PERFORMANCE OF REMEDIAL RESPONSE … Eau Claire Municipal Well Field is located northwest of the...

WORK ELAN MEMORANDUMFOR

EAU CLAIRE MUNICIPAL WELL FIELDEAU CLAIRE, WISCONSIN

AUGUST 1985*** Company Confidential ***

R E M II

PERFORMANCE OF REMEDIAL RESPONSEACTIVITIES AT UNCONTROLLED

HAZARDOUS WASTE SITESUS. EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-01-6939

CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.PRIME CONTRACTOR

CE OF REMEDIAL RESPONSEAT UNCONTROLLED HAZARDOUS

WASTE SITES (REM II)

U.S. ERA CONTRACT NO. 68-01-6939

WORK HAN MEMORANDUMFOR

EAIJ CLAIRE MUNICIPAL WELL FIEUDEMJ CLAIRE, WISCONSIN

AUGUST 1985*** Company Confidential ***

Prepared for:U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyEmergency and Remedial Response BranchRegion V230 South Dearborn StreetChicago, Illinois 60604

This document has been prepared for the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency under Contract No. 68-01-6939. The material contained hereinis not to be disclosed to, discussed with, or made available to anyperson or persons for any reason without the prior es$>ressed approvalof a responsible official of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Document No.: 257-WP1-W1-HX3Q-1Work Assignment No.: 153-5LL3

100 CORPORATE NORTH, SUITE 101ROUTE 22 AND LAKESIDE DRIVEBANNOCKBURN. ILLINOIS 60015(312)295-6020

DESIGNERS

12 August 1985

Mr. John W. Hawthorne, P.E.Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc.11 East Adams StreetChicago, Illinois 60603Subject: Work Plan Memorandum for Eau Claire Well FieldWork Assignment No: 153-5LL3Project: EPA Contract No. 68-01-6939Document No: 257-WP1-WM-BHQG-1Dear Mr. Hawthorne:We are hereby transmitting to you fifteen ccpies of the Work PlanMemorandum for the Eau Claire Well Field located in Eau Claire,Wisconsin.Upon approval, please forward ccpies of this Work Plan Memorandum toRIM, Ms. Joan Calabrese.If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.

Very truly yours,ROY F. WESTON, INC.

Robert J. Karnauskas, P.G. , P.HG.Site ManagerRJK:slr

TABLE OFWORK PIAN MQOWNDUM

FOREMJ CLAIRE MUNICIPAL WELL FIELD

REMEDIAL INVESTIGATICN/FEASIBIIITY STOCKEAIJ CLAIRE, WISCONSIN

Section1 .01.11.21 .32 .02.12.22 .32 .4

2 .53 .03. 13 .23 .33 .43 .54 .05 .06.07 .0

IntroductionSite location and HistorySite Status and Project TypeOverviewInitial Site EvaluationStatus of the Initial Site EvaluationSite DescriptionContamination Problem DefinitionContamination Migration Pathways and Environmental/HealthImplicationInitial Remedial Measure EvaluationPreliminary Assessment of Remedial AlternativesIdentification of Remedial AlternativesPerformance Criteria and Standards for Remedial AlternativesApproach to Alternative EvaluationIdentification of Data RequirementsRemedial Investigation/Feasibility Study ObjectivesScope of ServicesScheduleProject StaffingBudget

Page1-11-11-11-42-12-12-22-22-2

2-33-13-13-23-23-53-54-15-16-17-1

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page1 Site location Map 1-22 Site Vicinity Map 1-33 Schedule of Activities 5-24 Schedule of Deliverables 5-3

LIST OF TABLES

1 Quality Assurance Project Plan Table of Contents 4-52 Work Plan Table of Contents 4-83 Summary of Total Work Plan Costs 7-24 Total Work Plan labor Costs 7-35 Total Work Plan Expense Costs 7-46 Total Work Plan ODC Costs 7-5

ATTACHMENTSA) Professional Profile of Robert J. Kamauskas

Work Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: 1Revision: 0July 29, 1985Page: 1-1 of 5

