temperatureORP=oxygen reduction potentialmilligrams per literpH=potential hydrogen=millisiemens per centimeterppt=parts per thousandmV=millivoltsPWS=Gambell public water system wellMW=monitoring wellmg/LmS/cmJuly 200711REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 560161Turbidity results for all samples, with the exception of MW-31, were below 1.0 nephelometric2turbidity unit (NTU). The turbidity result for MW-31 was 176 NTUs. This is very likely due3to the low water level in MW-31 and the fact that it did not recharge in a reasonable time.4Therefore, any water pulled from this well was not reflective of the water surrounding the5well, but contained particles.6The pH results average for MW-30 and MW-31 are also higher with pH measured at 7.05 and76.38, respectively, compared to an average of 5.26. ORP levels for all sampling locations8ranged between 142.4 millivolts (mV) at PWS to 298.2 mV at MW-15.94.310A summary of groundwater analytical results from the August 2006 groundwater sampling11event is presented below. The complete laboratory data package is provided in Appendix B.124.3.113Analytical results for groundwater samples collected during the August 2006 groundwater14sampling are presented in Table 4. Analytical results for trip blanks are presented in Table 5.15No analytes were detected in the groundwater samples at, or above, their respective cleanup16levels. Monitoring well MW-30, MW-30 QC duplicate, MW-30 QA duplicate, and PWS17contained DRO at 0.495 mg/L, 0.71 mg/L, 0.736 mg/L, and 0.0699 mg/L, respectively. The18cleanup level for DRO is 1.5 mg/L. DRO chromatograms for MW-30, MW-30 QC duplicate,19and MW-30 QA duplicate, showed patterns that may be consistent with a highly weathered20middle distillate fuel. The DRO result from PWS was between the practical quantitation limit21(PQL) and the method detection limit (MDL); therefore, amounts of DRO cannot be22accurately quantified. The DRO chromatogram for PWS was not consistent with a middle23distillate fuel. In the opinion of the Project Chemist, the PWS chromatographic pattern24cannot be definitively identified. It is not consistent with the pattern of a middle distillate (for25example, it does not have a single large peak of a gausian-type curve that is commonly seen in26chromatograms of middle distillate fuels such as Diesel Fuel #2).ANALYTICAL DATAGroundwaterJuly 200712REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 560161Monitoring well MW-30, MW-30 QC duplicate, MW-30 QA duplicate, and PWS contained2RRO at 0.113 mg/L, 0.073 mg/L, 0.110 mg/L, and 0.170 mg/L, respectively. All RRO results3were between the PQL and MDL; therefore, amounts of RRO cannot be accurately quantified.4The RRO chromatogram for PWS was not consistent with a middle distillate fuel. In the5opinion of the Project Chemist, the PWS chromatographic pattern cannot be definitively6identified. It is not consistent with the pattern of a middle distillate (for example, it does not7have a single large peak of a gausian-type curve that is commonly seen in chromatograms of8middle distillate fuels such as Diesel Fuel #2).July 200713REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-01031Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016(Intentionally blank)July 200714REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016Table 4Sample NumberLocationGroundwater Analytical Results06GAM05GS1706GAM05GS2206GAM05GS2306GAM05GS2506GAM05GS1906GAM05GS2106GAM05GS2006GAM05GS1806GAM05GS24PWSMW-14MW-15MW-29MW-30MW-30MW-30MW-31MW-3206GAM05GS1906GAM05GS19Duplicate ofTest MethodUnitsCleanupLevelsaAK101mg/L1.3ND (0.100)0.0114 NJ, TB, BND (0.100)ND (0.100)0.0171 NJ, TB, B0.0144 NJ, TB, BND (0.050)ND (0.100)ND (0.100)BenzeneSW8260Bµg/L5ND (0.400)ND (0.400)ND (0.400)ND (0.400)ND (0.400)ND (0.400)ND (0.10)ND (0.400) JLND (0.400)TolueneSW8260Bµg/L1,000ND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)0.010 NJ, TB, BND (1.00) JLND (1.00)EthylbenzeneSW8260Bµg/L700ND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (0.10)ND (1.00) JLND (1.00)Total XylenesSW8260Bµg/L10,000ND (3.00)ND (3.00)ND (3.00)ND (3.00)ND (3.00)ND (3.00)ND (0.10)ND (3.00) JLND (3.00)DROAK102mg/L1.50.0699 NJND (0.300)ND (0.300)ND (0.300)0.4950.7360.71--ND (0.300)RROAK103mg/L1.10.170 NJ, BND (0.500)ND (0.500)ND (0.500)0.113 NJ0.110 NJ0.073 NJ--ND (0.500)SW8270C SIMµg/L2,200ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)AcenaphthyleneSW8270C SIMµg/Lb2,200ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)AnthraceneSW8270C SIMµg/L11,000ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)Benzo(a)anthraceneSW8270C SIMµg/L1ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)Benzo(a)pyreneSW8270C SIMµg/L0.2ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)Benzo(b)fluorantheneSW8270C SIMµg/L1ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)Benzo(g,h,i)peryleneSW8270C SIMµg/L1,100ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)Benzo(k)fluorantheneSW8270C SIMµg/L10ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)----ND (0.0500)ChryseneSW8270C SIMµg/L100ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)Dibenzo(a,h)anthraceneSW8270C SIMµg/L0.1ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)FluorantheneSW8270C SIMµg/L1,460ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)FluoreneSW8270C SIMµg/L1,460ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyreneSW8270C SIMµg/L1ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)NaphthaleneSW8270C SIMµg/L700ND (0.100)ND (0.100)ND (0.100)ND (0.100)ND (0.100)ND (0.100)0.0070 NJ, JH--ND (0.100)PhenanthreneSW8270C SIMµg/L11,000ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)PyreneSW8270C SIMµg/L1,100ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.0500)ND (0.10)--ND (0.0500)ParameterGRO/BTEXGRODRO/RROPolynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsAcenaphtheneJuly 2007bb15REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016Table 4Sample NumberGroundwater Analytical Results (continued)06GAM05GS1706GAM05GS2206GAM05GS2306GAM05GS2506GAM05GS1906GAM05GS2106GAM05GS2006GAM05GS1806GAM05GS24PWSMW-14MW-15MW-29MW-30MW-30MW-30MW-31MW-3206GAM05GS1906GAM05GS19LocationDuplicate ofTest MethodUnitsCleanupLevelsaArsenicSW6020µg/L50ND (10.0)ND (10.0)ND (10.0)ND (10.0)ND (10.0)ND (10.0)0.93 NJ, JND (10.0)ND (10.0)BariumSW6020µg/L2,0003.56 B6.61 B7.55 B19.5ND (3.00)ND (3.00)0.54 NJ, J12.313.7CadmiumSW6020µg/L5ND (2.00)ND (2.00)ND (2.00)ND (2.00)ND (2.00)ND (2.00)ND (2.0) JND (2.00)ND (2.00)ChromiumSW\6020µg/L1005.834.979.097.69ND (4.00)ND (4.00)3.5 JND (4.00)6.62LeadSW6020µg/L152.830.520 NJ, BND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)0.391 NJ, B0.12 NJ, J10.30.421 NJ, BNickelSW6020µg/L1001.49 NJ1.66 NJ1.19 NJ1.82 NJ1.31 NJ1.16 NJ1.5 NJ, J7.362.11VanadiumSW6020µg/L260ND (20.0)ND (20.0)ND (20.0)28.1ND (20.0)ND (20.0)ND (2.0) JND (20.0)ND (20.0)ParameterTotal MetalsNotes:a18AAC75, Table C, Groundwater Cleanup Levels (updated October 16, 2005) unless note b.bAlaska Department of Environmental Conservation Technical Memorandum 01-007 dated November 24, 2003, calculated Table C Groundwater Cleanup LevelsJuly 2007µg/L=micrograms per literGRO=gasoline-range organicsNJ=results between PQL and MDL, value estimated--=not availableJ=value estimatedPQL=practical quantitation limitAK=State of Alaska MethodJL=value estimated with a potential low biasPWS=Gambell public water system wellB=Analyte found in sample less than 5 times the concentration in the method blank; results may