submit Draft Interim Remedial Action Report for Area C Groundwater

t 

REPLY TO 

ATTENTION OF 

Environmental Affairs Division 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

INSTALLATION MANAGEMENT COMMAND 

HEADQUARTERS, UNITED STATES ARMY GARRISON, PICATINNY 

PICATINNY ARSENAL, NEW JERSEY 07806-5000 

August 18, 2010 

SUBJECT: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability 

Act (CERCLA)/Interagency Agreement (IAG) Administrative Docket No. II-CERCLA- 

FFA-001-04: Submittal of Draft Interim Remedial Action Report, Area C 

Groundwater: Review is ER,A-eligible 

Mr. William Roach 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 2 

290 Broadway, 18 th Floor 

New York, NY 10007-1866 

Mr. Gregory Zalaskus 

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 

Emergency Management Program 

East State Street, Floor 5, P.O. Box 028 

Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0028 

Dear Sirs: 

Enclosed for your review are copies of the report entitled “Draft 

Interim Remedial Action Report, Area C Groundwater”. This short 

summary document developed by Shaw Environmental for the Army is being 

co-reviewed by the Army team with you. 

The report follows the format of the Area E Groundwater IRAR that was 

approved by the EPA and NJDEP in 2008. The first quarter data for the 

LTM for Area C data was submitted to you in May of 2010. 

The action based on the approved remedial design started this fiscal 

year so the site was not included in the June Certification Report. 

The data the 2 nd quarter sampling event which took place recently will 

be submitted separately. 

Any questions or concerns please give me a call at 973-724-6748 or 

email me at ted.gabel@us.army.mil. 

Sincerely, 

Enclosure 

Project Manager for 

Environmental Restoration 

Copies Furnished: 

NJDEP, Mr Joseph Marchesani 

RAB Co-chair: Letter with PDF 

only 

1

Section 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ ES-1 

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1-1 

1.1 SITE HISTORY ................................................................................................................ 1-1 

1.2 SITE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................... 1-2 

2.0 PICATINNY ARSENAL – AREA C BACKGROUND ................................................................... 2-1 

2.1 ROD REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................... 2-1 

2.2 REMEDY DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................ 2-1 

2.2.1 Area C Groundwater ........................................................................................... 2-1 

3.0 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................... 3-1 

3.1 LTGM SAMPLING ............................................................................................................ 3-1 

3.2 DISPOSITION OF WASTE .............................................................................................. 3-1 

4.0 CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS ...................................................................................................... 4-1 

5.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL ....................... 5-1 

6.0 FINAL INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION ............................................................................... 6-1 

6.1 INSPECTIONS ................................................................................................................. 6-1 

6.2 HEALTH AND SAFETY ................................................................................................... 6-1 

6.3 INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTION ........................................................................................ 6-1 

7.0 OPERATION & MAINTENANCE (O&M) ACTIVITIES ................................................................. 7-1 

7.1 O&M ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................................ 7-1 

7.2 FUTURE GROUNDWATER ACTIVITIES ........................................................................ 7-1 

7.3 SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS ................................................................................. 7-1 

8.0 OBSERVATION AND LESSONS LEARNED .............................................................................. 8-1 

9.0 AREA C CONTACT INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 9-1 

10.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 10-1 

W912DR-05-D-0026 i Area C Interim Remedial Action 

HTRW 04 

Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey 

August 2010 

Draft Document

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 

1 Location of Area C and Picatinny Arsenal 

2 Conceptual Site Model 

3 Location of Wells to be Included in Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring of Natural Attenuation 

4 Area of Applicability of Land Use Controls 

Table 

LIST OF TABLES 

1 Monitoring Well Sampling Matrix 

2 Comparison of Groundwater Standards and Maximum Concentrations of COCs in Area C 

Groundwater 

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

AEDBR ............. Army Environmental Database Restoration 

ARAR ................ Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement 

Army .................. United States Department of the Army 

CEA ................... Classification Exception Area 

COC .................. Contaminant of Concern 

EAD ................... Environmental Affairs Division 

FS ..................... Feasibility Study 

FSP ................... Field Sampling Plan 

HASP ................ Health and Safety Plan 

ICFKE ............... ICF Kaiser Engineers 

IRAR ................. Interim Remedial Action Report 

IT ....................... IT Corporation 

LOC ................... Level of Concern 

LTGM ................ Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring 

LUC ................... Land Use Control 

NJ ...................... New Jersey 

NJDEP .............. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 

ORP .................. Oxidation-Reduction Potential 

PCE ................... Tetrachloroethene 

QAPP ................ Quality Assurance Project Plan 

RAO .................. Remedial Action Objective 

RD ..................... Remedial Design 

RI ....................... Remedial Investigation 

ROD .................. Record of Decision 

SCL ................... Site Cleanup Level 

Shaw ................. Shaw Environmental, Inc. 