SECTION 11.0 INTRODUCTIONThis work plan memorandum describes the tasks to be performed inpreparation of the work plan for the Eau Claire Municipal Well Fieldlocated in Eau Claire, Wisconsin in accordance with the U.S.EPA's WorkAssignment No. 145.5LL3.1.1 SITE lOamON AND HISTORYThe Eau Claire Municipal Well Field is located northwest of the cityof Eau Claire in the northwest corner of Eau Claire County (seeFigures 1 and 2). Ihe well field includes 500 acres on the east bankof the Chippewa River, The Eau Claire County Airport and residentialareas border the well field on the north and east. Several industrialand ocnonercial enterprises and one landfill occur within a two mileradius of the well field.The well field, which is bounded on the west by the Chippewa River,is composed of 14 production wells. Four of the wells are located inthe southernmost portion of the well field with the remaining tenlocated in the north-central portion of the site.In March 1981, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WENR),in cooperation with the U.S.EPA, tested the water supplies of 20communities, including Eau Claire, for possible volatile organicccnpcunds (VOC's). The Eau Claire well field, which supplies drinkingwater to approximately 55,000 people, showed traces of several VOC's,including 1,1-Didhloroethane, 1,1-Dichloroethene,l l Trichlhoroethane, and Trichloroethene, in all except oneproduction well. These results were confirmed by additional WENRsampling and testing in January 1982.In May 1982, the City of Eau Claire contracted E.A. Hickok andAssociates to conduct a hydrcgeologic study of the well field area.The study defined the hydrogeologic conditions of the site, attemptedto determine the source and extent of VDC contamination, and projectedwater usage and quality for the next twenty years.Various techniques for treating water from the well field wereevaluated by Strand and Associates beginning in 1982. Also, the Cityof Eau Claire, vftiich had been testing the production wells, begantesting residential wells on the north side of the city.

LEOEND• APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF

ACTIVE CITY WELLSA APPROXIMATE LOCATION

OFHtLLMANWELL

20004000

FIGURE 1LOCATION MAPEAU CLAIRE MUNICPAL WELL FIELD

K tALSAMjLAKt

CHEOUAMEQONNATIONALFOREST -v

40 1 CHIPPEWAFALLS

HALLIE [ 27EAUCLAIRE

20 i10

Seal * In Milt *

FIGURE 2VICINITY MAPEAU CLAIRE MUNICIPAL WELL FIELD


In the spring of 1983, the WENR designated the municipal well field asa potential Superfund site. The Eau Claire well field was ranked 19thout of the 36 sites identified in Wisconsin. On September 11, 1984,the city's well field was included on the National Priority List (40CFR Part 300) as a Superfund site. Under the Superfund program orComprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Actof 1980 (EL 96-510), the City became eligible for federal assistance.In May 1984, Strand Associates completed their report on watertreatability for the City of Eau Claire and recommended a packed toweraeration system to reduce VDC concentrations in the public watersupply. The currently available test results of a pilot test plant,installed during the summer of 1984, indicate that the aeration systemwould successfully remove VOC's from the water supply.In the summer of 1984, the Wisconsin CNR inspected 22 commercialestablishments in an attempt to identify potential sources of thecontamination. Later that year OLM-Hill conducted a focusedfeasibility study to evaluate alternative initial remedial measures(IBM's) that may be suitable to protect public health.In 1985, OOi-Hill conducted a site visit to the well field, duringwhich 36 water supply samples and 1 surface water sample werecollected. Also, a final draft of the preliminary hydrogeologicevaluation was issued as part of the Interim Work Assignment.The OLM-Hill report states that the source of VOCfs is unknown. Nineestablishments have been identified as potential contaminationsources. VDC contaminated groundwater has been confirmed beneath oneof these establishments, National Presto Industries, Inc., locatedapproximately two miles east of the well field. Althou i thegroundwater flow direction is to the west-southwest in the vicinity ofthe study area, there is no conclusive evidence linking the VOCcontamination beneath the National Presto Industries, Inc. site to thecontamination at the well field.1.2 SITE STRTOS AND EKOJECT T¥PE

