1. science
2. ecology
3. pollution

NPL-U34-2-5-R5
HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD--REVIEW COVER SHEET
Name of Site: Chanute Air Force Base (AFB)
U.S. EPA Identification No.: IL1 570 024 157
Contact Persons
Site Investigation:
Gary Schafer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Region 5,
(312) 353-8827
Documentation Record:
Kelly Hirsch, Tetra Tech EM Inc., U.S. EPA Region 5 Contractor,
(312) 856-8700
Pathways, Components, or Threats Not Evaluated
The Hazard Ranking System (HRS) evaluation performed for the Chanute AFB site focused only on the
threats associated with surface water contamination. The soil exposure, ground water migration, and air
migration pathways were not scored because the sample analytical data and target data available when the
HRS evaluation was performed were insufficient to score these pathways.
1
HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD
Name of Site: Chanute AFB
U.S. EPA Identification No.: IL1 570 024 157
Spill Identification No.: Not applicable
U.S. EPA Region: 5
Date Prepared: October 12, 2000
Street Address of Site: Rantoul, Illinois
County and State: Champaign County, Illinois
General Location in the State: East-central Illinois
Topographic Maps: Rantoul, Gifford, and Flatville, Illinois
Latitude: 40E17'19"
Longitude: 88E08'19"
Figure 1 shows the location of the site as well as the location of operable unit (OU-) 2 at the site. Refer
to the Surface Water Migration Pathway to Target Distance Limit figure (Ref. 4) for the reference point
used to identify the latitude and longitude of the site.
Scores
Air
Ground Water
Soil Exposure
Surface Water Pathway
0
0
0
96.597
HRS SITE SCORE
48.30
2
CHANUTE AIR FORCE BASE
Rantoul, Illinois
U.S. EPA Identification No. IL1 570 024 157
Chanute Air Force Base (AFB) is located in the north-central portion of Champaign County in eastcentral Illinois. The main base covered 2,125 acres in the Village of Rantoul. A small stream, Salt Fork
Creek, flows along the southern perimeter and directly through the southeastern corner of the base. The
southeastern corner of the base is known as Operable Unit (OU-) 2, which is the location of past waste
disposal activities. The primary contaminant sources within OU-2 include Landfills 1, 2, 3, and 4; Fire
Training Areas (FTA-) 1 and 2; and Buildings 916, 922, 927, 932, 975, and 995, which contained either
oil-water separators, underground storage tanks (UST), sludge pits, or a combination of those items. The
primary mission of the base was to provide military and technical training for Air Force personnel and
civilian employees and for other Department of Defense personnel. The training activities focused on
operation and maintenance of military aircraft and ground support equipment.
Chanute AFB was constructed in 1917 and initially served as a pilot training facility and a storage depot
for aircraft engines and paint. The base served as a training school for all Air Corps mechanics from 1922
to 1938. During World War II, technical training operations focused on aircraft maintenance and metal
processing. Military flight operations were terminated at Chanute AFB in 1971, and base closure began
in 1990 in response to an order issued by the Secretary of Defense. All military operations at the base
ceased in September 1993, and portions of the base became available for commercial and other uses. The
Air Force Base Conversion Agency (AFBCA) currently oversees the base closure.
A Phase I investigation of the base completed in 1983 identified six contaminant sources: Landfills 1, 2,
3, and 4; FTA-1; and FTA-2. Stage I of a Phase II investigation completed in 1986 identified another
source: a sludge disposal pit in Building 932. In 1987, remedial investigation (RI) activities were
initiated to confirm source contamination and to characterize the geologic and hydrogeologic features at
Chanute AFB. The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (U.S. EPA), and AFBCA rejected the draft RI report in 1991. Another RI was submitted in
1993 but was rejected in 1996 by IEPA, U.S. EPA, and AFBCA because of problems with its geologic
and hydrogeologic interpretations and with the quality of the analytical data. In response to these
deficiencies, AFBCA directed the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence to conduct an RI and
feasibility study for the locations of waste activities in OU-2 along with Salt Fork Creek and Heritage
Lake. A third RI was submitted in 1998 and is ongoing. RI activities successfully completed to date
include excavation of test pits in the four landfills, removal of abandoned USTs, and excavation of
portions of the contaminated soil in the areas of Building 932 and FTA-2.
Migration of contamination from the sources in OU-2 into Salt Fork Creek is a primary concern.
Although each of these sources potentially contaminates the creek via runoff and drainage ditches,
migration of contamination from Landfills 1 and 2 is the most critical threat for three reasons: (1) Salt
Fork Creek runs directly between the two landfills, (2) all surface water drainage from Landfills 1 and 2
is directed to Salt Fork Creek, and (3) an observed release can clearly be established for both landfills.
An observed release can be established because sample analytical results indicate migration of
contaminants from Landfills 1 and 2 into Salt Fork Creek. IEPA collected sediment samples along Salt
Fork Creek and analyzed the samples for semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC) and metals. A
sediment sample collected directly downstream of Landfills 1 and 2 contained bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate,
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), and lead concentrations at levels above sample quantitation
3
limits (SQL) or greater than three times the background concentrations. During excavation of test pits in
Landfills 1 and 2, volatile organic compounds, SVOCs, dioxins and furans, pesticides and
polychlorinated biphenyls, and metals were detected in the soil and/or leachate in Landfills 1 and 2. Only
PAHs and lead were detected in sediment samples of Salt Fork Creek at levels above SQLs or greater
than three times the background concentrations and in the soil and leachate samples in Landfills 1 and 2
above SQLs. A sediment sample collected by IEPA directly upstream of OU-2 did not contain lead at
elevated levels or PAHs; therefore, Landfills 1 and 2 are considered to be sources of PAH and lead
contamination in Salt Fork Creek.
Contamination of Salt Fork Creek is of primary concern because fishing activities have been documented
in the creek between Landfills 1 and 2. In addition, wetlands are present along about 1 mile of Salt Fork
Creek; these wetlands lie within 15 miles of Landfills 1 and 2.
4
A copy of Figure 1, Site Location Map, is available at the EPA Headquarters Superfund Docket:
U.S. CERCLA Docket Office
Crystal Gateway #1, 1st Floor
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
Telephone: (703) 603-8917
E-Mail: [email protected]
5
WORKSHEET FOR COMPUTING HRS SITE SCORE
S2
S
1.
Ground Water Migration Pathway Score (Sgw)
2a.
Surface Water Overland/Flood Migration Component
2b.
Ground Water to Surface Water Migration Component
2c.
Surface Water Migration Pathway Score (Ssw)
0
0
96.597
9,331
0
0
96.597
9,331
Enter the larger of lines 2a. and 2b. as the pathway score.
3.
Soil Exposure Pathway Score (Ss)
0
0
4.
Air Migration Pathway Score (Sa)
0
0
5.
Total of Sgw2 + Ssw2 + Ss2 + Sa2
9,331
6.
HRS Site Score
48.30
Divide the value on line 5 by 4 and take the square root.
NE = Not evaluated
6
SURFACE WATER OVERLAND/FLOOD MIGRATION
COMPONENT SCORESHEET
Maximum Value
Factor Categories and Factors
Value Assigned
Drinking Water Threat
Likelihood of Release
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Observed Release
Potential to Release by
Overland Flow
Containment
2a.
Runoff
2b.
2c.
Distance to Surface Water
Potential to Release by
2d.
Overland Flow
[lines 2a x (2b +2c)]
Potential to Release by Flood
Containment (Flood)
3a.
Flood Frequency
3b.
Potential to Release
3c.
by Flood [lines 3a x 3b]
Potential to Release
[lines 2d + 3c, subject to
a maximum of 500]
Likelihood of Release
[higher of lines 1 and 4]
550
550
10
25
25
NE
NE
NE
500
NE
10
50
NE
NE
500
NE
500
NE
550
550
Waste Characteristics
6.
7.
8.
Toxicity/Persistence
Hazardous Waste Quantity
Waste Characteristics
a
a
100
10,000
100
50
0
b
b
b
0
0
0
b
5
0
0
32
Targets
9.
10.
11.
12.
Nearest Intake
Population
Level I Concentrations
10a.
Level II Concentrations
10b.
Potential Contamination
10c.
10d.
Population
[lines 10a + 10b + 10c]
Resources
Targets
[lines 9 + 10d + 11]
b
7
0
SURFACE WATER OVERLAND/FLOOD MIGRATION
COMPONENT SCORESHEET (Cont.)
Maximum Value
Factor Categories and Factors
Value Assigned
Drinking Water Threat Score
13.
Drinking Water Threat Score
[(lines 5 x 8 x 12)/82,500,
subject to a maximum of 100]
0
100
Human Food Chain Threat
Likelihood of Release
14.
Likelihood of Release
[same value as line 5]
550
550
Waste Characteristics
15.
16.
17.
a
a
1,000
Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation
Hazardous Waste Quantity
Waste Characteristics
5 x 108
100
320
Targets
18.
19.
20.
Food Chain Individual
Population
Level I Concentrations
19a.
Level II Concentrations
19b.
Potential Human Food
19c.
Chain Contamination
Population
19d.
[lines 19a + 19b + 19c]
Targets
[lines 18 + 19d]
50
45
b
b
0
0.03
b
0
b
0.03
b
45.03
Human Food Chain Threat Score
21.
Human Food Chain Threat Score
[(lines 14 x 17 x 20)/82,500,
subject to a maximum of 100]
100
8
96.064
SURFACE WATER OVERLAND/FLOOD MIGRATION
COMPONENT SCORESHEET (Cont.)
Maximum Value
Factor Categories and Factors
Value Assigned
Environmental Threat
Likelihood of Release
22.
Likelihood of Release
[same value as line 5]
550
550
Waste Characteristics
23.
24.
25.
Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
Hazardous Waste Quantity
Waste Characteristics
a
a
1,000
5 x 108
100
320
Targets
26.
27.
Sensitive Environments
Level I Concentrations
26a.
Level II Concentrations
26b.
Potential Contamination
26c.
Sensitive Environments
26d.
[lines 26a + 26b + 26c]
Targets
[value from line 26c]
b
b
b
0
0
0.25
b
0
b
0.25
60
0.533
Environmental Threat Score
28.
Environmental Threat Score
[(lines 22 x 25 x 27)/82,500,
subject to a maximum of 60]
Surface Water Overland/Flood Migration Component Score for a Watershed
29.
Watershed Scorec
[lines 13 + 21 + 28,
subject to a maximum of 100]
100
96.597
SURFACE WATER OVERLAND/FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT SCORE
30.
a
b
c
Component Score (Sof)c
[highest score from line 29
for all watersheds evaluated,
subject to a maximum of 100]
100
Maximum value applies to waste characteristics category.
Maximum value not applicable.
Do not round to nearest integer.
9
96.597
REFERENCES
Reference
Number
Description of the Reference
1.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1990. Hazard Ranking System
(HRS), 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 300, Appendix A. December 14.
2.
U.S. EPA. 1996. "Superfund Chemical Data Matrix." June.
3.
U.S. EPA. 1992. "The Hazard Ranking System Guidance Manual." EPA540-R-92026. November.
4.
U.S. Geological Survey. Rantoul Quadrangle, Illinois-Champaign Co., 7.5-Minute
Series (Topographic). Provisional Edition. 1984. Gifford Quadrangle, IllinoisChampaign Co., 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). Provisional Edition. 1984.
Flatville Quadrangle, Illinois-Champaign Co., 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). Dated
1968 and Photoinspected 1975. Surface Water Migration Pathway to the Target
Distance Limit. Modified by Tetra Tech EM Inc. (Tetra Tech). 1 Page.
5.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Map Titled "Proposed Surface Water,
Sediment, Seep & Storm Water Sampling Locations." September 14. Modified by
U.S. EPA. The map is reproduced in black and white. 1 Page.
6.
National Wetlands Inventory. Rantoul, 1983; Gifford, 1983; Flatville, 1983; Illinois
Quadrangles. 7.5-Minute Series. Wetland Maps. 3 Pages.
7.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1999. "Site Characterization Report: Fire Training
Area 2." 867 Pages. November.
8.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1999. "Site Characterization Report: Building 932."
695 Pages. November.
9.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1999. "Focused Feasibility Study for Interim
Remedial Action, Operable Unit 2, Landfills 1-4." Page 1-2 is missing. 158 Pages.
November.
10.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. "Final Work Plan: Landfills RI." 535 Pages.
October.
11.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. "Chanute AFB April 1998 Peer Review:
Landfill Remedial Actions." 269 Pages. A table of contents is not provided. April.
12.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. "Draft Work Plan: OU-2 Seven Sites, Remedial
Investigation, Chanute Air Force Base, Rantoul, Illinois." 411 Pages. January.
13.