be biased high or false positive.MDL=method detection limitRRO=residual-range organicsBTEX=benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenesmg/L=milligrams per literSIM=selective ion monitoringDRO=diesel-range organicsMW=monitoring wellSW=EPA Solid Waste MethodEPA=U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyND=nondetectTB=Analyte found in sample 5 times the concentration in the trip blank; results may be biased high or false positive.16REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-01031Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016Table 5Sample TypeTrip Blank ResultsTrip BlankTrip BlankTrip BlankCollection DateTrip Blank8/16/06Sample Number05GAM05GSTB4-105GAM05GSTB4-205GAM05GSTB4-305GAM05GSTB5Laboratory NumberSGS1064875-10SGS1064875-11SGS1064875-12STL 580-3377-2Units2GROµg/LND (100)111ND (100)ND (0.050)Benzeneµg/LND (0.400)ND (0.400)ND (0.400)ND (1.0)Tolueneµg/LND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)0.089 NJ, BEthylbenzeneµg/LND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.00)ND (1.0)Total Xylenesµg/LND (3.00)ND (3.00)ND (3.00)ND (1.0)Notes:µg/L=micrograms per literB=GROMDL==Analyte found in sample less than 5 times the concentration in the method blank. Results maybe high or false positive.gasoline-range organicsmethod detection limitJuly 200717NDNJPQLSGSSTL=====nondetectresults between PQL and MDL, value estimatedpractical quantitation limitSGS Environmental Services, Inc.Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc.REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 560161Because of low well recovery volumes, only GRO and BTEX samples were collected from2MW-31. Neither GRO or BTEX was present at a concentration above the MDL.3Chromatograms from previous sampling events showed a pattern consistent with a middle4distillate fuel from MW-31.5GRO was detected in MW-14, MW-30 and MW-30 duplicate at 0.0114 mg/L, 0.0171 mg/L,6and 0.0144 mg/L. The results were between the PQL and MDL; therefore, amounts of GRO7cannot be accurately quantified. Also, amounts of GRO were found in the sample at less than8five times the concentration in the method blank and amounts of GRO for the samples from9MW-30 were found in the sample at less than five times the concentration in the trip blank.10Results may be biased high or false positive and have been flagged appropriately.11Metals were variously detected in each of the monitoring wells and PWS. The metals barium,12chromium, lead, nickel, and vanadium were detected at very low levels from these wells.134.3.214QA/QC samples were collected during the August 2006 groundwater sampling event.15Laboratory-prepared method blanks, laboratory control samples, laboratory sample duplicates,16and trip blanks, were also part of the QA/QC program. Analytical results for the trip blanks17are provided in Table 5.18QA/QC (duplicate/triplicate) samples were collected at a rate of one per 10 samples, or 1019percent. QC samples were analyzed by SGS for the same parameters, and in the same20extraction batches as the primary samples. QA samples were sent to STL and were analyzed21for the same parameters as primary samples. QA/QC samples can be used to evaluate the22precision and reproducibility of primary sample results.23Trip blanks were submitted with each sample delivery, and were analyzed for GRO/BTEX.24No equipment rinsate samples or field blanks were collected. Three trip blanks for four25coolers were submitted to SGS. All of the submitted trip blanks were below PQL levels for26all analytes, with the exception of GRO in trip blank 05GAM05GSTB-4 which was detected27at 111 micrograms per liter. The results for samples associated with trip blankQuality Assurance/Quality Control SamplesJuly 