FINAL WORK PLAN REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION FEASIBILITY STUDY · 2020-07-03 · hazardous site control division epa region 5 records ctr. 253051 contract no. 68-01-6692 final. - . ' ;••

HAZARDOUSSITE CONTROL

DIVISION

EPA Region 5 Records Ctr.

253051

CONTRACT NO.68-01-6692

FINAL. - . ' ;••WORK PLAN '"

REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY

CHEM-DYNE SITEHAMILTON, OHIO

EPA WA 21.5M10.0W65310.CO/DO

July 1983

CH2MBHILL

FINALWORK PLAN

REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY

CHEM-DYNE SITEHAMILTON, OHIO

EPA WA 21.5M10.0W65310.CO/DO

July 1983

CH2M•HILL

engineersplannerseconomistsscientists

July 28, 1983

W65310.COW65310.DO

Mr.. Don BruceHazardous Waste DivisionU.S. Environmental Protection Agency230 South Dearborn Street13th FloorCh:.cago, Illinois 60604

Dear Don:

Subject: Chem-Dyne Hazardous Waste SiteRI/FSWA 21.5M10.0Final Work Plan

I am pleased to submit the final work plan for the Chem-Dynesite Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS). Thiswork plan establishes a period of performance of just over67 weeks. The total estimated project budget isapproximately $948,421.

This general schedule is extremely tight due to review,comment, and revision requirements, potential publicinvolvement, subcontract procurement, and laboratoryturnaround time. In the likely event additional studies arerecruired, the time schedule will be extremely tight. Closecoordination and cooperation will be required to achieve theproject schedule.

Milwaukee Regional Office313 West Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 700, P.O. Box 2090, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201 414/272-2426 (CH2M)

Mr. Don BrucePage 2July 28, 1983W65310.CO

Please contact me if there are any questions, or if I canprovide further information.

Sincerely,

ALarry A. Holm, P.E.Site Project Manager

jkb/GLT414/14

Enclosures

cc: N. Willis/REM-DPO (EPA HQ) (2 copies)M. Ryan (EPA V)R. D'Agostaro/AZPM-REM (WDC)D. Shoup/PROJ ASST (WDC)W. Sellman/AZPM-ADMIN (WDC)B. Rosain, Region V QAMM. Harris/RPTL (GLO)D. Tyler/CO (EPA HQ)R. Marotte/RPTL (DEN)S. Hoffman/RPTL (SEA)D. Strayer/OEPAR. Hannahs/OEPAB. Wright/U.S. EPAJ. Keely/U.S. EPA

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION 2

Objective 2Background 2

SCOPE OF SERVICES 4

Development of the RI/FS Work Plan 4Assemble Project Team 4Prepare Quality Assurance Project Plant 4Prepare Work Plan 4

Remedial Investigation (RI) 4Task 1. Review of Existing Information 4Task 2. Investigation Support 5Task 3. Site Investigations 5Task 4. Develop Preliminary Assessment ofRemedial Alternatives 9

Task 5. Site Investigations Analysis 10Task 6. Final Report 10Task 7. Additional Requirements 10

Feasibility Study (FS) 12Task 8. Description of Current Situation

and Scoping Update 12Task 9. Development of Alternatives 12Task 10. Initial Screening of Alternatives 13Task 11. Additional Studies (Optional) 13Task 12. Detailed Analysis of Alternatives 13Task 13. Evaluation and Selection of Cost-Effective Alternative 15

Task 14. Conceptual Design 16Task 15. Final Report 16Task 16. Community Relations 16Task 17. Additional Requirements 18

LIST OF PROJECT DELIVERABLES

ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS

OPTIONAL FORM 60's

GENERAL SCHEDULE

GLT414/15

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This work plan. was prepared and submitted as a requirementof the REM/FIT Zone II contract for remedial planning ofuncontrolled hazardous waste sites. Primary objectives ofthe RI/FS described in this work plan are to determine thenature and extent of soil and groundwater contamination ator near the site, identify and evaluate alternative sourcecontrol and off site remedial response actions, to recommendthe most cost-effective alternative (s) pursuant to the Na-tional Contingency Plan (NCP) , and to prepare a conceptualdesign of the remedial response action alternative selectedby U.S. EPA, in consultation with the State of Ohio, for theChem-Dyne site in Hamilton, Ohio.

This work plan establishes a scope of services to be per-formed with an associated budget of $948,421 and a revisedperformance schedule of just over 67 weeks.

Currently the work assignment has been issued for the RI/FSdescribed in this work plan. To date at least two majorstudies have been performed at the site under previous con-tracts, and removal contracts (IRM) for surface cleanup havebeen bid by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Surface cleanupbegan May 1983, and is expected to be completed by Septem-ber 1, (excluding modifications for decontamination of onsitebuildings) . Surface cleanup is being performed by O.K.Materials.

A portion of the work described in this plan will be con-ducted concurrently with IRM activities. In addition, por-tions of the work described in this plan were conducted underearly authorization to permit baseline data gathering priorto IRM activities at the site.

INTRODUCTION

This work plan was prepared to define the scope of activi-ties anticipated to accomplish Work Assignment (WA) 21.5M10.0,Chem-Dyne, Hamilton, Ohio, Remedial Investigation and Feasibi-lity Study. Requirements of the WA and the CH2M HILL ZoneII REM/FIT Management Plan have been incorporated along withresults of specific discussions with the U.S. and Ohio EPA.

WA 21.5M10.0 includes an estimated cost of $500,000 and aperiod of performance of 12 months. Both the estimated costand schedule are revised by this work plan.

OBJECTIVE

Primary objectives of the RI/FS are to recommend the mostcost-effective source and off site control remedial action (s)in accordance with the NCP, and to prepare a conceptualdesign of the source control remedial action alternative (s)selected by U.S. EPA. All tasks and subtasks are directedtoward accomplishment of these primary objectives.

BACKGROUND

The Chem-Dyne facility is located on a 10 acre site in thenorthern part of the City of Hamilton, Butler County, Ohio.It is bounded on the south by a residential area, on theeast by a park facility, on the north by a hydraulic canalwhich flows to the Great Miami River, and on the west by anelectric power generating station and light industry. Thefacility was in operation from the fall of 1975 to February1980, providing waste handling services to major industriesin the region. Drum and bulk waste materials were acceptedat this facility and prepared for recycle, resale as chem-fuel,or disposed of at many different disposal sites. The mate-rials handled included pesticides and pesticide residues,chlorinated hydrocarbons, solvents, waste oils, plastics andresins, PCB's, tris, acids and caustics, heavy metal andsome cyanide sludges, and packaged laboratory chemicals fordisposal. In July 1979, as a result of an incident with afuming tank car and five fish kills in 1976, the company wasordered by the courts to remove all waste from the site. Alack of progress and two fires on the site in 1979 resultedin a decision by the court to place the company in receiver-ship in February of 1980.

Between 25 and 30,000 drums of waste and approximately 300,000gallons of bulk materials were on the site when the receiver-ship was established. The receiver was charged with theduty of carrying out the court's order to remove all wastefrom the site and could use assets of the company to accom-plish this task. In addition, negotiations were conducted

among the Ohio EPA, the Ohio Attorney General, the receiver,and identified generators of waste at the site for removalof these materials and their proper disposal. As a resultof these efforts, the onsite inventory has been reduced toapproximately 10,000 drums and 213,000 gallons of liquid andsolid bulk waste.

In the latter half of 1982, the initial phase of investi-gation work at the Chem-Dyne site was performed by the U.S.EPA zone contractor at that time, Roy F. Weston, Inc.Copies of data and reports from that effort are not yet avail-able to the Engineer as needed for the performance ofportions of this Work Plan. Approximately 100 drum sampleswere taken and analyzed to characterize waste materials onthe site and a limited hydrogeological investigation wasconducted in the fall of 1982 to characterize groundwatercontamination and flow in the area.