Engineering Science. 1983. "Installation Restoration Program, Phase I-Records
Search, Chanute Air Force Base (AFB), Illinois." 158 Pages. December.
14.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA). 1998. Organic Sediment Sampling
Data. 176 Pages. Pages 1 and 2 are not available. May.
10
Reference
Number
Description of the Reference
15.
IEPA. 1998. Inorganic Sediment Sampling Data. 252 Pages. April and July.
16.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Compact Disc (CD) Containing Landfill
Sampling Data Collected During Test Pit Excavation at Chanute Air Force Base (AFB).
A printout of relevant CD data, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH),
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and lead analytical results for Landfills 1 and 2, is provided.
23 Pages. February and March.
17a.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Report for Sample Delivery Group (SDG) Number 59521 for Landfills Remedial
Investigation. The report includes analytical results for field samples SO-TP-1020B,
SX-TP-1021B, SO-TP-1021A, SO-TP-1022A, and SO-TP-1025A through SO-TP1028A. 74 Pages. May 26.
17b.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Report for SDG Number 59545 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples SX-TP-1022B, SO-TP-1029A, SO-TP1029AFD, and SO-TP-1030A through SO-TP-1032A. 67 Pages. May 29.
17c.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Report for SDG Number 59577 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples SX-TP-1025B, SX-TP-1027B, SX-TP1027BB, SX-TP-1026B, SX-TP-1029B, SX-TP-1030B, SX-TP-1030BFD, SX-TP1032B, and SX-TP-1030BB. 80 Pages. June 30.
17d.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Report for SDG Number 59586 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples WG-TP-1031C, WG-TP-1028CFD, WGTP-1028C, WG-TP-1028CFD, and WQ-L980323EB1. 59 Pages. June 30.
17e.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Report for SDG Number 59588 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples WG-TP-1031C, WG-TP-1028C, WG-TP1028CFD, SX-TP-1031B, SX-TP-1028B, SX-TP-1031BB, WQ-L980322EB1, WQL980323EB1, WQ-L980323EB1, and WQ-L980324TB1. 71 Pages. June 30.
17f.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Report for SDG Number 59579 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples WG-TP-1025C, WG-TP-1027C, WG-TP1026C, WG-TP-1030C, WQ-L980321EB1, and WQ-L980322EB1. 54 Pages. June 30.
18a.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Report for SDG Number 59181 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples WP-FW1001, SO-TP-1001A,
WQ-L980219TB1, and WQ-L980219TB2. 60 Pages. June 18.
11
Reference
Number
Description of the Reference
18b.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Report for SDG Number 59188 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples WG-TP-1001C, SO-TP-100B, SO-TP1001BV, and WQ-L980220TB1. 65 Pages. June 19.
18c.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Report for SDG Number 59212 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples WG-TP-1002C, WG-TP-1003C, WG-TP1006C, and WQ-L980222TB1. 66 Pages. June 19.
18d.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Reports for SDG Number 59213 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples SX-TP-1002B, SX-TP-1002BV, SX-TP1003B, SX-TP-1006B, SO-TP-1002A, SO-TP-1002AV, SO-TP-1003A, and SO-TP1006A. 70 Pages. June 19.
18e.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Reports for SDG Number 59230 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples WG-TP-1004C, WG-TP-1005C, SX-TP1004B, SO-TP-1004A, WQ-L980223TB1, WQ-LSO980223EB1, and
WQ-L980224EB1. 74 Pages. June 19.
18f.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1998. Internal Working Copy of Data Validation
Reports for SDG Number 59243 for Landfills Remedial Investigation. The report
includes analytical results for field samples WG-TP-1005C, SX-TP-1005B, SX-TP1007B, SX-TP-1007BB, SX-TP-1008B, SX-TP-1008BFD, SO-TP-1005A, SO-TP1007A, SO-TP-1008A, WQ-L980224TB1, WQ-L980225TB1, and WQ-L980225EB1.
79 Pages. June 22.
19.
Tetra Tech EM Inc. (Tetra Tech). 2000. Interoffice Correspondence Regarding
Review of Semivolatile Organic Compound Analytical Results for Sediment Samples.
From Harry Ellis, Chemist. To Chanute AFB File. 2 Pages. June 20.
20.
Tetra Tech. 2000. Interoffice Correspondence Regarding Review of Lead Analytical
Results for Sediment Samples. From Harry Ellis, Chemist. To Chanute AFB File. 1
Page. June 28.
21.
Tetra Tech. 2000. Interoffice Correspondence Regarding Review of Data Validation
Reports and Data Transcription. From Harry Ellis, Chemist. To Chanute AFB File. 3
Pages. June 28.
22.
Tetra Tech. 2000. Log of Photographs Taken along Salt Fork Creek at Chanute AFB
by U.S. EPA Personnel on March 27, 2000. 7 Pages. July 10.
23.
Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). 2000. Fax Regarding Fish
Collected along Salt Fork Creek. From Gary Lutterbie, Stream Biologist. To Kelly
Hirsch, Environmental Engineer, Tetra Tech. September 8.
12
Reference
Number
Description of the Reference
24.
Tetra Tech. 2000. Record of Telephone Conversation Regarding Threatened and
Endangered Species along Salt Fork Creek. Between Kelly Hirsch, Environmental
Engineer, and Eric Smith, Natural Heritage Biologist, Illinois Department of Natural
Resources (IDNR). September 12.
25.
U.S. EPA. 2000. Memorandum Regarding a Telephone Conversation Between Gary
M. Schafer, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. EPA and Gary Lutterbie, Stream
Biologist, IDNR. From Gary Schafer, Remedial Project Manager. To Kelly Hirsch,
Environmental Engineer, Tetra Tech. October 11.
13
SD-Characterization and Containment
Source No.: 1
SOURCE DESCRIPTION
2.2
Source Characterization
Chanute AFB is located in the north-central portion of Champaign County in east-central Illinois. The
main base covered 2,125 acres in the Village of Rantoul (Ref. 10, p. 1-2). A small stream, Salt Fork
Creek, flows along the southern perimeter and directly through the southeastern corner of the base (Ref.
10, p. 2-1). The southeastern corner of the base is known as OU-2, which is the location of past waste
disposal activities as shown in Figure 2. The primary contaminant sources within OU-2 include Landfills
1, 2, 3, and 4; Fire Training Areas (FTA-) 1 and 2; and Buildings 916, 922, 927, 932, 975, and 995,
which contained either oil-water separators (OWS), underground storage tanks (UST), sludge pits, or a
combination of these items (Ref. 10, p. 1-4; Ref. 12, pp. 3-10, 3-11, 3-15, 3-20, 3-25, and 3-30). The
primary mission of the base was to provide military and technical training for Air Force personnel and
civilian employees and for other Department of Defense (DOD) personnel. The training activities
focused on operation and maintenance of military aircraft and ground support equipment (Ref. 10,
p. 1-2).
Source Number: 1
Source Description: Landfill 1
Landfill 1 occupies about 21.5 acres in the southern portion of Chanute AFB (Ref. 9, p. 1-3). The depth
of the waste in Landfill 1 is based on test pit excavation data collected in March 1998. Debris was
observed from 0 to 4 feet below ground surface (bgs) at test pit locations TP-1026 and TP-1029 and was
observed at the other six test pit locations down to the bottoms of the test pits, which ranged in depth
from 2 to 10 feet bgs. The average depth at which waste was observed in Landfill 1 was 6.7 feet (Ref. 11,
pp. 3-7 through 3-9; Ref. 16, pp. 11 through 22). In addition, the depth of Landfill 1 was estimated to be
8 to 10 feet bgs during a 1983 Phase I investigation (Ref. 13, p. 4-17). The landfill cover is an average of
1 foot thick and is as thin as 0.5 foot in many areas. The landfill is bordered on the west and north by
agricultural fields and on the southeast by South Perimeter Road, which runs adjacent to Salt Fork Creek
in this area (Ref. 9, p. 1-3; Ref. 10, Figure 2-1). The depth to ground water at Landfill 1 is reported to be
between 1.0 and 6.5 feet bgs (Ref. 9, p. 1-3).
Landfill 1 was first used in the 1930s. The U.S. Government purchased the land occupied by Landfill 1
in 1941, and the unit continued to serve as a landfill until 1960. Previous investigations have determined
that at least some wastes from the base were disposed of in Landfill 1 in the 1930s before government
ownership of the land began (Ref. 10, p. 1-3). Wastes that the base disposed of in the landfill included
garbage, paper, wood, metal, aircraft parts, pesticide containers, shop wastes, solvents, and construction
debris. The material deposited in this landfill was routinely burned. A small-arms firing range and other
buildings that served a trap shooting range were constructed on the land after 1960 (Ref. 9, p. 1-3).
Surface water drainage from Landfill 1 is directed to Salt Fork Creek (Ref. 9, p. 1-6).
During the test pit excavation program conducted in March 1998, drums open to the environment were
found in seven of the eight test pit locations at Landfill 1. This landfill contained some of the least
degraded drums observed in the four landfills during the test pit excavation program, which suggests that
most of the drums observed within 3 feet of the surface at Landfill 1 represent more recent waste disposal
activities. At most test pit locations at Landfill 1, the wastes found included layers of degraded, corroded
debris from 5 feet bgs to the bottoms of the test pits (Ref. 9, pp. 1-7 and 1-8).
14
SD-Characterization and Containment
Source No.: 1
During test pit excavation at Landfill 1, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and lead were detected
in surface soil, subsurface soil, and leachate samples at concentrations above sample quantitation limits
(SQL) (Ref. 16, pp. 11 through 22; Ref. 17a, pp. 68, 69, 71, and 72; Ref. 17b, pp. 64, 65, and 66;
Ref. 17c, pp. 74, 76, and 77; Ref. 17d, pp. 55 and 57; Ref 17e, pp. 69 and 70; Ref. 17f, pp. 51 and 52).
Volatile organic compounds (VOC), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC), metals other than lead,
herbicides, dioxins and furans, and pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) were also detected in
Landfill 1 during test pit excavation, but these chemicals were not analyzed for or not detected in IEPA
sediment samples at levels above SQLs or greater than three times the background concentration.
Consequently, these chemicals are not a focus of this HRS scoring (Ref. 9, p. 1-8).
Source Location (with reference to a site map):
Landfill 1 is bordered on the west and north by agricultural fields and on the southeast by South
Perimeter Road, which runs adjacent to Salt Fork Creek in this area (Ref. 9, p. 1-3; Ref. 10, Figure 2-1).
The location of Landfill 1 is identified in Figure 2.
Containment:
Gas release to air - NE
Particulate release to air - NE
Release to ground water - NE
Release via overland migration and/or flood A release to surface water via overland migration was established based on knowledge that surface water
drainage from Landfill 1 is directed to Salt Fork Creek (Ref. 9, p. 1-6). A sediment sample collected
from sampling location x102, which is immediately downstream of Landfill 1, had significantly greater
concentrations of PAHs and lead than the sediment sample collected from location x101, which is
directly upstream of the landfill (Ref. 5; Ref. 14, pp. 7 and 9; Ref. 15, pp. 237 and 238). PAHs and lead
were also detected at concentrations above SQLs in soil and leachate samples collected during Landfill 1
test pit excavation (Ref. 16, pp. 11, 12, 18, 19, 20, and 21; Ref. 17a, p. 71; Ref. 17b, pp. 64 and 65; Ref.
17c, pp. 74 and 76; Ref. 17d, pp. 55 and 57; Ref. 17e, pp. 69 and 70; Ref. 17f, pp. 51 and 52).
Release to surface water via ground water migration - NE
Source 1 was assigned a containment factor value of 10 because of the lack of a maintained engineered
cover or a functioning and maintained run-on control system and runoff management system (Ref. 1, p.
51609; Ref. 9, p. 1-3).
15
SD-Characterization and Containment
Source No.: 1
A copy of Figure 2, Site Layout and Sediment Sampling Locations, is available at the EPA Headquarters
Superfund Docket:
U.S. CERCLA Docket Office
Crystal Gateway #1, 1st Floor
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
Telephone: (703) 603-8917
E-Mail: [email protected]
16
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 1
2.4.1
Hazardous Substances
Wastes deposited in Landfill 1 during its operation included garbage, paper, wood, metal, aircraft parts,
pesticide containers, shop wastes, solvents, and construction debris. The material deposited was routinely
burned. A small-arms firing range and other buildings that supported a trap shooting range were
constructed on the land after 1960 (Ref. 9, p. 1-3).