200718REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016105GAM05GSTB-4 and those shipped without an accompanying trip blank have been2qualified.3The trip blank submitted to STL contained toluene below the PQL. This compound was also4found in the associated method blank.54.3.36All laboratory results generated as part of the August 2006 groundwater sampling event have7undergone data verification and review. The Chemical Data Quality Review Report and the8Chemical Data Quality Assurance Report are presented in Appendices C and D, respectively.9The ADEC Data Review Checklists are presented in Appendix E. In summary, the data10verification found most data usable as delivered by the analytical laboratories. Some data11required qualification due to results of field QA/QC, laboratory QA/QC, or failure to adhere12to method criteria, and have been flagged appropriately. No data was rejected. Data is13presented with appropriate qualifiers in both tables and figures (where applicable) in this14Groundwater Sampling Report.15No analytes were detected in the groundwater samples at, or above, their respective cleanup16levels. GRO was detected in MW-14, MW-30, and MW-30 duplicate; DRO was detected in17PWS, MW-30, and MW-30 duplicate; and RRO was detected in PWS, MW-30, and MW-3018duplicate. Some metals were detected in all monitoring wells.194.420This is the revised final report submitted for this project. The final report was submitted on21May 25, 2007. This revised final report addresses USACE comments that were not22adequately addressed in the final report. USACE and stakeholder comments were addressed23and incorporated into this document. Comments made by the USACE and stakeholders on24earlier versions of this document are presented in Appendix F.Data Verification ReportUSACE AND STAKEHOLDER REVIEWMay 200719FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-01031Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016(Intentionally blank)July 200720REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-0103Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 5601615.0REFERENCES23Alaska Administrative Code, Title 18, Section 75.345, Table C, Groundwater Cleanup Levels,2005 (October 16).456Bristol Construction Services, LLC (Bristol), 2005a (July). Sampling and Analysis Plan(Revision 0). Prepared for USACE to Support the Gambell FUDS Remedial Action,Gambell, Alaska.78Bristol. 2005b. Work Plan (Revision 0). Prepared for USACE to Support the Gambell FUDSRemedial Action, Gambell, Alaska.910Patton, W.W.&B. Cjeltsey, 1980. Geologic Map of St. Lawrence Island, Alaska. USGSMiscellaneous Investigation Map No. I-1203.July 200721REVISED FINALAugust 2006 Groundwater Sampling ReportContract No. W911KB-05-P-01031Gambell FUDS Remedial InvestigationBristol Project No. 56016(Intentionally blank)July 200722REVISED FINALL:\Jobs\56016 Gambell FUDS Remedial Action\70 Reports and Document Submittal\Native Files\August 2006 GW\Rev 2\August 2006 GroundwaterMonitoring_REVISED FINAL.docFIGURESAPPENDIX AGroundwater Sample Data SheetsAPPENDIX BLaboratory Data Package(Provided on CD)ANALYTICAL REPORTJob Number: 580-3377-1Job Description: Gambell FUDSFor:Bristol Env & Eng Services Corporation111 W. 16th Ave.Suite 301Anchorage, AK 99501Attention: Ms. Michelle T. TurnerTerri L TorresProject Manager IIttorres@stl-inc.com09/18/2006Project Manager: Terri L TorresSTL Seattle is a part of Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc.This report is issued solely for the use of the person or company to whom it is addressed. Any use, copying or disclosure other thanby the intended recipient is unauthorized. If you have received this report in error, please notify the sender immediately at253-922-2310 and destroy this report immediately.Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc.STL Seattle 5755 8th Street East, Tacoma, WA 98424Tel (253) 922-2310 Fax (253) 922-5047 www.stl-inc.comPage 1 of 383Case Narrative for job: 580-3377Client: Bristol Env & Eng Services CorporationDate: 09/15/2006VOLATILE ORGANICSSamples 580-3377-1 and 580-3377-2 were analyzed for BTEX in accordance with EPA SW-846Method 8260B. The samples were analyzed on 08/31/2006, which was one day past therequired method holding time.There were no manual integrations performed on the field or quality control samples in thisproject.The recovery of the surrogate Trifluorotoluene in sample 580-3377-1 exceeded quality controllimits. All other surrogates were within control limits. No further action was taken on this outlier.Toluene was detected in method blank MB 580-10651/1 at a level that was above the methoddetection limit but below the reporting limit. The value should be considered an estimate, and hasbeen flagged “J”. The associated sample results have been flagged “B”.No other difficulties were encountered during the volatile organics analyses.All other quality control parameters were within the acceptance limits.SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICSSample 580-3377-1 was analyzed for semivolatile organics in accordance with EPA SW-846Method 8270C. The sample was prepared and analyzed on 08/25/2006, which was two dayspast the method required holding time for preparation. The sample was analyzed within themethod required holding time.There were no manual integrations performed on the field or quality control samples in thisproject.The recoveries of Acenaphthylene and Benzo[a]pyrene in the LCS and the LCSD associated withanalytical batch 580-10210 exceeded the QC acceptance limits. The recoveries for thesecompounds in both the LCS and LCSD were high, however the recoveries in the LCSD werewithin the DoD marginal exceedance limits. These compounds were not detected in theassociated sample. No further action was taken on these outliers.The recoveries of several analytes in the LCS and the LCSD associated with analytical batch580-10210 exceeded the QC acceptance limits. The recoveries for these compounds in both theLCS and LCSD were high, however the recoveries were within the DoD marginal exceedancelimits. No further action was taken on these outliers.No other difficulties were encountered during the semivolatile organics analysis.All other quality control parameters were within the acceptance limits.Page 2 of 383GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICSSamples 580-3377-1 and 580-3377-2 were analyzed for gasoline range organics in accordancewith State of Alaska Method AK101. The samples were analyzed on 08/31/2006, which was oneday past the required method holding time.There were no manual integrations performed on the field or quality control samples in thisproject.No other difficulties were encountered during the gasoline range organics analyses.All quality control parameters were within the acceptance limits.DIESEL AND RESIDUAL RANGE ORGANICSSample 580-3377-1 was analyzed for diesel and residual range organics in accordance withState of Alaska Method AK102 and AK103. The sample was prepared and analyzed on08/25/2006, which was two days past the method required holding time for preparation. Thesample was analyzed within the method required holding time.Following DoD QSM guidelines, manual integrations were performed only when necessary andare in compliance with the laboratory’s standard operating procedure, Acceptable ManualIntegration Practices, SOP No.: S-Q-004, including Addendum 1. The reason(s) for manualintegration have been documented on the affected chromatogram(s), which is/are provided