From May until November 1983, a cleanup contract for theremoval of all remaining surface waste from the Chem-Dynesite has been underway and managed by the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers. This work will impact the Engineer's safetyprogram and activities at the site.

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Descriptions of the tasks and subtasks required to completethe RI/FS are presented on the following pages. Correspond-ing budgets and schedule relationships are also presented.

A. DEVELOPMENT OF THE RI/FS WORK PLAN

Assemble Project Team

After receipt of the work authorization, a project team wasassembled. The requirements for additional team memberswere identified. Some members of the project team met theOSC at the Chem-Dyne site during the initial site samplingconducted April 4 through 13, 1983 and/or during subsequentwork to date.

"*••*' Prepare Quality Assurance Project Plant

A site-specific quality assurance (QA) project plan for RIactivities will be developed to incorporate, by reference,the appropriate portions of the general QA project plan.The plan will include any other needs specific to the workassignment or requested by U.S. EPA as a result of extra-ordinary project requirements. A copy of the QA plan willbe provided to appropriate EPA project personnel.

Prepare Work Plan

This document is the final work plan prepared according tothe work assignment, EPA number 21.5M10.0. This final workplan incorporates U.S. and Ohio EPA comments on the draftwork plan submitted on May 6, 1983.

<wrB. REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (RI)

Task 1 - Review of Existing Information

The Engineer will be provided with all necessary records,repcrts, maps, and data related to the Chem-Dyne site avail-able in the U.S. EPA Region V files. This information, to-gether with material collected from the Ohio EPA and localagencies, and information available from the drum removaland initial subsurface phase, will be used to develop a gen-eral history of the site. The site history shall include adescription of the site, its location, physiography, hydro-logy, geology, ownership, operation, etc., as it is perti-nent to the implementation RI activities.

A brief technical memorandum will be prepared summarizingthe technical and historical details known about the Chem-Dyne site. This memo will build upon existing reports and

serve as the background document for the site for the RIactivities.

Task 2 - Investigation Support

The Engineer has conducted preliminary work necessary toconduct the remedial investigations. This work issummarized as follows:

o The Engineer conducted an initial site visit re-quired to become familiar with site topography,access routes, existing groundwater monitoringwell system, and site grid system.

o The Engineer prepared a site safety plan for RIactivities at the site. The safety plan was pre-pared to reflect activities proposed and activitiesdone by others at the site.

o The Engineer reviewed the site boundary map andlocation grid system which had already been pre-pared for the site. These drawings were madeavailable by U.S. EPA.

Task 3 - Site Investigations

The Engineer will conduct remedial investigations necessaryto characterize the extent and migration of soil and ground-water contamination both on and near the site and to evalu-ate the actual or potential hazard to public health and theenvironment. The remedial investigations shall also producedata of adequate technical content to assess preliminaryremedial alternatives and support the detailed evaluation ofalternatives during the feasibility study.

All sample analyses will be conducted at U.S EPA contractlaboratories following EPA protocols, or equivalents. Strictchain-of-custody procedures will be followed and all sampleswill be located on the site by the grid system referencedunder Task 2.

The analysis of groundwater and soil samples is assumed tobe limited to routine analytical services for inorganic andorganic analysis as defined by the U.S EPA ContractLaboratory program.

Depending on the analytical results from the samples takenApril 4 through 13 (see Subtask 3-1) selected portions ofthe routine analytical services may be deleted to reduceanalytical costs. For example, if inorganic analysis doesnot reveal significant contamination (as determined by EPA),the inorganic analysis may be dropped from future work. Thescope of work described in the following site investigations

does not include sampling for any special analytical ser-vices except the sampling for fish tissues described underSubtask 3-2.5.

Subtask 3-1 - Phase I - Initial Groundwater, Soil, SurfaceWater and Sediment Investigation. The Engineer has alreadyconducted an initial investigation of onsite and offsitesoil, surface water and sediments in the area prior to anydrum or waste removals under Superfund. A total of 14 soilsamples were taken at locations both on and off the site inlocations specified by the onsite coordinator (OSC), andsubmitted for analysis. Water and sediment samples werealso taken from a storm sewer which runs beneath the siteand from the Ford Hydraulic Canal, which is contiguous tothe site. The storm sewer and canal samples were taken inlocations specified by the OSC.

In addition to these samples, 21 groundwater monitoring wellswere also sampled. Details of this sampling work were des-cribed in a field work memorandum.

The initial site sampling work was performed under an earlyauthorization of funds, prior to completion of the work plan.Sampling was performed between April 6 through 13, 1983, andat the technical direction of U.S. EPA personnel.

The purpose of the Phase II Hydrogeologic Investigation isto define the nature, extent, and movement of groundwatercontamination onsite, downgradient from the site, and be-tween the site and the municipal groundwater well supply forthe city of Hamilton.

The Engineer has already conducted a portion of the Phase IIinvestigation as originally described in the Work Assignment(WA 21.5M10.0) and as modified through discussions with U.S.EPA personnel. Work to date has already included the follow-ing elements:

o 3-2.1 - Procured a qualified well drilling con-tractor.

o 3-2.2 - Installed seven groundwater monitoringwells onsite, five wells 35 feet deep and two wells65 feet deep.

o 3-2.3 - Performed split spoon sampling during theinstallation of the onsite wells. Soil sampleswere prescreened with an HNU and selected sampleswere sent to the contract laboratory for analysis.

Onsite sampling and drilling work was supported bythe IRM cleanup contractor, O.K. Materials, who

provided decontamination equipment and facilities,breathing air and transportation, and support per-sonnel.

o 3-2.4 - Performed groundwater sampling of all 22"existing" monitoring wells (see Subtask 3-1) andthe seven "new" onsite monitoring wells. In addi-tion to monitoring wells, the Engineer performedsampling of the Hamilton Municipal Well No. 11,Hamilton Electric Power Company Well No. 9, andsix private commercial cooling and process waterwells in the vicinity of the Chem-Dyne site.

Onsite groundwater sampling work was supported bythe IRM cleanup contractor, O.K. Materials, whoprovided decontamination equipment and facilities,breathing air and transportation and support per-sonnel.

The Engineer will conduct the remaining portion of thePha.se II Hydrogeologic Study which includes the followingelements:

o 3-2.5 - Conduct a limited sampling of sediment andfish species in the Ford Canal upstream and down-stream from the Chem-Dyne site. Approximately 10sediment samples and 25 fish samples will betaken. Selection of fish species will be based onthe available information on sedimentcontamination. In addition, the Engineer willconduct a sampling of Great Miami River water atthree locations similar to sampling performed in1981 by Ecology and Environment, Inc (E&E).

Subtask 3-3 - Phase III Hydrogeologic Investigation. ThePhase III portion of the hydrogeologic investigation willinclude the following elements:

o 3-3.1 - Procure well drilling contractor who canperform under Level B and C personnel protection.

o 3-3.2 - Installation of seven new monitoring wellsoffsite. Specific locations will be finalized indiscussions with U.S and Ohio EPA. All wells willbe developed by air/fluid lift and/or overpumping.Offsite wells will be constructed of galvanizedsteel, grouted, surface sealed, capped and lockedto insure accurate sampling results and security.