Test pit excavation was performed in March 1998 to characterize the waste in Landfill 1. Surface soil,
subsurface soil, and leachate samples were collected at eight test pit locations except for two locations
(TP-1029 and TP-1032) where leachate was not encountered (Ref. 11, p. 3-7). The test pit locations are
shown in Figure 3. Surface soil samples were collected from 0 to 0.5 foot bgs, subsurface soil samples
were collected at depths ranging from 1 to 10 feet bgs, and leachate samples were collected at depths
ranging from 9 to 12 feet bgs (Ref. 16, pp. 11 through 22). During test pit excavation, test pit locations
TP-1026 and TP-1029 were found to contain only construction debris with small amounts of metal and
drum fragments from 0 to 4 feet bgs. Consequently, test pit locations TP-1026 and TP-1029 were
changed after surface soil samples TP-1026A and TP-1029A were collected (Ref. 11, p. 3-7). At all
other test pit locations, the wastes found included a layer of degraded, corroded debris from 5 feet bgs to
the bottoms of the test pits. Drums open to the environment were found at seven of the eight test pit
locations. Burned material was found at four of the eight test pits, and a distinct layer of burned material
was found in test pits TP-1030 and TP-1031 (Ref. 11, p. 3-8).
VOCs, SVOCs, metals, pesticides, PCBs, PAHs, and dioxins and furans were analyzed for in samples
collected during test pit excavation. However, this HRS package focuses on PAHs and lead because only
these chemicals were detected (1) in IEPA sediment samples collected from Salt Fork Creek at elevated
concentrations and (2) in soil samples collected from Landfill 1 test pits at concentrations above SQLs
(Ref. 11, p. 3-6; Ref. 14, pp. 5 through 11; Ref. 15, pp. 236 through 241; Ref. 16, pp. 11 through 22; Ref.
17a, pp. 68, 69, 71, and 72; Ref. 17b, pp. 64, 65, and 66; Ref. 17c, pp. 74, 76, and 77; Ref. 17d, pp. 55
and 57; Ref 17e, pp. 69 and 70; Ref. 17f, pp. 51 and 52).
Benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, fluoranthene, pyrene, and lead were detected at elevated
concentrations at each of the eight test pit locations. Except for benzo(a)anthracene, these chemicals
were the only analytes detected in the leachate samples (Ref. 16, pp. 11 through 22; Ref. 17a, pp. 68, 69,
71, and 72; Ref. 17b, pp. 64, 65, and 66; Ref. 17c, pp. 74, 76, and 77; Ref. 17d, pp. 55 and 57; Ref 17e,
pp. 69 and 70; Ref. 17f, pp. 51 and 52). A maximum lead concentration of 59,700 milligrams per
kilogram (mg/kg) was detected in surface soil sample TP-1029A, which was collected near the
northwestern corner of Landfill 1 (Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17b, p. 66). Lead was also detected at a
concentration of 3,950 mg/kg in surface soil sample TP-1025A, which was collected on the eastern
border of Landfill 1 adjacent to Salt Fork Creek (Ref. 16, p. 11; Ref. 17a, p. 71 ). The highest
concentrations of PAHs in soil and ground water/ leachate were detected at test pit TP-1031, which is
located in the southern portion of Landfill 1 near Salt Fork Creek (Ref. 16, pp. 11 through 22; Ref. 17a,
pp. 68, 69, 71, and 72; Ref. 17b, pp. 64, 65, and 66; Ref. 17c, pp. 74, 76, and 77; Ref. 17d, pp. 55 and 57;
Ref 17e, pp. 69 and 70; Ref. 17f, pp. 51 and 52).
Sample analytical results for chemicals detected at elevated concentrations are provided in the table
below. The data validation reports for the samples collected during test pit excavation at Landfill 1 were
evaluated, and the PAH, SVOC, and lead analytical results were found to be acceptable (Ref. 21).
17
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 1
A copy of Figure 3, Landfill 1 Test Pit and Sampling Locations, is available at the EPA Headquarters
Superfund Docket:
U.S. CERCLA Docket Office
Crystal Gateway #1, 1st Floor
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
Telephone: (703) 603-8917
E-Mail: [email protected]
18
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 1
SQL
(mg/kg or
mg/L)
Reference
3,950
27.8
Ref. 16, p. 11; Ref. 17a, p. 71
14.8
0.25
Ref. 16, p. 11; Ref. 17c, p. 76
0.01
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17f, p. 52
2.6
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17a, p. 72
84.4
1.3
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17c, p. 77
059521-0007-SAN1
160
1.4
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17a, p. 70
059577-0015-SAN1
176
1.3
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17c, p. 76
TP-1028A
059521-0011-SAN1
189
1.3
Ref. 16, p. 15; Ref. 17a, p. 70
TP-1028B
059588-0020-SAN1
96.1
1.4
Ref. 16, p. 15; Ref. 17e, p. 70
TP-1029Ad
059545-0019-SAN1
59,700
270
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17b, p.66
TP-1029Bd
059577-0023-SAN1
9,230
53.1
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17c, p. 77
TP-1030A
059545-0015-SAN1
289
1.3
Ref. 16, p. 18; Ref. 17b, p. 65
TP-1030B
059577-0031-SAN1
1,880
15.2
Ref. 16, p. 19; Ref. 17c, p. 77
TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
61
0.26
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 65
TP-1031B
059588-0024-SAN1
65.5
1.3
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17e, p. 70
TP-1031C
059586-0023-SAN1
0.01
Ref. 16, p. 21; Ref. 17d, p. 57
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
56.7
0.25
Ref. 16, p. 21; Ref. 17b, p. 65
TP-1032B
059577-0027-SAN1
132
0.26
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17c, p. 77
TP-1025A
059521-0028-SAN1
1.5
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 11; Ref. 17a, p. 72
TP-1026A
059521-0031-SAN1
13.4
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17a, p. 72
TP-1027A
059521-0008-SAN1
0.66
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17a, p. 70
TP-1027B
059577-0016-SAN1
1.4
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17c, p. 76
Hazardous
Substance
Sample No.a
Lead
TP-1025A
059521-0027-SAN1
TP-1025B
059577-0007-SAN1
TP-1025C
059579-0020-SAN1
TP-1026Ad
059521-0032-SAN1
552
TP-1026Bd
059577-0019-SAN1
TP-1027A
TP-1027B
Lead-TCLP
d
Benzo(a)anthracene
Laboratory
Sample No.b
Concentration Concentration
(mg/kg)
(mg/L) c
0.29
1.2
d
TP-1029A
059545-0020-SAN1
3.7
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17b, p. 66
TP-1029Bd
059577-0024-SAN1
30.1
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17c, p. 77
TP-1030A
059545-0016-SAN1
2.4
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 18; Ref. 17b, p. 65
TP-1032A
059545-0012-SAN1
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 21; Ref. 17b, p. 65
TP-1025A
059521-0027-SAN1
0.03
0.013
Ref. 16, p. 11; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1026Ad
059521-0032-SAN1
0.028
0.012
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17a, p. 69
TP-1026Bd
059577-0019-SAN1
0.07
0.011
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1027A
059521-0007-SAN1
0.64
0.025
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1027B
059577-0015-SAN1
0.095
0.011
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1028B
059588-0020-SAN1
0.068
0.012
Ref. 16, p. 15; Ref. 17e, p. 69
TP-1028Ce
059586-0014-SAFD1
1.80e-04
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17d, p. 55
TP-1029B
d
0.85
1.60e-03
059577-0023-SAN1
0.18
0.012
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1030A
059545-0015-SAN1
0.85
0.024
Ref. 16, p. 18; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1030B
059577-0031-SAN1
0.26
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 19; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
1.7
0.058
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
0.072
0.011
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032B
059577-0027-SAN1
0.13
0.012
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17c, p. 74
19
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 1
SQL
(mg/kg or
mg/L)
Reference
0.093
0.017
Ref. 16, p. 11; Ref. 17a, p. 68
059521-0032-SAN1
0.041
0.016
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17a, p. 69
Hazardous
Substance
Sample No.a
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
TP-1025A
059521-0027-SAN1
TP-1026Ad
TP-1026B
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
059577-0019-SAN1
0.063
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17c, p. 74
059521-0007-SAN1
0.92f
0.033
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1027B
059577-0015-SAN1
0.088
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1028A
059521-0011-SAN1
0.024
0.016
Ref. 16, p. 15; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1028B
059588-0020-SAN1
0.053
0.016
Ref. 16, p. 15; Ref. 17e, p. 69
TP-1028Ce
059586-0014-SAFD1
2.50e-04
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17d, p. 55
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17b, p. 64
6.80e-04
d
TP-1029A
059545-0019-SAN1
0.064
0.016
TP-1029Bd
059577-0023-SAN1
0.2
0.016
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1030A
059545-0015-SAN1
0.85
0.032
Ref. 16, p. 18; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1030B
059577-0031-SAN1
0.31
0.018
Ref. 16, p. 19; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
2.1
0.077
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1031B
059588-0024-SAN1
0.056
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17e, p. 69
TP-1031C
059586-0007-SAN1
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
2.30e-04
1.70e-04
Ref. 16, p. 21; Ref. 17d, p. 55
0.1
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032B
059577-0027-SAN1
0.16
0.016
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1025A
059521-0027-SAN1
0.071
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 11; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1026Ad
059521-0032-SAN1
0.018
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17a, p. 69
d
059577-0019-SAN1
0.024
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1027A
059521-0007-SAN1
0.25
0.031
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1027B
059577-0015-SAN1
0.037
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17c, p. 74
d
TP-1029A
059545-0019-SAN1
0.025
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1029Bd
059577-0023-SAN1
0.057
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1030B
059577-0031-SAN1
0.077
0.017
Ref. 16, p. 19; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
0.74
0.071
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1031B
059588-0024-SAN1
0.024
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17e, p. 69
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
0.028
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032B
059577-0027-SAN1
0.047
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1025A
059521-0027-SAN1
0.17
0.069
Ref. 16, p. 11; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1027A
059521-0007-SAN1
0.49
0.14
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1027B
059577-0015-SAN1
0.077
0.064
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1028Ce
059586-0014-SAFD1
2.80e-04
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17d, p. 55
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1029B
Benzo(a)pyrene
Concentration Concentration
(mg/kg)
(mg/L) c
TP-1027A
TP-1026B
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
d
Laboratory
Sample No.b
d
3.60e-04
059577-0023-SAN1
0.13
0.066
TP-1030A
059545-0015-SAN1
0.6
0.13
Ref. 16, p. 18; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1030B
059577-0031-SAN1
0.16
0.076
Ref. 16, p. 19; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
1.6
0.32
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
0.063
0.062
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032B
059577-0027-SAN1
0.084
0.066
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17c, p. 74
d
TP-1026A
059521-0032-SAN1
0.048
0.02
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17a, p. 69
TP-1026Bd
059577-0019-SAN1
0.079
0.019
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1027A
059521-0007-SAN1
0.83
0.042
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1027B
059577-0015-SAN1
0.13
0.019
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17c, p. 74
20
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 1
Hazardous
Substance
Benzo(a)pyrene
(Continued)
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
Sample No.a
TP-1028B
Laboratory
Sample No.b
059588-0020-SAN1
TP-1028Ce
Concentration Concentration
(mg/kg)
(mg/L) c
0.069
059586-0014-SAFD1
1.40e-03
SQL
(mg/kg or
mg/L)
Reference
0.02
Ref. 16, p. 15; Ref. 17e, p. 69
3.20e-04
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17d, p. 55
d
TP-1029A
059545-0019-SAN1
0.049
0.02
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1029Bd
059577-0023-SAN1
0.18
0.02
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1030A
059545-0015-SAN1
1.8
0.04
Ref. 16, p. 18; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1030B
059577-0031-SAN1
0.29
0.023
Ref. 16, p. 19; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
2.3
0.096
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1031B
059588-0024-SAN1
0.079
0.019
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17e, p. 69
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
0.06
0.019
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032B
059577-0027-SAN1
0.14
0.02
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1027A
059521-0007-SAN1
1.1
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1028B
059588-0020-SAN1
0.086
0.054
Ref. 16, p. 15; Ref. 17e, p. 69
TP-1028Ce
059586-0014-SAFD1
2.80e-04
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17d, p. 55
TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
1.6
0.26
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
0.085
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1025A
059521-0027-SAN1
0.17
0.056
Ref. 16, p. 11; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1026Ad
059521-0032-SAN1
0.076
0.052
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17a, p. 69
TP-1026Bd
059577-0019-SAN1
0.098
0.051
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1027A
059521-0007-SAN1
1.1
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17a, p. 68
TP-1027B
059577-0015-SAN1
0.21
0.051
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17c, p. 74
059588-0020-SAN1
0.1
0.054
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17e, p. 69
TP-1028B
TP-1028C
e
1.70e-03
2.80e-04
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17d, p. 55
TP-1029Ad
059545-0019-SAN1
0.11
0.054
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1029Bd
059577-0023-SAN1
0.28
0.053
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1030A
059545-0015-SAN1
1.3
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 18; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1030B
059577-0031-SAN1
0.47
0.061
Ref. 16, p. 19; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
2.2
0.26
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1031B
059588-0024-SAN1
0.089
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17e, p. 69
TP-1031C
059586-0007-SAN1
1.90e-04
Ref. 16, p. 21; Ref. 17d, p. 55
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
0.23
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032B
059577-0027-SAN1
0.24
0.053
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17c, p. 74
Indeno(1,2,3-c,d) pyrene TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
1.3
0.19
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
0.079
0.037
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1026Bd
059577-0019-SAN1
0.061
0.051
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1027A
059521-0007-SAN1
0.73
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17a, p. 68
Phenanthrene
059586-0014-SAFD1
4.40e-03
2.50e-03
TP-1027B
059577-0015-SAN1
0.16
0.051
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1028B
059588-0020-SAN1
0.092
0.054
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17e, p. 69
TP-1028C
e
2.80e-04
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17d, p. 55
TP-1029Bd
059586-0014-SAFD1
059577-0023-SAN1
0.22
3.20e-03
0.053
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1030A
059545-0015-SAN1
0.65
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 18; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1030B
059577-0031-SAN1
0.35
0.061
Ref. 16, p. 19; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
1.1
0.26
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1031B
059588-0024-SAN1
0.056
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17e, p. 69
21
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 1
Hazardous
Substance
Phenanthrene
(Continued)
Pyrene
Sample No.a
Laboratory
Sample No.b
Concentration Concentration
(mg/kg)
(mg/L) c
SQL
(mg/kg or
mg/L)
Reference
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
0.092
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032B
059577-0027-SAN1
0.24
0.053
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17c, p. 74
0.21
TP-1025A
059521-0027-SAN1
TP-1025C
059579-0019-SAN1
TP-1026Ad
059521-0032-SAN1
TP-1026B
d
TP-1027A
0.056
Ref. 16, p. 11; Ref. 17a, p. 68
1.90e-04
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17f, p. 51
0.064
0.052
Ref. 16, p. 12; Ref. 17a, p. 69
059577-0019-SAN1
0.11
0.051
Ref. 16, p. 13; Ref. 17c, p. 74
059521-0007-SAN1
1.1
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17a, p. 68
2.20e-04
TP-1027B
059577-0015-SAN1
0.3
0.051
Ref. 16, p. 14; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1028B
059588-0020-SAN1
0.11
0.054
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17e, p. 69
2.80e-04
Ref. 16, p. 16; Ref. 17d, p. 55
TP-1028Ce
059586-0014-SAFD1
4.50e-03
d
TP-1029A
059545-0019-SAN1
0.094
0.054
Ref. 16, p. 17; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1029Bd
059577-0023-SAN1
0.38
0.053
Ref. 16, p. 18; Ref. 17c, p. 74
TP-1030A
059545-0015-SAN1
0.99
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 18; Ref. 17b, p. 64
0.68
TP-1030B
059577-0031-SAN1
TP-1030C
059579-0001-SAN1
TP-1031A
059545-0007-SAN1
2.2
TP-1031B
059588-0024-SAN1
0.13
TP-1031C
059586-0007-SAN1
TP-1032A
059545-0011-SAN1
0.18
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17b, p. 64
TP-1032B
059577-0027-SAN1
0.31
0.053
Ref. 16, p. 22; Ref. 17c, p. 74
3.10e-04
3.30e-03
0.061
Ref. 16, p. 19; Ref. 17c, p. 74
1.90e-04
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17f, p. 51
0.26
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b, p. 64
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17e, p. 69
1.90e-04
Ref. 16, p. 21; Ref. 17d, p. 55
Notes:
Fg/L
mg/kg
mg/L
TCLP
=
=
=
=
a
The A, B, or C in a sample number indicates whether the matrix was surface soil (A), subsurface soil (B), or leachate (C).