TCE ................... Trichloroethene 

USEPA .............. United States Environmental Protection Agency 

VOC .................. Volatile Organic Compound 

WWI .................. World War I 

WWII ................. World War II 

W912DR-05-D-0026 ii Area C Interim Remedial Action 

HTRW 04 


August 2010 


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This Interim Remedial Action Report (IRAR), prepared in accordance with Environmental 

Protection Agency Guidance Document 540-R-98-016, documents the interim completion of the selected 

remedy at Area C of Picatinny Arsenal. The selected remedy has been implemented to address 

groundwater in Area C, as specified by the Record of Decision for Picatinny Arsenal Area C Groundwater 

(Shaw, 2009a). Response activities described in this IRAR for Area C were conducted between January 

and March 2010. 

These activities included the following: 

• Implementation of a long-term groundwater monitoring (LTGM) and natural attenuation 

program, including the first LTGM sampling event. 

Groundwater monitoring results are not included in this document and have been reported 

separately in a groundwater monitoring report (Shaw, 2010) according to the schedule set forth in the 

Long Term Monitoring Plan and Land Use Control Remedial Design for Area C Groundwater (Shaw, 

2009b). 

Land use controls (LUCs) were implemented as part of this response action. A Site-Wide Land 

Use Certification will be prepared at the close of 2010. 

W912DR-05-D-0026 ES-1 Area C Interim Remedial Action 

HTRW 04 


August 2010 


1.0 INTRODUCTION 

Picatinny Arsenal is a 6,500-acre government-operated munitions research and development 

facility located in Morris County, New Jersey, approximately 40 miles west of New York City and 4 miles 

northeast of Dover, New Jersey. The Arsenal sits in the Highlands of the state of New Jersey (Figure 1). 

Picatinny Arsenal was established in 1880 by the U.S. War Department as a storage and powder 

depot. Later, it was expanded to assemble powder charges for cannons and to fill projectiles with 

maximize (a propellant). During World War I (WWI), Picatinny Arsenal produced all sizes of projectiles. 

In the years following WWI, Picatinny Arsenal began projectile melt-loading operations and began to 

manufacture pyrotechnic signals and flares on a production basis. During World War II (WWII), Picatinny 

Arsenal produced artillery ammunition, bombs, high explosives, pyrotechnics, and other ordnance. After 

WWII, Picatinny Arsenal’s primary role became the research and engineering of new ordnance. 

However, during the Korean and Vietnam conflicts, Picatinny Arsenal resumed the production and 

development of explosives, ammunition and mine systems. 

In recent years, Picatinny Arsenal’s mission has shifted to conducting and managing research 

development, life-cycle engineering, and support of other military weapons and weapon systems. The 

facility has responsibility for the research and development of armament items. The Base Realignment 

and Closure process in 2005 resulted in Picatinny being designated to remain open, and take on 

expansion in mission. 

1.1 SITE HISTORY 

Area C is approximately 126 acres in size, consists of five sites, and is located in the 

southwestern portion of Picatinny Arsenal, near the southern boundary of the Arsenal. The area is 

bounded by Green Pond Brook to the northwest, Route 15 to the southwest, and the Picatinny Arsenal 

boundary to the east. The five sites in Area C include Site 19 (Pyrotechnic Demonstration Area), Army 

Environmental Database Restoration (AEDBR) site PICA-020; Site 25 (Sanitary Landfill), AEDBR site 

PICA-067; Site 26 (Dredge Pile), AEDBR site PICA-068; Site 163 (Baseball Fields), AEDBR site PICA- 

092; and Site 180 (Waste Burial Area), AEDBR site PICA-093. Groundwater at these sites is considered 

part of the Area C operable unit. The Area C Groundwater operable unit is designated AEDBR site PICA- 

206. 

