Rev 6 Product and Groundwater Investigation ReportIntroduction ... Based on ConocoPhillips detailed product accounting following the release and comparative volume measurements taken

Product and Groundwater Investigation at Tank 1505 Report

DRAFT

Kansas City ConocoPhillips Terminal Facility

Prepared for

Risk Management and Remediation

Health, Safety and Environment Bartlesville, Oklahoma

Prepared by

St. Louis, Missouri

May 2008

I

Contents

Contents ........................................................................................................................................ iAcronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................. iii Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1-5

1.1Site Description and History .................................................................................. 1-51.2Tank 1505 Details of Release .................................................................................. 1-6

Investigation Objectives and Approach .............................................................................. 2-72.1Investigation Objectives .......................................................................................... 2-72.2Product Investigation Approach ........................................................................... 2-7

2.2.1 Subsurface Investigation Using LIF Methods .................................. 2-82.2.2 Confirmation Soil Sampling ............................................................... 2-82.2.3 Product Sampling ................................................................................ 2-8

2.3Groundwater Investigation Approach ................................................................. 2-92.3.1 Subsurface Investigation Using MIP Methods ................................ 2-92.3.2 Confirmation Groundwater Sampling ............................................ 2-10

2.4Geotechnical Data Collection Approach ............................................................ 2-102.4.1 Electrical Conductivity Survey ........................................................ 2-102.4.2 Geotechnical Soil Sampling .............................................................. 2-10

2.5Summary of Fieldwork Activities ....................................................................... 2-102.5.1 LIF Investigation Summary .............................................................. 2-102.5.2 Confirmation Soil Sampling Locations ........................................... 2-112.5.3 Product Sampling Locations ............................................................ 2-122.5.4 MIP Survey ......................................................................................... 2-122.5.5 Confirmation Groundwater Sampling Locations .......................... 2-132.5.6 Geotechnical Sampling Locations .................................................... 2-152.5.7 Soil Boring Abandonment ................................................................ 2-152.5.8 Investigation-Derived Waste Management ................................... 2-15

Investigation Results and Discussion ................................................................................ 3-163.1Site Geology ............................................................................................................ 3-163.2Product Investigation Results and Discussion .................................................. 3-17

3.2.1 Free Product Fingerprinting Results and Discussion ................... 3-173.2.2 Confirmation Soil Sampling Results and Discussion ................... 3-183.2.3 LIF Results and Discussion ............................................................... 3-20

3.3 Groundwater Investigation Results and Discussion .................................... 3-233.3.1 MIP and Confirmation Groundwater Sampling Results and Discussion 3-23

Conclusions & Path Forward ............................................................................................... 4-244.1Product and Groundwater Investigation Conclusions..................................... 4-244.2 Investigation Uncertainties .............................................................................. 4-26

4.1.1 LNAPL Contamination Related to the Tank 1505 Release .......... 4-264.1.2 Dissolved-Phase Contamination Related to the Tank 1505 Release4-26

References................................................................................................................................ 5-28

PRODUCT AND GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION AT TANK 1505 REPORT

II

Figures:

Figure 1 – Site Location Map Figure 2 – LIF Boring, Confirmation Soil Sample, and Product Sample Location Map Figure 3 – MIP Boring and Confirmation Groundwater Sample Location Map Figure 4 – Electrical Conductivity and Geotechnical Boring Location Map Figure 5 – Plan View of Discrete Depths of Gasoline LNAPL Above 4% RE LIF Response Figure 6 – Confirmation Soil and Product Sample Results Map Figure 7 – Plan View of Discrete Depths of MIP FID Responses Above 3,000,000 uV Figure 8 – Plan View of Discrete Depths of MIP PID Responses Above 3,000,000 uV Figure 9 – Confirmation Groundwater and March 2007 Sample Results Figure 10 – Conceptual Site Model

Tables:

Table 1 – Summary of Boring Locations and Investigation Data ...................................................

Table 2 – Summary of Confirmation Soil Sample Detections

Table 3 – Product Fingerprinting Data Summary

Table 4 – Summary of MIP Responses During 2007 MIP Investigation

Table 5 – Summary of Groundwater Field Parameters

Table 6 – Summary of Confirmation Groundwater Sample Detections

Table 7 – Summary of MIP Response and Groundwater Confirmation Sample Results

Appendixes:

A Raw and Analyzed LIF Output Logs B Product Fingerprinting Samples Analytical Data (Lab Summary Reports) C Confirmation Soil Samples Analytical Data (Laboratory Reports) D MIP Output Logs and Summary Report E Confirmation Groundwater Samples Analytical Data (Laboratory Reports) F Geotechnical Analysis Report and Geotechnical Boring Logs


III

Acronyms and Abbreviations

amsl above mean sea level

BTEX Benzene, tolulene, ethylbenzene and xylenes

CAS Corrective Action Study

CSM Conceptual Site Model

CI Comprehensive Investigation

COCs Chemicals of Concern

DO Dissolved oxygen

DRO Diesel Range Organics

EC Electrical Conductivity

ECD Electron capture detector

FDD Fairfax Drainage District

FID Flame ionization detector

FVD Fluorescence versus depth

gpd gallons per day

GRO Gasoline Range Organics

KC Kansas City

KDHE Kansas Department of Health and the Environment

LIF Laser Induced Fluorescence

LNAPL Light, non-aqueous phase liquid

MIP Membrane Interface Probe

MNA Monitored Natural Attenuation

mS/m Millisiemens per meter

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

ORP Oxidation-reduction potential

PID Photo ionization detector

ppb parts per billion (in water this is equivalent to micrograms per liter (ug/L)

ppm parts per million (in soil this is equivalent to milligrams per kilogram (mg/Kg)


IV

QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control

RBS Risk Based Standard (Kansas)

ROP Rate of push

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

RW Recovery Well (Product)

SSI Supplemental Site Investigation

TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

uV Microvolts

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds

WW Water Well (Groundwater Recovery)

%RE % reflectance emitter

PRODUCT AND GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION REPORT

1-5

SECTION 1

Introduction

The ConocoPhillips Kansas City (KC) Pipeline Terminal experienced a release of unleaded gasoline from Tank 1505 in April 2006. This report, prepared on behalf of ConocoPhillips, details the status of environmental activities related to that release conducted through September 2007.

This report updates prior reports regarding this release including the Removal Action Report (CH2M HILL, 2006a) and the Tank 1505 Activities Status Report (CH2M HILL, 2007a), and reports the results of the field activities conducted during 2007 as proposed in the Work Plan for Product and Groundwater Investigation (CH2M HILL, 2007b).

The objectives of this report are as follows:

Assess the current vertical and lateral extent of LNAPL in the vicinity of Tank 1505 using the laser induced fluorescence (LIF) and other LNAPL data collected during the investigation.

Assess the contribution of the April 2006 release at Tank 1505 (fresh unleaded gasoline) to LNAPL in the vicinity of the tank in comparison to the LNAPL that may be observed in the area that is related to the former refinery site (weathered, mixed hydrocarbons).

Assess the current vertical and lateral extent of dissolved-phase groundwater contamination (benzene, TPH-gasoline range organics [GRO], and TPH-diesel range organics [DRO]) using the membrane interface probe (MIP) and other groundwater data collected during the investigation.

Assess the impacts to groundwater based on the April 2006 release at Tank 1505 in comparison to the pre-existing groundwater contamination related to the former refinery site).

Present the new lithology information collected during the investigation (including electrical conductivity measurements and soil geotechnical analysis).

Present a revised Conceptual Site Model (CSM) that depicts the nature/extent and discusses the fate/transport aspects related to the Tank 1505 release, and evaluates the results of the Product and Groundwater Investigation.

Present a proposed path forward to further address the Tank 1505 release.

1.1 Site Description and History This section presents a brief summary of the site history and the current status of the Tank 1505 area.

Phillips Petroleum Company operated a refinery on ConocoPhillips property between 1930 and 1982, and environmental remediation activities have been ongoing at this property since the


1-6

refinery closure. ConocoPhillips is the current owner of the former Phillips KC Refinery, and acquired the property when Conoco Petroleum Company merged with Phillips Petroleum Company (Phillips) in 2002. This former refinery site encompasses approximately 240 acres, of which approximately 205 acres are currently owned by ConocoPhillips. The site is located in Wyandotte County, Kansas City, Kansas, within a highly industrialized area known as the Fairfax District. The site lies east of Fairfax Trafficway, immediately west of the Missouri River, and north of Interstate Highway 70 as depicted on Figure 1.

The ConocoPhillips KC Pipeline Terminal operates on the southern half of property owned by ConocoPhillips. As discussed in the recently submitted Risk Assessment and Data Gap Investigation (RA/DGI) Work Plan (CH2M HILL, 2007c), the terminal is an active operating facility and ConocoPhillips has no plans to sell or cease operations on this property in the future. The RA/DGI Work Plan presented this area as the “Active Area” and proposed the further investigative needs in order to complete the site characterization for the former refinery site.

The Tank 1505 Area is located entirely within the confines of the Active Area. As presented in this report, ConocoPhillips continues to aggressively investigate and report on the April 2006 release at Tank 1505 in order to expedite the path forward related to the release without hindrance based on the timeframe of activities related to the former refinery site as a whole.

1.2 Tank 1505 Details of Release On April 15, 2006 facility personnel at the ConocoPhillips Kansas City Terminal Facility observed gasoline being released to the ground surface within the secondary containment berm of Tank 1505. Facility personnel implemented emergency response actions, and at that time it was estimated that over 100,000 gallons of unleaded gasoline was thought to be unrecoverable and was assumed to have migrated to the subsurface underneath the tank.

Based on ConocoPhillips detailed product accounting following the release and comparative volume measurements taken while emptying product from an identical tank, it is believed the initial estimate of the volume of the release was high; a more realistic estimate for the volume of the unrecoverable gasoline released is 60,000 gallons.

Since April 2006, ConocoPhillips implemented significant activities to attempt recovery of the product and to investigate the subsurface following the release. Between April 2006 and March 2007 the following activities were conducted: a removal action of gasoline impacted soils, subsurface/trenching investigation adjacent to the tank, monthly groundwater monitoring at wells downgradient of Tank 1505, and installation and weekly gauging of temporary piezometers adjacent to the tank to monitor light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) thickness. These activities are detailed in the Tank 1505 Status Report (CH2M HILL, 2007a) and the Removal Action Report (CH2M HILL, 2006).

Since March 2007, further investigative activities have been conducted in accordance with the Work Plan for Product and Groundwater Investigation (CH2M HILL, 2007b), and as reported and evaluated herein.


2-7

SECTION 2

Investigation Objectives and Approach

This section describes the specific investigation objectives, the sampling and analysis approach, field methods, and quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) protocols that were employed during the investigation at the Tank 1505 Investigation Area. Investigation activities were conducted in accordance with the Work Plan for Product and Groundwater Investigation (Work Plan) submitted to KDHE in January 2007 (CH2M HILL, 2007b).

2.1 Investigation Objectives Specific investigation objectives were identified to reduce CSM uncertainties and support refinement of the RAOs presented in Section 1. These objectives are listed below:

Assess the current vertical and lateral extent of LNAPL in the vicinity of Tank 1505 using laser induced fluorescence (LIF) measurements.

Estimate the contribution of the April 2006 release at Tank 1505 (fresh unleaded gasoline) in comparison to the LNAPL that may be observed at the site that is related to the former refinery site (weathered, mixed hydrocarbons).

Assess the current vertical and lateral extent of dissolved-phase groundwater contamination (benzene, TPH-GRO, and TPH-diesel range organics [DRO]) using membrane interface probe (MIP) measurements.

Attempt to estimate the contribution of the April 2006 release at Tank 1505 to the dissolved-phase groundwater impact in the area (through delineation of the presence of highly mobile, and lighter volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in groundwater close to the tank, in comparison to the pre-existing groundwater contamination related to the former refinery site).

Collect sufficient information to refine the critical nature/extent and fate/transport aspects of the Tank 1505 Area CSM including lithology (electrical conductivity log on MIP tool), LNAPL and dissolved-phase contamination extent (LIF and MIP measurements), and extents of old and new contamination (LIF and MIP measurements).

Collect sufficient pre-design information to select an appropriate remediation path forward to address the Tank 1505 release, if remediation is necessary.

2.2 Product Investigation Approach The field investigations utilized in-situ LIF methods for delineation and characterization of the LNAPL. Using an adaptive approach, the investigation proceeded in an outward direction from the source area to delineate the contamination. Confirmation soil samples were collected to verify the LIF data generated during the investigation. Previous product fingerprinting data


2-8

was also used to establish a correlation with soil concentration data, and its ultimate relationship with the Tank 1505 release.

2.2.1 Subsurface Investigation Using LIF Methods In March 2007, the field investigation was completed with the use of a real-time, direct-push technology (DPT) LIF survey to delineate and characterize the extent of LNAPL contamination at the Tank 1505 Investigation Area.

The investigation was conducted through the use of the UltraViolet Optical Screening Tool (UVOST™) developed by Dakota Technologies and is a laser induced fluorescence (LIF) system used to screen soils for the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons. The LIF method is an in-situ process that works by driving multiple wavelengths of ultraviolet laser light into the subsurface via direct push technology (DPT) and measuring the resulting fluorescence of contaminants in the subsurface. If fluorescent compounds exist (as in petroleum hydrocarbon contaminants containing polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), a signal response, (i.e., percent fluorescence) will be received by the LIF tool. Fluorescence is reported on the UVOST™ logs in percent Reference Emitter (%RE) as compared to a calibration standard which contains a proprietary fuel. The UVOST™ was calibrated daily.