In addition to the monitoring wells, an 8-inchdiameter pumping well will be installed at a loca-tion to be selected in consultation with the U.S.and Ohio EPA.

o 3-3.2 - All new monitoring wells in place, (i.e.,the seven onsite and seven offsite wells, and theexisting 22 monitoring wells) shall be sampled todetermine the groundwater flow characteristics andquality at that time.

o 3-3.4 - A "fast track" evaluation and selection ofpumped water treatment and/or disposal method shallbe performed prior to the well pump test. If ground-water treatment/storage is required before discharge,the Engineer will procure a waste management con-tractor to perform the work. It is assumed thatthe contractor already onsite, O.K. Materials,would be retained if needed because they arealready mobilized and have demonstrated experiencewith this work.

The decisions on the necessary level of treatmentand discharge location (Ford Canal or HamiltonPOTW) will be made jointly with U.S. and Ohio EPA.It is assumed that any necessary discharge waiversor permits will be expedited through the U.S. andOhio EPA.

o 3-3.5 - A discussion between the Engineer, andU.S. and Ohio EPA of available data from previousinvestigations will determine the extent and dura-tion of hydraulic testing at the site. Long-termdisposition of contaminants should be evaluatedbased upon the transmissivity and storage coeffi-cient patterns resulting from the hydraulic test-ing as well as the mobility of the contaminants,attenuation capacity of local soils and other geo-logic features, apparent local regional flow direc-tions and rates, effects of local pumping and theeffects of the Great Miami River.

For purposes of budget preparation in this workplan, it was assumed that a pump test would be runat 250 gpm for 24-hours, generating 360,000 gallonsof water which will be disposed at $0.45/gallon.

Subtask 3-4 - Final Soils Investigation - Test Pits Onsite/Off site~Subsequent to the completion of all surface wasteremoval from the site (by COE), the Engineer will supplementthe initial soil investigation with a program to more com-pletely define the nature, and vertical and horizontalextent of contamination of surface and subsurface soils bothonsite and offsite.

Samples of soils will be taken to a maximum depth of 10 feetin selected locations onsite and offsite. The soil samplingshall be done using test pits excavated by backhoe.

Approximately 40 soil samples will be taken onsite and 10 soilsamples will be taken offsite, immediately south of the southparking lot at Baylor trucking as requested by U.S. EPA.

Locations of the onsite test pits will be selected by theEngineer based upon provisions data generated by Ohio EPA,onsite observations, history of waste handling at the site,and consultation with U.S. and Ohio EPA.

It is assumed that the excavation equipment and related decon-tamination facilities will be provided by the contractorpresently doing the IRM cleanup work, O.K. Materials. Allexcavation work would be performed by O.K. Materials per-sonnel under the direction of the Engineer.

Subtask 3-5 - Geophysical Investigation. The Engineer willevaluate the site and the immediately adjacent area and recom-mend a plan of geophysical investigation to provide informa-tion on subsurface conditions and to locate any previouslyunidentified buried waste materials. With concurrence ofthe U.S. EPA, the Engineer will then conduct such an inves-tigation subsequent to the completion of the drum and bulktank removals.

Subtask 3-6 - Surveying. The Engineer will procure a con-tractor to survey the Chem-Dyne site and vicinity. The pur-pose of the survey is as follows:

o Establish topographic data for the site after com-pletion of the IRM waste removal work.

o Establish horizontal control for all monitoringwells in the network (E&E, Weston, and CH2M HILLwells).

o Establish vertical control of all 14 monitoringwells installed by the Engineer.

o Prepare a final topographic map at 1" = 50' with1-foot contour intervals and sufficient spot ele-vations onsite to hand draw 6-inch contours onsite.

The topographic data and horizontal control will be estab-lished by areal photography methods. Vertical control ofthe 14 monitoring wells (seven onsite and seven offsite willbe established by ground survey methods.

Task 4 - Develop Preliminary Assessment of Remedial Alterna-tives

While conducting the site investigations described above,the Engineer will assess the site conditions to determinepotential categories of source control and offsite remedial

actions. The site investigations shall be performed withreference to only those alternatives identified as feasiblein this preliminary evaluation.

Task 5 - Site Investigations Analysis

The Engineer will prepare a thorough analysis and summary ofall site investigations and their results. The objective ofthis task will be to assure that the investigation data issufficient in quality and quantity to adequately describethe nature and extent of contamination and to support thefeasibility study.

The results and data from all site investigations shall beorganized and presented logically so that the relationshipsbetween site investigations for each media are apparent.The site investigation analysis shall be presented in twomajor discussions:

Subtask 5-1 - Data Analysis. All site investigations shallbe summarized to develop a description of the type and ex-tent of contamination at the site. This analysis shall in-clude significant pathways of contamination and an exposureassessment. The exposure assessment shall describe anythreats to public health, welfare, and the environment.

Subtask 5-2 - Application to Preliminary Remedial Alternatives.Results of the site investigations shall be analyzed in rela-tion to the preliminary remedial alternatives developed inTask 4. This analysis will determine the adequacy of dataquality and quantity to support the feasibility study andwill identify any additional data needs.

Task 6 - Final Report

The Engineer will prepare a final report covering the reme-dial investigations and submit two copies to the U.S. EPAProject Officer. The report will include the results ofTasks 1 through 5.

Task 7 - Additional Requirements

Reporting Requirements

Two types of monthly progress reports are required:

1. Technical Progress Reports

For this work assignment, the Engineer will submit progressreports with the following elements:

o Progress made this reporting periodo Problems resolved

10

o Anticipated problem areas and recommended solutionso Deliverables submittedo Upcoming eventso Activities plannedo Key personnel changeso Subcontractingo Travelo Contract laboratorieso Percent completeo Schedule

The monthly progress report will list target and actual com-pletion dates for each element of activity including projectcompletion and provide an explanation of any deviation fromthe milestones in the work plan schedule.

2. Financial Management Report

A monthly financial report will also be prepared for thiswork assignment. It will include the following information:

o Identification of site and activity.o Actual expenditures including fee and direct labor

hours expended for this period.*o Cumulative expenditures (including fee) and cumu-

lative direct labor hours.o Projection of expenditures for completing the proj-

ect, including an explanation of any significantvariations from the forecasted target.*

o A graphic representation of proposed versus actualexpenditures (plus fee) and comparison of actualversus target direct labor hours. A projection tocompletion will be made for both.

* indicates data required for input to EPA's Project"racking System/Project Management Module (PTS/PMM).Standardized input forms will be provided the Engineerfor monthly updating of project status.

Technical progress and financial management reports will bedistributed monthly as follows:

Number Addressee

2 Zone Manager (EPA Headquarters)2 Regional Project Officer2 State Project Officer

Chain-of-Custody Requirements. Any field sample collectionand analyses conducted shall be documented in accordancewith chain-of-custody procedures as provided by U.S. EPA.

11

Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Requirement. Seediscussion of QA/QC Plan in previous section, A. Developmentof the RI/FS Work Plan.

C. FEASIBILITY STUDY (FS)

Task 8 - Description of Current Situation and Scoping Update

The Engineer will describe current conditions at the site ina brief technical memorandum.

Task 9 - Development of Alternatives

Based on the results of the remedial investigation, the Engi-neer will develop a limited number of alternatives for sourcecontrol or offsite remedial actions or both, on the basis ofa range of objectives established for the response.

The development of remedial action alternatives will be a3-stage process:

o Establishment of the Range of Remedial ResponseObjectives. The Engineer will establish a rangeof site-specific objectives for the response basedon public health and environmental concerns, infor-mation gathered during the remedial investigation,Section 300.68 of the National Contingency Plan(NCP), EPA interim guidance, and the requirementsof any other applicable Federal or State statutes.Preliminary cleanup objectives shall be developedin consultation with the State and U.S. EPA.

o Identification of Remedial Technologies. The Engi-neer will identify appropriate remedial techno-logies as a basis for the development of remedialalternatives. These technologies shall be identi-fied on a media-specific basis, although consider-ation should be given to the interrelationship ofthe media. Only technologies expected to meet theresponse objectives will be considered.

o Identification of Remedial Alternatives. The Engi-neer will develop alternatives to incorporate re-medial technologies, response objectives, and otherappropriate considerations into a comprehensivesite-specific approach. The alternatives will bedeveloped in close consultation with the State andU.S. EPA.

