Document MG9MBM02r6m1er7d0LG2my79y

TO: Distribution TfW ERT: yp_ fvO^Q- RF Interoffice Communication FROM: DATE: SUBJ: T. G. Grumbles July 23, 1990 TUFTS UNIVERSITY REPORT VISTA Many months ago Vista agreed to participate in a Tufts University Center for Environmental Management study on corporate responses to SARA Title III. The Aberdeen facility as a user of VCM was used as a plant in the study. The final report is attached. The report is favorable to the industry and demonstrates that we are certainly doing as good as some larger companies in many of the organizational areas studied. The report is provided for your review. It also contains some good information on customer and competitor organizations in safety, health and environmental areas. The Aberdeen plant also received a copy. ) T. G. Grumbles dlj .128 Attachment Distribution: T. H. Huffman, J. A. DeBernardi, R. D. Gamblin, S. Reynolds, W. L. McClain, R. T. Ferrell, J. Burns M. D. cc: w/o attachment - R. W. Seymour-Aber TO: Distribution TGG: JCb ERT: MJH: AJO:vRF XF: Interoffice Communication FROM: DATE: SUBJ: T. G. Grumbles January 5, 1990 VISTACONE PENETROMETER RESULTS REVIEW MEETING JANUARY 4, 1990 The meeting was held in Ponca City to review the results of the Cone Penetrometer work done at the LCVCM plant the week of December 4, and determine needed actions based on the results. Below are the action items and a summary of discussions from the meeting. Attendees of the meeting are listed below in distribution. Action Items 1. It was decided that further on-site exploration in the 25 foot zone and off-site down to the 50 foot aquifer needs to be done. 2. Additional off-site work would be done based on the 200 foot grid plan approach used previously. 3. An attempt will be made to do the penetrometer work on public land, such as the roads and right-of-ways. 4. Mike Hayes will pursue getting permission from the parish for the work on public roads. 5. Mike Hayes and a Conoco PR representative will work on the public relations preparedness such as if-asked statements, and preparing the truck operators for questions. 6. Conoco estimates the cost for the work will be approximately $2,500 per day. The costs will be shared according to the existing cost-sharing agreement. 7. Gary Wojnowski will talk to IT about our plans and get them involved as appropriate. 8. David Booth will check with Paul Fetzer to assure he can run the water samples as needed, and to determine if he can run soil samples. 9. A draft report on the initial penetrometer work will be drafted and distributed in approximately two weeks. 10. Gary Wojnowski will write needed change orders for IT work. 11. Gary Wojnowski will provide Charlie Bleckman with examples of current field plans DEQ has approved. These will be used to begin extracting similar information out of the penetrometer truck operating manual. This will ultimately be needed for final report submittal to the state. 1 12. Vista will provide the initial probing of locations to be used in the next phase of work. 13. Conoco will ask Vista to provide containers for any needed waste disposal. 14. Vista will get some lighted barricades to be used at drill sites during the time the hole is still open. 15. David Booth will lay-out a grid of drill locations on a map and fax to Joel Wilson in Ponca for review. 