Additionally, the UVOST™ tool reports a waveform signature for each of the %RE peaks. The waveform signature presents a chromatograph of four individual wavelengths of light. The area under each wavelength peak in comparison to the others can be used to “fingerprint” unique fuel compositions. This characteristic waveform was used to assess whether the LNAPL identified during the investigation was related to the Tank 1505 release or former refinery site sources.

LIF measurements were taken at approximately 1-inch depth increments from ground surface to the termination depth of the boring. All LIF borings were advanced to 50 feet below ground surface (bgs), to the base of contamination, or to refusal, whichever came first. Thus with multiple boring locations this investigation enabled an accurate depiction of LNAPL in the subsurface – in both the vadose and saturated zones.

2.2.2 Confirmation Soil Sampling Laboratory analyses of discrete depth soil samples were used to confirm the in-situ results of the LIF sensor at areas of high LIF response or distinct waveform signatures, and to assist in the interpretation of the characterization of LNAPL in the Tank 1505 area. Soil confirmation samples were used to confirm the overall pattern of contamination indicated by the LIF results, and for this purpose, conventional soil sampling borings were advanced next to select LIF boring locations.

2.2.3 Product Sampling Product samples were collected from several monitoring wells and from Tank 1505 prior to the LIF investigation. The data provided by the laboratory provided insight into the composition of the fuel. However, as the results were not available until after the completion of the LIF investigation, real-time data generated in the field was the primary driving factor in the decision-logic process.


2-9

2.3 Groundwater Investigation Approach Groundwater surrounding Tank 1505 was investigated through the use of a MIP survey for in-situ VOC measurements. Using an adaptive approach, the investigation proceeded in an outward direction from the source area to delineate the contamination. MIP measurements were confirmed through collection of groundwater confirmation samples at select locations.

2.3.1 Subsurface Investigation Using MIP Methods In March 2007, the field investigation was completed with the use of a real-time, DPT MIP survey to delineate VOCs in soil, soil gas, and groundwater in the vicinity of Tank 1505. The MIP tool can detect the presence of VOC contamination using different detectors; the FID and PID were utilized during the investigation as they are suitable for use with hydrocarbon constituents. The following contaminants typically can be detected:

Straight-chained hydrocarbons (best detector is FID) Aromatic hydrocarbons (best detector is PID)

Prior to advancement of each MIP boring, a “dunk test” was performed with a known concentration of benzene in 0.5 liters of water and a known concentration of unleaded gasoline in 0.5 liters of water. The detector response relationship between benzene and the unleaded gasoline standard was used to estimate the maximum concentrations (in parts per million) at each MIP boring location.

A heated probe equipped with a permeable membrane was advanced using the DPT rig. Subsurface volatile organic contaminants diffuse across the membrane and enter into a carrier gas within the probe. The probe was heated to accelerate diffusion of contaminants across the membrane. The carrier gas sweeping behind the membrane transported the contaminants through a trunk line and to the gas-phase detectors at the ground surface for measurement.

The MIP tool also measured the electrical conductivity (EC) of the subsurface and was used to discern changes in soil lithology. The EC probe used a dipole arrangement at the tip of the MIP probe so that both conductivity and MIP detector readings could be obtained simultaneously. This enabled increased understanding of the location of contaminant mass that was typically encountered trapped in finer-grained sediment layers.

The rate of MIP advancement was dependent upon the geology and presence and magnitude of contamination. To obtain an accurate in-situ VOC measurement, the MIP probe remained at the depth interval for a minimum amount of time equal to the travel time of the carrier gas from the downhole membrane to the analytical detectors in the aboveground mobile “lab” (typically on the order of 1 minute). The initial MIP survey locations were “stopped” at more frequent depth intervals to gain a baseline understanding of the geometry of the dissolved-phase VOC plume before the project team made decisions to expedite the effort. Expediting the MIP survey included increasing the length of the advancement intervals and focusing “stops” only within known contaminated zones.


2-10

2.3.2 Confirmation Groundwater Sampling Following the completion of the MIP survey and data evaluation, confirmation groundwater samples were collected from soil borings advanced near select MIP borings of low, medium, and high response values. The data collected during confirmation groundwater sampling activities was used to verify the data generated during the MIP investigation. Groundwater confirmation samples were also collected near pre-selected LIF borings that exhibited waveform responses that were associated with both former refinery operations and the Tank 1505 release.

2.4 Geotechnical Data Collection Approach A soil electrical conductivity survey and discrete soil sampling were conducted to further define the lithology in the vicinity of Tank 1505.

2.4.1 Electrical Conductivity Survey In conjunction with the MIP survey, a soil electrical conductivity (EC) survey was conducted. The MIP survey provided a degree of soil lithologic information from each boring as an EC sensor was on-board the MIP probe in order to identify changes in stratigraphy. However, additional EC data was collected to both verify the EC data generated during the MIP survey and provide a greater dataset by advancing the EC probe adjacent to select LIF locations. The additional soil EC survey consisted of a four pair dipole arrangement, as opposed to the one pair dipole arrangement equipped on the MIP probe. The increased number of dipole arrangements provides a more detailed “picture” of the subsurface materials present beneath the site.

2.4.2 Geotechnical Soil Sampling In order to better define the soil lithology in the vicinity of the release and prepare for potential remedial design requirements, soil borings were advanced for continuous sampling and visual logging. Discrete soil sampling was conducted to further define the lithology in the vicinity of Tank 1505.

2.5 Summary of Fieldwork Activities Field activities at the site consisted of premobilization tasks including utility clearance, health and safety meetings, the LIF and MIP investigations, confirmation soil and groundwater sampling, the soil EC survey, and geotechnical soil sampling.

2.5.1 LIF Investigation Summary In accordance with the Work Plan (CH2M HILL, 2007b), the investigation started immediately adjacent to the exterior walls of Tank 1505 and progressed in a radial pattern away from the tank until the extent of LNAPL in the subsurface was delineated. Twenty-five LIF borings (LIF-000 through LIF-024) were advanced to investigate the Tank 1505 area: one background location (LIF-000), one location to attempt to calibrate to the release (LIF-001), and several upgradient, downgradient, and cross-gradient LIF borings until the LNAPL delineation objectives were met.


2-11

LIF boring locations are depicted on Figure 2. A summary of all boring locations advanced and samples collected during the Tank 1505 investigation is presented in Table 1. The LIF output data logs are included in Appendix A.

The Work Plan originally proposed the advancement of 18 LIF borings or less to delineate the extent of LNAPL contamination related to the Tank 1505 release. Based on observations made while advancing the initial LIF borings and the dynamic approach of the investigation, a revision was made to the number of LIF borings: additional borings were advanced because of the complexity of LNAPL contamination in the vicinity of Tank 1505.

The first boring, LIF-000, was advanced adjacent to PZ-360 to aid in determining the background LIF response associated with subsurface LNAPL related to former refinery operations. However, it became evident during the LIF survey that establishing an appropriate background response value would be difficult, as response values that were related to former refinery operations were often greater than the response value related to the Tank 1505 release.

Various factors may affect the magnitude of response values including the “type” of LNAPL present in the subsurface. Gasoline typically has a lower magnitude LIF response than that of other types of fuel, such as diesel. In other words, the chemical makeup of gasoline makes it less responsive, so typically lower % RE values are observed during the LIF survey than the % RE values of other types of fuel . The addition of lighter compounds (as seen in gasoline) to weathered LNAPL can create a solvating effect of the fuel constituents that fluoresce, which can lead to elevated LIF responses observed for older product. Therefore, the % RE value is not directly related to the concentration or percent saturation of LNAPL in the subsurface when evaluating the results of different fuels or mixtures of product. The magnitude of the LIF response was thus interpreted during the in-situ investigation with professional judgment and in conjunction to the observed waveform signature that is indicative of the type of fuel.

Therefore, based on the known location of the leak on the south portion of the tank floor and the hydraulic gradient of the subsurface at the site (to the southeast), a baseline response value was determined by evaluating the maximum % RE observed at LIF-004 (the boring identified as the ‘LNAPL source’). A nominal baseline response value of 10% RE was used to guide the investigation and meet the delineation objectives, as observed on the LIF output data logs showing the fluorescence versus depth (Appendix A).

Additionally, free product was collected at two temporary piezometers near Tank 1505 (PZ-364 and PZ-365) and one free product sample from a monitoring well south of the MW-50 investigation area (PZ-434) during the LIF investigation. The free product was poured over the window of the UVOST and fluorescence was recorded for a short period of time in order to generate a LIF log for the LNAPL. This helped identify a maximum fluorescence when the probe is located within that specific fuel type, and also the waveform signature of the LNAPL. Note that due to the quenching effect, the % RE is not directly comparable to the in-situ LIF response data as a quantitative representation of the amount of product in the subsurface.

2.5.2 Confirmation Soil Sampling Locations Ten soil borings were advanced for the purpose of collecting soil samples (PR-001 through PR-010). The soil borings were continuously sampled using a Geoprobe® Macro-Core sampling


2-12

device driven using a Geoprobe® 6600 Series DPT rig. The soil borings were positioned as close as possible (generally within 12 to 18 inches) to a LIF survey location to correlate LIF results with lithological observations and laboratory-based VOC concentrations. Confirmation soil boring locations are depicted on Figure 2. A summary of all boring locations advanced and samples collected during the Tank 1505 investigation is presented in Table 1.

Soil samples were collected from select sample intervals based on pre-selected LIF responses. One soil sample was collected from each boring location, with the exception of PR-003 and PR-004, in which two soil samples were collected from one boring location at different depths. The Macro-Core sampling device was decontaminated between samples using a nonphosphate detergent wash and potable water rinse.

The soil confirmation samples were submitted under CH2M HILL-signed chain-of-custody to Severn-Trent Laboratories (STL) in Chicago, Illinois for analysis of VOCs and tentatively identified compounds (TICs) by USEPA Method 8260B, total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) by USEPA Method OA1, and TPH by USEPA Method OA2. The complete analytical data for the soil samples collected is included in Appendix C. Table 2 summarizes the analytical data for detected constituents.

2.5.3 Product Sampling Locations Following the release of unleaded gasoline at Tank 1505 in April 2006, a free product sample was collected from PZ-434 and a product sample was collected from Tank 1505. Additionally, product samples were collected from PZ-364 and PZ-365 during monthly groundwater sampling activities in 2007. Figure 2 illustrates product sample locations. A summary of the samples collected during the Tank 1505 investigation is presented in Table 1.

Each sample was submitted under CH2M HILL-signed chain-of-custody to the ConocoPhillips laboratory located in Bartlesville, OK, for laboratory analysis of basic fingerprinting (carbon number distribution), specific gravity, total sulfur, specific gravity (at 38.5°C), viscosity (reported at 60°F), and, if necessary, a detailed hydrocarbon analysis (DHA), and simulated distillation. Product fingerprinting reports are contained in Appendix C and a summary of product fingerprinting is included as Table 3.

2.5.4 MIP Survey The MIP survey started south of Tank 1505, adjacent to LIF borings that were used to delineate the extent of LNAPL (LIF-008, LIF-009, LIF-014, LIF-015, and LIF-016). The investigation progressed in the direction of groundwater flow at the site and towards the investigation boundary until the extent of groundwater impact was delineated. Twenty-one MIP borings (MIP-000 through MIP-020) were advanced to investigate the Tank 1505 area: one background location (MIP-000), several MIP borings downgradient of the source, and several upgradient and cross-gradient MIP borings until the groundwater delineation objectives were met. MIP boring locations are depicted on Figure 3. A summary of all boring locations advanced and samples collected during the Tank 1505 investigation is presented in Table 1. The MIP output data logs are included in Appendix D.


2-13

The Work Plan originally proposed the advancement of 18 MIP borings or less to delineate the extent of dissolved-phase contamination related to the Tank 1505 release. As the MIP survey used an iterative approach to delineate dissolved-phase contamination, the number of MIP borings advanced was increased based on the results of the in-situ data. The number of MIP borings increased from 18 boring locations to 21 boring locations.

The first boring, MIP-000, was advanced adjacent to PZ-360 to aid in determining the background MIP response value. The background response value is associated with dissolved-phase contamination related to former refinery operations. However, it became evident during the MIP survey that establishing a background response value would be difficult, as response values related to former refinery operations may be greater than the response value related to the Tank 1505 release. Therefore, a nominal background response value of 250,000 microvolts was established as the delineation criteria for dissolved-phase contamination.

The remaining MIP borings were positioned and advanced as needed to meet the investigation objectives and were generally terminated after the response curve returned to near consistent baseline response values (250,000 microvolts), as observed on the PID and FID output data. Each MIP boring was advanced to a depth of 50 feet, refusal, or to the base of contamination, whichever was encountered first. A summary of the PID and FID data recorded in each MIP boring is summarized in Table 4. Please note that FID data collected is not presented in Table 4, as the groundwater investigation was driven by PID data. Elevated FID readings observed throughout the investigation was determined to be the result of methanogenic processes. The MIP output data plots (Appendix D) were normalized for depth, conductivity, and temperature. Appendix D also contains a copy of the MIP operator’s (Matrix Environmental) final project report. Attached to this report are MIP output data plots.

2.5.5 Confirmation Groundwater Sampling Locations Fifteen borings were advanced for the purposes of collecting groundwater confirmation samples (GW-000 through GW-014. Groundwater samples were collected using a Geoprobe® Screen Point groundwater sampling device at pre-selected locations and depth intervals driven using a Geoprobe® 6610 Series DPT track rig. All but five of the borings, GW-001, GW-002, GW-012, GW-013, and GW-014, were positioned as close as possible (generally within 12 to 18 inches) to an original MIP survey location to correlate MIP results with confirmation sample results. Borings GW-001, GW-002, GW-012, GW-013, and GW-014 were positioned near LIF boring locations to provide more spatial coverage of groundwater data across the investigation area and attempt to gain a better understanding of the relationship between the Tank 1505 release and the dissolved-phase contamination. Confirmation groundwater sampling locations are depicted on Figure 3. A summary of all boring locations advanced and sampled collected during the Tank 1505 investigation is presented in Table 1.

