/

0000046

GROUNDWATERGroundwater Technology, Inc.

March 10, 19957960 Castleway Drive, Indianapolis, IN 46250 USA

Tel: (317) 595-6400 Fax: (317) 595-6420

Mr. Brad BradleyU.S. EPA Region 5HSRL-6J77 West Jackson Blvd.Chicago, IL 60604-3590

Dear Mr. Bradley,

Attached please find the monthly progress report for activities at the Conrail Elkhart Indiana Rail Yard site'sinterim remedial action. Any questions on this submittal may be addressed by calling my office orcontacting Mr. T.P. Pendergast at Conrail at (215) 209-1688.

Sincerely,

David J. Demko, P.G.Project Coordinator

cc: Tom PendergastKrista DuncanPaul LambertJohn Weaver

Offices throughout the L'.S.. Canada and Overseas

GROUNDWATER® Croundwater Technology, Inc.

7960 Castleway Drive. Indianapolis, IN 46250 USATel: (317) 595-6400 Fax: (317) 595-6420

MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORTFOR

INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTION FOR CONRAIL ELXHART RAIL YARD SITEELKHART, INDIANA

Submitted to:U.S. EPA Region 5

77 West Jackson Blvd.Chicago, IL 60604

March 10, 1995

Prepared for:Consolidated Rail Corporation

2001 Market Street 3CPhiladelphia, PA 19101-1403

Prepared by:Groundwater Technology, Inc.

7960 Castleway DriveIndianapolis, IN 46050

Offices throughout the i'^S.. Canada and Overseas

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 RD/RA ACTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2.0 DEUVERABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

3.0 FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

4.0 MODIFICATIONS TO WORK PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

5.0 POTENTIAL PROBLEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

6.0 PROJECTED WORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

7.0 SUMMARY OF CONTACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

8.0 PERMITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

uumnnr GROUNDWATERTECHNOLOGY,

1.0 RD/RA ACTIONS

The following actions have been taken to comply with the Section 106 Unilateral Administrative Order thatbecame effective August 6, 1992, for the Conrail Elkhart Rail Yard Site:

Alternate Water Supply

Conrail and American Premier Underwriters (APU) is continuing with procurement of propertyaccess agreements from residences scheduled for connection to the public water supply;

Conrail and APU conducted the sixth monthly construction meeting on February 22 to update theprogress of construction activities. In attendance were representatives from Conrail, APU,Groundwater Technology, Wightman Petrie, Selge Construction, and the Elkhart City Water Utility.All representatives in attendance agreed that the project was proceeding according to plans;

Larue Area - From January 25 through February 22, 1995, 19 exterior water service connectionsand 2 interior water service connections were installed. Additionally, 18 residential wells wereabandoned. To date, 133 homes are complete with exterior service connections and 109 homesare complete with interior service connections (and using municipal water). A total of 1 20 residentialwells have been disconnected and properly abandoned following connection to the municipal watersupply (some homes have more than one well);

Groundwater Extraction/Treatment System

s^1trie"iWfc groundwater extraction/treatmentdesign, Conrail and APU have suspended all activities relating to the design/construction of theextraction/treatment system.

2.0 DEUVERABLES

The following deliverables were submitted during the reporting period February 10 through March 10, 1995:

The monthly progress report for the January 10 through February 10, 1995 reporting period wassubmitted to EPA on February 10, 1995.

Preliminary analytical results for the 4th quarter 1 994 groundwater sampling event were submittedin the February 10, 1994 Monthly Progress Report.

The following deliverables will be submitted during the reporting period March 10 through April 10, 1995:

The Monthly Progress Report for March 1 0 through April 1 0, 1 995, reporting period will be submittedto EPA on April 10.