05"The Eau Claire Municipal Well Field currently supplies 5s,jfiOO peoplewith drinking water and has been included on the National PriorityList. The well field is a fund-lead site.1.3 OVKKVlbWThis Work Plan Memorandum describes the initial tasks to be performedfor the Eau Claire Municipal Well Field project in accordance withEPA's Work Assignment No. 153.5113. It provides the scope, cost, andschedule required to:

Work Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: lRevision: 0July 29, 1985Page: 1-5 of 5

Evaluate existing information.Review and revise (if necessary) the existing CH_M-Hilldraft Quality Assurance Project Plan (including the Saitplingand Analysis Plan) ./Draft Work Plan.

o Revise the Health and Safety Plan.Included in this Work Plan Memorandum are an initial site evaluationand preliminary identification of remedial alternatives. Preliminaryremedial alternatives are presented in Section 3.1 and procedures forevaluation and screening of alternatives are presented in Sections 3.2and 3 .3 .


SECTION 22.0 INITIAL SITE EVMUftTICM2.1 STATOS OF 1HE INITIAL SITE EVALUATIONCH-M-Hill has prepared a Draxt/lWbrk Plan, a draft Quality AssuranceProject Plan which includes a Sampling and Analysis Plan, and a draftSite Safety Plan. Other file data is available fron CHJt-Hill andU.S.EPA. It was not possible to conduct the initial site visitor properly review all existing information prior to preparing theWork Plan Memorandum.Data files which have been ccnpiled to date include:

1. U.S.EPA Work Assignment2. omill Draft Work Plan - KE/FS3. CH-M-Hill Quality Assurance Project Plan

Contract No. 68-01-66924. OLM-Hill Preliminary Hydrogeologic Evaluation

Contract No. 68-01-66925. OtjM-Hill Site Safety Plan for Field Investigations

JoB No. W65212.AO6. CH-M-Hill Focused Feasibility Study

Contract No. 68-01-66927. E.A. Hickok and Associates Airport HydrogelogicalInvestigation, Part A for City of Eau Claire, Wisconsin8. E.A. Hickok and Associates Well Field Investigation for Cityof Eau Claire, Wisconsin9. E.A. Hickok and Associates Organics Investigation for Cityof Eau Claire, Wisconsin

10. Strand Associates, Inc. Pilot Process Studies for WaterTreatment Alternatives for City of Eau Claire11. Strand Associateas, Inc. Report on Water Treatability forCity of Eau Claire12 . EDER Associates Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Due to

Waste Disposal Practices at National Presto Industries, Inc.


13. Miscellaneous file data.2.2 SITE DESCRIPTIONIhe Eau Claire Municipal Well Field is located on the northern edge ofEau Claire, WI. Ihe 500-acre site is bordered on the west by theChippewa River and on the east by the Eau Claire County Airport andresidential areas. Water is derived from approximately 150 feet ofpoorly sorted glacial sands and gravels. Ihe site supplies 55,000residents of Eau Claire with drinking water and, as of April 1985,contained 14 production wells. Based on data gathered by theWisconsin CNR in March 1981, it was discovered that all except oneproduction well showed trace or small amounts of several volatileorganic compounds (VDCfs) .2.3 OaJTMgNftTION EKOBUMBased on WENR samples collected in March 1981, at least trace amountsof 1,1-Dichloroethane, 1,1-Didiloroethene, l l lrichloroethane, anTrichloroethene were detected in all except one production well. -m^hTetrachloroethylene, Irichloroethylene, and 1,1-Dichloroethylene have Aalso been detected in some of the production wells, nearby private V " i)wells, and in monitoring wells at National Presto Industries (NPI) . -Concentrations on-site of Tetrachloroethylene, Irichloroethylene, and1,1-Dichloroethylene have at times, and in some wells, greatly

s\» «flceededJ2ie__exgess.g cancer risk valves calculated by the U.S.EPA\0 ~ ———— Cancer Assessment Group.Contaminated wells appear to be confined to the northern well fieldincluding private wells adjacent to it and monitoring wells at NPIplus wells up to 1/2 mile north of NPI. Ihe source of VOCcontamination has not yet been identified.2.4 CONTAMINATION MIGRATION PATHWAYS AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEAUH

IMPLICATIONSAlthough migration pathways of VOC contamination are currentlyundefined, they will most likely flow through the thickest outwashdeposits and move downgradient towards the Chippewa River. A portionof the contaminated groundwater may migrate to the underlyingsandstone aquifer.VDC's already pose a threat to human health because they expose humansto an excess cancer risk. Further, migration of contaminants couldextend to other private wells and thereby increase the threat to humanhealth.