The Work Plan proposed the collection of up to 8 groundwater confirmation samples. In order to provide an improved groundwater dataset and correlate the MIP response to concentrations of specific contaminants, groundwater samples were collected from 15 locations during the investigation. These confirmation sampling locations were determined based on the results of the MIP investigation and were spatially distributed throughout the investigation area to


2-14

encompass areas of low/no, medium, and high response based on the results of the MIP survey.

The Screen Point groundwater sampling device was first advanced to the deepest depth interval to be sampled. Groundwater was purged and sampled using low-flow sampling techniques. Field parameters including pH, temperature, specific conductivity, oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), dissolved oxygen, and turbidity were monitored and recorded during purging of all groundwater samples using a flow-through cell groundwater quality monitoring instrument. All field observations were recorded on a groundwater sampling form. Purging continued until groundwater parameters stabilized for three successive readings (pH ±0.1; specific conductivity ±3 percent; temperature ±0.2°C; ORP ±10 millivolts; dissolved oxygen ±10 percent). A summary of the field parameters measured during groundwater sampling is included in Table 5.

Following stabilization of parameters, groundwater confirmation samples were collected from the deepest interval in a boring first. After collection of a groundwater sample, the Screen Point sampling device was pulled up to the next shallowest sample interval in the boring and purged and sampled in the same manner. Dedicated tubing was used for each sample interval. The Screen Point groundwater sampling device was decontaminated following groundwater sample collection at location using a non-phosphate detergent wash and potable water rinse.

Two groundwater confirmation samples were collected from soil borings GW-001, GW-002, GW-006, and GW-008. The samples were collected from the top 4 feet of the water table and from 15-19 feet below the top of the water table. One groundwater confirmation sample was collected from soil borings GW-000, GW-003, GW-004, GW-005, GW-007, and GW-009 through GW-014. The samples were collected from the top 4 feet of the water table. The rationale used for determining the sample intervals was that the top 20 feet of the water table is the assumed upper transmissive zone for dissolved-phase migration. Additional groundwater confirmation samples were collected from depths below the upper transmissive zones at several boring locations to verify the absence/decreasing trend of dissolved-phase contamination.

Groundwater confirmation samples were submitted under CH2M HILL-signed chain-of-custody to STL for analysis of VOCs and gasoline range organics (GRO) by USEPA Method 8260B, diesel range organics (DRO) by USEPA Method 8270, lead and arsenic by USEPA Method 6010B. The complete analytical data for the groundwater samples is contained in Appendix E. Table 6 summarizes the analytical data for detected constituents in the groundwater confirmation samples. Electrical Conductivity Survey

In order to verify electrical conductivity (EC) data collected during the MIP survey and provide greater spatial coverage of geotechnical data, additional electrical conductivity data was collected through a survey utilizing a dedicated EC probe with a greater arrangement of dipole pairs. A total of 8 EC borings (EC-001 through EC-008) were advanced in the vicinity of Tank 1505 as depicted on Figure 4. Electrical conductivity output logs are included as part of the MIP Report by subcontractor Matrix Environmental (Appendix D). (Note that EC data was also collected at each MIP boring location and this data is included in Appendix D also.)

The borings were advanced using a Geoprobe® 6610 Series DPT track rig. Four EC borings (EC-005 through EC-008) were positioned near LIF borings that exhibited fluorescence thought to be indicative of LNAPL contamination related to former refinery operations and four EC borings


2-15

(EC-001 through EC-004) were positioned near LIF borings exhibiting fluorescence thought to be indicative of LNAPL contamination related to the Tank 1505 release.

2.5.6 Geotechnical Sampling Locations Nine soil samples were collected from three soil boring locations (SB-001, SB-002, and SB-003) located downgradient of Tank 1505. These three soil boring locations were continuously sampled using a Geoprobe® Macro-Core® sampling device with the DPT rig. The soil lithology was logged by a CH2M HILL geologist in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The samples were also examined for potential environmental impacts (discoloration, odor, elevated PID readings). Field observations were recorded on soil boring log forms. Geotechnical boring locations are depicted on Figure 4. A summary of all boring locations advanced and samples collected during the Tank 1505 investigation is presented in Table 1.

Three soil samples were collected from each boring location. Soil samples were collected from the interval exhibiting elevated PID readings (based on field screening), and the intervals immediately above and below this zone of elevated PID readings. Soil samples were submitted to PTS Laboratories, Inc. in Santa Fe Springs, CA for laboratory analysis of grain size distribution by ASTM D422/4464M. The geotechnical laboratory data report and CH2M HILL’s soil boring logs are included in Appendix F.

2.5.7 Soil Boring Abandonment Following the advancement of soil borings related to the product and groundwater investigation, each borehole was abandoned in accordance with Kansas regulations. Soil borings within the critical zone of the levee (within 500 feet landward of the levee) were abandoned in accordance with USACE regulations. Boring location information collected during the product and groundwater investigations are contained in Table 1.

2.5.8 Investigation-Derived Waste Management Aqueous investigation-derived waste (IDW) generated during confirmation groundwater sampling activities was containerized in a 125-gallon polyethylene tank. As with previous IDW generated at the site, aqueous IDW was contained and transferred to the oil-water separator located in the southwestern portion of the site. Waste from the oil-water separator is discharged to the municipal wastewater treatment facility (Water Pollution Control Division of Wyandotte County, under permit number S-1104).

Soil cuttings generated during soil geotechnical sampling activities were temporarily containerized in a55-gallon drum. The soil was incorporated into the landfarm area located in the southern portion of the Active Area of the former refinery site. In this area soils excavated during the Tank 1505 removal action (CH2M HILL, 2007a), among others, are landfarmed on plastic in coordination with KDHE.

Paper towels, gloves, sample liners, and other miscellaneous trash material were contained in plastic trash bags and handled as municipal waste.


3-16

SECTION 3

Investigation Results and Discussion

As noted in Section 2, a key objective of the investigation was to update the CSM for the Tank 1505 Area following the April 2006 gasoline release from this tank. The investigation was successful in acquiring the necessary data to meet the investigation objectives and update the CSM. However, the investigation also resulted in adding further characterization information for LNAPL and groundwater in the area of Tank 1505 that is related to the former refinery site. This section presents and discusses the results of the investigation and an updated CSM.

3.1 Site Geology Site geologic conditions were interpreted from the EC logs obtained during the MIP investigation and EC survey (dedicated locations), from geotechnical soil sampling boring logs and geotechnical data, and prior site geologic data and borings. The EC logs are presented as part of the MIP output data provided in Appendix D. Soil boring logs and geotechnical data are provided in Appendix F, with locations depicted on Figure 4.

Information provided by the Soil Conservation Service and included in Black & Veatch’s 1992 Groundwater Modeling Report indicates that surface soils in the Missouri River floodplain are in the Haynie and Onawa Series. Soils in the Haynie series are primarily silty loam or sandy loam. They are well drained and typically have a high available water capacity and moderate permeability. The Onawa series consists of silty clay loam, silty clay, and silt loam. The available water capacity is high, but the soils are somewhat poorly drained. Although these surface soils may be present in some areas onsite, the majority of the surface soils have been altered by construction activities, so that the uppermost soil is fill material instead of native material.

Previous investigations have encountered fill, consisting of fine-grained clayey soil and assorted debris, sporadically across the site at thicknesses ranging from less than 1 foot to as much as 10 feet in some locations. In general, the upper 15 feet to 20 feet of native material beneath the site consist of inter-bedded silty clay, clayey silt, sandy silt, and silty sand. This material is underlain by approximately 20 feet of fine grained sand. Alternating layers of silty sand, fine-grained sand, medium-grained sand, and possible lenses of silty clay are observed below the initial layer of medium-grained sand. Deeper borings show that coarser-grained clean sands, up to 60 feet thick, underlie the inter-bedded clays, silts, and fine sands. Gravelly sand and sandy gravel were found near the top of bedrock in some portions of the site, and range from less than 10 feet to as much as 30 feet thick in some locations.

This depiction of the site geology was generally confirmed during the MIP survey, the EC survey, and geotechnical soil sampling activities. Soil borings SB-001 through SB-003 indicate layers of fine-grained sand, sandy silt, and silty sand at depths between 17 and 28.5 feet bgs. Medium-grained sands are observed at depths between 28.5 and 38.7 feet bgs.


3-17

3.2 Product Investigation Results and Discussion LNAPL delineation related to the April 2006 release at Tank 1505 was achieved through the collection of LIF measurements, soil confirmation sampling, and product fingerprinting.

3.2.1 Free Product Fingerprinting Results and DiscussionIn order to provide an accurate picture of the nature and extent of the release at Tank 1505 in relation to LNAPL related to former refinery operations, product fingerprinting data from both prior to the Tank 1505 release and recent data collected after the release were evaluated.

Fingerprinting data from product samples collected during 2006 and 2007 and analyzed by the ConocoPhillips lab are presented in Appendix B. Results of fingerprinting of select (gasoline) product samples that were analyzed as part of the SSI together with the results of recent samples are presented in Table 3.

Results provided in the Draft CI/CAS SSI Report (CH2M HILL, 2005) indicate that product related to the former refinery varies from slightly weathered to highly weathered gasoline, middle distillates, and crude oil. Key identifiers in the determination of weathering in the product samples include:

Low BT/EX ratios (benzene and toluene/ethylbenzene and xylenes [calculated B+T/E+X]) due to volatilization, dissolution (water washing) or degradation. Benzene and toluene are more water soluble and more volatile than other hydrocarbon components in gasoline (like ethylbenzene and xylenes) and are removed from the LNAPL via these processes.

Loss of the lighter hydrocarbons in the C3-C7 range due to evaporation, dissolution, or degradation.

In 2006, a product sample was collected from Tank 1505 to assess the chemical properties of the released gasoline. The results from this sample were compared with product samples collected at nearby temporary piezometers PZ-364 and PZ-365 (within the Tank 1505 secondary containment), as well as from PZ-434 (located to the north). Based on the analytical results by the ConocoPhillips laboratory, the free product samples collected from PZ-434, PZ-364, and PZ-365 do not match the chemical characteristics of the product from Tank 1505. Several factors provided by the laboratory as part of their evaluation are indicators that the free product from the temporary piezometers is not the same as the product from Tank 1505:

The amount of iso-octane observed in the product collected at Tank 1505 is significantly higher than the amount found in the product at PZ-364 and PZ-365. Iso-octane is slowly depleted from fresh product and is usually detected at low levels in weathered material.

The BT/EX ratios for the Tank 1505 sample is significantly higher than the piezometer product samples.

The free product samples from the piezometers are more similar to a refinery naphtha stream than to blended gasoline as was contained in the tank.


3-18

Free product samples collected from PZ-364 and PZ-365 contain 3% and 2% respectively of middle distillate indicating that these samples are a blend of former refinery LNAPL containing heavier fuel types. The free product sample from PZ-434 and product sample from Tank 1505 contain less than 1% middle distillate.

The free product samples collected from PZ-364 and PZ-365 are similar, suggesting that they originated from the same source or contain a similar mixture of former refinery LNAPL.

Product samples collected from PZ-364 and PZ-365 were also analyzed for total sulfur content. Based on the high sulfur content in PZ-364 and PZ-365 (1,055 ppm and 807 ppm, respectively), it is fair to assume that free product in these wells are not similar to gasoline from Tank 1505. Although sulfur was not analyzed on the Tank 1505 sample specifically, the release was a blended gasoline that under current standards is required to contain less than 80 ppm of sulfur; ConocoPhillips routinely tests this parameter for product at the facility.

For comparison, Table 3 also includes 2004-2005 product fingerprinting data from select locations across the former refinery site where product contained within monitoring wells or piezometers was typed as containing gasoline components. Data for these product samples (MW-50, MW-79, PZ-414, and PZ-416) was originally reported in the SSI (CH2M HILL, 2005). In comparison of these data to the more recent product samples the following points are noted:

The results of the PZ-434 sample (2007) and the MW-50 sample (2004) are very similar for all parameters analyzed. As these wells are closely located from within the same area (PZ-434 is a step-out well of MW-50) it is reasonably concluded that they are both representative of the same source and the recent analysis correlates with the data generated during the SSI.

The BT/EX ratios and carbon range for the PZ-364 and PZ-365 samples (piezometers within Tank 1505 secondary containment) are very similar to the results for PZ-414, with all three samples identified as a blend of gasoline and middle distillate range product.

Of the samples that were identified as consisting entirely of gasoline range product, the Tank 1505 sample is unique because the BT/EX ratio is significantly higher, as would be expected for a fresh gasoline, than all other samples.

The fingerprinting data adds weight to the SSI-confirmed former refinery site CSM of discontinuous areas (or “pools”) of LNAPL at mobile saturation levels of various fuel types or mixtures. The recent data augments this model, and indicates that the LNAPL observed at piezometers PZ-364 and PZ-365 is likely an area of mobile LNAPL related to the former refinery site that had not been identified prior to the Tank 1505 release.

3.2.2 Confirmation Soil Sampling Results and DiscussionConfirmation soil sampling analytical data is summarized in Table 2 with the complete analytical data included in Appendix C. Table 2 presents the analytical results of detected contaminants and the BT/EX ratios for each sample. Figure 6 presents a summary of the confirmation soil sample results and depicts all locations sampled as part of the product investigation.