Site 34 (Burning Ground) AEDBR site PICA-002 is geographically located in Area C. However, 

Site 34 is not part of the Area C Groundwater operable unit. The Burning Ground has its own 

groundwater monitoring plan. The Record of Decision (ROD) for the Burning Ground was signed by 

Picatinny Arsenal and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in 2005. The 

decision to group groundwater from all Area C sites with the exception of the Burning Ground was made 

with the agreement of the regulatory community. Area C groundwater once included Site 23, the Post 

Farm Landfill, which is located on the southeast ridge of Picatinny Arsenal. Site 23 was removed from 

the Area C designation, and groundwater at Site 23 was addressed as part of the feasibility study (FS) for 

site 23 (IT, 2001); a final ROD for Site 23 was signed by the Army and USEPA in December 2004 (Shaw, 

2004a). The final ROD for Area C Groundwater was signed by the Army and USEPA in July and 

September 2009, respectively (Shaw, 2009a). 

W912DR-05-D-0026 1-1 Area C Interim Remedial Action 

HTRW 04 


August 2010 


Section 1.0 

Introduction 

1.2 SITE CONDITIONS 

There was concern about groundwater contamination in Area C due to historic activities that have 

been conducted within the area, such as land filling (Site 25), dumping (Site 180), and testing (Site 19). 

Further, because the southern boundary is the point where some Picatinny Arsenal groundwater flows off 

post, the Army wanted to ensure that human health and the environment would be protected from 

unacceptable risk. The Army as the lead agency has investigated these concerns and worked with the 

USEPA and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) to ensure the investigation 

was complete. There are four aquifers, listed in descending order, associated with Area C: unconfined, 

upper semi-confined, lower semi-confined, and bedrock. Area C groundwater moves in a southsoutheasterly 

direction towards the installation’s southern boundary. 

A conceptual site model has been developed for Area C groundwater in order to convey the 

salient processes affecting the introduction, movement, and distribution of contaminant mass at the site. 

Historic activities that have been conducted within the area, such as land filling (Site 25), dumping 

(Site 180), and testing (Site 19) introduced contaminants of concern (COCs) through infiltration and 

percolation mechanisms into the groundwater interface, contaminants were gradually transported to 

groundwater. 

In 1998, a remedial investigation (RI) was performed for Area C including the collection of 

groundwater samples. The Phase I RI Report (Dames and Moore, 1998) concluded that there were only 

limited exceedances of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and dioxins/furans in groundwater in Area C. 

Detections of explosive compounds appeared to be related to activities at the Burning Ground (Site 34) 

and the pyrotechnic area (Site 19). Exceedances of lead and arsenic were widespread throughout the 

area with no specific identifiable source (Dames and Moore, 1998). 

Monitoring of southern boundary groundwater has been conducted from 2002 to 2010. A limited 

number of exceedances have been observed during this period, demonstrating that the groundwater 

contamination observed within Area C is isolated and of limited extent. However, the number of 

exceedances has decreased over time, indicating a downward trend in the concentrations and suggesting 

that the contamination is attenuating. During the initial LTGM program conducted from January 2010 to 

March 2010 (Shaw, 2010), groundwater concentrations of four metals (arsenic, lead, manganese, and 

sodium), one VOC (tetrachloroethene [PCE]), one explosive (RDX), and one anion (chloride) exceeded 

levels of concern (LOC), which are based on current regulatory criteria, in Area C and southern boundary 

monitoring wells. 

Overall, detections of constituents above criteria in groundwater have either been sporadic and 

isolated at low concentrations (such as RDX, a compound associated with explosives, VOCs), potentially 

related to local background geology (such as the naturally-occurring metals iron and manganese), or not 

related to site activities occurring at Picatinny Arsenal (such as sodium and chloride). Figure 2 presents 

the Conceptual Site Model for Area C groundwater. 


HTRW 04 


August 2010 


2.0 PICATINNY ARSENAL – AREA C BACKGROUND 

2.1 ROD REQUIREMENTS 

In Area C, the Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs) for groundwater are: 

• Prevent human consumption of, and contact with, contaminated Area C groundwater. 

• Protect uncontaminated groundwater for designated uses. 

• Attain Site Cleanup Levels (SCLs) in Area C groundwater. 