b
Laboratory sample numbers are included so that raw sample data provided in the validation reports (Ref. 17; Ref. 18) can
be readily identified.
c
The analytical results for leachate samples were originally reported in Fg/L. These results were converted to mg/L as
follows:
Microgram per liter
Milligram per kilogram
Milligram per liter
Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
Fg/L x
mg
' 0.001 mg/L
1,000 Fg
d
The original sampling locations for test pits TP-1026 and TP-1029 were changed after surface soil samples TP-1026A and
TP-1029A were collected because only construction debris with small amounts of metal and drum fragments was present
from 0 to 4 feet bgs at these locations (Ref. 11, p. 3-7).
e
Sample TP-1028C is a sludge sample, not a leachate sample, and its results are reported in mg/L. The sample was
collected at a depth of 2 to 8 feet bgs (Ref. 16, p. 16).
f
A concentration of 0.86 mg/kg was recorded in Ref. 16, p. 13, and a concentration of 0.92 mg/kg was recorded in Ref. 17a,
p. 68. This HRS package uses the result from Ref. 17, p. 68 because Ref. 17a contained raw data.
22
SD-Hazardous Constituent Quantity
SD-Hazardous Wastestream Quantity
Source No.: 1
2.4.2
Hazardous Waste Quantity
The hazardous waste quantity is based on the total volume of Landfill 1.
2.4.2.1.1
Hazardous Constituent Quantity
No hazardous constituent quantity could be determined for Source 1 because insufficient information was
available.
Sum (pounds) (S): Unknown
Hazardous Constituent Quantity Value: NE
2.4.2.1.2
Hazardous Wastestream Quantity
No hazardous wastestream quantity could be determined for Source 1 because insufficient information
was available.
Sum (pounds) (W): Unknown
Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Value: NE
23
SD-Volume
Source No.: 1
2.4.2.1.3
Volume
For Source 1, the volume assigned value is 0 because the exact source dimensions needed to accurately
calculate the volume are unknown. However, if it were necessary to determine a volume assigned value,
the total volume of Source 1 could be estimated by multiplying the surface area of Landfill 1 (21.5 acres)
by the estimated depth of the landfill (Ref. 9, p. 1-3). The estimated depth of Landfill 1 is based on test
pit excavation data collected in March 1998. Debris was observed from 0 to 4 feet bgs at test pit
locations TP-1026 and TP-1029 and was observed at the other six test pit locations down to the bottoms
of the test pits, which ranged in depth from 2 to 10 feet bgs. The average depth to which waste was
observed in Landfill 1 was 6.7 feet bgs (Ref. 11, pp. 3-7 through 3-9; Ref. 16, pp. 11 through 22).
Therefore, the total volume of Source 1 could be estimated as follows:
21.5 acres x 43,560 square feet (ft2)/1 acre = 936,540 ft2
936,540 ft2 x 6.7 feet x 1 cubic yard (yd3)/27 cubic feet (ft3) = 232,401 yd3
The volume assigned value for Source 1 could then be determined using a waste quantity divisor of 2,500
for a landfill as shown below (Ref. 1, p. 51591).
232,401 yd3/2,500= 92.96 yd3
Dimension of source (V): yd3
References: 9, p. 1-3; 1, p. 51591; 11, pp. 3-7 through 3-9; 16, pp. 11 through 22
Volume Assigned Value (V): 0
24
SD-Area
SD-Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value
Source No.: 1
2.4.2.1.4
Area
Landfill 1 has a total area of about 21.5 acres (Ref. 9, p. 1-3). Using a waste quantity divisor of 3,400,
the area assigned value was calculated as follows (Ref. 1, p. 51591):
21.5 acres x 43,560 ft2/acre = 936,540 ft2
936,540 ft2/3,400 = 275.5 ft2
Area of source (ft2) (A): 936,540
References: 1, p. 51591; 9, p. 1-3
Area Assigned Value: 275.5
2.4.2.1.5
Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value
Hazardous Constituent Quantity Assigned Value: 0
Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Assigned Value: 0
Volume Assigned Value: 0
Area Assigned Value: 275.5
Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value: 275.5
25
SD-Characterization and Containment
Source No.: 2
SOURCE DESCRIPTION
2.2
Source Characterization
Source Number: 2
Source Description: Landfill 2
Landfill 2 occupies about 22.7 acres in the southern portion of Chanute AFB (Ref. 9, p. 1-4). The depth
of the waste in Landfill 2 is not clear from the test pit excavation data collected in February 1998;
however, the depths of the test pits excavated ranged from 5 to 13 feet bgs and averaged 8.6 feet bgs
(Ref. 11, pp. 3-7 through 3-9; Ref. 16, pp. 1 through 11). Furthermore, the depth of Landfill 2 was
estimated to be 8 to 10 feet bgs during a 1983 Phase I investigation (Ref. 13, p. 4-17). Landfill 2 is
bordered by South Perimeter Road and Salt Fork Creek to the northwest, Heritage Lake to the east, and
FTA-2 to the south as shown in Figure 2. The landfill is predominantly covered with weeds and
wildflowers, and outcrops of rubble and debris are present on the western edge of the landfill bordering
Salt Fork Creek. A drainage ditch is present on the southern edge of the landfill. The depth to ground
water at Landfill 2 is between 3.0 and 9.5 feet bgs (Ref. 9, p. 1-4).
The landfill was used from the early 1950s until 1967. Wastes deposited there included office trash, shop
wastes such as waste solvents, and construction rubble. In the 1960s, four 55-gallon drums of herbicide
containing 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D); 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4,5-T); or both
may have been buried in Landfill 2 or 3. Some of the sludge associated with the former Heritage Lake
sewage lagoons, which were used from 1969 to 1973, may also have been disposed of in Landfill 2 (Ref.
10, p. 2-6). In addition, 50 1-ounce, wax-encased, sealed containers of zinc phosphide were disposed of
in Landfill 2. Materials deposited in the landfill were routinely burned. All surface water drainage from
the landfill flows to Salt Fork Creek (Ref. 9, p. 1-4). In the western and northern portions of Landfill 2,
Salt Fork Creek forms a steep bank where numerous leachate seeps have been observed. Sheet piling has
been installed at these locations to help prevent erosion of Landfill 2 waste material (Ref. 9, p. 1-6).
During the test pit excavation program conducted in February 1998, drums were found in four of the
eight test pits at Landfill 2. The drums were corroded, rusted, and twisted, but were recognizable as
drums. Also, three of the test pits at Landfill 2 revealed burned or charred material (Ref. 9, pp. 1-7 and
1-8).
During test pit excavation at Landfill 2, PAHs and lead were detected in surface soil, subsurface soil, and
leachate samples at concentrations above SQLs (Ref. 16, pp. 1 through 11; Ref. 18a, pp. 58 and 59; Ref.
18b, pp. 63 and 64; Ref. 18c, pp. 63 and 64; Ref. 18d, pp. 66, 68, and 79; Ref. 18e, pp. 71 and 73; Ref.
18f, pp. 73, 75, and 76).
Source Location (with reference to a site map):
Landfill 2 is located in the southern portion of the base on the east side of South Perimeter Road. The
landfill lies immediately west of Heritage Lake (Ref. 9, p. 1-4). The location of Landfill 2 is shown in
Figure 2.
26
SD-Characterization and Containment
Source No.: 2
Containment:
Gas release to air - NE
Particulate release to air - NE
Release to ground water - NE
Release via overland migration and/or flood A release to surface water via overland migration was established based on knowledge that all surface
water drainage from Landfill 2 flows to Salt Fork Creek (Ref. 9, p. 1-4). In addition, sediment sample
x102, which was collected immediately downstream of Landfill 2, had significantly greater
concentrations of PAHs and lead than sediment sample x101, which was collected immediately upstream
of the site (Ref. 5; Ref. 14, pp. 7 and 9; Ref. 15, pp. 237 and 238). PAHs and lead were also detected at
concentrations above SQLs in soil and leachate samples collected during Landfill 2 test pit excavation
(Ref. 16, pp. 1 through 11; Ref. 18a, pp. 58 and 59; Ref. 18b, pp. 63 and 64; Ref. 18c, pp. 63 and 64; Ref.
18d, pp. 66, 68, and 79; Ref. 18e, pp. 71 and 73; Ref. 18f, pp. 73, 75, and 76).
Release to surface water via ground water migration - NE
Source 2 was assigned a containment factor value of 10 because of the lack of a maintained engineered
cover or a functioning and maintained run-on control system and runoff management system (Ref. 1, p.
51609; Ref. 9, p. 1-4).
27
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 2
2.4.1
Hazardous Substances
Wastes deposited in Landfill 2 included office trash, shop wastes such as waste solvents, and construction
rubble. In the 1960s, four 55-gallon drums of herbicide containing 2,4-D; 2,4,5-T; or both may have been
buried in Landfill 2 or 3. In addition, 50 1-ounce, wax-encased, sealed containers of zinc phosphide were
disposed of in Landfill 2. Materials deposited in the landfill were routinely burned (Ref. 9, p. 1-4).