in theraw data package. The raw data also includes the original chromatogram(s) prior to any manualintegration being performed. Manual integrations were performed on the following samplesanalyzed on May 2, 2006; IC 49920 5000 AK. Manual integrations were performed on thefollowing samples analyzed on August 25, 2006; 580-3377-H-1-A.No other difficulties were encountered during the DRO and RRO analysis.All quality control parameters were within the acceptance limits.TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALSSample 580-3377-1 was analyzed for total recoverable metals in accordance with EPA SW-846Method 6020. The samples were prepared and analyzed on 08/29/2006, which was within themethod required holding times.Sample 580-3377-1 required dilution prior to analysis.Barium, Chromium, Lead, Nickel and Vanadium were detected in method blank MB 580-10401/8A at levels that were above the method detection limit but below the reporting limit. The valuesshould be considered estimates, and have been flagged “J”. The associated sample results havebeen flagged “B”.No other difficulties were encountered during the total recoverable metals analysis.All other quality control parameters were within the acceptance limits.Page 3 of 383METHOD SUMMARYClient: Bristol Env & Eng Services CorporationJob Number: 580-3377-1DescriptionLab LocationMethodVolatile Organic Compounds by GC/MSPurge-and-TrapSTL SEASTL SEASW846 8260BSemivolatile Organic Compounds by GC/MS (Selective IonMonitoring)Separatory Funnel Liquid-Liquid ExtractionSTL SEASW846 8270CGasoline Range OrganicsPurge-and-TrapSTL SEASTL SEAADEC AK101Nonhalogenated Organics by FID (Diesel Range Organics &Residual Range OrganicsSeparatory Funnel Liquid-Liquid ExtractionSTL SEAADEC AK102 & 103Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass SpectrometryAcid Digestion of Waters for Total Recoverable orSTL SEASTL SEAMatrix:Preparation MethodWaterSW846 5030BSTL SEASW846 3510CSW846 5030BSTL SEASW846 3510CSW846 6020SW846 3005ALAB REFERENCES:STL SEA = STL SeattleMETHOD REFERENCES:SW846 - "Test Methods For Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods", Third Edition, November 1986And Its Updates.STL SeattlePage 4 of 383SAMPLE SUMMARYClient: Bristol Env & Eng Services CorporationJob Number: 580-3377-1Lab Sample IDClient Sample IDClient Matrix580-3377-1580-3377-206GAM05GS2006GAM05GSTB5WaterWaterSTL SeattlePage 5 of 383Date/TimeSampledDate/TimeReceived08/16/2006 133008/16/2006 133008/23/2006 090008/23/2006 0900Analytical DataClient: Bristol Env & Eng Services CorporationClient Sample ID:06GAM05GS20Lab Sample ID:Client Matrix:580-3377-1WaterJob Number: 580-3377-1Date Sampled:Date Received:08/16/2006 133008/23/2006 09008260B Volatile Organic Compounds by GC/MSMethod:Preparation:Dilution:Date Analyzed:Date Prepared:8260B5030B1.008/31/2006 225308/31/2006 2253Analysis Batch: 580-10651Instrument ID:SEA003Lab File ID:MS166920.DInitial Weight/Volume:5 mLFinal Weight/Volume:5 mLAnalyteResult (ug/L)QualifierMDLRLBenzeneTolueneEthylbenzenem-Xylene & p-Xyleneo-XyleneND0.10NDNDNDHJHBHHH0.100.0660.0850.170.0681.01.01.02.01.0SurrogateFluorobenzene (Surr)Toluene-d8 (Surr)Ethylbenzene-d104-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)Trifluorotoluene (Surr)%Rec104105105103122STL SeattlePage 6 of 383XAcceptance Limits80 - 12080 - 12080 - 12080 - 12080 - 120Analytical DataClient: Bristol Env & Eng Services CorporationClient Sample ID:06GAM05GSTB5Lab Sample ID:Client Matrix:580-3377-2WaterJob Number: 580-3377-1Date Sampled:Date Received:08/16/2006 133008/23/2006 09008260B Volatile Organic Compounds by GC/MSMethod:Preparation:Dilution:Date Analyzed:Date Prepared:8260B5030B1.008/31/2006 223108/31/2006 2231Analysis Batch: 580-10651Instrument