2.2 REMEDY DESCRIPTION 

2.2.1 Area C Groundwater 

The selected remedy (Alternative 2 from the ROD) consists of a LTGM program conducted semiannually 

and LUCs including institutional and access restrictions, periodic inspections, and the 

implementation of a Classification Exception Area (CEA). The components of the compliance and 

performance sampling programs are described in the Remedial Design (RD) (Shaw, 2009b). The LTGM 

Sampling was initiated in January 2010. 

2.2.1.1 Groundwater 

The Picatinny Arsenal master planning land use designation for the land within Area C is 

administrative, industrial, and open space; future land use of Area C is anticipated to remain unchanged. 

LUCs for Area C are specified in the FS (Shaw, 2005). 

The LUC objectives for Area C are as follows: 

• Prevent access or use of the groundwater until cleanup levels are met. 

• Maintain the integrity of any current or future remedial monitoring system such as monitoring 

wells. 

• Maintain the existing CEA. 

• Prohibit excavation without safeguards in all areas below the water table where groundwater 

contaminants exceed SCLs. 


HTRW 04 


August 2010 


3.0 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 

The following sections provide a summary of the activities undertaken in the implementation of 

the remedial action. 

3.1 LTGM SAMPLING 

One month prior to the groundwater sampling, many of the site wells were re-developed to 

reduce the turbidity in the wells, With the exception of the sixteen Southern Boundary wells, the site wells 

had not been sampled since 2001. The LGTM sampling program was implemented in January 2010. 

The initial sampling event began on January 5, 2010. Groundwater samples were collected from 30 

monitoring wells listed in Table 1. Samples were collected in accordance with the Picatinny Facility-Wide 

Field Sampling Plan (FSP) (ICFKE, 1998a), the Picatinny Facility-Wide Quality Assurance Project Plan 

(QAPP) (ICFKE, 1998b) and its addendum, and the Picatinny Facility-Wide Health and Safety Plan 

(HASP) (ICFKE, 1998c). All samples were analyzed by Empirical Laboratories, Inc. for VOCs, 

explosives, metals, dioxins and furans, and anions. Field- parameters (temperature, pH, oxidationreduction 

potential (ORP), specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity) were recorded during 

sampling. 

3.2 DISPOSITION OF WASTE 

Purge water from well development and the initial semi-annual LTGM event was disposed of onsite, 

following procedure described in the Facility-Wide FSP, Section 3.14.1 (ICFKE, 1998a). 


HTRW 04 


August 2010 


4.0 CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS 

Date 

February 2001 to February 2008 

September 1, 2009 

Event 

Area C and southern boundary groundwater sampling 

conducted. 

ROD for Area C Groundwater approved by USEPA. 

November 18, 2009 

January 5 to February 3, 2010 

Submitted Final Remedial Design (RD) to NJDEP and 

USEPA. 

First semi-annual LTGM sampling event performed. 

Ongoing • Semi-annual LTGM sampling for a minimum of 

two years and semi-annual reporting. 

• Annual LTGM sampling for project years 3 

through 5 and annual reporting. 

• Five (5) Year Review, future LTGM sampling and 

reporting frequency to be determined and 

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate 

Requirement (ARAR) compliance duration 

reevaluated. 

• RAOs achieved, Site Close Out Report 

submitted, public notice, and deletion from the 

National Priorities List. 


HTRW 04 


August 2010 


5.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL 

The LTGM program has been designed to demonstrate performance of the remedy and 

achievement of the RAOs discussed in Section 2. The monitoring program is described in detail in the 

Final Long Term Monitoring Plan and Land Use Control Remedial Design for Area C Groundwater (Shaw, 

2009b). Briefly, the monitoring program consists of groundwater sampling and analyses. The initial 

monitoring well network is shown on Figure 3. 

The LTGM program will assure RAOs are met for theArea C Groundwater operable unit. The 

initial two years of the LTGM program include semi-annually analysis of VOCs (COCs in Area C are: 1,2- 

dichloroethene [total], trichloroethene [TCE], PCE, and vinyl chloride), explosives (COCs in Area C are: 

RDX), metals (COCs in Area C are: arsenic, beryllium, lead, and sodium), anions (COCs in Area C are: 

chloride), perchlorates, and dioxins/furans and field-measured parameters (temperature, pH, ORP, 

specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and groundwater elevations). In Project Years 3 to 5, 

the analyses and field parameter collection may be reduced to annually. 