Test pit excavation was performed in February 1998 to characterize the waste in Landfill 2. Surface soil,
subsurface soil, and leachate samples were collected at eight test pit locations except for two locations
(TP-1007 and TP-1008) where leachate was not encountered (Ref. 11, p. 3-7). Surface soil samples were
collected from 0 to 0.5 feet bgs, subsurface soil samples were collected at depths ranging from 4 to 13
feet bgs and leachate samples were collected at depths ranging from 9 to 15 feet bgs (Ref. 16, pp. 1
through 11). The test pit locations are shown in Figure 4. The location of test pit TP-1001 was changed
after surface soil sample TP-1001A was collected because no waste was observed except for surficial
brick, concrete, and glass (Ref. 11, p. 3-7). During test pit excavation, drum fragments were encountered
in four of the eight test pits. Specifically, test pits TP-1001, TP-1003, TP-1006, and TP-1007 contained
drum fragments and discolored surrounding soil. TP-1001, TP-1002, and TP-1003, which were located
in the southern and southwestern portion of the landfill, were the only test pits that contained burned or
charred debris (Ref. 11, pp. 3-8 and 3-9).
VOCs, SVOCs, metals, pesticides, PCBs, PAHs, and dioxins and furans were analyzed for during test pit
excavation. However, this HRS package focuses on PAHs and lead because only these chemicals were
detected (1) in IEPA sediment samples collected from Salt Fork Creek at elevated concentrations and (2)
in soil samples collected from Landfill 2 test pits at elevated concentrations (Ref. 11, p. 3-6; Ref. 14, pp.
5 through 11; Ref. 15, pp. 236 through 241; Ref. 16, pp. 1 through 11).
Benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene, fluoroanthene, indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene, phenanthrene, pyrene, and lead were detected at elevated concentrations at each of the eight
test pit locations (Ref. 16, pp. 1 through 11; Ref. 18a, pp. 58 and 59; Ref. 18b, pp. 63 and 64; Ref. 18c,
pp. 63 and 64; Ref. 18d, pp. 66, 68, and 79; Ref. 18e, pp. 71 and 73; Ref. 18f, pp. 73, 75, and 76). Test
pit TP-1007, which was adjacent to Salt Fork Creek, had the highest PAH concentrations in subsurface
soil, and test pit TP-1003 had the highest PAH concentrations in surface soil (Ref. 16, pp. 1 through 11;
Ref. 18a, pp. 58 and 59; Ref. 18b, pp. 63 and 64; Ref. 18c, pp. 63 and 64; Ref. 18d, pp. 66, 68, and 79;
Ref. 18e, pp. 71 and 73; Ref. 18f, pp. 73, 75, and 76). All analytes except benzo(g,h,i)perylene were
detected at elevated concentrations in the leachate sample collected from test pit TP-1002 (Ref. 16, p. 3;
Ref. 18c, p. 63). Lead was detected at elevated concentrations in all the test pit locations where leachate
was present (Ref. 16, pp. 1 through 10; Ref. 18b, p. 64; Ref. 18c, p. 64; Ref. 18e, pp. 72 and 73). The
levels of PAH contamination in soils and leachate at Landfill 2 were much greater than at Landfill 1.
Sample analytical results for chemicals detected at elevated concentrations are provided in the table
below. The data validation reports for the samples collected during test pit excavation at Landfill 2 were
evaluated, and the lead and PAH analytical results were found to be acceptable (Ref. 21).
28
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 2
A copy of Figure 4, Landfill 2 Test Pit and Sampling Locations, is available at the EPA Headquarters
Superfund Docket:
U.S. CERCLA Docket Office
Crystal Gateway #1, 1st Floor
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
Telephone: (703) 603-8917
E-Mail: [email protected]
29
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 2
Hazardous
Substance
Lead
Sample
No.a
Laboratory
Sample No.b
Concentration
(mg/kg)c
TP-1001Ad
059181-0016-SAN1
76.9
TP-1001Bd
059188-0013-SAN1
31.3
TP-1001Cd
059188-0003-SAN1
TP-1002A
059213-0021-SAN1
45
TP-1002B
059213-0017-SAN1
16.4
TP-1002Ce
059212-0002-SAN1
2.8
TP-1002Ce
059212-0003-SAN1
0.024
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
TP-1003B
059213-0007-SAN1
TP-1003Ce
059212-0011-SAN1
e
059212-0012-SAN1
TP-1003C
Lead-TCLP
Benzo(a)anthracene
Concentration
(mg/L)
SQL
(mg/kg or
mg/L)
Reference
0.48
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 59
0.23
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 64
0.002
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 64
0.26
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 69
0.26
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 69
0.01
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 64
0.01
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 64
797
5
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 68
2,460
13.4
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 68
0.420
0.01
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18c, p. 64
0.024
0.01
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18c, p. 64
0.24
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18e, p. 73
0.017
TP-1004A
059230-0050-SAN1
20.5
TP-1004B
059230-0046-SAN1
17.9
0.25
Ref. 16, p. 5; Ref. 18e, p. 73
TP-1004Ce
059230-0011-SAN1
0.021
0.002
Ref. 16, p. 5; Ref. 18e, p. 72
TP-1004Ce
059230-0012-SAN1
0.0024
0.002
Ref. 16, p. 5; Ref. 18e, p. 72
TP-1005A
059243-0030-SAN1
14.2
0.24
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 76
TP-1005B
059243-0026-SAN1
22.8
0.26
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 75
TP-1005C
059230-0029-SAN1
0.002
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18e, p. 73
TP-1006A
059213-0011-SAN1
40
0.25
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 68
TP-1006B
059213-0003-SAN1
375
2.8
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 68
TP-1006C
059212-0020-SAN1
0.01
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18c, p. 64
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
31.6
0.25
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18f, p. 75
TP-1007B
059243-0038-SAN1
103
0.49
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 76
TP-1008A
059243-0018-SAN1
16.3
0.25
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 75
TP-1008B
059243-0042-SAN1
18.9
0.27
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 76
TP-1003A
059213-0016-SAN1
1.7
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 68
TP-1003B
059213-0008-SAN1
5.6
1
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 68
TP-1001Ad
059181-0016-SAN1
0.38
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 58
TP-1001Bd
059188-0013-SAN1
0.33
0.01
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 63
TP-1002A
059213-0021-SAN1
0.028
0.012
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1002B
059213-0017-SAN1
0.044
0.012
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1002C
059212-0001-SAN1
0.0013
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 63
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
2.9
0.23
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1003B
059213-0007-SAN1
0.51
0.024
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1004A
059230-0050-SAN1
0.23
0.011
Ref. 16, p..5; Ref. 18e, p. 71
TP-1005A
059243-0030-SAN1
0.042
0.011
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1005B
059243-0026-SAN1
0.13
0.011
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1006A
059213-0011-SAN1
0.13
0.011
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1006B
059213-0003-SAN1
0.39
0.013
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1006C
059212-0019-SAN1
1.20e-04
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18c, p. 63
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
2.6
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1007B
059243-0034-SAN1
15
1.2
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
0.011
0.610
0.014
2.30e-04
30
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 2
Hazardous
Substance
Benzo(a)anthracene
(Continued)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Sample
No.a
SQL
(mg/kg or
mg/L)
Reference
0.11
0.011
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
Laboratory
Sample No.b
Concentration
(mg/kg)c
TP-1008A
059243-0018-SAN1
TP-1008B
Concentration
(mg/L)
059243-0042-SAN1
0.065
0.012
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
d
TP-1001A
059181-0016-SAN1
0.42
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 58
TP-1001Bd
059188-0013-SAN1
0.28
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 63
TP-1002A
059213-0021-SAN1
0.041
0.016
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1002B
059213-0017-SAN1
0.077
TP-1002C
059212-0001-SAN1
0.020
0.016
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 66
0.0018
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 63
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
4.2
0.3
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1003B
059213-0007-SAN1
0.61
0.032
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1004A
059230-0050-SAN1
0.26
0.014
Ref. 16, p..5; Ref. 18e, p. 71
TP-1005A
059243-0030-SAN1
0.048
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1005B
059243-0026-SAN1
0.087
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1006A
059213-0011-SAN1
0.18
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1006B
059213-0003-SAN1
0.37
0.017
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
2.4
0.15
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1007B
059243-0034-SAN1
18
1.5
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1008A
059243-0018-SAN1
0.1
0.015
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1008B
059243-0042-SAN1
0.096
0.016
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1001Ad
059181-0016-SAN1
0.16
0.013
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 58
TP-1001Bd
059188-0013-SAN1
0.12
0.013
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 63
TP-1002A
059213-0021-SAN1
0.017
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1002B
059213-0017-SAN1
0.054
TP-1002C
059212-0001-SAN1
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
TP-1003B
TP-1004A
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 66
0.0017
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 63
1.6
0.28
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
059213-0007-SAN1
0.23
0.029
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 66
059230-0050-SAN1
0.12
0.013
Ref. 16, p. 5; Ref. 18e, p. 71
TP-1005A
059243-0030-SAN1
0.025
0.013
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1005B
059243-0026-SAN1
0.045
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1006A
059213-0011-SAN1
0.06
0.014
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1006B
059213-0003-SAN1
0.18
0.016
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
1
0.14
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1007B
059243-0034-SAN1
7.6
1.4
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
0.010
TP-1008A
059243-0018-SAN1
0.053
0.013
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1001Ad
059181-0016-SAN1
0.32
0.06
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 58
TP-1001Bd
059188-0013-SAN1
0.23
0.058
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 63
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
3.3
1.3
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1003B
059213-0007-SAN1
0.51
0.13
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1004A
059230-0050-SAN1
0.18
0.06
Ref. 16, p. 5; Ref. 18e, p. 71
TP-1005B
059243-0026-SAN1
0.069
0.064
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1006A
059213-0011-SAN1
0.11
0.063
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1006B
059213-0003-SAN1
0.3
0.071
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
1.7
0.63
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18f, p. 73
31
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 2
Hazardous
Substance
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
(Continued)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
Sample
No.a
TP-1007B
TP-1008A
Concentration
(mg/L)
SQL
(mg/kg or
mg/L)
Laboratory
Sample No.b
Concentration
(mg/kg)c
059243-0034-SAN1
15
6.4
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
059243-0018-SAN1
0.072
0.061
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
Reference
d
TP-1001A
059181-0016-SAN1
0.4
0.018
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 58
TP-1001Bd
059188-0013-SAN1
0.33
0.017
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 63
TP-1002B
059213-0017-SAN1
0.063
0.02
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1002C
059212-0001-SAN1
0.0023
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 63
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
4
0.38
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1003B
059213-0007-SAN1
0.59
0.04
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
2.3
0.19
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1007B
059243-0034-SAN1
17
1.9
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1008B
059243-0042-SAN1
0.086
0.02
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1001Ad
059181-0016-SAN1
0.36
0.048
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 58
TP-1001Bd
059188-0013-SAN1
0.27
0.046
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 63
TP-1002C
059212-0001-SAN1
0.002
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 63
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
4
1
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1003B
059213-0007-SAN1
1.6
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1004A
059230-0050-SAN1
0.28
0.048
Ref. 16, p. 5; Ref. 18e, p. 71
TP-1005A
059243-0030-SAN1
0.071
0.047
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1005B
059243-0026-SAN1
0.67
0.051
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1006A
059213-0011-SAN1
0.19
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
2.8
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1007B
059243-0034-SAN1
16
5.1
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1008A
059243-0018-SAN1
0.13
0.049
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1001Ad
059181-0016-SAN1
0.81
0.048
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 58
d
TP-1001B
0.018
0.028
059188-0013-SAN1
0.68
0.046
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 63
TP-1002A
059213-0021-SAN1
0.075
0.052
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1002B
059213-0017-SAN1
0.074
0.052
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1002C
059212-0001-SAN1
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
TP-1003B
059213-0007-SAN1
TP-1004A
059230-0050-SAN1
TP-1005A
059243-0030-SAN1
TP-1005B
TP-1006A
0.013
0.002
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 63
1
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
1.3
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 66
0.67
0.048
Ref. 16, p. 5; Ref. 18e, p. 71
0.14
0.047
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
059243-0026-SAN1
0.29
0.051
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
059213-0011-SAN1
0.43
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1006B
059213-0003-SAN1
1
0.057
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
6.9
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1007B
059243-0034-SAN1
32
5.1
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1008A
059243-0018-SAN1
0.24
0.049
Ref.16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1008B
059243-0042-SAN1
0.16
0.054
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
8.8
32
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 2
Hazardous
Substance
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Concentration
(mg/L)
SQL
(mg/kg or
mg/L)
Sample
No.a
Laboratory
Sample No.b
Concentration
(mg/kg)c
TP-1001Ad
059181-0016-SAN1
0.27
0.036
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 58
TP-1001Bd
059188-0013-SAN1
0.12
0.035
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 63
TP-1002C
059212-0001-SAN1
0.0042
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 63
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
2.6
0.75
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1003B
059213-0007-SAN1
0.35
0.08
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1004A
059230-0050-SAN1
0.18
0.036
Ref. 16, p. 5; Ref. 18e, p. 71
TP-1005B
059243-0026-SAN1
0.16
0.038
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1006B
059213-0003-SAN1
0.21
0.043
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
1.2
0.38
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1007B
059243-0034-SAN1
9.6
3.9
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
0.0082
Reference
TP-1008A
059243-0018-SAN1
0.044
0.037
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1001Ad
059181-0016-SAN1
0.42
0.048
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 58
TP-1001Bd
059188-0013-SAN1
0.52
0.046
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 63
TP-1002C
059212-0001-SAN1
0.002
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 63
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
6.1
1
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1003B
059213-0007-SAN1
0.89
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1004A
059230-0050-SAN1
0.51
0.048
Ref. 16, p. 5; Ref. 18e, p. 71
TP-1005A
059243-0030-SAN1
0.1
0.047
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1005B
059243-0026-SAN1
0.19
0.051
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1006A
059213-0011-SAN1
0.31
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1006B
059213-0003-SAN1
0.86
0.057
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18d, p. 66
0.0048
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
5
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1007B
059243-0034-SAN1
19
5.1
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1008A
059243-0018-SAN1
0.15
0.049
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1008B
059243-0042-SAN1
0.13
0.054
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1001Ad
059181-0016-SAN1
0.75
0.048
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18a, p. 58
TP-1001Bd
059188-0013-SAN1
0.55
0.046
Ref. 16, p. 1; Ref. 18b, p. 63
TP-1002A
059213-0021-SAN1
0.073
0.052
Ref. 16, p. 2; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1002C
059212-0001-SAN1
0.002
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 63
0.014
TP-1003A
059213-0015-SAN1
9.2
1
Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1003B
059213-0007-SAN1
1.4
0.11
Ref. 16, p. 4; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1004A
059230-0050-SAN1
0.76
0.048
Ref. 16, p. 5; Ref. 18e, p. 71
TP-1005A
059243-0030-SAN1
0.2
0.047
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1005B
059243-0026-SAN1
0.19
0.051
Ref. 16, p. 6; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1006A
059213-0011-SAN1
0.44
0.05
Ref. 16, p. 7; Ref. 18d, p. 66
TP-1006B
059213-0003-SAN1
0.94
TP-1006C
059212-0019-SAN1
3.00e-04
0.057
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18d, p. 66
1.90e-04
Ref. 16, p. 8; Ref. 18c, p. 63
TP-1007A
059243-0022-SAN1
6.9
0.5
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1007B
059243-0034-SAN1
32
5.1
Ref. 16, p. 9; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1008A
059243-0018-SAN1
0.31
0.049
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
TP-1008B
059243-0042-SAN1
0.31
0.054
Ref. 16, p. 10; Ref. 18f, p. 73
33
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 2
Notes:
Fg/L
mg/kg
mg/L
TCLP
=
=
=
=
a
The A, B, or C within a sample number indicates whether the matrix was surface soil (A), subsurface soil
(B), or leachate (C).