For each remedial action alternative developed, the followingthree factors will be addressed:

12

o Cost. The estimated Order-of-Magnitude cost ofinstallation or implementing the remedial actionwill be provided, including estimated operationand maintenance costs.

o Effects of the Alternative. The effects of eachalternative shall be evaluated in two ways:1) whether the alternative itself or its implemen-tation has any adverse environmental effects; and2) whether the alternative is likely to effectivelymitigate or minimize the threat of harm to publichealth, welfare, and the environment.

o Acceptable Engineering Practices. The technicalfeasibility of each alternative will be discussedregarding the location and conditions of the re-lease, application to the problem, and reliabilityof the technologies involved.

Task 10 - Initial Screening of Alternatives

The alternatives developed in Task 9 will be screened by theU.S. and Ohio EPA to eliminate alternatives, prior to detailedanalysis, that are judged not feasible or appropriate.

The following considerations will be used by U.S. and OhioEPA as a basis for the initial screening:

o Costo Effects of the alternativeo Acceptable engineering practices

Task 11 - Additional Studies (Optional)

The Engineer will conduct studies required based on the re-suits of Task 5. Such studies may include additional fieldwork and/or laboratory and bench scale treatability studiesrequired to evaluate the applicability of remedial techno-logies, e.g., leachate treatment, groundwater treatment,compatibility of waste/leachate with liners, cover, or othermaterials proposed for use in the remedy. The scope of thistask will incorporate the results of Task 10.

The Engineer will submit a separate work plan for any pro-posed laboratory studies for U.S. and Ohio EPA approval.This submittal will be made as required to maintain steadyprogress of the overall feasibility study.

Task 12 - Detailed Analysis of Alternatives

The Engineer will prepare a detailed analysis of the alter-natives that pass through the initial screening in Task 10.

13

It is assumed that three alternatives will be analyzed indetail under this task.

This detailed analysis shall consist of the following ele-ments :

Subtask 12.1 - Detailed Description. The detailed descriptionof each remaining alternative will include:

o Description of appropriate treatment and disposaltechnologies.

o Special engineering consideration required to im-plement the alternative, e.g., pilot treatmentfacility, additional studies needed to proceedwith final remedial design.

o Operation, maintenance, and monitoring require-ments of the completed remedy.

o Off site disposal needs and transportation plans.

o Temporary storage requirements.

o Safety requirements for remedial implementation,including both onsite and offsite health and safetyconsiderations .

o An analysis of how the alternative could be phasedinto individual operations and a discussion of howthese operations could best be implemented, indi-vidually or in groups, to produce significant en-vironmental improvement or cost savings.

o A review of any offsite treatment or disposal facil-ities (provided by the State) to ensure compliancewith applicable RCRA and State requirements, bothcurrent and proposed.

Subtask 12.2 - Environmental Assessment. The purpose ofthis element is to identify issues of importance and addressthem in the environmental assessment proportional to theirsignificance. This would involve a meeting chaired by theU.S. EPA and attended by representatives of such agencies asthe Ohio EPA and CH2M HILL. Major issues could include, butare not limited to:

o Groundwater pollutiono Land valueo Public health problemso Communications

14

Evaluation criteria would be defined and used to compara-tively evaluate project alternatives. A preliminary set ofcriteria would be prepared and reviewed by CH2M HILL, U.S.and Ohio EPA.

The Engineer will rely extensively on baseline data acquiredduring the remedial investigation.

Remedial actions and alternatives would be systematicallyand analytically evaluated. The evaluation of the recom-mended plan is the heart of the environmental assessmentprocess. The environmental engineering, financial and so-cial impacts of these alternatives would be limited to aconcise descriptive summary of the impacts using a matrix orsummary form for easy comparison.

Mitigation measures would be developed to reduce or minimizethose adverse impacts of the proposed action identified inthe previous task. Adverse impacts could include physicalor legal constraints, and compliance with Federal and Stateregulatory requirements. For the no action alternative, anendangerment assessment will be prepared to evaluate thepotential health and/or environmental risks of taking noaction at the site and to determine whether the risks, ifany, may be acceptable.

A draft environmental assessment would be submitted to U.S.EPA and Ohio EPA for review. The Engineer will finalize theenvironmental assessment based on review comments and thepublic hearing on the RI/FS.

The estimated present worth cost of implementing each reme-dial alternative (and each phase of the alternative) as wellas the estimated annual operating and maintenance cost willbe presented. The estimated costs will be provided both asa total estimated cost and as a distribution of estimatedcosts over time.

Task 13 - Evaluation and Selection of Cost-Effective Alter-native

The Engineer will recommend a cost-effective alternativebased on a review of the results of the detailed analysis ofalternatives prepared under Task 12. The lowest cost alter-native that is technologically feasible and reliable andthat adequately protects (or mitigates damage to) publichealth, welfare, and the environment will be considered thecost-effective alternative.

The following five considerations shall be used as the basisfor recommending the cost-effective alternative:

15

o Reliabilityo Implementabilityo Effects of the alternativeo Safety requirementso Cost

Task 14 - Conceptual Design

A conceptual design of the remedial alternative selected bythe U.S. and Ohio EPA shall be prepared. The conceptualdesign shall include, but is not limited to, the engineeringapproach including implementation schedule, special implemen-tation requirements, institutional requirements, phasingconsiderations, design criteria, preliminary site and facil-ity layouts, refined Order-of -Magnitude cost estimate (inclu-ding operation and maintenance costs) , operating and mainte-nance requirements and duration, and an outline of the safetyplans, including cost impact on implementation.

Task 15 - Final Report

A final report including the results of Tasks 8 through 14shall be prepared for submission to the U.S. and Ohio EPA.Two copies of the report shall be submitted to the EPAProject Officer.

Task 16 - Community Relations

The following work plan for Chem-Dyne site Community Rela-tions Plan outlines the objectives and scope of activitiesand tasks needed to complete the work.

This scope of work was prepared based on discussions withMarcia Carlson and Don Bruce of U.S. EPA Region V. The ac-tivities outlined differ somewhat from the text in the WorkAssignment because certain activities have already beenstarted by EPA. CH2M HILL will be providing basic supportservices to Region V EPA in the conduct of the CommunityRelations Plan. A community relations plan has already beenprepared for surface removal. This plan will be amended byEPA with assistance from CH2M HILL to include activitiesduring RI/FS.

EPA activities during the community relations plan will in-clude organization and conduct of meetings and hearings,maintenance of local contacts, preparation of press releasesand newsletters.

The following elements outline the scope of work to be com-pleted in the preparation of the Chem-Dyne Community Rela-tions Plan.

16

The Engineer's project staff will meet with U.S.EPA Region V to discuss the community relationsassessment contained in the draft RAMP and theexisting Community Relations Plan. Discussionswill be held with both the technical and communityrelations staff to determine the appropriate com-munity relations technique and scope of work.Project staff will also meet with the Ohio EPAstaff *-Q review the community relations assess-ments .

The Engineer will assist EPA in the preparation ofa draft Community Relations Plan based on the pre-vious community relations plan and assessment forthe site. Section 1 of the plan will contain thecommunity relations assessment. Section 2 willcontain the implementation plan and Section 3 willinclude supporting information as appropriate.

A fact sheet or technical summary will be preparedby the Engineer in the middle and at the end ofthe remedial investigation. These sheets willsummarize technical information presented in theRI for use by EPA in preparing newsletters andpress releases. It may also be used as backgroundinformation for local and state officials.