ID:SEA003Lab File ID:MS166919.DInitial Weight/Volume:5 mLFinal Weight/Volume:5 mLAnalyteResult (ug/L)QualifierMDLRLBenzeneTolueneEthylbenzenem-Xylene & p-Xyleneo-XyleneND0.089NDNDNDHJHBHHH0.100.0660.0850.170.0681.01.01.02.01.0SurrogateFluorobenzene (Surr)Toluene-d8 (Surr)Ethylbenzene-d104-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)Trifluorotoluene (Surr)%Rec104104104102117STL SeattlePage 7 of 383Acceptance Limits80 - 12080 - 12080 - 12080 - 12080 - 120Analytical DataClient: Bristol Env & Eng Services CorporationClient Sample ID:06GAM05GS20Lab Sample ID:Client Matrix:580-3377-1WaterJob Number: 580-3377-1Date Sampled:Date Received:08/16/2006 133008/23/2006 09008270C Semivolatile Organic Compounds by GC/MS (Selective Ion Monitoring)Method:Preparation:Dilution:Date Analyzed:Date Prepared:8270C3510C1.008/25/2006 132108/25/2006 0814Analysis Batch: 580-10237Prep Batch: 580-10210Instrument ID:SEA023Lab File ID:HP02201.DInitial Weight/Volume:975 mLFinal Weight/Volume:10 mLInjection Volume:AnalyteResult (ug/L)QualifierMDLRLNaphthalene2-Methylnaphthalene1-MethylnaphthaleneAcenaphthyleneAcenaphtheneFluorenePhenanthreneAnthraceneFluoranthenePyreneBenzo[a]anthraceneChryseneBenzofluorantheneBenzo[a]pyreneIndeno[1,2,3-cd]pyreneDibenz(a,h)anthraceneBenzo[g,h,i]perylene0.0070NDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDJ**0.00620.00920.0330.00410.00310.00820.00310.00820.00920.0130.00920.00920.0320.0620.0150.0120.0180.100.130.100.100.100.100.100.100.100.100.100.100.210.210.100.100.10SurrogateNitrobenzene-d52-FluorobiphenylTerphenyl-d14%Rec1089497STL SeattlePage 8 of 383*******Acceptance Limits34 - 14635 - 14335 - 166Analytical DataClient: Bristol Env & Eng Services CorporationClient Sample ID:06GAM05GS20Lab Sample ID:Client Matrix:580-3377-1WaterJob Number: 580-3377-1Date Sampled:Date Received:08/16/2006 133008/23/2006 0900AK101 Gasoline Range OrganicsMethod:Preparation:Dilution:Date Analyzed:Date Prepared:AK1015030B1.008/31/2006 225308/31/2006 2253Analysis Batch: 580-10655Instrument ID:SEA003Lab File ID:CS166920.DInitial Weight/Volume:5 mLFinal Weight/Volume:5 mLInjection Volume:Column ID:PRIMARYAnalyteResult (mg/L)QualifierMDLRLGasoline Range Organics (GRO)-C6-C10NDH0.0100.050SurrogateTrifluorotoluene (Surr)4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)Ethylbenzene-d10Fluorobenzene (Surr)Toluene-d8 (Surr)%Rec103101109101111STL SeattlePage 9 of 383Acceptance Limits60 - 12060 - 12060 - 12060 - 12060 - 120Analytical DataClient: Bristol Env & Eng Services CorporationClient Sample ID:06GAM05GSTB5Lab Sample ID:Client Matrix:580-3377-2WaterJob Number: 580-3377-1Date Sampled:Date Received:08/16/2006 133008/23/2006 0900AK101 Gasoline Range OrganicsMethod:Preparation:Dilution:Date Analyzed:Date Prepared:AK1015030B1.008/31/2006 223108/31/2006 2231Analysis Batch: 580-10655Instrument ID:SEA003Lab File ID:CS166919.DInitial Weight/Volume:5 mLFinal Weight/Volume:5 mLInjection Volume:Column ID:PRIMARYAnalyteResult (mg/L)QualifierMDLRLGasoline Range Organics (GRO)-C6-C10NDH0.0100.050SurrogateTrifluorotoluene (Surr)4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)Ethylbenzene-d10Fluorobenzene (Surr)Toluene-d8 (Surr)%Rec100101109101111STL SeattlePage 10 of 383Acceptance Limits60 - 12060 - 12060 - 12060 - 12060 - 120Analytical DataClient: Bristol Env & Eng Services CorporationClient Sample ID:06GAM05GS20Lab Sample ID:Client Matrix:580-3377-1WaterJob Number: 580-3377-1Date Sampled:Date Received:08/16/2006 133008/23/2006 0900AK102 & 103 Nonhalogenated Organics by FID (Diesel Range Organics & Residual Range OrganicsMethod:Preparation:Dilution:Date Analyzed:Date Prepared:AK102 & 1033510C1.008/25/2006 125308/25/2006 0807Analysis Batch: 580-10239Prep Batch: 580-10208AnalyteResult (mg/L)DRO (nC10-