Sampling will be consistent with the Picatinny Facility-Wide FSP and QAPP (ICFKE, 1998a, 

1998b). Low-flow methodology will be used to collect the samples. The monitoring schedule is 

presented in the Final RD (Shaw, 2009b) and summarized in Section 4. During each 5-Year Review, the 

monitoring program will be reviewed for possible modification. LTGM data reports will be submitted semiannually 

for the first two years of operation and annually for the following three years. The LTGM reports 

will include data interpretation, copies of field records, copies of analytical data, and discussion of the 

data validation results. Statistical analyses will be performed on the analytical data after Project Years 2 

and 5 and each 5–year period thereafter. As part of the 5-Year Review, a reduction in reporting 

frequency will be considered. 

Table 2 presents a comparison of groundwater standards and the maximum concentrations of 

COCs in Area C. Full analytical results of the first semi-annual sampling event were reported in the 

Area C Groundwater Long Term Monitoring Report (Shaw, 2010). 


HTRW 04 


August 2010 


6.0 FINAL INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION 

6.1 INSPECTIONS 

The Army will conduct annual inspections of the site to confirm continued compliance with all LUC 

objectives established in the RD. The applicable coverage area for LUCs in Area C is presented on 

Figure 4. The Picatinny Environmental Affairs Division (EAD) will maintain the records of these 

inspections, which will include the following: 

• Evaluation of Land Use – The site will be inspected to verify land use is consistent with the 

assumptions in the risk assessment as documented in the ROD, which identified risks 

exceeding the target range for Area C groundwater exposure. 

• Condition of Monitoring Wells – The wells will be inspected for damage. Any repair necessary 

will be performed as soon as possible. 

Shaw will also assess and document the condition of monitoring wells in Area C concurrent with 

any LTGM sampling event. Monitoring well conditions were assessed and documented by Shaw during the 

initial semi-annual LTGM sampling event, in January 2010. Two of the 32 wells included in the LTGM 

program could not be sampled. Monitoring well 3548-3 could not be located and is assumed to have been 

destroyed by a snow plow. Monitoring well LF-2 could not be opened due to oxidation of the well cap to the 

galvanized steel casing. EPA Region 2 Superfund Well Assessment Checklists were used to document well 

location information, construction details and well condition for each well. The completed checklists are 

presented as Appendix C in the Area C Groundwater Long Term Monitoring Report (Shaw, 2010). 

6.2 HEALTH AND SAFETY 

Health and Safety risks were successfully mitigated during construction of the remedial system at 

Area C by strict compliance with the approved Picatinny Facility-Wide Health and Safety Plan (HASP) 

(ICFKE, 1998c). Health and Safety procedures were overseen by Shaw’s Site Safety Officer, Chris Cook. 

6.3 INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTION 

No certificate of completion is issued for an interim remedial action. A certificate of completion 

will be issued after the final remedial goals are met. An exit strategy for the LTGM was developed and 

presented in the RD (Shaw, 2009b). The exit strategy is discussed in Section 7.2. 


HTRW 04 


August 2010 


7.0 OPERATION & MAINTENANCE (O&M) ACTIVITIES 

7.1 O&M ACTIVITIES 

Periodic mowing and site maintenance will be performed at the site as needed, in order to make 

LTGM sampling locations accessible. Any damage to monitoring wells included in the LTGM program will 

be repaired as necessary. 

7.2 FUTURE GROUNDWATER ACTIVITIES 

LTGM sampling will continue as described in Section 5, semi-annually for a minimum of two 

years. In order to evaluate temporal changes or seasonal fluctuations in water level and groundwater 

flow regimes, the first four semiannual sampling events will be conducted seasonally. During Year One, 

the sampling events were conducted in winter and summer. Spring and autumn sampling events will be 

performed in the second year. If concentrations of the analytes in any well have not increased or have 

remained consistent over a span of four semiannual sampling events, the sampling frequency will be 

reduced to annual. Sampling frequency and analyses will then be reevaluated during each 5-year period 

and during the 5-year review. 

An exit strategy has been developed to specify the constituent levels at which the frequency of 

groundwater monitoring can be altered or discontinued. Trigger levels for the LTGM analytes were 

selected from the maximum concentration of these analytes detected within Area C groundwater during 

previous sampling events. Trigger levels of the LTGM analytes will be implemented as part of the exit 

strategy to indicate the concentration at which the monitoring program will be abandoned for a more 

aggressive remedial alternative. 