3.0 RECENT DATA/FINDINGS

Attached to this report are the final groundwater analytical results and data evaluation/validationreport for the 4th quarter, 1994, groundwater sampling event;

Also attached to this report are maps updated with the 3rd and 4th quarter, 1994, groundwatersampling event results that show the zone of contamination. The maps indicate the approximate

GROUNDWATERTECHNOLOGY .,

region within which TCE and CCI4 contaminated groundwater has previously been detectednorthwest of the Conrail railyard. The maps are not intended to imply that all groundwater withinthe outlined region is known to be contaminated, nor are they intended to imply that the Conrailproperty is the only source of contamination contained within the indicated region. The maps arebased on groundwater quality results from all previous samplings of monitoring wells, lead screenauger borings, and residential wells. The sampling events have occurred over a long period of time.The sampling locations cover a large area and samples have been collected from various depths.

4.0 MODIFICATIONS TO WORK PLAN

As stated in the 106 Order and in the Work Plan, all residences within the four service areas are to besupplied with public water. To date, six homeowners (56705 CR-1, 56783 Burbank, 56575 Spring, 56577Spring, 56684 Spring, and 56683 Shore) have indicated that they will refuse to hook-up to the public watersupply. Of these six homeowners, only two (56783 Burbank and 56684 Spring) have signed releaseagreements as requested by Conrail and APU confirming their position. EPA and IDEM have been advisedof these refusals.

5.0 POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

Conrail and APU have provided easement access agreements to all residences scheduled for public waterhook-up in the four service areas through bulk mailings. Conrail also provided access agreements to thepublic at the August 23 public meeting. During watermain construction, Conrail and APU have instructedtheir contractor to document all attempts at contacting non-responsive residents as well as to leave flyersat these residences to remind them of the opportunity to hook-up to city water. As of the end of thisreporting period, 351 residences have signed and returned their access agreements indicating their desireto hook-up to the public water system. EPA RPM Brad Bradley is following up on those residences whohave not, to date, returned service agreements. The following table summarizes residential response in thefour service areas:

Area

Larue

CR-1

Charles/Vistula

Totals:

# Residences

148

123

206

477

# Accepted

131

84

136

351

# Refused

4

2

0

6

illil!13

37

70

120

Five residents (56589 Shore, 56579 Boss, 56783 Boss, 56649 Best, 56508 Best) have denied access toproperly abandon their domestic wells. IDEM and EPA were advised of these residents at the January 31construction meeting. Ms. Duncan of IDEM was further advised that Conrail, APU, and the City of Elkhartwere looking to EPA to inform residents of the requirements for well closure or take the necessary steps toshut off municipal water supply while these wells remained in use.

GROUNDWATERTECHNOLOGY,

6.0 PROJECTED WORK FOR FOLLOWING SIX WEEKS

Watermain installation activities will likely resume during the upcoming reporting period as winter weatherconditions subside. As weather allows, the following activities will be conducted during the next reportingperiod:

Resume installation of watermains;

Continue procurement of easement access agreements from property owners;

Continue installation of service connections and well abandonments in the Lame and County Road1 Areas;

Conduct the first quarter 1995 residential sampling event (scheduled for March 23 and 24); and,

Conduct the first quarter 1995 groundwater sampling event (scheduled for March 20 through 23).

7.0 SUMMARY OF CONTACTS

None during this reporting period.

8.0 PERMITS

Alternate. Water. SJJPP)H

The water main construction permit was issued to Conrail by IDEM on July 27, 1994. The IndianaDepartment of Transportation (IN DOT) issued the Right-of-Way permit for construction of the watermainsin state roads on August 16, 1994. Elkhart County has issued all applicable permits. Required projectpermits for St. Joseph County are being pursued by the contractor.

Groundwater Extraction/Treatment System

With EPA's suspension of the design as stated in the June 3 100% design comments, permitting activitieshave been suspended.

DDE GROUNDWATERjUDI TECHNOLOGY ,

GROUNDWATER1 ECHNOLOVJI ® Croundwater Technology. Inc.