2.5 INITIAL REMEDIAL MEASURE EVMUMTCNIn the summer of 1984, a pilot test system was designed by Strand andAssociates. The aeration system, as indicated by test results,appears to successfully remove VOC's from the drinking water supply.Based on the remedial measures that have already taken place, it doesnot appear that further immediate remedial action is required.

Work Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: 3Revision: 0July 29, 1985Page:3.1 of 6

3.0 FPFTTMINARYSECTICN 3

OF REMEDT&T. ATfTERNftTIVES

The purpose of this section is to identify a range of potentialremedial approaches which are consistent with the presently availableinformation. In addition, preliminary criteria have been developedfor facilitating a coordinated screening and evaluation process forthe remedial alternatives. Preliminary alternatives have beenidentified and are presented in Section 3.1 . Given the limitedavailable site data it is anticipated that a significant number ofadditional remedial alternatives may be developed early in the WorkPlan phase. The final range of alternatives will probably extentbeyond those considered during the previously completed FocusedFeasibility Study.3.1 IDENTIFICATION OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVESAvailable information from the site files indicates that thegroundwater in the vicinity of the well field may have beencontaminated from the improper disposal of substances containing VOC'sat one or more of nine establishments in the immediate vicinity of theEau Claire Municipal Well Field. Based on initial information, thefollowing potential remedial alternatives have been identified forfurther review and evaluation.Remedial Alternative 1.

Alternative ComponentTechnology

Remedial Alternative 2.Alternative Component

Technology

Remedial Alternative 3.Alternative ComponentTechnologies

No Action- Periodic Monitoring

Subsurface environmental isolation- Slurry trench- Grout curtain- Sheet piling- Bottom sealing/directionalgrouting- Groundwater interception trench- Groundwater pumpingGroundwater treatment- Activated carbon treatment- Biological treatment- UV/ozonation- Ion exchange- Reverse osmosis


- Coagulation/filtration- Air StrippingRemedial Alternative 4. Identification and mitigation ofVOC contamination source.A combination of the above can be identified as additionalalternatives, such as:Remedial Alternative 5. Groundwater treatment andidentification and removal of VOCcontamination source.The evaluation of Remedial Alternative 3, groundwater treatment, willaddress an expansion or enhancement of the air stripping treatmentsystem recommended in the Focused Feasibility Study report as well asother treatment technologies.3.2 PERJFUBMaNCE CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOP PFMFHTAT. ATFFRRNATTVESFour factors have been identified for evaluating alternative remedialaction strategies. These factors provide a consistent basis forcomparison, evaluation and screening of each alternative, and whenused in conjunction with the objectives of the overall workassignment provide a rational process for selecting the appropriateremedial action alternative. These factors include:

o Environmental and Public Health Standards such as groundwaterquality standards, surface water quality standards, toxicitydata, etc.

o Cost consideration based on estimated cost versus meetingenvironmental objectives.o Technical feasibility, including technical risks, acceptableand proven technology, commercial availability,inplementability, etc.o Institutional factors such as permit requirements, regulatoryagency acceptance, and government infrastructurerequirements.