Once long-term monitoring of the selected analytes achieves chemical-specific ARARs for two 

consecutive years of semiannual sampling (four rounds) and statistical evaluation of the data indicates 

concentrations are decreasing over time, a decision will be made to cease monitoring of these 

constituents. Termination of sampling of particular analyte groups may occur at different times. Longterm 

monitoring of the selected analytes may also be terminated subsequent to the 5-year review, if the 

contamination plumes are shown to be stable or decreasing over time. 

Additional source area investigations will be initiated if the trigger levels are reached and/or 

exceeded and statistically significant increases have been observed. Delineation of an additional source 

area will result in the evaluation of alternatives to mitigate the source. If no source is delineated, but 

trigger levels are still exceeded and statistically significant increases are still observed, individual actions 

may be taken to reduce contaminant concentrations in the specific wells. 

7.3 SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS 

The first year of this project was performed under a contract between Shaw and the U.S. Army. 

Subsequent project years will proceed under a performance based contract. The actual project costs 

incurred by the contractor are confidential. 


HTRW 04 


August 2010 


8.0 OBSERVATION AND LESSONS LEARNED 

Field activities conducted in Area C, since the implementation of the remedy in January 2010, 

have been executed as planned. There are no observations or lessons learned to report at this time. 


HTRW 04 


August 2010 


9.0 AREA C CONTACT INFORMATION 

Listed below are the contact persons for this project. Contacts for major subcontractors are also 

included. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region II 

William Roach 

290 Broadway, 18 th Floor 

New York, NY 10007-1866 

202-637-4335 

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection – 

Division of Responsible Party Site Remediation, 

Bureau of Case Management 

Gregory Zalaskus 

401 East State Street, Floor 5, PO Box 028 

Trenton, NJ 08625-0028 

609-633-1455 

Picatinny Arsenal Environmental Affairs Division – U.S. 

Army Installation Management Agency – Northeast 

Region Office 

Ted Gabel 

Building 319 

Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000 

973-724-6748 

US Army Environmental Command – Installation 

Restoration Division 

Fran Coulter 

Building E4480, Beal Road 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5401 

410-436-1615 

Shaw Project Manager 

Gerard Maresca 

Shaw Environmental, Inc. 

111 Howard Boulevard, Suite 110 

Mount Arlington, New Jersey 07856 

973-770-5305 

Laboratory Analysis 

Delia Weber 

Empirical Laboratories LLC 

621 Mainstream Drive, Suite 270 

Nashville, Tennessee 37228 

615-345-1119 


HTRW 04 


August 2010 


10.0 REFERENCES 

Dames and Moore. 1998. Phase I Remedial Investigation Report – Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey. Draft 

Final Document. Prepared for U.S. Army Environmental Center, Aberdeen Proving Ground, 

Maryland. 

ICF Kaiser Engineers (ICFKE). 1998a. Picatinny Arsenal Facility-Wide Field Sampling Plan. Prepared for 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District. September. 

ICF Kaiser Engineers (ICFKE). 1998b. Picatinny Arsenal Facility-Wide Quality Assurance Project Plan. 

Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District. December. 

ICF Kaiser Engineers (ICFKE). 1998c. Picatinny Arsenal Facility-Wide Health and Safety Plan. Prepared 

for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District. February. 

IT Corporation (IT). 2001. Feasibility Study for Site 23 Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey. Final. Prepared for 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District. June 2001. 

Shaw Environmental, Inc. (Shaw). 2004. Record of Decision, Site 23 – The Post Farm Landfill. Final. 

Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District. August 2004. 

Shaw Environmental, Inc. (Shaw). 2005. Area C Groundwater Feasibility Study. Final. Prepared for U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District. November. 

Shaw Environmental, Inc. (Shaw). 2009a. Picatinny Arsenal Record of Decision, Area C Groundwater. 

Final. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District. June. 

Shaw Environmental, Inc. (Shaw). 2009b. Long Term Monitoring Plan and Land Use Control Remedial 

Design for Area C Groundwater. Final. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore 

District. November. 

Shaw Environmental, Inc. (Shaw). 2010. Area C Groundwater Long Term Monitoring Report. Draft Final. 

Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District. May. 


HTRW 04 


August 2010 


FIGURES 

W912DR-05-D-0026 

HTRW 04 

May 2010 

Area C Interim Remedial Action 



TABLES 

W912DR-05-D-0026 

HTRW 04 

May 2010 

Area C Interim Remedial Action 



. 