Confirmation Soil Sample Results vs. Product Fingerprinting Results


3-19

Confirmation soil sample results were compared against product fingerprinting data. A comparison of the BT/EX ratios provides qualitative information on the degree of weathering that has occurred at each location. The relationship between BT/EX ratios observed in soil and in product can be used as a line of evidence to establish the relationship to the Tank 1505 release. The BT/EX ratios in product samples collected from Tank 1505, PZ-364, and PZ-365 are presented in Table 3. All locations and analytical results are depicted on Figure 6.

Laboratory results provided by the ConocoPhillips laboratory indicate a BT/EX ratio of 0.85 in product collected from Tank 1505, with much lower BT/EX ratios of 0.28 and 0.31 observed in product samples collected at PZ-364 and PZ-365, respectively. Comparing these data to the soil BT/EX ratios provides interesting results.

On the south side of Tank 1505:

A strong correlation exists between the BT/EX ratios at PR-002 and Tank 1505 (0.89 and 0.85, respectively).

A similarity exists between the BT/EX ratios at PR-003 (shallow sample) and Tank 1505 (0.56 and 0.85, respectively), whereas, at the same location but the deeper sample there is a poor correlation (PR-004 was 0.02).

A poor correlation exists between the BT/EX ratios at PR-008 (located in the adjacent secondary containment area) and Tank 1505 (0.07 and 0.85, respectively).

On the west side of Tank 1505:

The BT/EX ratios at PR-006 and at PZ-364 closely match (0.26 and 0.28, respectively).

On the north side of Tank 1505:

A similarity exists between BT/EX ratios at PR-001 and at PZ-365 (0.58 and 0.31, respectively).

Gas chromatograpy (GC) results or chromatograms generated during the laboratory analysis of each confirmation soil sample further supports the hypothesis that PR-002 is likely related to the source LNAPL. GC chromatograms are included in Appendix C (separated at the front). GCs are utilized for analysis of volatile or semi-volatile samples because they can separate individual components from the sample mixture based on their chemical properties as they pass through the capillary column before analysis at the detector. In general more volatile compounds and hydrocarbons with low numbers of carbon atoms move first through the column, so are detected first, and appear first as peaks plotted on the chromatogram. Heavier (higher carbon number) or less volatile constituents generally appear as peaks later on the chromatogram. Therefore, a visual comparison of chromatograms from the laboratory analysis can provide significant information on the total chemical composition of the product sample. As all fuels are complex mixtures of individual chemical compounds, standard analytical results can be limiting as they are narrowed to specific chemical compounds.

The GC chromatogram for PR-002 was compared against the soil confirmation GC results for other locations. Soil sample PR-002 is different because it appears that a significant mass of light-end (low carbon number) components were detected at the start of the analysis (retention


3-20

times less than eight minutes). The data suggest that weathering processes have not drastically altered the chemical make-up of the product sample in comparison to the other chromatograms.

In summary, the product confirmation data and above lines of evidence suggest that the source of the LNAPL related to the Tank 1505 release is centered on PR-002, may extend laterally to the east at PR-003 in shallow soil (vadose zone) but not at depth (water table), and is bounded by PR-008 to the south. LNAPL observed to the north and west of the Tank 1505 is not related to the release based on the product fingerprinting data and soil data collected at/near PZ-364 and PZ-365; this LNAPL is more related to the former refinery site.

Confirmation Soil Sample Results vs. LIF Responses Confirmation soil sample laboratory results (BTEX, GRO, and DRO concentrations) were compared to fluorescence response results obtained from the co-located LIF borings over the same depth intervals as the soil samples. The LIF data output logs are presented in Appendix A.

A regression analysis method was used to evaluate the degree of correlation between the concentrations of constituents as detected in soil samples and LIF responses. Results indicated a poor correlation between soil confirmation sample results and LIF measurements at approximately the same depth interval. These results added complexity to the data evaluation but were not unexpected due to the nature of the complex mixtures of LNAPL observed onsite and the different data collection and analysis methods. Although these data may not be correlated when performing a detailed statistical analyses, each set of data individually remain good indicators of the extent and characteristics of LNAPL onsite.

3.2.3 LIF Results and Discussion LIF output logs for each boring are presented in Appendix A. Three pages comprise the “log” for each LIF boring advanced as explained below. Figure 6 depicts the location of each LIF boring and all locations sampled as part of the product investigation.

The LIF output logs generated during the in-situ investigation are the first page of data for each boring as presented in Appendix A; these logs present the raw LIF data in a visual form of % RE versus the depth of the boring. The logs include a ‘color-coding’ of the data that depicts the waveform signature of the type of fuel observed based on the fluorescent response at different wavelengths.

Following the field investigation, the LIF data was further analyzed by the subcontractor, Dakota Technologies, into two broad categories: “Total Gasoline” and “Mixed Product”; the second and third pages of data for each boring in Appendix A presents the data reanalyzed during this process. The “Total Gasoline” is representative of all data collected that most resembles gasoline signature waveforms. It does not differentiate gasoline related to the Tank 1505 release from gasoline releases related to former refinery operations. “Mixed Product” is representative of all data collected that did not fit the gasoline signature waveform.

The three dimensional (3D) kriging routine of Mining Visualization Software (MVS) was subsequently used to interpolate the LIF data so that the horizontal and vertical extents of the LNAPL could be depicted. Kriging parameters were fine tuned until the model representation of the plume best fit the LIF dataset.


3-21

In order to best illustrate mobile and residual LNAPL distribution in the vicinity of Tank 1505, the analyzed LIF data interpreted as “Total Gasoline” was used to generate a series of MVS images at various discrete depths. Figure 5 depicts these ‘slices’ of the LIF data at each depth at a nominal value of 4% RE.

Based on the 4% RE value as depicted on Figure 5, the lateral extent of LNAPL contamination related to the Tank 1505 (i.e. product located on the south of the tank) release is delineated down-gradient and cross-gradient of Tank 1505. Upgradient of this area LNAPL is not delineated based on the MVS images because it blends with product of a different waveform signature based on the LIF logs that is related to the former refinery site.

Delineation during the field investigation proceeded based on the higher 10 % RE value for background and the interpretation of the signature waveforms of the data.

A Conceptual Site Model (Figure 10) is included which illustrates two distinct LNAPL plumes; an LNAPL plume contained within the vadose zone as it relates to the Tank 1505 release and an LNAPL plume in the “smear zone” related to former refinery operations.

Prior to the LIF investigation (March 2007), it had been hypothesized that the free product observed at PZ-364 and PZ-365 was related to the Tank 1505 release. However, based on the current understanding of the product fingerprinting data (summarized in Section 3.2.1), free product observed at PZ-364 and PZ-365 are not related to the Tank 1505 release. The product collected at PZ-364 and PZ-365 and poured over the sapphire window of the UVOST screening tool did not depict a signature waveform indicative of fresh gasoline.

Based on the LIF output logs generated during the product investigation at Tank 1505, along with the results presented in Sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2, the extent of LNAPL related to the Tank 1505 release is delineated.

The LNAPL plume appears to extend laterally beyond LIF borings LIF-004 and LIF-005, which are bounded by LIF-008 and LIF-009 to the northeast, LIF-006 to the north, LIF-013 to the south, and LIF-015 to the southwest. The LNAPL plume related to the Tank 1505 release appears to be contained within the vadose zone, between approximately 10-20 feet bgs at LIF-004 and at LIF-005 (Figure 5).

PRODUCT AND GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION REPORT

3-23

3.3 Groundwater Investigation Results and Discussion 3.3.1 MIP and Confirmation Groundwater Sampling Results and DiscussionA summary of the groundwater confirmation sample results and the March 2007 monthly groundwater monitoring event results is presented in Figure 9. . Confirmation samples were collected in areas of low, medium, and high MIP PID responses. Confirmation samples were additionally collected in areas of high LIF responses. A regression analysis method was used to attempt to find a best-fit curve correlating petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations detected in groundwater samples and MIP responses. Elevated BTEX, GRO, and DRO concentrations in the confirmation groundwater samples generally correspond with high MIP PID response (Table 3). Table 4 summarizes detections in groundwater. Elevated BTEX, GRO, and DRO concentrations are observed between approximately 715 and 711 feet amsl. This is further confirmed by the series of MVS-generated images of discrete depths of the dissolved-phase plume (Figures 7 and 8). Lower BTEX, GRO, and DRO concentrations generally correspond with lower MIP responses (Table 3). For the purpose of dissolved-phase plume delineation, PID responses were used to evaluate vertical and lateral extents of contamination. During the MIP survey it was noted that high FID responses were likely attributed to methanogenic processes occurring at the site.

Based on the MIP response curves (PID) and groundwater confirmation results, the dissolved-phase concentrations do not extend to bedrock. Vertical migration of VOCs appears to be contained onsite to the fine sand layer and, to a smaller extent, the medium-grained sand layer (Figure 10). Dissolved-phase contamination does not extend offsite toward the river. Lateral migration of VOCs appears to be delineated by MIP boring locations MIP-008 through MIP-14 with the highest concentration of VOCs originating from the northwest (Figure 8). The PID response curves generally show a maximum response within the sand layers after which the response decreases with depth (Appendix E).

As stated in Section 2.1, one of objectives was to delineate the current vertical and lateral extent of dissolved-phase groundwater contamination in the vicinity of Tank 1505. The investigation successfully achieved this objective. However, it was not feasible to differentiate dissolved-phase contamination nor approximate the contribution of dissolved-phase contamination related to former refinery operations and the April 2006 release at Tank 1505. Therefore, the data presented in the MVS-generated images (Figures 7 and 8) can only be observed as dissolved-phase contamination as the result of both former refinery operations and the Tank 1505 release. However, data generated during the product investigation indicates that LNAPL contamination related to the Tank 1505 release appears to be contained within the vadose zone; therefore, dissolved-phase contamination related to the release is unlikely. A Conceptual Site Model is included which illustrates this observation (Figure 10).


4-24

SECTION 4

Conclusions & Path Forward

Activities since the release have shown that there is minimal evidence of lateral movement of LNAPL, and it is predicted that the majority of the volume of the gasoline released from the tank remains tied up in the vadose zone beneath Tank 1505. Similarly, the potential groundwater impact relating to the release is unlikely to have impacted the existing dissolved-phase plume related to former refinery operations during the elapsed timeframe since the release.

4.1 Product and Groundwater Investigation Conclusions Based on the data collected during the product and groundwater investigation, the following can be concluded:

The current vertical and lateral extent of LNAPL in the vicinity of Tank 1505 using LIF data has been established.

The LNAPL migrated vertically downward over the entire area of the tank, trapping the entire released volume of fresh unleaded gasoline within the vadose zone under a cylindrical/conical distribution using the more realistic estimate of 60,000 gallons, based on ConocoPhillips detailed product accounting.

The current vertical and lateral extent of dissolved-phase groundwater contamination (benzene, TPH-GRO, and TPH-DRO) using MIP measurements has been established.

The contribution of the April 2006 release at Tank 1505 to the dissolved-phase groundwater impact in the area in groundwater close to the tank cannot be estimated due to the complex nature of contamination related to former refinery operations. However, based on the understanding that LNAPL contamination related to the Tank 1505 release is contained within the vadose zone, dissolved-phase contamination related to the release is unlikely.

The lithology in the vicinity of Tank 1505 has been verified through soil EC data collected during the MIP survey and through an additional soil EC survey.

Collect sufficient pre-design information to select an appropriate remediation path forward to address the Tank 1505 release, if remediation is necessary. Additional pre-design data includes, potential additional monitoring wells southeast and south of Tank 1505, soil sampling for laboratory analysis of heterotrophic plate count (HPC), as well as and oxygen readings under or in the vicinity of Tank 1505 as an indication of biodegradation in the vadose zone.

MNA EvaluationBiodegradation conditions across the site have been evaluated in selected wells by analyzing for MNA parameters for several years. MNA data indicate that anaerobic biodegradation is a significant process over most of the site, with aerobic processes becoming dominant in wells


4-25

located east of the Missouri River levee, correlating with the decrease of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) concentrations in this area and the likely influx of oxygen-rich river water recharging groundwater. The MNA data, together with the fact that no organic constituents have been detected above the Kansas RBSs in the levee wells during semiannual monitoring, demonstrate that dissolved phase hydrocarbons are limited to onsite areas. MNA data collected during the confirmation groundwater sampling activities will be used to evaluate site-wide MNA processes during follow-on work (Table 5).

Hydrocarbon Degradation in the Vadose ZoneSeveral factors influencing hydrocarbon degradation can contribute to the ultimate fate and transport of LNAPL contamination if the entire volume of gasoline related to the Tank 1505 release remains contained within the vadose zone:

Oxygen availability within the vadose zone

Organic carbon and nutrient availability

Abundance and distribution of microbes

The vadose zone is a significant source of oxygen, which can accelerate the degradation process through volatilization, evaporation, and aerobic microbial stimulation prior to reaching the saturated zone. Shallow subsurface geology at the site (highly heterogeneous material consisting of silty-clays to sandy silts) and tank foundation construction consisting of primarily crushed rock, along with a “dryer” subsurface beneath the tank (as it essentially prevents infiltration), could foster the right environment for these processes to occur through sufficient oxygen availability.

The type of substrate can also affect the abundance of microbes within the vadose zone. Clay soils tend to contain higher amounts of organic carbon and dissolved nutrients, thereby controlling microbial abundance and availability. Schematics of Tank 1505 (will provide upon request) depict the area under the tank as primarily consisting of crushed rock ranging in thicknesses from 4 feet (at the center of the tank) stepping outward to a thickness of approximately 8 feet (under the concrete tank ring). A 4 x 4’x 3.5’ clay pocket that contains the anode for the cathodic protection system is centered beneath Tank 1505 at 1 foot bgs, which may contribute a minimal source of organic carbon and nutrient availability for microbial stimulation and activity.