The Engineer will prepare a fact sheet or technicalsummary following completion of the feasibilitystudy. The purpose of this document is to summa-rize, in layman's language, technical activitiesand recommendations resulting from the feasibilitystudy.

A responsiveness summary will be prepared follow-ing public meetings and a public hearing wheresignificant questions or comments regarding theproject are discussed. The summaries will includeinformation regarding the activity conducted, sub-ject matter discussed, summary of public views andmajor comments, and State and EPA response to thoseconcerns.

The Engineer will assist EPA in the preparation ofgraphic materials for public meetings and the pub-lic hearing. Appropriate charts would be draftedby hand for use during the public hearing andmeetings. It is anticipated that three to foursuch charts per meeting will be required to assistin the presentation of study results and recommen-dations.

17

Task 17 - Additional Requirements

Two types of monthly progress reports will be prepared forFS activities: technical progress reports and financialmanagement reports. These documents are described in moredetail in Task 6 of the remedial investigation scope of work,

GLT414/16

18

CHEM-DYNE RI/FS

LIST OF PROJECT DELIVERABLES

Deliverable

A. Development of RI/FS Work Plan

Assemble Project Team

Prepare QA/QC Plan

Prepare Work Plan

Task

Expected

Issue Date

9/5/83

Schedule

Week

1

24

5/6/83 (draft) 6

7/28/83 (final) 19

B. Remedial Investigation

Review of Existing Information

Technical Memorandum

Preinvestigation Support Report

Site Investigation Technical Memorandums

Phase I

Phase II

Phase III

Final Soil Investigation

Geophysical Investigation

Survey

Remedial Alternative Preliminary

Assessment Technical Memorandum

Remedial Investigation Analysis


Remedial Investigation Final Report

Technical Progress and Financial

Management Reports

C. Feasibility Study

Current Situation Update Memorandum

Remedial Alternative Development


Remedial Alternative Screening

Joint Decision Memorandum

1

2

3-13-23-33-43-53-6

4

5

6

7

8

9

10/1/83

4/8/83

6/6/83

9/1/83

11/29/83

10/17/83

11/7/83

10/10/83

10/28/83

12/14/803

12/30/8/1̂

Monthly

1/14/84

1/30/84

28

2

112435293028

31

37

40

--

42

45

10 2/13/84 47

Deliverable TaskExpected ScheduleIssue Date Week

Remedial Alternative DetailedAnalysis Technical Memorandum

Environmental AssessmentInformation Document

Evaluation Selection of RemedialAlternative Joint DecisionMemorandum

Conceptual Design Technical Memorandum

Final FS Report

Community Relations Plan

Community RelationsBriefing Documents

Technical Progress and FinancialManagement Reports

12

12

13

14

15

16

3/14/84

3/23/84

5/13/84

6/29/84

7/6/84

9/2/83

51

52

60

66

67

23

16

17

As needed

Monthly

GLT4:.4/22

ASSEMBLE PROJECT TEAM

CH2M HILL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST

CHEM-DYNE DEVELOPMENT OF WORK PLAN

W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

LABOR COST

Grade

P3Tl0

Hours

16

16

Total$/Hour

16.74

Direct Labor

$267.84

267.84

Description

Travel

TransportationSubsistence

Other Direct Costs

Total Direct LaborDirect Labor Overhead (41%)G&A Overhead (121%)

TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

267.84

109.81

324.09

$701.74

$ 50.00

50.00

$751.74

GLT301/24

CH2M HILL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTCHEM-DYNE DEVELOPMENT OF WORK PLAN

W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

PREPARE QA/QC PLAN

LABOR COST

Grade

P4P3110

Hours

420--4

28

Total$/Hour

23.3116.74

--7.87

Direct Labor

$ 93.24334.80~31.48

$ 459.52

Description

Travul

transportationSubsistence

Other Direct Costs


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

459.52188.40556.02

$1,203.94

$ 50.00

50.00

$1,253.94

GLT301/25

CH2M HILL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTCHEM-DYNE DEVELOPMENT OF WORK PLAN

W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

PREPARE WORK PLAN

84

LABOR COST

Grade

P4P3Tl0

Hours

464a8

Total$/Hour

23.3116.748.287.87

Direct Labor

$ 93.241,071.36

66.2462.96

$1,293.80

Description

Travul


Other Direct Costs


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$1,293.80530.46

1.565.50

$3,389.76

$ 150.00

150.00

$3,539.76

GLT301/26

CH2M HILL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTCHEM-DYNE REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION

W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK: i. REVIEW EXISTING INFORMATION

LABOR COST

Grade

P4P3PITl0

Hours

850248_4

94

TotalS/Hour Direct Labor

$ 186.48837.00295.4466.2431.48

$1,416.64

Description

Travel


Other Direct Costs


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$1,416.64580.82

1.714.13

$3,711.60

$ 111.00

111.00

$3,822.60

GLI301/27


CHEM-DYNE REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION

W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 2. INVESTIGATION SUPPORT

16

LABOR COST

Grade

P4P3Tl0

Hours

412

--

—

Total$/Hour

23.3116.74----

Direct Labor

$ 93.24200.88

—--

$ 294.12

Description

Travel


Other Direct Costs

Subcontracting


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 275.0075.00

E££

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 294.12120.59355.89

$ 770.59

$ 350.00

1,500

1,850

$2,620.59

GLT301/28


CHEM-DYNE REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONW65310.CO and W65310.DO

EPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 3. SITE INVESTIGATIONS

Subtask 3-1. Phase I - Initial Groundwater, Soil, Surface Water and SedimentInvestigation

LABOR COST

Grade

P4P3T2PI0

Hours

2428011610016

536

Total$/Hour Direct Labor

$ 559.444,687.201,284.121,231.00125.92

$ 7,887.68

Description

Travel


Other Direct Costs

Subcontractor


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 1,585.002,860.00

E&E

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 7,887.683,233.959,544.09

$20,665.72

$ 4,445.00

7,000.00

18,000.00

29,445.00

$50,110.72

GLT301/29


W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0


Subtask 3-2. Phase II - Hydrogeologic Investigation (page 1 of 2)

LABOR COST

P4P3PIT20

SUBTASK (hours /$)

3-2.1 3-2.2 3-2.3

4/93.24 4/93.2440/669.60 232/3,883.68

176/2,166.56192/2,125.44

2/15.74 8/62.96

46/778.58 612/8,331.88 --/--


3-2.4

4/93.2478/1,305.7232/393.9252/575.648/62.96

174/2,431.48

$ 11,541.944,732.2013,965.75

TotalDirect Labor

12/279.72350/5,859.00208/2,560.48244/2,701.08

18/141.66

1,030/11,541.94

$ 30,239.88

EXPENSES

Description

TravelTransporationSubsistence

Other Direct Costs

Subcontracting (Estimate)

Well InstallationE&EOnsite Support(O.H. Materials)

Total Expenses

SUBTASK TOTAL

$ 775.004,575.00

$ 5,350.00

7,395.00

164,000.00

$100,000.004,000.0060,000.00

$176,745.00

$206,984.88

GLI301/23-1


W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0


Subtask 3-2. Phase II - Hydrogeologic Investigation (page 2 of 2)