16. David Booth will identify an engineer to provide on-site assistance during the off-site work. 17. The truck will be in Lake Charles on January 24th to begin work. 18. David Booth will contact DEQ (local and Baton Rouge) to discuss the work to be done. Summary of Discussions 1. The cone penetrometer results were reviewed to determine if the technology worked in this application. In general, it was decided that the cone penetrometer worked and could be used for the additional work as identified. The potential for down-hole contamination and qa/qc aspects of soil and water sampling were discussed. In general, these issues are adequately addressed with existing procedures. The truck had some difficulties in reaching the 80 foot sands and in some cases the 50 foot sand. However, it is felt that with some modification of procedures these difficulties can be overcome. The 80 foot exploration will be attempted again after the off-site "shallow" work is completed. In summary, the truck works, and provides a cheaper, more discrete method of obtaining soil an water samples, with much less waste generation. 2. The sampling results were reviewed (attached). Based on these results, It was decided that off-site work was necessary to further define the extent of contamination in the 10, 25, and 50 foot aquifers. In general, the concerns are: 1. 25-foot contamination extent on-site. 2. 25 and 50 foot potential contamination off-site 3. Impact of 1 and 2 on the design of the remediation system. How to proceed was discussed and it was decided that a 200 foot grid concept, similar to previous rate and extent exploration, would be used. The possibility of siting drill sites on the roads or right- 2 VVV 000001079 of-ways in Mossville was discussed. This would avoid potential issues with getting permission from land owners. This approach will be pursued and actions needed are reflected in the action items. A draft report of the initial penetrometer work will be issued in 2 weeks. 3. The need to complete the 80 foot exploration work, as originally planned, was discussed. It was decided that after we do the off-site shallow work, another attempt will be made to use the penetrometer to finish this work. Following are additional groundwater project items discussed. 1. The annual well monitoring will be scheduled for the week of March 5. Conoco will provide assistance and work with Dave Booth on the details. 2. There is a general concern regarding the status of the VD-1 P & A work. David Lourie has been very slow to respond to our requests and his draft report falls short of answering key questions. We will work to get final reports from Lourie and consider a meeting with G & M to discuss the results of the P & A activity and inspections. 3. Tom Grumbles will contact Wendy Call to request that she prepare a summary of the air stripping feasibility/pilot study contractor proposals and recommendations, and begin to schedule a meeting to review proposals and interview contractors. 4. The instillation of TFZ-7 was discussed. Gary Wojnowski will provide final comments to IT on their draft report and get it issued. David Booth will send the report to the State for approval. Gary Wojnowski will instruct IT to plan to proceed with identified P 6c A activities and instillation of TFZ-7 during the first week of February. The two abandoned copper pit area wells will be included in the P & A work. Stam-Schele should be used for P & A work. Vvv Qoo0l OSo 3 o . The decreasing scream factor of the tank, farm remediation wells was reviewed. It