Knowledge of the abundance and distribution of microbes in the vadose zone helps us ascertain the potential for biodegradation to occur. Microbial biomass is generally highest in surface soils and declines rapidly with depth. In order to determine if a sufficient population of microbes beneath and surrounding Tank 1505 exist, soil samples can be collected and submitted for for a variety of laboratory analyses, such as Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC) and the quantification of extractable phospholipid fatty acids (PLFAs) or diglyceride fatty acids (DGFAs) (Holden and Fierer, 2003).


4-26

4.2 Investigation Uncertainties This investigation successfully refined the Site CSM by reducing critical areas of uncertainty (for example, current vertical and lateral extent of LNAPL contamination related to the Tank 1505 release and current vertical and lateral extent of dissolved-phase contamination). It did not, however, close all the data gaps. This section presents areas of uncertainty that remain in the vicinity of Tank 1505 following the investigation and how they may affect future site activities. If needed, measures to address critical remaining uncertainties are proposed in Section 5.

4.1.1 LNAPL Contamination Related to the Tank 1505 ReleaseThe LIF survey provided sufficient coverage to evaluate the horizontal and vertical extents of LNAPL contamination related to the Tank 1505 release. The confirmation soil data collected during the LIF survey provided a level of certainty when compared against the product fingerprinting data. However, no temporary piezometers/monitoring wells exist near the south side (LNAPL source and downgradient) of Tank 1505. A monitoring well located in this area would provide additional information and a higher level of certainty into the chemical characteristics of the LNAPL in relation to the product fingerprinting data collected at Tank 1505.

4.1.2 Dissolved-Phase Contamination Related to the Tank 1505 ReleaseElevated concentrations of contaminants were encountered at various depths within the saturated zone. Due to the complex nature of groundwater contamination at the site, a distinction could not be made between dissolved-phase contamination related to former refinery operations and the Tank 1505 release. It is with an unknown level of certainty that one can conclude that dissolved-phase contamination related to the Tank 1505 is unlikely, based on the data collected during the investigation. However, no temporary piezometers/monitoring wells currently exist to better define the extent of dissolved-phase contamination on the south side of Tank 1505. Periodic groundwater monitoring at these monitoring wells would provide information on increasing/decreasing trends of contaminants in the vicinity of Tank 1505.


5-28

SECTION 5

References

Black & Veatch. 1992. Groundwater Modeling Report Prepared for Phillips Petroleum Company, Kansas City Refinery.

CH2M HILL. 2006a. Removal Action Report – April 2006 Release of Unleaded Gasoline at Tank 1505, ConocoPhillips Kansas City Terminal Facility. July.

CH2M HILL. 2007a. Tank 1505 Activities Status Report, January 2007. ConocoPhillips Pipeline Terminal Facility, Kansas City, Kansas. January.

CH2M HILL. 2007b. Work Plan for Product and Groundwater Investigation at Tank 1505. ConocoPhillips Pipeline Terminal Facility, Kansas City, Kansas.

CH2M HILL, 2007c. Risk Assessment and Data Gap Investigation Work Plan, Draft, July 2007. ConocoPhillips Former Refinery Site, Kansas City, Kansas. July.

Dakota Technologies, 2007. UVOST™ User’s Guide

Holden and Fierer. 2003. Microbial Processes in the Vadose Zone. Vadose Zone Journal, v. 4, p. 1-21. December.

Matrix, 2007. Direct Sensing Report. ConocoPhillips Pipeline Terminal Facility, Kansas City, Kansas.


5-29

Figures

MISSOURI R

IVER

I-70

KANS

ASR.

353212_site_map.mxt

ConocoPhillipsBARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA

PRODUCT AND GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION AT TANK-1505 REPORT

TERMINAL FACILITYKANSAS CITY, KANSAS

File Name: Date Created:Created By:

L.Crause November 2007

FIGURE 1

SITE LOCATION MAP

0 2,2001,100

Feet

SCALE 1:24000

WW-3RW-3

RW-12

RW-11

MW-79

MW-75

MW-66

MW-61

MW-56MW-55MW-54

MW-51MW-50MW-49

MW-314

MW-313

PZ-366

PZ-364

PZ-365

PZ-434

PZ-433PZ-432PZ-431

PZ-418

PZ-417

PZ-416

PZ-415

PZ-414PZ-413

PZ-412

PZ-363

PZ-361

PZ-360

PZ-359

PZ-358

MW-312

MW-310

MW-309

MW-304SMW-304D

MW-303SMW-303D

MW-111S

MW-111D

LIF-024

LIF-023

LIF-022

LIF-021

LIF-020

LIF-019

LIF-018

LIF-017 LIF-016

LIF-015

LIF-014LIF-013

LIF-012

LIF-011LIF-010

LIF-009

LIF-008

LIF-007 LIF-006

LIF-005

LIF-004

LIF-003

LIF-002

LIF-001

LIF-000

LIF-203

LIF-202LIF-201

LIF-200

LIF-104

LIF-103

LIF-102

PR-010

PR-009

PR-008

PR-007

PR-006

PR-005

PR-004PR-003

PR-002

PR-001

1505

1504

80028007

8009 8001

8010

8006

8008

5803

5301

298

2001

5001

3001

MISSO

URI RIV

ER

LegendLIF Location

Soil Confirmation Boring Location

Product Sample Location

Deep Monitoring Well

Recovery Well

Shallow Monitoring Well

Step-out Well

Temporary Piezometer

CP Property

Tank

Basemap

LIF Boring, Confirmation Soil Sample, and Product Sample Location Map


L.CRAUSE November 2007353212_LIF_location.mxt


TERMAINAL FACILITYKANSAS CITY, KANSAS

FIGURE 2

0 50 100 150 20025Feet

PRODUCT AND GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION AT TANK 1505

RW-12

MW-75

MW-314

MW-313

PZ-366

PZ-364

PZ-365

PZ-360

MW-309

MW-303SMW-303D

MW-111S

MW-111D

MIP-020

MIP-019

MIP-018

MIP-017

MIP-016

MIP-015

MIP-014

MIP-013

MIP-012

MIP-011

MIP-010

MIP-009MIP-008

MIP-007

MIP-006

MIP-005

MIP-004

MIP-003

MIP-002

MIP-001

MIP-000

GW-014

GW-013

GW-012

GW-011

GW-010

GW-009

GW-008

GW-007

GW-006

GW-005

GW-004

GW-003

GW-002

GW-001

GW-000

1505

1504

8010

5803

5301

2001

MISSO

URI RIV

ER

LegendMIP Location

Groundwater Confirmation Sample Location


Recovery Well


Step-out Well


CP Property

Tank

Basemap

MIP Boring and Confirmation Groundwater Sample Location Map


L.CRAUSE November 2007353212_MIP_location.mxt



FIGURE 3

0 30 60 90 12015Feet


MW-313

PZ-366

PZ-364

PZ-365

MW-303SMW-303D

MW-111S

MW-111D

EC-008

EC-007

EC-006

EC-005

EC-004

EC-003EC-002

EC-001

SB-003

SB-002

SB-001

15058010

5803

1504

5301

2001

MISSO

URI RIV

ER

LegendEC Location

Geotechnical Soil Sample Location


Recovery Well


Step-out Well


CP Property

Tank

Basemap

Electrical Conductivity and Geotechnical Boring Location Map


L.CRAUSE November 2007353212_EC_GEOTECH.mxt



FIGURE 4

0 25 50 75 10012.5Feet


LIF

Res

pons

e at

Gro

und

Surfa

ceLI

F R

espo

nse

at 7

39 fe

et a

msl

5 fe

et b

gs

LIF

Res

pons

e at

724

feet

am

sl20

feet

bgs

LIF

Res

pons

e at

719

feet

am

sl25

feet

bgs

LIF

Res

pons

e at

712

feet

am

sl32

feet

bgs

LIF

Res

pons

e at

709

feet

am

sl35

feet

bgs

LIF

Res

pons

e at

734

feet

am

sl10

feet

bgs

LIF

Res

pons

e at

729

feet

am

sl15

feet

bgs

LIF

Res

pons

e at

717

feet

am

sl27

feet

bgs

LIF

Res

pons

e at

714

feet

am

sl30

feet

bgs

LIF

Res

pons

e at

704

feet

am

sl40

feet

bgs

Con

ocoP

hillip

sBA

RTL

ESVI

LLE,

OKL

AHO

MA

Plan

Vie

w o

f Dis

cret

e D

epth

s of

Gas

olin

e LN

APL

Abov

e 4%

RE

LIF

Res

pons

e

TER

MAI

NAL

FAC

ILIT

YKA

NSA

S C

ITY,

KAN

SAS

FIG

UR

E 5

PRO

DU

CT

AND

GR

OU

ND

WAT

ER IN

VEST

IGAT

ION

AT

TAN

K 15

05

File

Nam

e:D

ate

Cre

ated

:C

reat

ed B

y: L.C

RAU

SEN

ovem

ber 2

007

3532

12_L

IF_R

espo

nse.

mxt

XX

X

X

>>

B

B

B

>

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

I

I

II

I

I

I

I

I

IPR-010

PR-009

PR-008

PR-007

PR-006

PR-005

PR-004PR-003

PR-002

PR-001

MW-313

PZ-366

PZ-364

PZ-365

MW-303SMW-303D

LIF-024

LIF-023

LIF-022

LIF-021

LIF-020

LIF-019

LIF-018

LIF-017LIF-016

LIF-015

LIF-014

LIF-013

LIF-012

LIF-011

LIF-010

LIF-009

LIF-008

LIF-007 LIF-006

LIF-005

LIF-004

LIF-003

LIF-002

LIF-001

LIF-104

1505

1504

8010

5803

2001

MISSO

URI RIV

ER

Legend# LIF Location

I Soil Confirmation Boring Location

X Product Sample Location

> Deep Monitoring Well

/ Recovery Well

> Shallow Monitoring Well

B Step-out Well

B Temporary Piezometer

CP Property

Tank

Basemap

Cross section as depicted on Figure 10

Confirmation Soil and Product Sample Results Map


L.CRAUSE November 2007353212_SOIL_PRODUCT.mxt



FIGURE 6

'0 20 40 60 8010

Feet


BTEX Ratio 0.28Product at PZ-364

BTEX Ratio 0.85Product at Tank 1505

BTEX Ratio 0.31Product at PZ-365

Depth bgs 23-25Elevation ft. amsl 717.5-715.5Benzene mg/kg 82

Gasoline as OA1 mg/kg 9800Diesel as OA2 mg/kg ND

BTEX Ratio - 0.72

PR-010

Depth bgs 27-29Elevation ft. amsl 716.74-714.74Benzene mg/kg 3.9


BTEX Ratio - 0.11

PR-009

Depth bgs 26.5-27.25Elevation ft. amsl 715.86-715.11Benzene mg/kg 0.91


BTEX Ratio - 0.07

PR-008



BTEX Ratio - 0.29

PR-007


Gasoline as OA1 mg/kg 6100Diesel as OA2 mg/kg 2500

BTEX Ratio - 0.26

PR-006



BTEX Ratio - 0.16

PR-005

Depth bgs 32-33.5Elevation ft. amsl 709.4-707.9Benzene mg/kg 0.17


BTEX Ratio - 0.02

PR-004

Depth bgs 13-14.5Elevation ft. amsl 728.4-726.9Benzene mg/kg 3.9


BTEX Ratio - 0.56

PR-003



BTEX Ratio - 0.89

PR-002

Depth bgs 25-27Elevation ft. amsl 715.65-713.65Benzene mg/kg 4.8


BTEX Ratio - 0.58

PR-001

Notes:Product sample data at PZ-414, PZ-416, PZ-434, MW-50 and MW-79 are included in Exhibit 1Shaded cells represent exceedances of Kansas RBS

Benzene mg/kg 17GRO mg/kg 450DRO mg/kg 20000

Kansas RBS

FID

Res

pons

e at

Gro

und

Surfa

ceFI

D R

espo

nse

at 7

39 fe

et a

msl

5 fe

et b

gs

FID

Res

pons

e at

724

feet

am

sl20

feet

bgs

FID

Res

pons

e at

719

feet

am

sl25

feet

bgs

FID

Res

pons

e at

704

feet

am

sl40

feet

bgs

FID

Res

pons

e at

699

feet

am

sl45

feet

bgs

FID

Res

pons

e at

734

feet

am

sl10

feet

bgs

FID

Res

pons

e at

729

feet

am

sl15

feet

bgs

FID

Res

pons

e at

714

feet

am

sl30

feet

bgs

FID

Res

pons

e at

709

feet

am

sl35

feet

bgs

FID

Res

pons

e at

694

feet

am

sl50

feet

bgs

Plan

Vie

w o

f Dis

cret

e D

epth

s of

MIP

FID

R

espo

nses

Abo

ve 3

,000

,000

uV

TER

MAI

NAL

FAC

ILIT

YKA

NSA

S C

ITY,

KAN

SAS

FIG

UR

E 7

PRO

DU

CT

AND

GR

OU

ND

WAT

ER IN

VEST

IGAT

ION

AT

TAN

K 15

05

File

Nam

e:D

ate

Cre

ated

:C

reat

ed B

y: L.C

RAU

SEN

ovem

ber 2

007

3532

12_F

ID_R

espo

nse.