LABOR COST

P4P3P2120

SUBIASK (hours/$)3-2.5

4/93.2436/602.6440/554.8024/265.688/62.96

112/1,579.32

TotalDirect Labor

4/93.2436/602.6440/554.8024/265.688/62.96

112/1,579.32


Description

TravelTransporationSubsistence

Other Direct Costs

EXPENSES

700.00675.00

$ 1,579.32647.52

1,910.96

$ 4,137.82

$ 1,375.00

1,830.00

Total Expenses

Subtask SubtotalSubtask Subtotal (from previous page)SUBTASK TOTAL

$ 3,205.00

$ 7,342.82206,984.88

$214,327.70

GLT301/23-2



W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0


Subi:ask 3-3. Phase III - Hydrogeologic Investigation

LABOR COST

. ,

P4P3P3P3PIT20

SUBTASK (hours/$)3-3.1 3-3.2 3-3.3

4/93.24 4/93.24 4/93.244/66.96 160/2,678.40 8/139.92

40/669.60 16/267.84 130/2,273.70

114/1,467.18

200/2,462.00 122/1,411.54

4/31.48 8/62.96 24/197.28

52/861.28 388/5,564.44 402/5,582.86

Total Direct LaborDirect: Labor Overhead (41%)G&A Overhead (121%)

Total Labor Cost

EXPENSES

Description

TravelTransporation $ 1,200.00Substance 2,625.00

Other Direct CostsSubcontracting (Estimate)

• Water Treatment 160,000.00Well Installation 86,500.00Ons ite Support 22,500.00Off site Support 17,500.00

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

3-3.4

4/93.244/66.96

40/669.60

40/492.408/88.564/31.48

100/1,442.24

$ 14,412.22

5,909.01

17,438.79

$ 37,760.02

$ 3,825.00

8,175.00

286,500.00

298,500.00

$336,260.02

Total

3-3.5 Direct Labor

4/93.24 20/466.20

24/401.76 200/3,354.00

80/1,339.20 306/5,219.94

56/937.44 56/937.44

36/443.16 390/4,800.90

130/1,439.10

8/62.96 48/377.76

208/3,277.76 1,150/14,412.22

GLT301/22


W65310.CO and W65310.DO

EPA 21.5M10.0


Subtiask 3-4. Final Soil InvestigationsTest Pits Onsite/Offsite

LABOR COST

Grade

P4

P3

PI

T2

0

Hours

4

80

80

56

_8

228

Total

$/Hour

23.3116.7412.3111.07

7.87

Direct Labor

$ 93.241,339.20

984.80

619.92

62.96

$ 3,100.12

Description

Travel

IransportationSubsistence

Other Direct Costs

Subcontractor


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 700.001,350.00

Onsite SupportOffsite SupportEquipment Rental

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 3,100.121,271.053,751.15

$ 8,122.31

$ 2,050.00

2,950.00

6,000.002,500.001,500.00

$ 15,000.00

$23,122.31

GLT201/30


W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0


Subt:ask 3-5. Geophysical Investigation

LABOR COST

Grade

P4P3PI120

Hours

88460168

Total$/Hour

24.3617.49

12.87

11.57

8.22

Direct Labor

$ 194.881,469.16772.20

185.12

65.76

176 2,687.12

Description

Travel


Other Direct Costs


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 275.00

375.00

SubcontractorGeophysical InvestigationE&E

$5,5001,500

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 2,687.121,101.723,251.42

S 7,040.25

$ 650.00

900.00

7,000.00

8,550.00

515,590.25

GLI301/31


W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0


Subtask 3-6. Surveying

108

LABOR COST

Grade

P3PIT20

Hours

88--164

Total$/Hour

16.7412.3111.077.87

Direct Labor

$ 1,473.12--177.12

31.48

$ 1,681.72

Description

Travel


Othe:: Direct Costs

SubcontractorSurvey Contractor


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 500.00900.00

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 1,681.72689.51

2.034.88

$ 4,406.11

S 1,400.00

700.00

9,400.00

$11,500.00

$15,906.11

GLT301/51



W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 4. DEVELOP PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

LABOR COST

Grade

P4P3PIT20

Hours

2012080168

244

Total$/Hour

23.3116.7412.3111.07

7.87

Direct Labor

$ 466.202,008.80984.80177.12

62.96

$ 3,699.88

Description

Travel


Other Direct Costs

Total Direct LaborDirect Labor OverheadG&A Overhead (1210<0

TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 3,699.88

1,516.95

4.476.85

$ 9,693.69

200.00

200.00

$ 9,893.69

GLT301/32



W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 5. SITE INVESTIGATIONS ANALYSIS

Subtask 5-1. Data Analysis

LABOR COST

Grade

P4

P3

P2

PI

T2

0

Hours

8

96

32

40

40

16

232

Total

$/Hour

24.36

17.49

14.49

12.87

11.57

8.22

Direct Labor

$ 194.88

1,679.04

463.68

514.80

462.80

131.52

$ 3,446.72

Description

Travel

Transportation

Subsistence

Other Direct Costs


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 3,446.721,413.164,170.53

$ 9,030.41

425.00

425.00

$ 9,455.41

GLI301/33



W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.SM10.0

TASK 5. SITE INVESTIGATIONS ANALYSIS

Subtask 5-2. Site Data Application to Preliminary Alternatives

LABOR COST

Grade

P4

P3

PI

T2

0

Hours

24

170

60

40

16

310

Total

S/Hour Direct Labor

$ 584.64

2,973.30

772.20

462.80

131.52

$ 4,924.46

Description

Travel

Transportation

Subsistence

Other Direct Costs

Total Direct Labor

Direct Labor Overhead (41%)G&A Overhead (121%)

TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 50.00

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 4,924.46

2,019.03

5.958.60

$12,902.09

$ 50.00

425.00

475.00

$13,377.09

GLI3D1/34



W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 6. FINAL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

LABOR COST

Grade

P4

P3

PI

T2

0

Hours

16

160

80

40

32

328

Total

$/Hour

24.3617.4912.8711.57

8.22

Direct Labor

$ 389.762,798.401,029.60

462.80263.04

$ 4,943.60

Description

Travel


Otheir Direct Costs


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 50.00

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 4,943.60

2,026.88

5,981.76

$12,952.23

50.00

800.00

850.00

$13,802.23

GLi:i01/35


W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 7. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

LABOR COST

TotalGrade Hours $/Hour Direct Labor

P4 40 24.36 $ 974.40P3 400 17.49 6,996.00

12 40 11.57 462.80

0 40 8.22 328.80

520 S 8,762.00

Total Direct Labor $ 8,762.00Direct Labor Overhead (41%) 3,592.42G&A Overhead (121%) 10,602.02

TOTAL LABOR COST $22,956.44

EXPENSES

Description

Travel S

Transportation $Subsistence

Other Direct Costs 705.00

Total Expenses 705.00

TASK TOTAL $23,661.44

GLT301/36


CHEM-DYNE FEASIBILITY STUDY

W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 8. DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT SITUATION AND SCOPE UPDATE

LABOR COST


P4 4 24.36 $ 97.44

P3 68 17.49 1,189.32PI 20 12.87 257.40

'*•""' T2 16 11.57 185.12

0 8 8.22 65.76

116 $ 1,795.04

Total Direct Labor S 1,795.04Direct Labor Overhead (41%) 735.97G&A Overhead (121%) 2,172.00

TOTAL LABOR COST $ 4,703.00

EXPENSES

Description

Travel $

Transportation $ —

Subsistence



TASK TOTAL $ 4,978.00

GLT301/37



W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 9. DEVELOPMENT OF REMEDIAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES

LABOR COST

Grade

P4

P3

PI12

0

Hours

24

220

160

40

24

468

Total

$/Hour

24.36

17.49

12.87

11.57

8.22

Direct Labor

$ 584.64

3,847.80

2,059.20

462.80

197.28

7,151.72

Description

Travel

Transportation

Subsistence

Other Direct Costs

Total Direct Labor

Direct Labor Overhead (41%)

G&A Overhead (121%)

TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 100.00

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 7,151.72

2,932.21

8,653.58

318,737.51

$ 100.00

815.00

915.00

$19,652.51

GLT301/38


CHEM-DYNE FEASIBILITY STUDYW65310.CO and W65310.DO

EPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 10. INITIAL SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES

LABOR COST

Grade

P4

P3

PI

12

0

Hours

8

112

24

24

16

184

Total

$/Hour

24.3617.4912.8711.57

8.22

Direct Labor

$ 194.881,958.88

308.88

277.68

131.52

2,871.84

Description

Travel

transportationSubsistence

Other Direct Costs


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 50.00

30.00

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 2,871.84

1,177.45

3,474.93

$ 7,524.22

$ 80.00

450.00

530.00

$ 8,054.22

GLT301/39

CH2M HILL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTCHEM-DYNE FEASIBILITY STUDY

W65310.CO and W65310.DO

EPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 11. ADDITIONAL STUDIES (Optional)

No work is scheduled under this task at this time. ADDITIONAL STUDIES may be necessaryto evaluate technologies as required.