b
Laboratory sample numbers are included so that the raw sample data provided in the validation reports
(Ref. 17; Ref. 18) can be readily identified.
c
The analytical results for leachate samples were originally reported in Fg/L. These results were converted
to mg/L as follows:
Microgram per liter
Milligram per kilogram
Milligram per liter
Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
Fg/L x
mg
' 0.001 mg/L
1,000 Fg
d
The original sampling location for test pit TP-1001 was changed after surface soil sample TP-1001A was
collected because no waste was encountered at the original location except for surficial brick, concrete, and
glass (Ref. 11, p. 3-7).
e
Two different leachate samples were collected and analyzed for lead.
34
SD-Hazardous Constituent Quantity
SD-Hazardous Wastestream Quantity
Source No.: 2
2.4.2
Hazardous Waste Quantity
The hazardous waste quantity is based on the volume of Landfill 2.
2.4.2.1.1
Hazardous Constituent Quantity
No hazardous constituent quantity could be determined for Source 2 because insufficient information was
available.
Sum (pounds) (S): Unknown
Hazardous Constituent Quantity Value: NE
2.4.2.1.2
Hazardous Wastestream Quantity
No hazardous wastestream quantity could be determined for Source 2 because insufficient information
was available.
Sum (pounds) (W): Unknown
Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Value: NE
35
SD- Volume
Source No.: 2
2.4.2.1.3
Volume
For Source 2, the volume assigned value is 0 because the exact source dimensions needed to accurately
calculate the volume are unknown. However, if it were necessary to determine a volume assigned value,
the total volume of Source 2 could be estimated by multiplying the surface area of Landfill 2 (22.7 acres)
by the estimated depth of the landfill (Ref. 9, p. 1-4). The depth of Landfill 2 cannot be estimated based
solely on the test pit excavation data collected in February 1998; however, the depths of the test pits
ranged from 5 to 13 feet bgs and averaged 8.6 feet bgs (Ref. 11, pp. 3-7 through 3-9; Ref. 16, pp. 1
through 11). Furthermore, the depth of Landfill 2 was estimated to be 8 to 10 feet bgs during a 1983
Phase I investigation (Ref. 13, p. 4-17). Therefore, the depth could be assumed to be 8 feet for the
volume calculation. Therefore, the total volume of Source 2 could be estimated as follows:
22.7 acres x 43,560 ft2/1 acre = 988,812 ft2
988,812 ft2 x 8 feet x 1 yd3/27 ft3 = 292,981 yd3
The volume assigned value for Source 2 could then be determined using a waste quantity divisor of 2,500
for a landfill as shown below (Ref. 1, p. 51591).
292,981 yd3/2,500 = 117.2 yd3
Dimensions of source (V): yd3
References: 9, p. 1-4; 11, pp. 3-7 through 3-9; 16, pp. 1 through 11; 13, p. 4-17; 1, p. 51591
Volume Assigned Value: 0
36
SD-Area
SD-Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value
Source No.: 2
2.4.2.1.4
Area
Landfill 2 has a total area of about 22.7 acres (Ref. 9, p. 1-4). Using a waste quantity divisor of 3,400,
the area assigned value was calculated as follows (Ref. 1, p. 51591):
22.7 acres x 43,560 ft2/1 acre = 988,812 ft2
988,812 ft2/3,400 = 290.8 ft2
Area of source (ft2): 988,812
References: 1, p. 51591; 9, p. 1-4
Area Assigned Value: 290.8
2.4.2.1.5
Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value
Hazardous Constituent Quantity Assigned Value: 0
Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Assigned Value: 0
Volume Assigned Value: 0
Area Assigned Value: 290.8
Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value: 290.8
37
SD-Characterization and Containment
Sources Not Evaluated
SOURCE DESCRIPTION
2.2
Source Characterization
Landfill 3; Landfill 4; FTA-1; FTA-2; Building 932; Buildings 916, 922, and 927; and Buildings 975 and
995 are potential sources but are not evaluated in this HRS documentation record. These potential
sources will be evaluated at a later date. The locations of these potential sources are shown in Figure 2.
According to the HRS Rule, most of these potential sources could be evaluated because a potential exists
for contaminants present in the sources to migrate to Salt Fork Creek. However, these seven potential
sources are not evaluated herein because a migration pathway to Salt Fork Creek is not well defined for
the individual sources. In addition, inclusion of these potential sources would not affect the overall site
score because the additional waste quantities and chemical contaminants associated with these sources
would not change the waste characteristic value or the overall site score.
38
Potential Source
Area
Hazardous Substances Present
Reference
Landfill 3
33 acres
During 1998 test pit excavation, elevated concentrations of PAHs, dioxins, arsenic,
barium, beryllium, total chromium, and nickel were detected in soils and elevated
concentrations of benzene; vinyl chloride; 1,4-dichlorobenzene; arsenic; lead; and
manganese were detected in leachate.
Ref. 9, pp.
1-4, 1-15, and
1-16
Landfill 4
44 acres
During 1998 test pit excavation, elevated concentrations of dioxins, PAHs, dieldrin,
arsenic, barium, beryllium, total chromium, and nickel were detected in subsurface
soil, and elevated concentrations of benzene; cis-1,2-dichloroethylene;
tetrachloroethene; trichloroethene (TCE); vinyl chloride; arsenic; lead; and
manganese were detected in leachate.
Ref. 9, pp.
1-4 and 1-16
FTA-1
< 6.5 acres
Waste fuels, fuels, lubricants, paints, thinners, and solvents were reportedly
discharged and ignited in the central portion of FTA-1; however, sampling data are
not available.
Ref. 12, pp.
3-1 and 3-2
FTA-2
< 13 acres
Analytical results reported in the 1999 site characterization report for FTA-2
indicate widespread VOC, SVOC, PAH, and dioxin and furan contamination in
surface and subsurface soils.
Ref. 7,
pp. 2 and 3
Building 932
Unknown
Analytical results reported in the 1999 site characterization report for Building 932
indicate widespread VOC, SVOC, and PAH contamination in surface and
subsurface soils.
Ref. 8,
pp. 2 and 3
Buildings 916,
922, and 927
Unknown
Following OWS and UST removals conducted in 1990 and 1991, TCE, vinyl
chloride, and 1,2-dichloroethylene were detected in soil, ground water, and OWS
samples collected at Building 916. At Buildings 922 and 927, chlorinated VOCs
were detected in both soil and ground water, and PAHs were detected in ground
water.
Ref. 12,
pp. 3-11,
3-12, 3-17,
and 3-21
Buildings 975
and 995
Unknown
Although analytical data from previous investigations of Buildings 975 and 995 are
considered to be unreliable, BTEX and chlorinated hydrocarbons have been detected
in soils and PAHs and chlorinated hydrocarbons have been detected in groundwater
near Building 995. In addition, sediment samples collected from a drainage ditch
north of Building 975 were found to contain PCBs, pesticides, and PAHs as well as
benzidine.
Ref. 12, pp.
3-31 and 3-32
39
SD-Summary
SITE SUMMARY OF SOURCE DESCRIPTIONS
Containment
Source
No.
Source Hazardous
Waste Quantity
Value
1
2
275.5
290.8
Ground water
NE
NE
Surface
Water
10
10
Gas
NE
NE
Air
Particulate
NE
NE
Based on Ref. 1, p. 51591, Table 2-6, the Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value of 100 has been
assigned to the sources.
40
SWOF-Surface Water Overland Flow/Flood Migration Pathway
4.1
OVERLAND/FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT
4.1.1.1 DEFINITION OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE MIGRATION PATH FOR
OVERLAND/FLOOD COMPONENT
The surface water overland flow portion of the migration pathway for Landfills 1 and 2 consists of runoff
to Salt Fork Creek. Salt Fork Creek flows through the southern portion of Chanute AFB between
Landfills 1 and 2, and all surface water drainage from Landfills 1 and 2 is directed toward Salt Fork
Creek (Ref. 9, pp. 1-4 and 1-6; Ref. 10, p. 2-5).
The in-water surface water segment of the hazardous substance migration path begins at the probable
point of entry (PPE), which is located on the bank of Salt Fork Creek where surface water drainage from
Landfills 1 and 2 flows into the creek. The hazardous substance migration path proceeds along Salt Fork
Creek as it flows east toward the eastern boundary of the site. Salt Fork Creek flows off site to the east
along Township Road and flows about 1.33 miles from the PPE. Salt Fork Creek drains into the Upper
Salt Fork Drainage Ditch about 2 miles southeast of Chanute AFB and 3.33 miles downstream of the
PPE. The Upper Salt Fork Drainage Ditch feeds into the Salt Fork of the Spoon River about 13.5 miles
downstream of the PPE (Ref. 4). The 15-mile target distance limit (TDL) begins at the PPE and ends 1.5
miles downstream of the point where Salt Fork Drainage Ditch feeds into the Salt Fork of the Spoon
River (Ref. 4). The flow rate of Salt Fork Creek ranged from 10.31 to 13.9 cubic feet per second (cfs)
during an IEPA investigation in 1987, but the flow rate was only 5 cfs during a remedial investigation in
1995 (Ref. 7, p. 10; Ref. 10, p. 2-5). The stream width of Salt Fork Creek is 20 feet, and the creek has a
water depth of 9 to 33 inches (Ref. 11, p. 2-1).