7960 Castleway Drive, Indianapolis, IN 46250 USATel: (317) 595-6400 Fax:(317)595-6420

DATA EVALUATION/VAUDATION REPORTCONRAIL ELKHART RAILYARD

GROUNDWATER SAMPUNG Q4 1994

February 7, 1995 DATA REVIEWED BY:

GREIG T. RENVIRONMENTAL CHEMIST

REPORT REVIEWED BY:

FRANK D. WESTPROJECT MANAGER

throughout the I '.S.. Canada and Overseas

Conrail Elkhart RailyardData Evaluation/Validation ReportGroundwater Sampling Q4 1994Date: February 7, 1995Page: 1 of 3

1.0 Introduction

Groundwater samples were obtained from selected monitoring wells (listed below), located at the ConrailElkhart Railyard site, during the period from December 5th to December 8th, 1994. Sampling was performedin accordance with the approved Conrail Elkhart RD/RA Work Plan by Groundwater Technology personnel.Analysis of these samples was performed by the Quanterra Environmental Services laboratory located inCanton, Ohio, according to USEPA Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) procedures. This dataevaluation/validation was performed by Groundwater Technology, using the CLP procedures and datavalidation guidelines as references. Analysis results for all samples are summarized in Table 1.

Monitoring Wells:

MW-1MW-3MW-8SMW-23DMW-38DMW-43BR

MW-2SMW-4SMW-8DMW-37SMW-41

MW-2DMW-4DMW-8BRMW-37DMW-42

MW-2BRMW-7SMW-23SMW-38SMW-43S

2.0 TCL Volatiles

A total of 28 samples were analyzed for TCL volatiles. This total includes 21 monitoring well water samples,2 monitoring well field duplicates, 4 equipment blanks, and 1 trip blank. The sample results are divided Intotwo Sample Delivery Groups, identified as SDG EQBLK1 and SDG EQBLK3.

2.1 Holding Times

All samples from both SDGs were analyzed within 10 days of validated time of sample receipt. The pH ofall samples was less than 2.0, with the exception of the sample obtained from MW-8S, which had a pH of6.0. Only volatile aromatics, such as benzene, would be affected by this condition. Historically, onlychlorinated compounds have been detected in this well. No qualification of the data is necessary.

2.2 GC/MS Tuning

GC/MS tuning runs for both SDGs were performed within the specified 12 hour time interval, and all ionabundances were within method specified ranges.

GROUNDWATERTECHNOLOGY,

Conrail Elkhart RailyardData Evaluation/Validation ReportGroundwater Sampling Q4 1994Date: February 7, 1995Page: 2 of 3

2.3 Calibration

2.3.1 Initial Calibration

Method requirements for initial calibration were met for both SDGs.

2.3.2 Continuing Calibration

Continuing calibrations were performed at the required frequency for both SDGs. All compoundspecific RRFs were above the required minimum values. All continuing calibration standardsanalyzed met required maximum percent difference criteria (25.0%), with the exception of thefollowing continuing calibration results:

SDG EQBLK1 Date: 12/14/94 Chloroethane * 32.5% RPDAcetone * 44.4%2-Butanone * 33.5%1,2-Dichloroethane 28.9%Bromoform 31.2%1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 * 29.3%

Date: 12/15/94 Chloroethane * 35.2%Acetone* 51.2%2-Butanone * 44.8%Dibromochloromethane 25.4%Bromoform 34.6%2-Hexanone * 26.1%l,2-Dichloroethane-d4* 25.3%

SDG EQBLK3 Date: 12/17/94 Chloromethane * 27.8%Acetone * 81.8%2-Butanone* 49.1%2-Hexanone * 38.5%

* no maximum RSD/RPD limit

Up to two compounds with maximum RPD and minimum RRF criteria are allowed to exceed the 25% RPDcriteria.

2.4 Blanks

No target compounds were detected in the method blanks analyzed for both SDGs.

GROUNDVWTERTECHNOLOGY.

Conrail Elkhart RailyardData Evaluation/Validation ReportGroundwater Sampling Q4 1994Date: February 7,1995Page: 3 of 3

2.5 Surrogate Compound Recoveries

All surrogate compound recoveries were within established control limits for all samples in both SDGs. Thisincludes method blanks, matrix spikes, and equipment and trip blanks.