GLT 2.01/40


W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 12. DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES

LABOR COST


P4 24 24.36 $ 584.64

P3 552 17.49 9,654.48

PI 180 12.87 2,316.60

12 104 11.57 1,203.38

0 88 8.22 723.36

948 $15,641.56

Total Direct Labor $15,641.56Direct Labor Overhead (41%) 6,413.04G&A Overhead (121%) 18,926.29


EXPENSES

Description

Travel $ 1,900.00

Transportation $1,100.00Subsistence 800.00

Other Direct Costs 1,000.00

Total Expenses 2,900.00


GLT301/41



W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 13. EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE

LABOR COST

Grade

P4

P3

PI

T2

0

Hours

40

144

24

16

_8

232

Total

S/Hour Direct Labor

$ 974.40

2,518.56

308.88

185.12

65.76

$ 4,052.72

Description

Travel


Other Direct Costs


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 50.00

30.00

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 4,052.72

1,661.62

4,903.79

$10,618.13

80.00

350.00

430.00

$11,048.13

GLI301/42



W65310.CO and W65310.DO

EPA 21.5M10.0

TASK: 14. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

LABOR COST

Grade

P4

P3

PI

T2

0

Hours

40

116

100

80

16

352

Total

S/Hour Direct Labor

$ 974.40

2,028.84

1,287.00

925.60

131.52

5,347.36

Description

Travel

Transportation

Subsistence

Other Direct Costs

Total Direct Labor

Direct Labor Overhead (41%)G&A Overhead (121%)

TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$ 50.00

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 5,347.36

2,192.42

6,470.31

$14,010.09

$ 50.00

575.00

625.00

$14,635.09

GLT3D1/43

TASK 15. FINAL REPORT



W65310.CO and W65310.DO

EPA 21.5M10.0

LABOR COST

Grade

P4P3PIT20

Hours

40104402416

224

Total$/Hour

24.3617.4912.8711.57

8.22

Direct Labor

$ 974.401,818.96514.80277.68

131.52

3,717.36

Description

Travel

"ransportationSubsistence

Other Direct Costs

Total Direct LaborDirect Labor OverheadG&A Overhead (121%)

TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

(41%)

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 3,717.361,524.124.498.01

$ 9,739.49

750.00

750.00

$10,489.49

GLI301/44



W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 16. COMMUNITY RELATIONS

225

LABOR COST

Grade

P4P3T20

Hours

321067215

TotalS/Hour

24.36

17.49

11.57

8.22

Direct Labor

$ 779.52

1,853.94

833.04

123.30

3,589.80

Description

Travel


Other Direct Costs

SubcontractorPrepare Fact Sheet


TOTAL LABOR COST

EXPENSES

$1,100.00

800.00

Total Expenses

TASK TOTAL

$ 3,589.80

1,471.82

4,343.66

$ 9,405.28

$ 1,900.00

675.00

1,200.00

3,775.00

$13,180.28

GLi:i01/45


W65310.CO and W65310.DOEPA 21.5M10.0

TASK 17. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

LABOR COST


P4 40 24.36 $ 974.40

P3 320 17.49 5,596.8012 32 11.57 370.240 32 8.22 263.04

424 $ 7,204.48

Total Direct Labor $ 7,204.48Direct Labor Overhead (41%) 2,953.84G&A Overhead (121*o) 8,717.42


EXPENSES

Description

Travel $

"ransportation $Subsistence




GLl:J01/46

CHEM-DYNE WORK PLAN PREPARATION

PROJECT BUDGET COST SUMMARY

Labor Expense Subcontract Total

Task Description Costs Costs Cost Cost

A. Development of Work Plan

Assemble Project Team $ 701.74 $ 50.00 $ -- $ 751.74

Prepare QA/QC Plan 1,203.94 50.00 -- 1,253.94

Prepare Work Plan 3,389.76 150.00 -- 3,539.76

B. Remedial Investigation (RI)

Task 1 Review Existing Info. $ 3,711.60 $ 111.00 $ — $ 3,822.60

Task 2 Investigation Support 770.59 350.00 1,500 2,620.59

Task 3 Site Investigations 112,372.11 48,045.00 494,900 655,317.11

^•r Task 4 Develop Preliminary

Assessment of Remedial

Alternatives 9,693.69 200.00 -- 9,893.69

Task 5 Site Investigaion Anal. 21,932.50 900.00 -- 22,832.50

Task 6 Final Remedial Investi-

gation Report 12,952.23 850.00 -- 13,802.23

Task 7 Additional Requirements 22,956.44 705.00 -- 23,661.44

C. Feasibility Study (FS)

Task 8 Description of Current

Stituation & Scope Update $ 4,703.00 $ 275.00 $ — $ 4,978.00

Task 9 Development of Remedial

Action Alternatives 18,737.51 915.00 -- 19,652.51

Task 10 Initial Screening of

Alternatives 7,524.22 530.00 -- 8,054.22

^ , Task 11 Laboratory Studies

(Optional)

Task 12 Detailed Analysis of

Alternatives 40,980.89 2,900.00 — 43,880.89

Task 13 Evaluation & Selection

of Cost-Effective Alternative 10,618.13 430.00 — 11,048.13

Task 14 Conceptual Design 14,010.09 625.00 -- 14,635.09

Task 15 Final Report 9,739.49 750.00 -- 10,489.49

Task 16 Community Relations 9,405.28 2,575.00 1,200 13,180.28

Task 17 Additional Requir. 18.875.74 625.00 — 19.500.74

TOTALS $324,278.95 $ 61,036.00 $497,600 $882,914.95

Unadjusted Fee $ 63.087.00

Contract Total $946,001.95

Includes direct labor, direct overhead (41%), and G&A overhead (121%).

GLT414/26

CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL o«c. of M.«.s.m««u „* Buds«<*ES£ARCH A.\O D&'ELOPME\Tj Approv.l No. 29-ROI84

Thii fonri ii (or uw whm i,f mfenuunn of coif or prionj data (M« rVK |.).«O7-)> » rvquind ud '*** NC "* °' '*CIS

'«O tubwirun** br oW Opiiotial Form W it auihonnd by dw contracting oActr.

CH2M HILL Southeast, Inc. WA 21.5M10.0HOMI !oj«a toonss Remeaial inv

1941 Roland Clarke Place stud che

Reston, Virginia 22091 Hamilton, Oh

estigation/Feasibilitym-Dyne Siteio

ovuKXii AMD Looro^si «nm won is TO H nvotitio TOTAI AMOUNT o» MOTOSAI OOVT souctTAnoM NOMilwaukee, WI and Hamilton, OH , 948,421 68-01-6692

DETAIL DESCRIPTION OF COST ELEMENTS

1 OWCT MAlIlUt Illtmn, t» £>*•»« 4;

4. »V)«CXAMB »A«n

*. iuKOwntAcno IHMSf. OTM«I_.//> IAW M*rt«M

CJ> TOWt JTANOAJO COMMMGM (TIMS

rj; iMTWivtSIONAI. nUNSHH t Al wArr ,«M« tmil

TOTAL OIUCT M.1TC111AL

1ST COST (S)

:. «*fHlM CVUMAO' r*,« X.YJ a»wa;

..-« -.,»•*, is:0MuA,7° HO^.