Releases of hazardous substances to Salt Fork Creek that are attributable to Landfills 1 and 2 have been
documented (see Section 4.2.2.1). The releases of hazardous substances are evidenced by sediment
contamination in Salt Fork Creek and soil and leachate contamination in Landfills 1 and 2. Salt Fork
Creek supports a diverse community of wildlife, including fish (Ref. 11, p. 2-7). During a survey
conducted in 1986 by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), fish that can be used for
human consumption were found in Salt Fork Creek about 4 miles downstream from the PPE. Eighteen
different species and 1,760 fish were collected, including such fish as the large mouth bass, which can be
consumed by humans (Ref. 23, pp. 2, 3, and 4). Photographs taken during a site visit by U.S. EPA on
March 27, 2000, show a fishing line, bobber, and bait bucket along the bank of Salt Fork Creek between
Landfills 1 and 2 (Ref. 5; Ref. 22, Photographs No. 3, 4, and 5). The photographs also show parts of the
fence along the creek that were missing, were breached, or had unsecured gates (Ref. 5; Ref. 22,
Photographs No. 2, 6, and 7). In addition, U.S. EPA personnel have observed numerous species,
including larger fish such as the carp, during remedial investigation (RI) activities conducted at Chanute
AFB in 2000. Because of the presence of fish such as large mouth bass and carp that can be consumed
by humans, IDNR considers Salt Fork Creek to be a fishery in the vicinity of the PPE (Ref. 25).
Wetlands located along Salt Fork Creek have a total frontage length of 1 mile (Ref. 6). Also, according
to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) and the bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) are federally listed species that may be present in the Chanute AFB region. The riparian
vegetation community along the lower on-site segment of Salt Fork Creek may be an adequate habitat for
the Indiana bat, but no sightings of the Indiana bat on base have been documented (Ref. 9, p. 1-6; Ref. ).
State-listed species present in Champaign County include the henslow’s sparrow (Ammodramus
henslowii), the upland sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda), the red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), the
logger-head shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), and a mussel called the spike (Elliptio dilatata). According to
the regional natural heritage biologist, no state- or federally listed threatened or endangered species have
been documented near Salt Fork Creek within the TDL (Ref. 4; Ref. 24).
41
SWOF-Surface Water Overland Flow/Flood Migration Pathway
Segment
Description
Length
(feet)
Mile/
Foot Marker
1
Salt Fork Creek
17,582
3.33/17,582
2
Upper Salt Fork Drainage Ditch
53,698
13.5/71,280
3
Salt Fork of the Spoon River
7,920
15/79,200
42
SWOF-Surface Water Overland Flow/Flood Migration Pathway
SWOF-Observed Release
4.1.2.1 LIKELIHOOD OF RELEASE
4.1.2.1.1
Observed Release
Releases of hazardous substances are evidenced by comparison of sediment contamination in Salt Fork
Creek and soil and leachate contamination in Landfills 1 and 2. An observed release was established
based on analytical results for (1) IEPA sediment samples collected along the creek upstream and
downstream of Landfills 1 and 2 on April 27, 1998, and (2) soil and leachate samples collected at
Landfills 1 and 2.
Chemical Analysis
Analysis of IEPA sediment sample x102 collected in Salt Fork Creek immediately downstream of
Landfills 1 and 2 revealed elevated concentrations of PAHs and lead compared to sediment sample x101
collected in Salt Fork Creek upstream of Landfills 1 and 2. PAHs were not detected and lead was
detected at a low concentration of 14 mg/kg in sediment sample x101 (Ref. 14, p. 7; Ref. 15, p. 237; Ref.
5). In downstream sample x102, PAHs were detected above SQLs and lead was detected at a
concentration of 54 mg/kg, which is more than three times the upstream concentration. The analytical
results from IEPA sediment sampling are included in the table below (Ref. 14, pp. 7 and 9; Ref. 15, pp.
237 and 238). Lead was also detected at an elevated concentration of 59 mg/kg in sample x104, which
was collected further downstream from samples x102 (SVOC analysis was not performed on sample
x104) (Ref. 15, p. 240; Ref. 14, p. 5).
Concentration (mg/kg)
Hazardous Substancea
Sample x101
Sample x102
Lead
14
54
0.5
Benzo(a)anthracene
<SQL
1.6
0.5
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
<SQL
1.6
0.5
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
<SQL
1.1
0.5
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
<SQL
0.63
0.5
Benzo(a)pyrene
<SQL
1.4
0.5
Chrysene
<SQL
1.7
0.5
Fluoranthene
<SQL
3.9
0.5
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
<SQL
0.62
0.5
Phenanthrene
<SQL
2.9
0.5
Pyrene
<SQL
3.0
0.5
Notes:
<SQL = Less than sample quantitation limit
a
Sample Quantitation
Limit (mg/kg)
Anthracene is not included because analytical results were <SQL.
43
Surface Water Attribution
No sources of PAHs and lead have been identified upstream of Chanute AFB. Most of the Salt Fork
Creek watershed upstream of OU-2 and Chanute AFB consists of agricultural land. Additional upstream
land uses that may contribute minor runoff to Salt Fork Creek include residential (mobile home court)
and transportation (highway and railroad) uses (Ref. 10, p. 2-5). However, the potential runoff from
upstream areas has not impacted Salt Fork Creek; the sediment sampled immediately upstream of OU-2
had no PAHs above detection limits (Ref. 14, p. 7).
All of the PAHs and lead detected in the sediment of Salt Fork Creek were also detected at
concentrations above SQLs in soil and/or leachate samples collected at Landfills 1 and 2 during the test
pit excavation program conducted in February and March 1998 (Ref. 16, pp. 1 through 22; Ref. 17a, pp.
68, 69, 71, and 72; Ref. 17b, pp. 64, 65, and 66; Ref. 17c, pp. 74, 76, and 77; Ref. 17d, pp. 55 and 57;
Ref. 17e, pp. 69 and 70; Ref. 17f, pp. 51 and 52; Ref. 18a, pp. 58 and 59; Ref. 18b, pp. 63 and 64; Ref.
18c, pp. 63 and 64; Ref. 18d, pp. 66, 68, and 69; Ref. 18e, pp. 71 and 73; Ref. 18f, pp. 73, 75, and 76).
Surface soil samples were collected from 0 to 0.5 foot bgs, subsurface soil samples were collected at
depths ranging from 1 to 13 feet bgs, and leachate samples were collected at depths ranging from 9 to 15
feet bgs at eight locations within each landfill ( Ref. 16, pp. 1 through 22). Section 2.4.1 summarizes the
sample analytical results from the test pit excavation program, and Figures 3 and 4 show the sampling
locations.
The highest PAH concentrations in Landfill 1 (1) surface soil and leachate were detected in test pit TP1031 and (2) subsurface soil were detected in test pit TP-1030. Benzo(a)pyrene, the most toxic PAH,
was detected in surface soil in test pit TP-1031 at a concentration of 2.3 mg/kg (Ref. 16, p. 20; Ref. 17b,
p. 64). Benzo(a)pyrene was detected in subsurface soil in test pit TP-1030 at a concentration of 0.29
mg/kg (Ref. 16, p. 19; Ref. 17c, p. 74). Benzo(b)fluoranthene, fluoranthene, and pyrene were detected in
leachate in test pit TP-1031 at concentrations of 2.3E-04 mg/L, 2.5E-03 mg/L, and 3.3E-03 mg/L,
respectively (Ref. 16, p. 21; Ref. 17d, p. 55).
The highest PAH concentrations in Landfill 2 (1) surface soil were detected in test pit TP-1003,
(2) subsurface soil were detected in test pit TP-1007, and (3) leachate were detected in test pits TP-1002
and TP-1006. Benzo(a)pyrene was detected in surface soil in test pit TP-1003 at a concentration of 4.0
mg/kg and was detected in subsurface soil in test pit TP-1007 at a concentration of 17 mg/kg (Ref. 16,
pp. 3 and 9; Ref. 18d, p. 66; Ref. 18f, p. 73). Test pit TP-1007 was the sampling point closest to Salt
Fork Creek, and the subsurface soil samples collected in test pit TP-1007 had the highest PAH
concentrations of all the soil samples analyzed (see Figure 4). Test pit TP-1002 had the highest leachate
concentrations of chrysene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, and benzo(a)pyrene (0.028, 0.020, and 0.018 mg/L,
respectively) (Ref. 16, p. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 63).
Lead was detected at concentrations above SQLs in soil and leachate at Landfills 1 and 2. Test pit TP1029, which was located near the northwestern corner of Landfill 1, had the highest surface and
subsurface soil concentrations of lead (59,700 and 9,230 mg/kg, respectively). In addition, the lead
concentration (30.1 mg/L) in the subsurface soil sample collected from test pit TP-1029 exceeded the
RCRA TCLP criterion. The highest concentration of lead in leachate (2.8 mg/L) was detected in test pit
TP-1002, which was in the southern portion of Landfill 2 (see Figure 4) (Ref. 16, pp. 3; Ref. 18c, p. 64).
Lead was detected in leachate at all the Landfill 2 test pit locations where leachate was encountered.
Observed Release Factor Value: 550
44
SWOF/Drinking-Toxicity/Persistence
WASTE CHARACTERISTIC
4.1.2.2
4.1.2.2.1
Toxicity/Persistence
The following hazardous substances are in the observed release to the surface water.
Source
No.
Toxicity
Factor
Value
Persistence
Factor
Valuea
Toxicity/
Persistence
Factor Value
Lead
1,2
10,000
1
10,000
Ref. 1, p. 51601 and Table
4-26; Ref. 2, p. B-13
Benzo(a)anthracene
1, 2
1,000
1
1,000
Ref. 1, p. 51601 and Table
4-26; Ref. 2, p. B-2
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
1, 2
1,000
1
1,000
Ref. 1, p. 51601 and Table
4-26; Ref. 2, p. B-3
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
1, 2
100
1
100
Ref. 1, p. 51601 and Table
4-26; Ref. 2, p. B-3
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
1, 2
--
1
--
Ref. 1, Table 4-26; Ref. 2,
p. B-3
Benzo(a)pyrene
1, 2
10,000
1
10,000
Ref. 1, p. 51601 and Table
4-26; Ref. 2, p. B-2
Chrysene
1, 2
10
1
10
Ref. 1, p. 51601 and Table
4-26; Ref. 2, p. B-5
Fluoranthene
1, 2
100
1
100
Ref. 1, p. 51601 and Table
4-26; Ref. 2, p. B-10
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
1, 2
1,000
1
1,000
Ref. 1, p. 51601 and Table
4-26; Ref. 2, p. B-12
Phenanthrene
1, 2
--
1
--
Ref. 1, p. 51601 and Table
4-26; Ref. 2, p. B-16
Pyrene
1, 2
100
1
100
Ref. 1, p. 51601 and Table
4-26; Ref. 2, p. B-17
Hazardous
Substance
Reference
Notes:
a
--
Persistence factor for a river
= No factor value available
Toxicity/Persistence Factor Value: 10,000
45
SWOF/Drinking-Hazardous Waste Quantity
SWOF/Drinking-Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value
4.1.2.2.2
Hazardous Waste Quantity
Source Hazardous
Waste Quantity
Value (Section 2.4.2.1.5)
Source No.
1
2
275.5
290.8
Is source hazardous
constituent quantity
data complete? (yes/no)
No
No
Sum of values: 566.3
In accordance with Ref. 1, p. 51591, Table 2-6, the hazardous waste quantity factor value assigned to the
above sum is 100.
4.1.2.2.3
Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value
The waste characteristics factor category value is calculated by multiplying the highest
toxicity/persistence factor value by the hazardous waste quantity factor value. Lead and benzo(a)pyrene
have a toxicity/persistence factor value of 10,000. The calculation is performed as follows:
10,000 x 100 = 1 x 106
Toxicity/persistence factor value
X hazardous waste quantity factor value: 1 x 106
In accordance with Ref. 1, p. 51592, Table 2-7, the assigned waste characteristics factor category value is
32.
Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100
Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 32
46
SWOF/Drinking-Targets
4.1.2.3
DRINKING WATER TARGETS
The nearest intake and population drinking water targets were not assessed because no drinking water
intakes were identified within the in-water segment of Salt Fork Creek.
4.1.2.3.1
Nearest Intake
NE
4.1.2.3.2
Population
NE
4.1.2.3.3
Resources
NE
Nearest Intake Factor Value: NE
Population Factor Value: NE
Resources Factor Value: NE
47
SWOF/Food Chain-Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation
WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
4.1.3.2
4.1.3.2.1
Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation
The following hazardous substances are in the observed release both to surface water.
Source
No.