3.3 APPROACH TO ALTERNATIVE EVALUATIONThe criteria selected for evaluation and screening of the alternativeshave been identified on the basis of ability to achieve the desiredeffect and conform to environmental and public health standards.In addition, other criteria including cost, technical feasibility and

Work Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: 3Revision: 0JUly 29, 1985Page: 3-3 of 6

time required for implementation will be considered. The criteria tobe used for comparison of the remedial alternatives during thescreening and evaluation process are listed and described below:

1. Environmental and Public Health FactorsThe purpose of remedial action at the site is to rectify anyexisting and potential future environmental effects and mitigateconditions that could potentially affect public health in thearea. Therefore, the ability of a remedial alternative tomitigate/eliminate these impacts is important. Remedialalternatives will be evaluated considering their ability to:

o Abate/minimize existing and potential future groundwatermigration and contamination.o Minimize any potential additional impacts, duringremedial action operations, on air, land, surface water,

and groundwater.o Minimize any potential adverse impacts on human health,

wildlife and vegetation, neighboring properties andother sensitive population.o Abate/minimize existing and potential future migrationand contamination of air, soils and surface waters.

2. CostA remedial action must not only be technically feasible ofaddressing objectives of the remedial action but must also beamenable to being implemented in a cost-effective manner. Inevaluating the cost-effectiveness of various remedialalternatives, costs for each alternative will be identified bytaking into consideration, capital and investment costs, labor/expenses, operating costs and any long-term maintenance costs.All costs should be adjusted for present worth to eliminate biasagainst alternatives with high operation and maintenance costs.The object of the cost screening is to eliminate alternativesthat have costs an order of magnitude greater than those of otheralternatives but do not provide greater environmental or publichealth benefits or great reliability.3. Technical FeasibilityThe preliminary screening of technical feasibility of theremedial alternatives will be based on the following criteria:


Performance - She performance of an action is determined bythe degree to which the action will prevent or minimizesubstantial danger to public health, welfare or theenvironment and the length of time this level ofeffectiveness can be maintained. In the preliminaryscreening of remedial actions preference will be given tothose technologies with documented effectiveness levels anduseful lives.Reliability - The two factors that provide the most insightinto the reliability of a remedial technology are theiroperation and maintenance requirements and demonstratedreliability at similar sites. Technologies that requirefrequent or complex operation and maintenance activitieswill be assigned a lower reliability rating thantechnologies requiring little or straightforward operationand maintenance. Similar preference shall be given totechnologies that have proven effective under waste and siteconditions consistent with those anticipated at Eau Claire.Bnplementabilitv - Ihe implementability of given remedialaction is a function of the relative ease of installation,or constructability and the time required to effect a givenresponse level. Ihe constructability of an action isdetermined by site conditions, availability of equipment,local zoning and permit requirements, compliance with stateand federal regulations and public acceptability. The timeelement consists of the time required for pilot studies,design and construction as well as the time fron thebeginning of construction until the desired results areachieved.Safety - Each remedial action will be evaluated with regardto the short-term and long-term threats to the safety of thenearby ocnmunities and environments as well as those toworkers during implementation.

4. Institutional factorsThe institutional factors that will be considered in thepreliminary screening of remedial action alternatives include:

o Acceptability by federal and state regulatory agencieso Safety (i.e. on-site and off site requirements during

implementation of the alternatives)o Public acceptance


o Permits and licenses (i.e. air or water dischargepermits; construction or operations permits)

o Long-term management agency requirements.3.4 IDENTIFICATION OF DftTft REQUIREMENTSThe evaluation of existing data, scoping of the problem,identification of remedial alternatives, and approach to theirscreening and evaluation will provide the basis for identifying datarequirements during Work Plan preparations. Ihe general datarequirements for the site identified on a preliminary basis include:

o Assessment of extent of contamination of soils, groundwaterand surface water.

o Characterization of contaminant pathways and degree ofmigration.o Location of receptors, sensitive populations and susceptibleenvironmental media in the area.o Evaluation of the chemical/toxicological and physical

properties of the contaminants and their potential breakdown products and by-products.3.5 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATICN/FEASIBIIITY STUDY OBJECTIVESThe ultimate objectives of this project are:

o Quantify the type and extent of contamination.o Identify relationship between current contamination andorigin/sourceo Identify cleanup criteriao Determine the magnitude and probability of actual orpotential harm to public health, welfare, or theenvironment.o Identify technological options for cleaning up and

preventing migration of contaminants beyond current extent.