was decided to ask Stara-Schele to "de-silt" the recovery wells while in the plant for P & A activities. '-J V_ T. G. Grumbles dlj .926 Distribution: Jack Neeld, Gary Wojnowski, Joel Wilson-Conoco (by phone) Bob Huddleston, Dave Richter, Charles Bleckman David Booth-LCVCM, W. L. McClain cc: M. G. Hayes-LCCP, E. R. Taylor vvv oooooioei 4  i i; w 's 3D Research and Engineering Department : REL.LMINAEY RESULTS CONE PENETROMETER TRUCK TESTING V7STA LAKE CHARLES VCM PLANT Conoco Inc. PO. Bo* 1267 Ponca Citv, OK 74603 1405) 767-3456 TYPES AND DEPTHS OF COMPLETED PENETROMETER WORK ( x-8enotes detectable cpds.) BORING NO. LOCATION DEPTH(ft) TYPE OF WORK ANALYSES 1 Near VD-2 1 i# 57.4 64.0 Stratigraphy Stratigraphy N/A N/A 5 5 5 5 V*' 5 5 2501N. of TF2-5 i * tf 66.1 65.9 14.2 24.0 25.5 38.2 St rat. 4c Soil Stratigraphy So i L SoiL Soi! ^^ x N</ ^/ Soil { 'T VfA^ YES x N/A YES NO YES x NO 5 ) 5 ii t* 43,7 53.0 Soil Soil NO NO 6 500'N-of TFZ-5 8.6 6 < 23.8 6 6 i 24.0 27.0 Soil Soil _s SoilWwatery ^iV 1 Stratigraphy YES NO YES xx N/A Vv \X * 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 W. of TFZ-5 11 1< t1 1t V1 1 8.6 20.5 21.1 23.0 23.1 66.9 68.9 69.0 67.1 Soil Soil Water Soil Stratigraphy Stratigraphy Soil Soil Water NO NO YES YES N/A N/A NO NO YES VVV 000001082 Research and Engineering Department PRELIMINARY RESULTS ( CONT.) BORING NO. 11 11 11 LOCATION 760' N. of. TFZ-5 11 Conoco Inc. PO. Box 1267 Ponca City, OK 74603 (405) 767-3456 DEPTH (ft) 8.5 23.2 28.0 TYPE OF WORK Soil Soil Stratigraphy ANALYSES YES YES N/A VVV 000001083 ,, :onoCv Research and Engineering Department Conoco Inc. PO. Box 1267 Ponca Citv, OK 74603 1405) 767-3456 X irt\ t'BHVURAUy DATA REPORT FOR LAKE CHARLES VISTA SOIL SAMPLES ANALYSES Six soil sampLes were extracted with MeOh. was analyzed by GC/MS. METHOD: 8240 Aliquots of each extract Reportable Cmpds. only ( values greater than 5 ppb )* BORING NO. 5 DEPTH( ft) 25.5 5 66.1 6 3.6 7 23.0 11 8.5 11 23.2 COMPOUNDS 1,2-dichLoroethane 1,1,2-trichloroe thane 1,2-dichloroethane All cmpds. below reporting levels at above conditions. *1,2-dichloroethane 1,1,2-trichloroe thane All cmpds. below reporting levels at above conditions. All cmpds, below reporting levels at above conditions. AMOUNT(ug/kf) 20667 2417 4420 N/A 27778 4597 N/A N/A * Actual value exceeded largest calibration standard. wv 000001084 TEMPORATY DATA REPORT FOR LAKE CHARLES VISTA WATER SAMPLES ANALYSES sample : M E T H C D \ ?' m ft r r. c, C f c p i r m BLANK R"VTt'N'F F.T\': p T ' v '' 1 | T . ^ p t t/ r p ? v . DHP ^ P T F F RF V po *p I v 1 B :< 1 r w -J r o o T V1 FP" TV1 *'? T V 1 F" ? (Location boring No. 6- depth 24.0 ft.) " w \ p r pc PATE SAMPLER HATE ANA LY7FT) n 11 !'TTOY r ,.,'TnP M p v n *. ) 2 '2R 'R9 l OOP R E P C TV T F C BY' VKRTFTFn BY: .. } _ j - B J C H T. 0 R O F T H A N E - B 1 1 _P or\MO r T mono r > - ? c y p TOLUEN'E-PR > cJUD*toETjiAVe Yxttyu chlortbe RO WPME TH-AtfE CHLOROCTHANt T^TOROROFLOORDWCTffAl^ \7 )-0TCWLClROETHVL/<f ttETVYLEWE. CH-LO RtbErg^A/S- J Z->TCttLDftZ>THYLEN i - LiCttLD KOEmWF CHLOROFORM 1; I. 1-TftrCH-LDteoETH^We CARBON 7TrRftCMLOftXJ5E SENZZNE > ,2s rCHLO T^rCH UJROtTHYLENt l, 2-0tDf W?ROf>ROfWE. BRDKCOlCWLOROMfTHAWe 2-C4J LOfcOETHYiVJAfYLET?JR CtS- 1 j3-0rCHL0^^R0#>EVE TOLOETKE TfUN's-i; 7-nrcHLOAoPBof>E^ \ , 1 , Z-rRfCBLOftZ>FTRANE tetrach loroetby lene D rp ROMO t* U> ROMETH A^ -LHLOfi,0KEh*2E^f ?THYUEtfZW # fcROMOfORW a-Tt7R'ACLROETHAW l ,3-irCHLDROfiN2NE ;. m - jj