?4 452*PLEASE SEE P3 4330

REVERSE SIDE P2 72PI 1670T2 1186Tl 16

KTCOST (S)

10,9027 4 , 4 7 3

1,0132 0 , 9 9 913,421

1.32O TOTAL omecT nao* *''*" "^461~ -':-- •"•••••'••••... ( 3,745

t LA*OI OvflMtAO tSfKiff DtfHrtmnl f Ctti Cl**r>' O.H. (ATI I UMai

0.41 124, 69C.

1ST COST til

51,123

TOTAI MM*1ST COST' JNC!:

-0--u-

i

124 , 6 9 0

ror^t uteot outline p»--'-^.-- :- ,- 1 • . , . ̂ .- - ...: ̂ -^ 51,123i. tnCUi rtllXC llmimdimt JtM .••* *i <*rmm~> mu*iL,,~*,>

TOTAL SHCIAL TtSTI\C

». SKC1AI IOUOMIMT (•// ̂ inn tbtrft) Illimiu tm txJutti A)

7 TtAVU (If ,6ntt (kurfti 1 Gin «tr*Mft «• «/aM«W Sfk»4*itt

m. TtANS*CITAnOM

». m on M ot jutsartKi/ori/ . r».<i EL

1. CONSUTANTS lUimufy-tmr^mi f*u>

Community Relations (unidentified)

1ST COST It)

1ST COST lit

8,56015,095

1ST COST ' 1 >

1,200E & E Health and Safety Plan; Samoling and

Field Assistance 2 5 , 0 0 0Geoohysicist - Geophysical (unidentified; 5 ,500

-0--0-

23 ,655t

Drillina Services and Pump Test, roru cwwri.7-«vrj [ 4 6 5 , you 4 9 7 , 6 0 0* OTHH WltCr COSTS tlHmilt «• £\jW*<« A 1 37,331

10. TOTAL miner COJT 4 NO urEX/«E.i» 7 3 4 , 3 9 9i > SINIIAI AI«O AOMNisTtAnvi ixptNSi <x*ti ]^ _ 2 1 * *^ '*" ''"•"" v**- 3 ^ ' 150,875U. IOTAITM ' -0-

13. TOTAL VTIVATKIJ HIM' 8 8 5 , 2 7 4

it mo»*o*r (See Exhibit A for Detail) b J , i « t /u. ror.iL tsTivATin cc»5r <\o «f ot Hum 948. ,421

OPTIONAL FORM MOctober 19'1

Dm firepouJ i» lutoraund loc UM m cuniwvtiun «nh «nd m rnpunx 10 (Ontn*, gfP. ,h. i

«nd rrfvctt our bm rMinum li o< (hit dm. in j»eurO*o«« «nh (h* InnrvKmxu in Qfl*r»rt <»d th» FIMMIKM** » K K h folio*

N. Wayne SellmanContract Administrator

CH2M HILL Southeast, Inc.

.̂ (Ja^jM—.(J 8*"°7-^-°8N3

EXHIBIT A-SUPt>O«T>NG SCHWUU: iSptttfy. If mort spact it »ttdt<*. uu rutnt)COST ti HO. TOM oescmmoN fStt f»ctnftt 1) I$T COST fS/

3 Direct Labor:1983 Est. Hours

P4 104P3 1678P2 40PI 882T2 602Tl 16O 126

Rate cost23.31 2 , 4 2 4 . 2 416.74 28,089. 7213.87 554.8012.31 10,857.42 j11.07 6 ,664.14

8.28 132.487.87 991.62

1984P4 348P3 2652P2 32PI 788T2 5840 335

24.36 8 , 4 7 7 . 2 8 ^r17.49 46 ,383 .4814. 49 463. 6812.87 10,141.5611.57 6 ,756 .88

8.22 2 ,753 .70 ; 124.690

7 Travel I

a) Transportation - air fare, car rental, parking 8 , 5 6 0bl Subsistence 15,095

9 Other Direct Costs: Copying, postage, telephone, etc. 37,33114 Fee: 10% of (885 .274 - 497 ,600 ) 38,767

5% of (5 .500 + 4653% of ( 2 5 . 0 0 0 )

,900-)- 1 .200123.630750 63 .147

i HA» J.NT UKUTivt AOtNOr or TMI uMTtD STATU OOVI*NMINT PWO*M*O ANT ttvilw Of tout ACCOUNTS O* HCOIOS IN CONNKTION WITH AMT orGQVIlNMtNT WMl CONTRACT OR SUtCONTlACT WITHIN THI FAST TWtlVI «ONTHST \^

0 TM Q NO fif^t. *ut>h *+*•>NA«< AND AMMii or «VKWMO oma AND INMVWUM TurNOM NUMMR/UTINSION

DCAA, Seattle, Washington Dennis Peterson ( 2 0 6 ) 4 4 2 - 4 7 7 0II. Wll TOU ItOUlM TMI UU Or ANT OOVIRNMINT MJOHITT IN THI KWOlMAMCI Of TM} nOTOUO CONTIAO7

III DO TCU MOUM OOVttNMINT CONTRACT MNANONC TO ri*TO*M >H» nOrOUO CONTRACT*

gj r« Q NO tlfrn.i+mttf,.,: Q AOVANC1 >«T»rtNn Q PtOOWiS r»T«<Nn OR Q OUARANTMO IOAN1

IV DO T«U MOW HOiO ANT CONTRACT 1 Or. d» jf» *-r, *mj imlifimlimilj

Q YIS Q NO flf JH. i+mufl.):

fiu**t* lltLCtO) fl/*li> KM THI lAMf OR MMIIA* WOM CAUlO K3t IT -NIS

v SOU (MIS CO»T IUMMART CONTORM WITH THI CO»T MINOnU JIT fORTM IN AOfNOT BOUIATIONJ7

(%[ Til Q NO (If *•. txfitm «• nrmt tr i*p*r*u f*tn

In ttrmt fir Imurwammt *mj F***~n OPTIONAL FORM *O lO- ' l

OPTIONAL fORM M (lO-'l) SK) \m 3 . .40.:««

I 11 TANKS• /I TANKS'' 1J-TiM)«.-!S

TANK »

9ND

_ BOUNDARY

IK AREA

v FENCE

.TAINMENT BERM

0 OFFICES 4 PARKING

ONT «.MINATION A R E A

E S S R O A D W A Y S

K A G E A R E A S

EHAi. WORKING AREA

GING 4 S T O R A G E A R E A

<nnrr t i A »j c \viriTH F rt o

, rSITE UDCATION 8. TOPOGRAPHIC (MAP OF OHO-HAMLTON /CHEM-CNNE

I \

.,Krrr-..«- ---

GENERAL SCHCDULCCHEM-DYNE RI/FS WORK PLAN21.5M1C.OWBS310CO (Rl) AND WG5310DO <FS>

TASK I FIN*I. *i HIPO*'

TASK 7«DOnrCW*l » f C n ( i d t M I N T S

4< • • t • h rift-' Hi'*. • • • 11 .p . 11 . •l • ~t ' ' ' '! • • ! • • ! '. , . . . . , . ,

A A

* A A

. .4.. .

SITE LOCATION & TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF OKO-HAMILTON/CHEM-DYNE