2.6 Matrix Spike / Matrix Spike Duplicates (MS/MSD)

Three MS/MSD pairs were analyzed, two for SDG EQBLK1 and one for SDG EQBLK 3. MW-3 and MW-7Swere designated as the MS/MSD samples for SDG EQBLK 1. All compound recoveries and relative percentdifferences (RPDs) for these MS/MSDs were within established control limits. MW-8D was designated as theMS/MSD sample for SDG EQBLK3. All compound recoveries and relative percent differences for thisMS/MSD were within established control limits.

2.7 Field Duplicates

A total of two field duplicates were sampled and analyzed for this event. Samples selected as duplicateswere MW-2BR and MW-37S. Duplicate results are summarized in Table 2.

2.8 Internal Standards Performance

All internal standard results were within established control limits.

2.9 TCL Compound Identification

All sample spectra meet compound identification criteria.

2.10 Compound Quantitation and Reported Detection Limits

No errors were discovered in compound quantitatlon or detection limit calculations.

2.11 Tentatively Identified Compounds

No unknown peaks greater than 10% intensity of the nearest internal standard were observed.

2.12 System Performance

No adverse trends or performance problems were observed.

2.13 Overall Assessment

All laboratory reported concentrations and qualifiers are acceptable.

GROUNDWATERTECHNOLOGY,

TABLE 1CONRAIL ELKHART RAILYARD

Q4 1994 Monitoring Well ResultsPage 1 of 3

SAMPl-E I-D. *

SAMPI-E DATE

COMPOUND

CNoror"»th*n»Bfomoi««t"ane

Vinyl cN°rW«Chloro*th«n*Methyl * ChlorideAceton^Carbon DIsuKide1 .1 -DlpWorowthafi*;Ij-Dlphloroethane1 ,2- Dl<rh!oro*tn*n* (Total):;<srt0i*i1 ,2-bl n'oro*tnarM

2-Buton°n«1 j ,-j -•frichloroethanel*llii :'T^™*?W0rt4*:. :

Bromocllchloromethane1 -Dtfhloropropan*els - 1 ,a>- Dlchloropropene;:iVJfli r9s*hio*;;:::::::::::.V.v ;. . :- ;Dlbromocn|oro'n»'hnne•j j ,2-f rlchloroethaneBenzen"trans- 1 .3- DlchloropropeneBromofPrm

4-M»tHyl-2-P«ntanone2-He)rfnon«T«trach|oro«thene1 ,1 ,2,2-'T«tracNoroethaneToluene1

Chlorob*nzvn*Ethylbe"z»neStyreneXylene (Total)

MW1

12/8/94

MW2S

12/6/94

34

•"••-':94.. '

10

MW2D

12/7/94

4J

45

150

MW2BR

1 2/7/94

36

MW3

1 2/5/94

MW4S

12/6/94

MW4D

12/8/94

MW7S

1 2/6/94

MV/8S

12/P/94

IjlJ

3^0

52

1

j

MW8D

12/8/94

25J

490

130

[*(,!«——— Ttfc

UNDWATKK1NOLOGY

TABLE 1CONRAIL ELKHART RAILYARD

Q4 1994 Monitoring Well ResultsPige2of3

SAMPLE 1.0. t

SAMPLE DATE

COMPOUND

CNoromethaneBromomethaneVinyl ChlorideChloroethaneMethyl ene ChlorideAcetoneCarbon Dlsulfide1.1- Dichloroethene1.1-Dlchloroethane1,2- Dichloroethene (Total)•Gtirii^fMS^ ^S ''•'• '•::• oV".-':.1.2-Dlchloroethane2-Butanone1.1,1-TrlchlororthaneCvbon TMtrncblorida ; ; ;•BromodicNorom«than»1.2- Dlchloropropanecis- 1 ,3- Dichloropropene:iiri;ip|tii|i MH*h*;:;:: i::;J :"' , . . " . " •DlbromocNoromathane1,1.2-Trlchloro«tharwB*nzen«trans- 1 ,3- DichloropropeneBromoform4- Methyl-2- Pentanone2-HexanoneTetrachloroethene1 . 1 ,2,2-TetracNoroethaneTolueneCNorobenzeneEthylbenzeneStyreneXylene (Total)

MW8BR

12/8/94

:A-^S:

>\^4*!^

•J

MW23S

1 2/5/94

^^M.^ •:•'::

..:::::.:«(>;,..