rcH lorofenzej/e .Z-OrCHLDROFEWZEA'e n 'r l* v SURROGATE spppon -\'rr SURROG ATP 10 4 RFC 0 2 0 RET qfi 0 RFC CONTFNTRAT TON < 4 00 oo t-i g / T. < 4 0000 < 20000 u ' T. < 40000 . - * " < 20 ODD c $0000 < ZOO 00 ug'.'L < 2.000 fi ua. L < 20000 ''I. < 2.0000 < 20 000 ttft/L < 2D 000 Vg/L < ZOOOD VKiU 320000 u j/L < 200Cfo u{;. < acooo u it ' r 20 00(0 u?:c. < J0DOCO < 20006 V. it ' ` < 20600 1] ft /1. < 20 000 U '' f 22000 It s* ' T < 20000 iip;;! < 50060 v$/L < 2000 l) :; < 20000 < 20060 UffM < 30000 c Zoo Ott L, < 20000 U; f 20000 VVV 0000010B5 TEMPORARY DATA REPORT FOR LAKE CHARLES VISTA WATER SAMPLES ANALYSES (Location boring No. 7-depth 21.1) MET;: Cl1 *I 3 LANK RON; vr'NT ftT'c. vr IVl660 i'v ; 1 IY1 b) at- sampled DATS ANALYZED : L L 7 MV ACTOR ia/r/^a 1 .G R E P 0 ft ; ; yzrifie; 1, 'i-Yi lCtiLOHOFT:;.' '.T : TOLL' iJ .V E 1 A "8ROMOFLUOKOBEWZE//E sLRT-';': \ TE 2 L ft HO- : : T F. X l ft ft 0 Ci A 7 E vrwri- cm.o*rtE 8ROM0METKANE CttLOROETHA>/E TTtt: C H LO ROF L 0 OROM nu I, 1 -'DrCH-LOfiOETH'YLEW'E METHYLENE CH-LOfcTDE TRAK5-1 , a-erEHT-OROETHYLEVE J, I-CtCHLOROETHANE CHLOROFORM 1 , 1 , 1 - TRTOHLOROETHANF CARBON tptR ATHLORTDF 8EKZENT TRTCHT.OROFTHYT F \'F 1 o ~ R T *' u t n tv n rtj o p a v t B ROMOP TC H ! OROMETH.A V F 2-CHI.OROFTHYl VTVYT FT HER C T S - 1 .:i-pTCHTOpOODnDtrhrr TOT.ITVE TRAN'S - 1 . R-n TCHT.OROPPOPEYF 1.1 2 '* o : r 1 r T o ft O ft t y \ v y 'f'P'fpH'UTnDnrTuyi pyr ft T ft R C Nf w 1 ^pri\'K'f!j \ \:c CHL0R0RFN7F.VF FTHYLBEN/Z>/ bromoform 1 . 1.2. Z-TETRACHLOROErHAf^F 1 ft _ n T r u i o cy p p y p v p l 1 .. n I r \: ^ r\ij r\u 1/ \ v r r i . l - n rruM r oou u'v-/ t.-v c 10 4 0. RFC .: 7 ' | r. f COMLFN'TnATTC'; < 10 "}. ' < 10 ; .* V I " < 5 Ug. L < 10 < .5 ug T. < ao lift, 1 < 5 ug. 7 < 5, < 6< 5 \l / T. < 5 / 11.1 <3. < 5 I.t < L < 5 ft ' f TM a g, L 5 u ii . ' 7 < 5 n& ' } < S i.i p; `T < Z5 n -ft f T, < 5 i } i < 5 U f( f I, < 5 11 v; / r a Mn > i < 5 ,, , T < 5 u p' ' L < 5 np.'L < 5 nt - T < 5 u if ' !. < 5 i i p; 'T < 5 1 1 .V /' T ff< u p; / T < S' F / T VV^ 000001086 : 1 i a P T r L' : \ i>. : .v v t (' v tv : u 1i rv r TEMPORARY DATA REPORT FOR LAKE CHARLES VISTA WATER SAMPLES ANALYSES rvv TF:: [. C V - D 7 - 0 C (Location boring No. 7-depth 67.1 ft.) "voonoou a; lake :.:: - ;c .?,.v L A X !'. : T U N F K V >: . T; A I L. V 'W'.. ;r t i: r T I) I'P F F' 7 V. F TAM r. "> c V 1 A:: I -s- /s-/Vf P i Ll'T ION FACTO H i . 0 m 5^ \i r> \ :v e ? o r t i : \ VERIFIED 1 O I: I R R 0 (: A T F l R ROC A ~ F r* 14t npnMP'fHA^F Vtvv! nn npT|)P ppnwoMPTU^vp rUinDfAtTlUMC TftANS-l, 2-5iCHLORDerYUE^E ' l-nii-uinpnrTp.Ayr (' u i / > 'J 11 ` / % 1> 1 > 1 . TPTrUT npnpTU A vu r- \ r? n n v --t'? - u t npnr - t* *'T r'" CIS-1.R-nTCHIopoRPOPKNE tom'I'VF tra\is- 1 A-n 1 r-WT CiROPROPFNF 1 1 O..TU | CfJT AlJOTTUi Vp T",nniri;T o t'j A r t n v t I'x'r r> i n pn\i r\r ir ? r, r?OM F T U a vt' C; p T o R 0 p r v 7 v v r I ." T U V I ' ' \ i t 2 2~TTrnRAO*L0ft0lSnUa& ' ii i (> / % ;; i - - ' f: ;: r\ u r v ; t ' ' > _ n i < i: t p, ^ t..........-- - -- : ' y ri s p \ C F . 'i A RF( 1 P '-. E'' f' o Y 0 F \r T R i T T O m < ID !!S'F <(. ID 11o, / I, K " m * ' T, < \o <r < it) < 6^ < 5 :A < Jud < 5 'i ' f. < 5 us F < 5 `J;.' - I <C 5 1 *70 ... <5 < 5 U,;. : < s ur. : < ;5 n^T. < 5 u rr ' T < 5 mit-'i. < 5 *!?'! *i rf / T < 5 ""-/T <. 5 < S1 <5 < 5 Av/4. < 5 .