mxtCon

ocoP

hillip

sBA

RTL

ESVI

LLE,

OKL

AHO

MA

PID

Res

pons

e at

Gro

und

Surfa

cePI

D R

espo

nse

at 7

39 fe

et a

msl

5 fe

et b

gs

PID

Res

pons

e at

724

feet

am

sl20

feet

bgs

PID

Res

pons

e at

719

feet

am

sl25

feet

bgs

PID

Res

pons

e at

704

feet

am

sl40

feet

bgs

PID

Res

pons

e at

699

feet

am

sl45

feet

bgs

PID

Res

pons

e at

734

feet

am

sl10

feet

bgs

PID

Res

pons

e at

729

feet

am

sl15

feet

bgs

PID

Res

pons

e at

714

feet

am

sl30

feet

bgs

PID

Res

pons

e at

709

feet

am

sl35

feet

bgs

PID

Res

pons

e at

694

feet

am

sl50

feet

bgs

Con

ocoP

hillip

sBA

RTL

ESVI

LLE,

OKL

AHO

MA

Plan

Vie

w o

f Dis

cret

e D

epth

s of

MIP

PID

R

espo

nses

Abo

ve 3

,000

,000

uV

TER

MAI

NAL

FAC

ILIT

YKA

NSA

S C

ITY,

KAN

SAS

FIG

UR

E 8

PRO

DU

CT

AND

GR

OU

ND

WAT

ER IN

VEST

IGAT

ION

AT

TAN

K 15

05

File

Nam

e:D

ate

Cre

ated

:C

reat

ed B

y: L.C

RAU

SEN

ovem

ber 2

007

3532

12_P

ID_R

espo

nse.

mxt

>

>

>>

>

B

B

/

B

B

B

>

>

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

MIP-010GW-004

MIP-018

RW-12

MW-75

MW-314

MW-313

PZ-366

PZ-364

PZ-365

PZ-360

MW-309

MW-303S

MW-303D

MW-111S

MW-111D

MIP-020

MIP-019

MIP-017

MIP-016

MIP-015

MIP-014

MIP-013

MIP-012

MIP-011

MIP-009MIP-008

MIP-007

MIP-006

MIP-005

MIP-004

MIP-003

MIP-002

MIP-001

MIP-000

GW-014

GW-013

GW-012

GW-011

GW-010

GW-009

GW-008

GW-007

GW-006

GW-005GW-003

GW-002

GW-001

GW-000

1505

1504

8010

5803

5301

2001

MISSO

URI RIV

ER

Legend! MIP Location

H Groundwater Confirmation Sample Location

> Deep Monitoring Well

/ Recovery Well

> Shallow Monitoring Well

B Step-out Well

B Temporary Piezometer

CP Property

Tank

Basemap

Cross section as depicted on Figure 10

Confirmation Groundwater and March 2007 Sample Results Map


L.CRAUSE November 2007353212_GROUNDWATER.mxt



FIGURE 9

'0 30 60 90 12015

Feet


Benzene ug/L NDGRO ug/L NDDRO ug/L 130Lead ug/L ND

Arsenic ug/L ND

MW-309


Arsenic ug/L ND

MW-314


Arsenic ug/L 30

MW-111S


Arsenic ug/L 2.8J

MW-111D

Depth bgs 25-29Elevation ft. amsl 715.72-711.72Benzene ug/L 8900

GRO ug/L 29000DRO ug/L 3100Lead ug/L 5J

Arsenic ug/L 180

GW-002


GRO ug/L 6300DRO ug/L 1400Lead ug/L 29

Arsenic ug/L 61

GW-002


GRO ug/L 39000DRO ug/L 6200Lead ug/L 8.6

Arsenic ug/L 120

GW-012

Benzene ug/L 1700GRO ug/L 15000DRO ug/L 1500Lead ug/L ND

Arsenic ug/L 91

PZ-364



Arsenic ug/L 120

GW-014


Arsenic ug/L 84

PZ-360


GRO ug/L 6300DRO ug/L 2100Lead ug/L 4.7J

Arsenic ug/L 350

GW-000

Depth bgs 20-24Elevation ft. amsl 708.17-704-17Benzene ug/L 170

GRO ug/L 3800DRO ug/L 1300Lead ug/L ND

Arsenic ug/L 230

GW-003

Depth bgs 26-30Elevation ft. amsl 717-713Benzene ug/L ND


Arsenic ug/L 140

GW-010



Arsenic ug/L 25

GW-011



Arsenic ug/L 78

GW-009


Arsenic ug/L 37

MW-303S

Benzene ug/L NDGRO ug/L 27DRO ug/L 470Lead ug/L ND

Arsenic ug/L 2.1J

MW-303D



Arsenic ug/L 150

GW-004



Arsenic ug/L 330

GW-005



Arsenic ug/L 400

GW-008



Arsenic ug/L 31

GW-008



Arsenic ug/L 280

GW-006


Arsenic ug/L 50

MW-313



Arsenic ug/L 270

GW-013



Arsenic ug/L 150

GW-001



Arsenic ug/L 28

GW-001



Arsenic ug/L 110

GW-006



Arsenic ug/L 200

GW-007


Arsenic ug/L 140

PZ-365


Arsenic ug/L 300

PZ-366

Benzene ug/L 5GRO ug/L 500DRO ug/L 720Lead ug/L 12

Arsenic ug/L 10

Kansas RBS

Notes:Shaded cells represent exceedances of Kansas RBS


5-30

Tables

Sam

ple

I.D.

Dat

a Ty

peEa

stin

g C

oord

inat

eN

orth

ing

Coo

rdin

ate

Gro

und

Surf

ace

Elev

atio

n

(ft

. am

sl)

Tota

l Dep

th o

f Bor

ing

(feet

)Sa

mpl

e D

epth

(feet

)D

ata

Col

lect

ion

Loca

tion

Des

crip

tion

LIF-

000

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1245

.09

4332

326.

4974

0.9

50.1

8N

AAd

jace

nt to

PZ-

360

LIF-

001

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1400

.20

4332

424.

4874

0.65

50.0

1N

AAd

jace

nt to

PZ-

365

LIF-

002

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1346

.74

4332

394.

2574

2.01

54.2

7N

AW

est s

ide

of T

ank

1505

LIF-

003

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1353

.80

4332

374.

1974

1.84

50.0

4N

ASo

uthw

est s

ide

of T

ank

1505

LIF-

004

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1381

.98

4332

363.

6774

1.79

50.0

2N

ASo

uth

side

of T

ank

1505

LIF-

005

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1395

.96

4332

374.

6374

1.4

50.0

2N

ASo

uthe

ast s

ide

of T

ank

1505

LIF-

006

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1377

.69

4332

414.

9074

0.75

50.0

2N

AN

orth

east

sid

e of

Tan

k 15

05LI

F-00

7La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3613

61.1

243

3241

4.72

741.

0430

.62

NA

Nor

th-N

orth

wes

t sid

e of

Tan

k 15

05LI

F-00

8La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3614

18.1

243

3237

0.88

743.

5440

.08

NA

East

-Sou

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 a

djac

ent t

o PZ

-366

LIF-

009

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1418

.67

4332

390.

9174

3.51

38.1

9N

AEa

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 80

10 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tLI

F-01

0La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3613

79.3

843

3243

7.08

739.

7050

.05

NA

Nor

th o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

mid

dle

of s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tLI

F-01

1La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3613

47.3

043

3243

1.91

740.

1450

.03

NA

Nor

thw

est o

f Tan

k 15

05 w

ithin

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

LIF-

012

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1325

.60

4332

396.

4174

1.49

40.0

3N

AW

est o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

LIF-

013

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1376

.81

4332

344.

7574

2.36

40.0

2N

ASo

uth

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

2001

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

LIF-

014

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1400

.90

4332

338.

8574

1.74

40.0

2N

ASo

uth-

Sout

heas

t of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

2001

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

LIF-

015

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1352

.33

4332

351.

2474

2.34

38.2

2N

ASo

uthw

est o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tLI

F-01

6La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3613

87.2

343

3233

0.19

741.

1438

.25

NA

Sout

h-So

uthe

ast o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tLI

F-01

7La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3613

72.7

343

3232

8.53

741.

7738

.18

NA

Sout

h of

Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tLI

F-01

8La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3614

38.3

043

3241

2.09

743.

6838

.18

NA

East

-Nor

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 80

10 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tLI

F-01

9La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3614

20.6

843

3242

1.54

743.

2038

.33

NA

Nor

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 58

03 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tLI

F-02

0La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3614

20.7

643

3244

9.20

742.

9738

.2N

AN

orth

-Nor

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 58

03 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tLI

F-02

1La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3614

39.9

743

3243

6.94

743.

3238

.2N

AN

orth

east

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

5803

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

LIF-

022

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1441

.99

4332

462.

7974

3.74

38.0

8N

AN

orth

-Nor

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 58

03 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tLI

F-02

3La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

3614

21.0

443

3248

3.97

740.

3438

.39

NA

Nor

th-N

orth

east

of T

ank

1505

in o

pen

area

eas

t of T

ank

1504

LIF-

024

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1483

.80

4332

368.

8574

3.95

37.9

7N

AEa

st o

f Tan

k 15

05, a

djac

ent t

o M

W-3

03D

LIF-

104

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e36

1438

.90

4332

548.

3974

0.50

38.1

3N

AN

orth

of T

ank

1505

, sou

th o

f MW

-50

area

PZ-3

64La

ser I

nduc

ed F

luor

esce

nce

(pro

duct

)36

1339

.68

4332

401.

21N

AN

AN

AW

est s

ide

of T

ank

1505

, with

in s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tPZ

-365

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e (p

rodu

ct)

3614

02.3

643

3242

3.56

NA

NA

NA

Nor

thea

st s

ide

of T

ank

1505

, with

in s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tPZ

-434

Lase

r Ind

uced

Flu

ores

cenc

e (p

rodu

ct)

3614

24.4

443

3257

5.48

NA

NA

NA

Nor

th o

f Tan

k 15

05, s

outh

of M

W-5

0 ar

eaM

IP-0

00M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

be36

1246

.45

4332

325.

4175

3.17

49.6

5N

AAd

jace

nt to

PZ-

360

MIP

-001

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3613

51.3

743

3235

1.27

755.

2950

.55

NA

Sout

hwes

t of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

2001

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

MIP

-002

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3613

87.6

043

3233

0.68

755.

2950

.75

NA

Sout

h-So

uthe

ast o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tM

IP-0

03M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

be36

1399

.76

4332

339.

1175

5.29

50.7

5N

ASo

uth-

Sout

heas

t of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

2001

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

MIP

-004

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3614

18.4

243

3236

7.50

755.

2950

.35

NA

East

-Sou

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 a

djac

ent t

o PZ

-366

MIP

-005

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3614

18.7

043

3238

8.86

755.

2950

.75

NA

East

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

8010

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

MIP

-006

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3614

20.5

043

3242

3.86

743.

2142

.15

NA

Nor

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 58

03 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tM

IP-0

07M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

be36

1337

.73

4332

338.

0675

3.17

50.6

5N

ASo

uthw

est o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tM

IP-0

08M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

be36

1344

.36

4332

304.

5675

3.17

42.2

5N

ASo

uth-

Sout

hwes

t of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

2001

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

MIP

-009

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3613

70.2

443

3230

6.45

755.

2950

.55

NA

Sout

h of

Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tM

IP-0

10M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

be36

1398

.50

4332

313.

7675

5.29

42.4

5N

ASo

uth-

Sout

heas

t of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

2001

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

MIP

-011

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3614

20.6

043

3232

5.10

755.

2950

.15

NA

Sout

heas

t of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

8010

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

MIP

-012

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3614

42.0

343

3234

5.58

755.

2942

.55

NA

Sout

heas

t of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

8010

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

MIP

-013

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3614

59.4

143

3236

9.65

755.

2950

.55

NA

East

-Sou

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 80

10 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tM

IP-0

14M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

be36

1477

.98

4332

393.

7374

1.50

50.8

5N

AEa

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 80

10 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tM

IP-0

15M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

be36

1500

.24

4332

417.

3174

1.97

46.4

5N

AEa

st-N

orth

east

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

8010

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

MIP

-016

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3615

08.5

643

3243

7.97

742.

4942

.45

NA

Nor

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 58

03 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tM

IP-0

17M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

be36

1484

.46

4332

369.

2775

5.29

50.3

5N

AEa

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 a

djac

ent t

o

MW

-303

DM

IP-0

18M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

be36

1425

.85

4332

294.

6475

5.29

50.8

5N

ASo

uthe

ast o

f Tan

k 15

05 a

djac

ent t

o M

W-3

13M

IP-0

19M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

be36

1454

.60

4332

332.

5675

5.29

50.4

5N

AEa

st-S

outh

east

of T

ank

1505

bet

wee

n M

W-3

03D

and

MW

-313

MIP

-020

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

3615

17.2

943

3241

1.48

743.

0250

.35

NA

East

-Nor

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 58

03 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

t

Tabl

e 1Su

mmar

y of B

oring

Loca

tions

and I

nves

tigati

on D

ataPr

oduc

t and

Gro

undw

ater

Inve

stiga

tion

at T

ank 1

505

Repo

rt

Tank

150

5 In

vest

igat

ion

Area

B

orin

g I.D

.B

orin

g Ty

peEa

stin

g C

oord

inat

eN

orth

ing

Coo

rdin

ate

Gro

und

Surf

ace

Elev

atio

n

(ft

. am

sl)

Tota

l Dep

th o

f Bor

ing

(feet

)Sa

mpl

e D

epth

(feet

)B

orin

g Lo

catio

n D

escr

iptio

nEC

-001

Elec

trica

l Con

duct

ivity

3613

52.4

043

3235

0.18

742.

3448

.45

NA

Sout

hwes

t of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

2001

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

EC-0

02El

ectri

cal C

ondu

ctivi

ty36

1418

.49

4332

366.

9074

3.54

48.5

NA

East

-Sou

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 a

djac

ent t

o PZ

-366

EC-0

03El

ectri

cal C

ondu

ctivi

ty36

1387

.26

4332

364.

5274

1.79

48.5

5N

ASo

uth

side

of T

ank

1505

EC-0

04El

ectri

cal C

ondu

ctivi

ty36

1398

.86

4332

374.