Toxicity
Factor
Value
Toxicity/
Persistence
Factor
Value
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Factor
Value
Lead
1,2
10,000
10,000
50
5 x 105
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-13
Benzo(a)anthracene
1, 2
1,000
1,000
50,000
5 x 107
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-2
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
1, 2
1,000
1,000
50,000
5 x 107
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-3
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
1, 2
100
100
50,000
5 x 106
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-3
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
1, 2
--
--
50,000
--
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-3
Benzo(a)pyrene
1, 2
10,000
10,000
50,000
5 x 108
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-2
Chrysene
1, 2
10
10
500
5,000
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-5
Fluoranthene
1, 2
100
100
5,000
5 x 105
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-10
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene
1, 2
1,000
1,000
50,000
5 x 107
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-12
Phenanthrene
1, 2
--
--
50
--
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-16
Pyrene
1, 2
100
100
50
5,000
Ref. 1, Tables
4-26 and 4-28;
Ref. 2, p. B-17
Hazardous
Substance
Note:
-- =
Toxicity/
Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
Factor Value
References
No factor value available
Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 5 x 108
48
SWOF/Food Chain-Hazardous Waste Quantity
SWOF/Food Chain-Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value
4.1.3.2.2
Hazardous Waste Quantity
Source Hazardous
Waste Quantity
Value (Section 2.4.2.1.5.)
Source No.
1
2
275.5
290.8
Is source hazardous
constituent quantity
data complete? (yes/no)
No
No
Sum of values: 566.3
In accordance with Ref. 1, p. 51591, Table 2-6, the hazardous waste quantity factor value assigned to the
above sum is 100.
4.1.3.2.3
Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value
The waste characteristics factor category value is calculated by first multiplying the highest
toxicity/persistence factor value by the hazardous waste quantity factor value. Lead and benzo(a)pyrene
have a toxicity/persistence factor value of 10,000. The product is then multiplied by the highest
bioaccumulation potential factor value for one of these hazardous substances; however, the maximum
product is 1 x 1012 (Ref. 1, p. 51638). Benzo(a)pyrene has a bioaccumulation potential factor value of
50,000. The calculations are performed as follows:
10,000 x 100 = 1 x 106
Toxicity/persistence factor value
X hazardous waste quantity factor value: 1 x 106
(1 x 106) x 50,000 = 5 x 1010
(Toxicity/persistence factor value X hazardous waste quantity factor value)
X bioaccumulation potential factor value: 5 x 1010
In accordance with Ref. 1, p. 51592, Table 2-7, the assigned waste characteristics factor category value is
320.
Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100
Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 320
49
SWOF/Food Chain-Targets
SWOF/Food Chain-Food Chain Individual
4.1.3.3
HUMAN FOOD CHAIN THREAT-TARGETS
Actual Human Food Chain Contamination
Salt Fork Creek supports a diverse community of wildlife, including fish (Ref. 11, p. 2-7). During a
survey conducted in 1986 by the IDNR, fish that can be used for human consumption were found in Salt
Fork Creek about 4 miles downstream from the PPE. Eighteen different species and 1,760 fish were
collected, including such fish as the large mouth bass, which can be consumed by humans (Ref. 23, pp. 2,
3, and 4). Evidence of a fishery at the PPE was observed during a U.S. EPA visit to Chanute AFB on
March 27, 2000. Photographs taken during the site visit show a fishing line, bobber, and bait bucket
along the bank of Salt Fork Creek between Landfills 1 and 2 (Ref. 5; Ref. 22, Photographs No. 3, 4, and
5). The photographs also show parts of the fence along the creek that were missing, were breached, or
had unsecured gates (Ref. 5; Ref. 22, Photographs No. 2, 6, and 7). In addition, U.S. EPA personnel
have observed numerous species, including larger fish such as the carp, during RI activities conducted at
Chanute AFB in 2000. Because of the presence of fish such as large mouth bass and carp that can be
consumed by humans, IDNR considers Salt Fork Creek to be a fishery in the vicinity of the PPE (Ref.
25). The fishery is between the PPE and the boundary of the observed release (Ref. 5). Several PAHs,
including benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene,
benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, fluoranthene, and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, that have bioaccumulation factors
of 500 or greater were detected at elevated concentrations in creek sediment downstream of the PPE (Ref.
2; Ref. 14, p. 9).
4.1.3.3.1
Food Chain Individual
The fishery is subject to Level II contamination because several PAHs with bioaccumulation factors of
500 or greater meet the criteria for an observed release (Ref. 3, p. 299). Therefore, a food chain
individual factor value of 45 has been assigned (Ref. 1, p. 51620).
Food Chain Individual Factor Value: 45
50
SWOF/Food Chain-Level I Concentrations
SWOF/Food Chain-Level II Concentrations
SWOF/Food Chain-Potential human food chain contamination
4.1.3.3.2
Population
4.1.3.3.2.1 Level I Concentrations
No portion of the fishery is subject to Level I concentrations.
4.1.3.3.2.2 Level II Concentrations
As discussed in Sections 4.1.3.3 and 4.1.3.3.1, the fishery is subject to Level II concentrations. Specific
production data for the fishery are not available, and a reasonable production estimate cannot be made;
therefore, a production estimate of greater than 0 pound per year is used (Ref. 3, p. 307). The assigned
human food chain population value is 0.03 (Ref. 1, p. 51621).
4.1.3.3.2.3 Potential Human Food Chain Contamination
NE
Level I Concentrations Factor Value: NE
Level II Concentrations Factor Value: 0.03
Potential Human Food Chain Contamination Factor Value: NE
51
SWOF/Environment-Ecosystem Toxicity/Mobility/Persistence/Bioaccumulation
WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
4.1.4.2
4.1.4.2.1
Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation
The following hazardous substances are in the observed release to surface water.
Source
No.
Ecosystem
Toxicity
Factor Value
Persistence
Factor
Valuea
Ecosystem
Toxicity/
Persistence
Factor Value
Lead
1,2
10,000
1
10,000
Ref. 1, p. 51638
and Table 4-29;
Ref. 2, p. B-13
Benzo(a)anthracene
1, 2
10,000
1
10,000
Ref. 1, p. 51638
and Table 4-29;
Ref. 2, p. B-2
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
1, 2
--
1
--
Ref. 1, p. 51638
and Table 4-29;
Ref. 2, p. B-3
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
1, 2
--
1
--
Ref. 1, p. 51638
and Table 4-29;
Ref. 2, p. B-3
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
1, 2
--
1
--
Ref. 1, Table
4-29; Ref. 2,
p. B-3
Benzo(a)pyrene
1, 2
10,000
1
10,000
Ref. 1, p. 51638
and Table 4-29;
Ref. 2, p. B-2
Chrysene
1, 2
1,000
1
1,000
Ref. 1, p. 51638
and Table 4-29;
Ref. 2, p. B-5
Fluoranthene
1, 2
10,000
1
10,000
Ref. 1, p. 51638
and Table 4-29;
Ref. 2, p. B-10
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene
1, 2
--
1
--
Ref. 1, p. 51638
and Table 4-29;
Ref. 2, p. B-12
Phenanthrene
1, 2
1,000
1
1,000
Ref. 1, p. 51638
and Table 4-29;
Ref. 2, p. B-16
Pyrene
1, 2
10,000
1
10,000
Ref. 1, p. 51638
and Table 4-29;
Ref. 2, p. B-17
Hazardous Substance
Note:
a
-- =
Persistenc factor for a river
No factor value available
52
Reference
SWOF/Environment-Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation
Ecosystem
Toxicity/Persistence
Factor
Value
Ecosystem
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Factor Value
Ecosystem
Toxicity/
Persistence/
BioaccumulaFactor Value
Lead
10,000
5,000
5 x 106
Ref. 2, p. B-13;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
Benzo(a)anthracene
10,000
50,000
5 x 108
Ref. 2, p. B-2;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
--
50,000
--
Ref. 2, p. B-3;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
--
50,000
--
Ref. 2, p. B-3;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
--
50,000
--
Ref. 2, p. B-3;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
Benzo(a)pyrene
10,000
50,000
5 x 108
Ref. 2, p. B-2;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
Chrysene
1,000
5,000
5 x 106
Ref. 2, p. B-5;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
Fluoranthene
10,000
500
5 x 106
Ref. 2, p. B-10;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
--
50,000
--
Ref. 2, p. B-12;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
Phenanthrene
1,000
5000
5 x 106
Ref. 2, p. B-16;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
Pyrene
10,000
50
5 x 105
Ref. 2, p. B-17;
Ref. 1, Table 4-30
Hazardous Substance
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Reference
Note:
-- =
No factor value available
Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 5 x 108
53
SWOF/Environment-Hazardous Waste Quantity
SWOF/Environment-Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value
4.1.4.2.2
Hazardous Waste Quantity
Source No.
Source Hazardous
Waste Quantity
Value (Section 2.4.2.1.5)
Is source hazardous
constituent quantity
data complete? (yes/no)
1
2
275.5
290.8
No
No
Sum of values: 566.3
In accordance with Ref. 1, p. 51591, Table 2-6, the hazardous waste quantity factor value assigned to the
above sum is 100.
4.1.4.2.3
Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value
The waste characteristics factor category value is calculated by first multiplying the highest ecosystem
toxicity/persistence factor value by the hazardous waste quantity factor value. Benzo(a)anthrancene,
benzo(a)pyrene, fluoranthene, and pyrene have an ecosystem toxicity/persistence factor value of 10,000.
The product is then multiplied by the highest ecosystem bioaccumulation potential factor value for one of
these hazardous substances; however, the maximum product is 1 x 1012 (Ref. 1, p. 51644).
Benzo(a)anthracene and benzo(a)pyrene have an ecosystem bioaccumulation factor value of 50,000. The
calculations are performed as follows:
10,000 x 100 = 1 x 106
Ecosystem toxicity/persistence factor value
X hazardous waste quantity factor value: 1 x 106
(1 x 106) x 50,000 = 5 x 1010
(Ecosystem toxicity/persistence factor value X hazardous waste quantity factor value)
X ecosystem bioaccumulation potential factor value: 5 x 1010
In accordance with Ref. 1, p. 51592, Table 2-7, the assigned waste characteristics factor category value is
320.
Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100
Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 320
54
SWOF/Environment-Targets
SWOF/Environment-Level I Concentrations
SWOF/Environment-Level II Concentrations
4.2.4.3
4.2.4.3.1
ENVIRONMENTAL THREAT - TARGETS
Sensitive Environments
No Level I or Level II concentrations have been detected within a sensitive environment at Chanute AFB.
4.2.4.3.1.1
Level I Concentrations
NE
4.2.4.3.1.2
Level II Concentrations
NE
Level I Concentrations Factor Value: NE
Level II Concentrations Factor Value: NE
55
4.2.4.3.1.3
Potential Contamination
Sensitive Environments
Endangered Species
According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) and the bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) are federally listed species that may be present in the Chanute AFB region.
The riparian vegetation community along the lower on-site segment of Salt Fork Creek may be an
adequate habitat for the Indiana bat, but no sightings of the Indiana bat on site have been documented
(Ref. 9, p. 1-6). State-listed species present in Champaign County include the henslow’s sparrow
(Ammodramus henslowii), the upland sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda), the red-shouldered hawk (Buteo
lineatus), the logger-head shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), and a mussel called the spike (Elliptio dilatata).
According to the regional natural heritage biologist, there are no state- or federally listed threatened or
endangered species near Salt Fork Creek within the 15-mile TDL (Ref. 4; Ref. 24).
Critical and Sensitive Habitats
No federally designated critical habitats exist along Salt Fork Creek within the TDL. However, wetlands,
which are considered to be sensitive habitats, are present within the TDL (Ref. 6).
Wetlands
Wetlands located along Salt Fork Creek have a total frontage length of 1 mile (5,280 feet). The National
Wetlands Inventory classifies these wetlands in the Palustrine System as scrub-shrub, forested, and
emergent (Ref. 6). The flow rate of Salt Fork Creek ranged from 10.31 to 13.9 cfs during an IEPA
investigation in 1987, but the flow rate was only 5 cfs during a remedial investigation conducted in 1995
(Ref. 7, p. 10; Ref. 10, p. 2-5). For the purposes of this HRS package, Salt Fork Creek was
conservatively classified as a small to moderate stream (Ref. 1, Table 4-13)
Type of Surface
Water Body
Wetland
Frontage
Reference
Small to moderate stream
5,280 feet
Ref. 6
Wetland Frontage
Value (Wj) (Ref. 1, Table 4-24)
25
Type of Surface
Water Body
Sum of Sensitive
Environment
Values (Sj)
(Wj + Sj)Dj
Dilution
Wetland
(Ref. 1,
Weight (Dj)
Frontage
p. 51625)
Value (Wj) (Ref. 1, Table 4-13)
Small to moderate stream
0
25
0.1
2.5
The environment potential contamination factor value is determined by multiplying the sum of sensitive
environment values and the wetland frontage value by the dilution weight and dividing by 10. The
calculation of the environmental potential contamination factor value is shown below.
Sum of ([Wj + Sj]Dj): 2.5
Sum of ([Wj + Sj] Dj)/10 : 0.25
Ref. 1, p. 51625
([25 + 0] x 0.1) x 1/10 = 0.25
Potential Contamination Factor Value: 0.25
56