* < 5 'T < 5 ": ' < 5 v, OOOOOVO97 VVV . SAMPLE ANALYZED AT VISTA I OR ITS POLLUTANTS i iit 1 i e JraeUUi.. i-roctio" A 1 1 irt.u 1 C; in ug / 1 ,MPL SOURCE: / LCU-Od-OID 12/04/89 (boring No.6,depth_24.0 ft) PARAMETER___________________________ VINYL CHLORIDE ____________ PROMOMETHANE CHI.ORQETHAME 1.1- DICHLOROETHENE___________ METHYLENE CHLORIDE_____________ TRANS-1,E-DICHLGROETHEhE 1.1- DICHLCEOLTHANE___________ CHLOROFORM 1.1.1- TRICHLOROETHANE CARBON TETRACHLORIDE BENZENE 1.2- DICHLGROETHANE___________ TEICHLQROETHENE 1.2- DICHLORGPROPANE BRGMODICHLORQMETHANE 2-CHLQROETHYLVINVL ETHER CIS-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE TRANS--1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE TOLUENE __ _____________________ 1.1.2-TRICHLQROETHANG TETRACHLOROETKENE ___________ DIBRQMGCHLQROMETHANE CHLOROBENZENE ___________ ETHYL BENZENE BROMOFORM__________________________ 1.1.2.2-TETRACHLOROETHANE TRICHLQROFLUOROMETHANE CHLOROMETHANE ___________ 1.3-D I CHLOROBENZENE 1.2- DICHLOROBENZENE 1.4-DICHLOROBENZENE RESULT _____________ *1617 . 500 _____________ 500 ________ > /26 ____ 500 -596 _____________ d 27 *2957 5 00 ___ < 500 ____ .,500 ______ **436933 ___ :.;500 500 _____________ .300 _________ _ .500 500 _ 500 . 500 ___________ *2565 _ ; 500 __________ 500 ____ ________ 500 _____________ <500 _ ___________ <500 <500 ______________ <500 ______________ <500 _ ______________ 500 < 50 0 __ ___ __ _ ~_____ n.57 ______________ "____ ~_______ ____ ~ ~ <500 MDL U . 66 1.47 0. 7 8 O. 52 O. 7 1 :>.4 6 1.48 .>. 85 O. 81 0. 26 1.06 <). 66 0.46 /'. 40 0,52 0.25 0.25 0. 17 O . 19 0.60 0.27 0.23 0. 16 O. 14 0.64 1.07 1.59 1.07 0.68 0.32 DATE OF ANALYSIS: 12/05/89 ANALYST :(1JCC ND-NQT DETERMINED NF-NOT FOUND BMDL-BELQW DETECTION LIMITS ' RESULTS CORRECTED FOR METHOD BLANK *-DONE ON X500 DILUTION **-DONE ON X2500 DILUTION vvv o 0000108B SAMPLE ANALYZED AT VISTA PRIORITY l-'DLLUT AN T S ulittiit! urnarac Fraction All F t?.-;u i -- i ri uq / 1 SAMPLE SOURCE: L-CV /A O-jJ 1^/06/89 (boring No.7 depth,21.i l l . ; PARAMETER___________________________ VINYL CHLORIDE ____________ BROMGMETHANE ____________ CHLGRGETHAME ____________ 1 , 1-DICHLQROETHENE_______ ____ METHYLENE CHLORIDE____________ TRANS--1,2-DICHLDROETHENE 1 , 1 -D ICHLQRGETHANE____________ CHLGROFORM ____________ 1,1, 1-TRICHLQRQETHANE CARBON TETRACHLORIDE BENZENE ___________________________ 1.2-DICHLQROETHANE____________ TRICHLORQETHENE ____________ 1 1 , C-DICHLDRGPROF'ANE BRQMODICHLOROMETHANE 2-CHLORQETHYLVINYL ETHER CIS-1,3-DICHLGRGPRGPENE TRANS- 1,3-D I CHLGROF'RGPENE TOLUENE __________________________ 1 ,1 ,2-TRICHLOROETHANE TETRACHLOROETHENE ___________ DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE CHLOROBENZENE ___________ ETHYL BENZENE ____________ BROMOFORM__________________________ 1.1.2.2-TETRACHLOROETHANE TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE CHLOROMETHANE ___________ 1.3-DICHLOROBENZENE 1.2- DICHL0R0BENZENE 1.4-DICHL0R0BENZENE RESULT BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL 0.08 BMDL BMDL b iTi d 1 BMDL BMDL BMDL *185.9 BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL 6. 97 BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL BMDL i-1 DL V. 88 0.57 1.47 0.78 8.7 1 __ 48 __________________ 1.48 . OJ 0.81 0.28 1.06 0.66 0.46 0.4 0 0 - 52 0.25 0.25 0. 17 0. 19 0.60 0.27 0.23 0. 16 0 . 14 0.64 1.07 1.59 1.07 0. 68 o. 32 DATE OF ANALYSIS: 12/07/89 ANALYST :gCcf ND-NQT DETERMINED NF-NOT FOUND BMDL-BELDlO DETECTION LIMITS / RESULTS CORRECTED FOR METHOD BLANK'. k--DONE ON X10 DILUTION VVV 000001089