3374

1.40

48.9

5N

ASo

uthe

ast s

ide

of T

ank

1505

EC-0

05El

ectri

cal C

ondu

ctivi

ty36

1439

.42

4332

411.

8074

3.68

48.7

5N

AEa

st-N

orth

east

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

8010

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

EC-0

06El

ectri

cal C

ondu

ctivi

ty36

1378

.91

4332

436.

7273

9.70

48.7

5N

AN

orth

of T

ank

1505

in m

iddl

e of

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

EC-0

07El

ectri

cal C

ondu

ctivi

ty36

1348

.06

4332

390.

8274

2.01

48.6

5N

AW

est s

ide

of T

ank

1505

EC-0

08El

ectri

cal C

ondu

ctivi

ty36

1378

.21

4332

415.

0674

0.75

48.2

5N

AN

orth

east

sid

e of

Tan

k 15

05G

W-0

00C

onfir

mat

ion

Gro

undw

ater

3612

45.5

143

3232

5.60

740.

9228

(24-

28)

GW

-001

Con

firm

atio

n G

roun

dwat

er36

1381

.59

4332

363.

6274

2.11

44(2

5-29

), (4

0-44

)So

uth

side

of T

ank

1505

GW

-002

Con

firm

atio

n G

roun

dwat

er36

1379

.25

4332

436.

5273

9.72

44(2

5-29

), (4

0-44

)N

orth

of T

ank

1505

in m

iddl

e of

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

GW

-003

Con

firm

atio

n G

roun

dwat

er36

1338

.89

4332

337.

6072

9.17

24(2

0-24

)So

uthw

est o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tG

W-0

04C

onfir

mat

ion

Gro

undw

ater

3613

97.8

943

3231

3.22

741.

5926

(22-

26)

Sout

h-So

uthe

ast o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tG

W-0

05C

onfir

mat

ion

Gro

undw

ater

3613

86.7

343

3232

9.59

741.

4830

(26-

30)

Sout

h-So

uthe

ast o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tG

W-0

06C

onfir

mat

ion

Gro

undw

ater

3614

18.5

143

3236

7.01

744.

0944

(25-

29),

(40-

44)

East

-Sou

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 a

djac

ent t

o PZ

-366

GW

-007

Con

firm

atio

n G

roun

dwat

er36

1420

.92

4332

422.

0974

3.28

29(2

5-29

)N

orth

east

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

5803

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

GW

-008

Con

firm

atio

n G

roun

dwat

er36

1420

.62

4332

324.

7274

5.15

43(2

4-28

), (3

9-43

)So

uthe

ast o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 80

10 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tG

W-0

09C

onfir

mat

ion

Gro

undw

ater

3614

77.2

143

3239

3.11

741.

5329

(25-

29)

East

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

8010

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

GW

-010

Con

firm

atio

n G

roun

dwat

er36

1516

.62

4332

409.

8274

3.00

30(2

6-30

)Ea

st-N

orth

east

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

5803

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

GW

-011

Con

firm

atio

n G

roun

dwat

er36

1508

.02

4332

437.

2374

2.54

27(2

3-27

)N

orth

east

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

5803

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

GW

-012

Con

firm

atio

n G

roun

dwat

er36

1346

.41

4332

429.

8674

0.21

29(2

5-29

)N

orth

wes

t of T

ank

1505

with

in s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tG

W-0

13C

onfir

mat

ion

Gro

undw

ater

3613

77.2

143

3234

3.98

742.

2531

(27-

31)

Sout

h of

Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tG

W-0

14C

onfir

mat

ion

Gro

undw

ater

3613

26.5

143

3239

6.15

724.

1729

(25-

29)

Wes

t of T

ank

1505

in s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tPR

-001

Con

firm

atio

n So

il36

1401

.00

4332

421.

4874

0.65

30(2

5-27

)Ad

jace

nt to

PZ-

365

PR-0

02C

onfir

mat

ion

Soil

3613

82.4

143

3236

3.67

741.

7922

(18-

22)

Sout

h sid

e of

Tan

k 15

05PR

-003

Con

firm

atio

n So

il36

1396

.39

4332

374.

6374

1.40

36(1

3-14

.5)

Sout

heas

t sid

e of

Tan

k 15

05PR

-004

Con

firm

atio

n So

il36

1396

.39

4332

374.

6374

1.40

36(3

2-33

.5)

Sout

heas

t sid

e of

Tan

k 15

05PR

-005

Con

firm

atio

n So

il36

1347

.76

4332

431.

9174

0.14

25(2

3-24

)N

orth

wes

t of T

ank

1505

with

in s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tPR

-006

Con

firm

atio

n So

il36

1326

.23

4332

396.

4174

1.49

30(2

6-27

)W

est o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

PR-0

07C

onfir

mat

ion

Soil

3614

21.1

543

3242

1.54

743.

2030

(25-

26)

Nor

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 58

03 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tPR

-008

Con

firm

atio

n So

il36

1377

.46

4332

344.

7574

2.36

30(2

6.5-

27.2

5)So

uth

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

2001

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

PR-0

09C

onfir

mat

ion

Soil

3614

41.2

243

3246

2.79

743.

7430

(27-

29)

Nor

th-N

orth

east

of T

ank

1505

in T

ank

5803

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

PR-0

10C

onfir

mat

ion

Soil

3614

39.5

143

3254

8.39

740.

5025

(23-

25)

Sout

h-So

uthe

ast o

f MW

-50

in o

pen

area

nor

thw

est o

f Tan

k 15

04SB

-001

Geo

tech

nica

l 36

1352

.33

4332

350.

6374

2.34

45(2

5-26

.5),

(28.

9-31

), (3

3.2-

33.8

)So

uthw

est o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tSB

-002

Geo

tech

nica

l 36

1454

.41

4332

332.

0274

4.28

35(2

6.9-

27.5

), (2

7.5-

28.5

), (2

8.5-

30)

East

-Sou

thea

st o

f Tan

k 15

05 b

etw

een

MW

-303

D a

nd M

W-3

13SB

-003

Geo

tech

nica

l 36

1401

.26

4332

338.

8574

1.74

40(2

5-27

.4),

(29-

32),

(32-

34)

Sout

h-So

uthe

ast o

f Tan

k 15

05 in

Tan

k 20

01 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tPZ

-364

Prod

uct S

ampl

e36

1339

.68

4332

401.

21N

AN

AN

AW

est s

ide

of T

ank

1505

, with

in s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tPZ

-365

Prod

uct S

ampl

e36

1402

.36

4332

423.

56N

AN

AN

AN

orth

east

sid

e of

Tan

k 15

05, w

ithin

sec

onda

ry c

onta

inm

ent

PZ-4

34Pr

oduc

t Sam

ple

3614

24.4

443

3257

5.48

NA

NA

NA

Nor

th o

f Tan

k 15

05, s

outh

of M

W-5

0 ar

eaTa

nk 1

505

Prod

uct S

ampl

eN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AM

W-5

0Pr

oduc

t Sam

ple

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Nor

th o

f Tan

k 15

05, o

n fo

rmer

refin

ery

site

MW

-79

Prod

uct S

ampl

eN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AW

est o

f Tan

k 80

08, w

ithin

Tan

k 80

05 s

econ

dary

con

tain

men

tPZ

-414

Prod

uct S

ampl

eN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AAd

jace

nt to

RW

-11

PZ-4

16Pr

oduc

t Sam

ple

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Nor

th o

f Tan

k 80

08, s

outh

of T

ank

1505

Surv

ey c

oord

inat

es a

re in

UTM

NAD

83

Zone

15N

ft. a

msl

- fe

et a

bove

mea

n se

a le

vel

NA

- Not

App

licab

leEC

- El

ectri

cal C

ondu

ctivi

tyG

W -

Con

firm

atio

n gr

ound

wat

er s

ampl

eLI

F - L

aser

Indu

ced

Fluo

resc

ence

MIP

- M

embr

ane

Inte

rface

Pro

bePR

- C

onfir

mat

ion

soil s

ampl

eSB

- G

eote

chni

cal s

oil s

ampl

e

Not

es:

Prod

uct a

nd G

roun

dwat

er In

vesti

gatio

n at

Tan

k 150

5 Re

port

Well

IDSa

mpl

e Da

teSa

mpl

e De

pth

Diesel Range Organics (C10-C32)

Gasoline Range Organics (C6-C9)

Kerosene

Mineral Spirits

Motor Oil (MRO)

1,2,4-Trimehtylbenzene

1,2-Dimethylbenzene

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

Benzene

Ethylbenzene

Isopropylbenzene

m&p-Xylenes

Methyl-tert-butyl-ether (MTBE)

Naphthalene

n-Butylbenzene

n-Propylbenzene

p-Isopropyltoluene

sec-Butylbenzene

tert-Butylbenzene

Toluene

BT/EX Ratio

feet

bgs

2000

045

0N

AN

AN

A9.

770

069

.417

650

NA

700

1500

032

0N

A40

0N

A38

0N

A10

00N

A

PR-0

015/

23/2

007

25-2

7<

9810

,000

460

< 19

0<

190

202.

86.

54.

811

1.8

< 0.

61<

0.12

4.6

3.3

5.1

0.86

0.71

0.12

20.

58PR

-002

5/1/

2007

18-2

214

0011

000

1500

1600

150

190

180

5658

170

1347

0<1

.339

<0.6

744

2.7

3.4

<0.6

751

00.

89PR

-003

5/1/

2007

13-1

4.5

7310

0073

5349

8.1

3.4

2.6

3.9

3.7

0.79

110.

13 J

2.5

<0.0

671.

40.

420.

24<0

.067

4.4

0.56

PR-0

045/

1/20

0732

-33.

526

027

0025

019

011

04.

20.

095

5.4

0.17

113

7<0

.22

10<0

.11

6.3

202

1.3

<0.1

10.

270.

02PR

-005

5/23

/200

723

-24

1600

7200

1200

1100

500

130

2841

3858

5.7

220

<0.1

28.

611

231.

62.

10.

186.

20.

16PR

-006

5/1/

2007

26-2

725

0061

0022

0017

0018

0072

2.8

1316

313.

447

<0.0

2414

<0.1

29.

22.

21.

6<0

.12

4.1

0.26

PR-0

075/

23/2

007

25-2

6<4

953

0036

0<9

8<9

841

8.8

1312

193.

748

<0.1

27.

96

8.3

1.9

1.3

0.19

7.2

0.29

PR-0

085/

23/2

007

26.5

-27.

25<5

2600

41<1

0<1

024

27

0.91

9.7

227

<0.1

24.

43.

14.

31.

10.

680.

121.

60.

07PR

-009

5/23

/200

727

-29

<94

3300

810

<190

<190

422.

612

3.9

143.

136

<0.1

16.

25.

47.

51.

81.

20.

171.

60.

11PR

-010

5/23

/200

723

-25

<52

9800

<52

480

<100

6138

8782

120

1111

0<0

.13

1025

521.

44.

4<0

.064

840.

72N

otes

:J

- Res

ult i

s an

est

imat

ed v

alue

bel

ow m

etho

d de

tect

ion

limit

or a

tent

ativ

ely

iden

tifie

d co

mpo

und.

bgs

- bel

ow g

roun

d su

rface

NA

- Not

App

licab

leAl

l res

ults

are

repo

rted

in p

arts

per

milli

on (p

pm)

Bol

ded

resu

lts in

dica

te a

det

ectio

nSh

aded

cel

ls in

dica

te c

once

ntra

tions

in e

xcee

denc

e of

RBS

Scr

eeni

ng L

evel

s

Kans

as R

isk-B

ased

Sta

ndar

d (R

BS):

TABL

E 2

Summ

ary o

f Con

firmati

on S

oil S

ample

Dete

ction

s

Pag

e 1

of 1

Tank

150

5 R

elat

ed

Sam

ple

I.D.

Sam

ple

Dat

e

Fiel

d D

escr

iptio

n of

Pro

duct

Wea

ther

ing

Hyd

roca

rbon

Ty

pe

Car

bon

Num

ber

Ran

ge

% o

f G

asol

ine

Ran

ge

Mat

eria

l

% o

f M

iddl

e D

istil

late

R

ange

M

ater

ial

(B+T

)/(E+

X)

Rat

io

Visc

osity

Sulfu

r C

onte

nt

(ppm

)

Spec

ific

Gra

vity

at

38.5

deg

C

Tank

1505

4/24/2

006

NANA

Gaso

line

conta

ining

0.4

wt.%

ox

ygen

ates

C3 –

C14

100%

NA0.8

5NA

NA0.7

1463

PZ-4

344/2

4/200

6Lig

ht ye

llow,

thi

nSl

ightly

we

ather

edGa

solin

e and

mi

ddle

distill

ates

C3 –

C14

100%

NA0.5

1NA

NA0.7

2895

PZ-3

642/1

6/200

7Am

ber

Sligh

tly

weath

ered

Gaso

line a

nd

midd

le dis

tillate

sC3

- >C

2097

%3%

0.28

NA10

550.7

1731

PZ-3

652/1

5/200

7Ye

llow

Sligh

tly

weath

ered

Gaso

line a

nd

midd

le dis

tillate

sC3

– C2

998

%2%

0.31

NA80

70.7

0926

SSI P

rodu

ct

Sam

ple

I.D.