Table 1 

Area C/Southern Boundary Monitoring Wells in the Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Program 

Well 

Number 

Well 

Designation 

Hydrogeologic Unit 

Screened Interval 

(ft bgs) 

Groundwater Depth 1 

(ft bgs) 

MW180-1 Site Unconfined 5.0 – 15.0 3.00 

DM19-1 Site Unconfined 9.5 – 19.5 5.73 

DM19-2 Site Unconfined 9.5 - 19.5 6.60 



MW25-6A Site Unconfined 10.0 – 20.0 5.57 

MW25-6B Site Lower Semi-Confined 65.0 – 75.0 3.70 

MW25-7 Site Unconfined 4.0 - 14.0 3.70 

MW25-8 Site Unconfined 20.0 – 30.0 2.92 

1181-3 Site Unconfined 12.5 – 22.5 1.96 

MW-16 Site Unconfined 9.0 – 19.0 10.20 

MW-17 Site Unconfined 7.0 – 19.0 5.75 

C1-A Site Lower Semi-Confined 77.2 – 87.2 0.51 

C1-B Site Unconfined 12.3 – 22.3 2.17 

SB1-1 Sentinel Bedrock - Gneiss 83.0 – 93.0 Surface 

SB1-2 Sentinel Unconfined 8.0 – 18.0 2.30 

SB1-3 Sentinel Upper Semi-Confined 24.0 – 34.0 2.00 

SB1-5 Sentinel Bedrock - Gneiss 90.0 – 110 15.51 


SB1-7 Sentinel Unconfined 9.5 - 19.5 5.61 

SB2-1A Sentinel Lower Semi-Confined 158 – 168 12.02 


SB2-3 Sentinel Bedrock – Dolomite 243 – 253 12.37 

SB3-1B Sentinel Bedrock – Dolomite 326 – 336 30.33 

SB3-2 Sentinel Lower Semi-Confined 170 - 180 30.86 


SB4-1 Sentinel Bedrock – Dolomite 369 – 379 38.20 


SB4-3 Sentinel Upper Semi-Confined 92.0 – 102 23.19 

SB4-4 Sentinel Lower Semi-Confined 155 - 165 36.78 

Wells beginning with the “SB” prefix are southern boundary wells 

1 – Synoptic groundwater level readings measured on July 7 to 9, 2003.

Table 2 

Comparison of Groundwater Standards and Maximum Concentrations of COCs in Area C 

Groundwater 

Contaminant 

Federal and State Groundwater 

Standards (µg/L) 

NJDEP 

Chosen 

MCL GWQC 

Standard 

(PQL)* 

Maximum Concentration 

Observed (µg/L) 

1990‐2008 January 2010 

1,2‐Dichloroethene (total) 70 70 (1) 70 120 12.4 

Trichloroethene (TCE) 1 1 (1) 1 3.5 0.58 

Tetrachloroethene (PCE) 1 0.4 (1) 1 0.73 4.4 

Vinyl Chloride 2 0.08 (1) 1 6.6 7.0 

RDX NS 0.3 (0.5) 0.5 4.5 0.91 

Octachlorodibenzodioxin NS NS 0.0045** 0.00631 ND 

Arsenic 5 0.02 (3) 3 49.6 112 

Beryllium 4 1 (1) 1 6.86 0.97 

Lead 15 5 (5) 5 320 35.7 

Sodium NS 50,000 50,000 790,000 644,000 

(400) 

Chloride NS 250,000 

(2,000) 

250,000 1,380,000 1,380,000 

* ‐ Column lists New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) Groundwater Quality 

Criterion (GWQC) with the corresponding Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL)in parentheses. The NJDEP 

PQL values take the place of NJDEP GWQC where the GWQC are below the ability of chemical analysis to 

reliably detect/quantify the subject analyte. For analytes with a higher PQL than GWQC, the NJDEP 

directs the selection of the PQL as the standard. 

** ‐ For Octachlorodibenzodioxin there is no NJDEP or United States Environmental Protection Agency 

(USEPA) Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL), NJDEP GWQC, or NJDEP PQL; therefore, the USEPA Region 

III Tap Water Risk Based Concentration was the chosen standard. 

µg/L – micrograms per liter 

NS – No standard 

ND – Not detected above laboratory method detection limit

submit Draft Interim Remedial Action Report for Area C Groundwater

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?