MW23D

1 2/7/94

97

MW37S

12/8/94

25

46

MW37D

12/8/94

' :*J ' : , . :•

44

280

MW38S

1 2/6/94

12J

370

52

MW38D

12/8/94

twa

2,700

MW41

12/8/94

5.900

MW42

12/8/94

92

8J

!

j i

MW43S

12/8/94

&GKOII i TEC

IIMDWATKK1NOLOGY

TABLE 1CONRAIL ELKHART RAILYARD

Q4 1994 Monitoring Well Results

Page 3 of 3

SAMPLE I.D. *

SAMPLE DATE

COMPOUND

ChloromethaneBromomethaneVinyl ChlorideCNoroethaneMethyl ene ChlorideAcetone 'Carbon DUulfida •1,1- Dlchloroethene1.1 -Dlchloroethane1.2- Dlchloroethene (Total)Chloroform1 ,2- Dlchloroethane2-Butanone1,1,1-TrlchloroethaneCarbon TetrachlorldeBromodichloromethane1 ,2-Dlchloropropaneels - 1 ,3- Dlchloropropene

Dlbromochloromethane1 .1 ,2-TrlchloroethaneBenzenetran» - 1 ,3- DichloropropeneBromoform4-Methyl-2-Pentanone2-HexanoneTatrachloroethene1 .1 ,2.2-TetrachloroethaneTolueneCHorobenzeneEthylbenzeneStyreneXylene (Total)

MW43BR

12/8/94

380

EQ. BLK

1 2/6/94

EQ. BLKf2

12/6/94

EQ. Bl-K*3

1 2/8/S1*

8J

EQ. BLK#4

12/8/94

9J

TRIP BLK.

1 2/8/94

163J

" GKOUNDWATEKI TECHNOLOGY

TABLE 2Field Duplicate Comparison Table

TCL-Volatiles:Sample MW-2 BR

Compound

Trichloroethene

Sample

36 ug/L

Duplicate

36 ug/L

RPD

0.0%

TCL-Volatiles:Sample MW-37S

Compound

Carbon Tetrachloride

Trichloroethene

Sample

25 ug/L

46 ug/L

Duplicate

24 ug/L

44 ug/L

RPD

4.1%

4.4%

Compounds not listed were not detected in either the sample or the duplicate.

"Pagel c»M

HfflGROUNDWATERTECHNOLOGY*

CARBON TETRACHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN GROUNDWATERDECEMBER 1994

1/2

SCALE

0 1 UILE

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET

CONCCNIMTKMS ftfl

~s - swum_B - OOP ____• - TO» of mtocx

W> - NOT OCHCHE

TRICHLOROETHENE CONCENTRATIONS IN GROUNDWATERDECEMBER 1994

1/2SCALE

0

1000 2000 3OOO 4OOO 5000 6000 7000 FEET

t MILE

CCNCEMIIWnNS M/I\S - SHMID*

• KB- ___- nr of KOKC*.M) • NOT UtlGLIU>

CONCENTRATIONS IN GROUNDWATERSEPTEMBER 1994

SCiLE

COHttNTKATKWS f*

THTJS .

NO . HOT OE'ltat0

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 500C 6CCBSS RS is; i:.?.:.:..:.: •;: -Wtttr- •::•..;..•; :~HT

CARBON TETRACHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS

OWCOTHATIOO ,4/1

CCOQQOft ______ POOfr

E

SCALE

1/2 0

0 1000 2000 3000 1000 5000

t MILE

6000 7000 FEET

47 \m . TO* Or •COROCK

- HOT OCItCItD