Sam

ple

Dat

e

Fiel

d D

escr

iptio

n of

Pro

duct

Wea

ther

ing

Hyd

roca

rbon

Ty

pe

Car

bon

Num

ber

Ran

ge

% o

f G

asol

ine

Ran

ge

Mat

eria

l

% o

f M

iddl

e D

istil

late

R

ange

M

ater

ial

(B+T

)/(E+

X)

Rat

io

Visc

osity

Sulfu

r C

onte

nt

(ppm

)

Spec

ific

Gra

vity

at

38.5

deg

C

MW

-50

10/1/

2004

Light

yello

w-br

own,

thin

Sligh

tly

weath

ered

Gaso

line

C2 -

C13

100.0

0%NA

0.55

NA34

0.731

MW-7

910

/19/20

04Da

rk br

own,

thin

High

ly we

ather

edGa

solin

eC5

- C1

4NA

NA0.0

41.0

7NA

0.741

PZ-4

141/2

7/200

5

Dark

brow

n, me

dium

visco

sity

Mediu

m we

ather

ingGa

solin

e and

mi

ddle

distill

ateC4

- C2

278

.00%

22.00

%0.2

61.5

1NA

0.772

PZ-4

161/2

7/200

5Lig

ht ye

llow,

thi

nMe

dium

weath

ering

Gaso

line

C4 -

C13

100.0

0%0.0

0%0.1

50.8

4NA

0.709

NA

- Not

App

licab

le/N

ot A

vaila

ble

2006

-200

7 pr

oduc

t sam

ples

col

lect

ed in

resp

onse

to T

ank

1505

rele

ase;

200

4-20

05 s

ite-w

ide

prod

uct s

ampl

es u

sed

in c

ompa

rativ

e an

alys

is

Tabl

e 3Pr

oduc

t Fing

erpr

inting

Data

Sum

mary

Prod

uct a

nd G

roun

dwate

r Inv

estig

ation

at T

ank 1

505 R

epor

t

Not

es:

TABL

E 4

Summ

ary o

f MIP

Res

pons

es du

ring 2

007 M

IP In

vesti

gatio

nPr

oduc

t and

Gro

undw

ater I

nves

tigati

on at

Tan

k 150

5 Rep

ort

Max

imum

PID

Res

pons

eEq

uiva

lent

PID

Res

pons

e in

pp

m (G

RO

)(ft

bgs

)(ft

am

sl)

(ft b

gs)

(ft a

msl

)(u

V)(p

pm)

MIP

-000

740.

926.

5-

20.2

734.

4-

720.

78.

073

2.9

49.7

691.

32.

01E+

0740

0074

0.92

26.5

-43

.071

4.4

-69

7.9

27.0

713.

949

.769

1.3

8.48

E+06

2800

MIP

-001

742.

9325

.0-

34.0

717.

9-

708.

931

.071

1.9

50.6

692.

33.

20E+

0730

000

MIP

-002

741.

6116

.0-

19.0

725.

6-

722.

618

.072

3.6

50.8

690.

8R

espo

nse

not a

bove

bas

elin

e20

MIP

-003

742.

0313

.5-

14.5

728.

5-

727.

514

.072

7.6

50.8

690.

95.

47E+

0560

742.

0327

.0-

38.0

715.

0-

704.

029

.071

3.0

50.8

690.

91.

04E+

0719

00M

IP-0

0474

4.01

30.5

-40

.071

3.5

-70

4.0

32.0

712.

050

.469

1.3

3.19

E+07

1500

0M

IP-0

0574

4.23

21.5

-43

.072

2.7

-70

1.2

23.0

721.

0150

.869

0.9

3.02

E+07

1500

0M

IP-0

0674

3.21

14.0

-38

.572

9.2

-70

4.7

32.0

711.

242

.269

9.5

3.63

E+07

2000

0M

IP-0

0774

0.77

20.0

-21

.572

0.8

-71

9.3

21.0

722.

250

.769

1.0

3.03

E+05

100

MIP

-008

740.

415.

0-

12.0

735.

4-

728.

48.

073

2.4

42.3

699.

43.

76E+

0712

000

MIP

-009

741.

099.

0-

11.0

732.

1-

730.

110

.073

0.4

50.6

691.

14.

29E+

0530

MIP

-010

741.

716.

5-

13.5

735.

2-

728.

210

.073

1.7

42.5

699.

27.

26E+

0520

0M

IP-0

1174

5.08

17.0

-21

.072

8.1

-72

4.1

19.0

722.

7150

.269

1.5

9.26

E+05

70M

IP-0

1274

4.81

5.0

-9.

073

9.8

-73

5.8

6.0

738.

842

.669

9.1

2.92

E+05

55M

IP-0

1374

4.55

16.0

-18

.072

8.6

-72

6.6

16.0

728.

850

.669

1.1

Res

pons

e no

t abo

ve b

asel

ine

20M

IP-0

1474

1.50

42.0

-45

.569

9.5

-69

6.0

43.0

698.

550

.969

0.7

Res

pons

e no

t abo

ve b

asel

ine

50M

IP-0

1574

1.97

10.5

-35

.073

1.5

-70

7.0

15.0

726.

546

.569

5.5

1.38

E+06

200

MIP

-016

742.

4926

.5-

27.5

716.

0-

715.

027

.071

5.5

42.5

700.

0R

espo

nse

not a

bove

bas

elin

e8

MIP

-017

744.

5936

.0-

37.5

708.

6-

707.

137

.070

7.6

50.4

694.

2R

espo

nse

not a

bove

bas

elin

e50

MIP

-018

744.

1638

.0-

38.5

706.

2-

705.

738

.070

6.6

50.9

693.

3R

espo

nse

not a

bove

bas

elin

e10

MIP

-018

744.

1643

.0-

43.5

701.

270

0.7

43.0

701.

650

.969

3.3

Res

pons

e no

t abo

ve b

asel

ine

10M

IP-0

1974

4.28

43.0

-43

.570

1.3

-70

0.8

43.0

701.

350

.569

3.8

Res

pons

e no

t abo

ve b

asel

ine

15M

IP-0

2074

3.02

38.0

-38

.570

5.0

-70

4.5

38.0

706.

350

.469

2.7

Res

pons

e no

t abo

ve b

asel

ine

101 P

ID R

espo

nse

Inte

rval

cor

resp

ond

to d

epth

inte

vals

ove

r whi

ch th

e PI

D re

spon

se re

gist

ered

val

ues

abov

e ba

selin

e re

spon

se v

alue

(250

,000

uv)

.M

IP -

Mem

bran

e In

terfa

ce P

robe

ft am

sl -

feet

abo

ve m

ean

sea

leve

lft

bgs

- fee

t bel

ow g

roun

d su

rface

uV -

mic

rovo

ltsG

RO

- U

sed

gaso

line

rang

e or

gani

cs s

tand

ard

to d

eter

min

e eq

uiva

lent

ppm

read

ing

Gro

und

Elev

atio

n (ft

am

sl)

MIP

Bor

ing

Num

ber

MIP

Bor

ing

Term

inat

ion

Dep

th /

Elev

atio

n

MIP

Res

pons

e Da

ta1

Max

imum

Res

pons

e D

epth

/Ele

vatio

n in

Inte

rval

PID

Resp

onse

Inte

rval

1

(ft b

gs)

(ft a

msl

)

Page

1 of

1

TABLE 5Summary of Groundwater Field ParametersProduct and Groundwater Investigation at Tank 1505 Report

Well ID Sample Date pH

Specific Conductivity

(μmS/cm)Turbidity Temperature

°C ORP (MV) DO (mg/L)

GW-000 (24-28') 04/04/07 6.51 1.121 450 13.1 -204.6 0.72GW-001 (25-29') 04/05/07 6.25 1.074 437 13.98 -169.7 0.3GW-001 (40-44') 04/05/07 6.64 0.904 676 13.46 -152.7 3.09GW-002 (25-29') 04/05/07 6.19 1.24 739 12.72 -165.8 0.29GW-002 (40-44') 04/05/07 6.62 1.301 NA/+999 13.25 -173.4 0.35GW-003 (20-24') 04/04/07 6.58 1.289 96 13.6 -174.1 3.41GW-004 (22-26') 04/04/07 6.67 1.13 241 14.14 -106.6 5.5GW-005 (26-30') 04/04/07 6.77 1.3 476 14.69 -115.8 7.86GW-006 (25-29') 04/05/07 6.55 1.068 747 13.06 -154.1 0.16GW-006 (40-44') 04/05/07 6.41 1.05 NA/+999 13.46 -123.2 2.92GW-007 (25-29') 04/05/07 6.22 1.242 NA/+999 14.36 -127.2 0.22GW-008 (24-28') 04/05/07 6.64 1.443 803 12.12 -132.4 6.66GW-008 (39-43') 04/05/07 6.66 1.201 NA/+999 13.69 -140.1 3.31GW-009 (25-29') 04/05/07 6.58 1.084 NA/+999 14.01 -139.7 0.27GW-010 (26-30') 04/04/07 6.71 1.301 NA/+999 11.35 -167.2 0.43GW-011 (23-27') 04/05/07 6.38 1.288 96 13.92 -125 0.3GW-012 (25-29') 04/04/07 6.39 1.118 NA/+999 14.75 -98 0.26GW-013 (27-31') 04/04/07 6.37 0.996 NA/+999 14.83 -109.3 0.29GW-014 (25-29') 04/04/07 6.43 0.99 NA/+999 14.14 -115.2 2.72

Notes:NA/+999 - Turbidity is off scale on the high side.

TABL

E 6

Summ

ary o

f Con

firmati

on G

roun

dwate

r Sam

ple D

etecti

ons

Prod

uct a

nd G

roun

dwate

r Inv

estig

ation

at T

ank 1

505 R

epor

t

Well

IDSa

mpl

e Da

teSa

mpl

e De

pth

Diesel Range Organics (C10-C32)

Gasoline Range Organics (C6-C9)

Arsenic

Lead

1,2,4-Trimehtylbenzene

1,2-Dimethylbenzene

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

Acetone

Benzene

Ethylbenzene

Isopropylbenzene

m&p-Xylenes

Methyl-tert-butyl-ether (MTBE)

Naphthalene

n-Butylbenzene

n-Propylbenzene

p-Isopropyltoluene

sec-Butylbenzene

Toluene

feet

bgs

720

500

1015

1710

000

1793

05

700

NA

1000

020

350

8080

NA

8010

00

GW

-000

4/4/

2007

24-2

821

0063

0035

04.

7 J

<10

11<1

0<5

013

0021

1665

<10

<10

<10

20<1

0<1

032

GW

-001

4/5/

2007

25-2

938

0043

000

150

4.6

J47

069

014

0<2

5068

0011

00<5

021

0010

025

0<5

075

<50

<50

5600

GW

-001

4/5/

2007

40-4

463

072

0028

4.3

J55

6019

<50

1600

53<1

016

0<1

016

<10

17<1

0<1

023

0G

W-0

024/

5/20

0725

-29

3100

2900

018

05

J22

069

<50

<250

8900

400

<50

640

<50

120

<50

<50

<50

<50

400

GW

-002

4/5/

2007

40-4

414

0063

0061

2956

1719

<10

680

299.

592

2012

7.6

143.

12.

328

GW

-003

4/4/

2007

20-2

413

0038

0023

0<5

<10

<10

<10

<50

170

<10

<10

<20

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

GW

-004

4/4/

2007

22-2

611

0015

015

03.

2 J

2.5

<1<1

<53

1.6

<12.

7<1

2.1

<1<1

<1<1

<1G

W-0

054/

4/20

0726

-30

580

1200

330

<51.

54.

61.

155

25.0

1.2

9.8

17<1

1.8

<110

<1<1

3.9

GW

-006

4/5/

2007

25-2

915

0010

000

280

8.4

8315

33<5

068

160

3612

0<1

039

1572

11<1

024

GW

-006

4/5/

2007

40-4

411

0098

0011

08.

622

1217

<50

930

4029

120

<10

13<1

040

<10

<10

110

GW

-007

4/5/

2007

25-2

926

0029

000

200

1629

024

094

<50

5500

660

3711

00<1

022

014

58<1

0<1

066

0G

W-0

084/

5/20

0724

-28

290

420

400

6.8

2.2

6.3

<1<5

906.

31.

717

<11.

1<1

1.2

<1<1

33G

W-0

084/

5/20

0739

-43

490

6900

3113

<10

9 J

<10

190

3100

<10

<10

46<1

0<1

0<1

0<1

0<1

0<1

040

GW

-009

4/5/

2007

25-2

965

074

0078

11<1

0<1

0<1

0<5

035

00<1

0<1

0<2

0<1

0<1

0<1

011

<10

<10

23G

W-0

104/

4/20

0726

-30

320

23 J

140

4.5

J<1

<1<1

<5<1

<1<1

<2<1

<1<1

<1<1

<1<1

GW

-011

4/5/

2007

23-2

766

039

0025

<5<1

0<1

0<1

0<5

019

00<1

0<1

010

J38

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

11G

W-0

124/

4/20

0725

-29

6200

3900

012

08.

6 J

370

110

110

<50

9900

550

3996

053

017

019

6311

<10

410

GW

-013

4/4/

2007

27-3

174

0025

000

270

5.7

J21

013

010

0<5

017

0076

063

1300

<10

230

2495

14<1

015

0G

W-0

144/

4/20

0725

-29

6000

2700

012

010

J27

012

073

<50

3800

590

3276

029

020

0<1

056

<10

<10

490

Not

es:

J - R

esul

t is

an e

stim

ated

val

ue b

elow

met

hod

dete

ctio

n lim

it or

a te

ntat

ivel

y id

entif

ied

com

poun

d.bg

s - b

elow

gro

und

surfa

ceN

A - N

ot A

pplic

able

All r

esul

ts a

re re

porte

d in

par

ts p

er b

illion

(ppb

)B

olde

d re

sults

indi

cate

a d

etec

tion

Shad

ed c

ells

indi

cate

con

cent

ratio

ns in

exc

eede

nce

of R

BS S

cree

ning

Lev

els

Kans

as R

isk-B

ased

Sta

ndar

d (R

BS):

Pag

e 1

of 1

Documents

Rev 6 Product and Groundwater Investigation ReportIntroduction ... Based on ConocoPhillips detailed product accounting following the release and comparative volume measurements taken