Evaluate remediation alternatives consistent with theNational Contingency Plan and other regulatory requirementsand guidelines.Pecommend the remedial action that is technically andenvironmentally sound, and the most cost-effective.


SECTION 44.0 Scope of ServicesTASK 1. Prepare Work Plan MemorandumObjective:

Data Sources:

Prepare a work plan memorandum describing the tasks tobe performed in order to finalize the work plan andproject operation plan; identify the level of effort(IDE) and associated costs and schedule.1. Tasks 1 ,2,7, and 9 of Eau Claire Municipal Wellfieldjf remedial investigation/feasibility study

statement of work.2. U.S. EPA file information.3. REM II policy and guidance procedures.

Deliverables: Work plan memorandum.TASK 2. Initial Site EvaluationSutatask 2.1 Obtain and evaluate existing information.Objective: Review of existing information to become familiar withbackground data, project history and work which has

been performed by OLM-Hill and E.A. Hickok &Associates and Strana Associates, Inc.1. U.S. EPA Region V file data.2. oywiill.

a. Draft work plan - RI/FS.b. Quality assurance project plan.c. Preliminary hydrogeologic report,d. Miscellaneous O^M-Hill data.

3. E.A. Hickok and Associatesa. Groundwater investigation for the City of EauClaire.


Assumptions:

Deliverables:Subtask 2.2Objective:

Deliverable:

b. Airport hydrogeological investigation, Part BSeismic study.

c. Qrganics investigation. Phase I InitialAssessment.d. Airport Hydrogeological Investigation, Part B-Seismic study.e. Miscellaneous E.A. Hickok and Associates data.

4. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.a. Transcripts/summaries of interview withpotentially responsible parties.b. Miscellaneous WENR data.

5. Strand Associates, Inc.a. Report on Water Treatabilityb. Pilot Process Studies for Water Treatment

Alternatives.c. Miscellaneous Strand Associates, Inc. data.

1. The above reference information can be obtainedfrom the U.S. EPA, CHLM-Hill, E.A. Hickok andAssociates and Strand Associates, Inc.

2. The U.S. EPA and state and local agencies willprovide access to, and furnish additional data asit is required.

3. Site data is valid with respect to QVQCprotocols.NoneConduct initial site visit.Verify existing site conditions; evaluate the scope offield work relative to physical access, fieldconditions and logistical constraints; and assess thelevel of hazard at the site.Initial site visit memorandum.

Subtask 2.3Objective:

Deliverable:


Summarize history of response actions.Prepare summary of any response actionsfederal, state, local or private parties anc^r'ostdocuments prepared pursuant to these responsV ——activities.Results will be included in Section 1.1 (Background)of the Work Plan.

TASK 3. Designated Support ActivitiesObjective: Initiate Subcontractor Procurement activities so as to

be able to mobilize a driller to the site on or aboutOctober 1, 1985; plan and coordinate fieldmobilization. ^^

Data Sources: l. oyi-Hill Draft Work Plan.2. CHLM-Hill Draft Sampling and Analysis Plan.

Deliverables: Drilling Subcontractor Scope of Service.TASK 4. Community Relations PlanObjectives:

Assumptions:

Deliverables:

To provide information and input to public, industryand interested agencies on the Remedial Investigationand Feasibility Study work at the site.The Community Relations Plan has been developed byOOfr-Hill and will be Implemented by ICF, Inc. with

revisions.Community Relations Plan (will be delivered with DraftWork Plan) .

TASK 5. Prepare Quality Assurance Project PlanSubtask 5.1 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)Objective: Review and evaluate the existing QAPP prepared byCHJt-Hill and modified by U.S. ERA Region V. Changes

to this document may be suggested to meet the specificrequirements for the project.A typical Table of Contents for the QAPP is shown inTable 1.

Work Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: 4Revision: 0July 29, 1985Page:4,4 of 13

TABU: iQUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Title1.0 JNIRDDUCETON2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 Background2.2 Project Objectives2.3 Schedule2.4 Data Usage2.5 Sampling Network Design2.6 Sample Matrices/Parameters/Frequency

3.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITY3.1 Operations Responsibility3.2 laboratory Responsibility3.3 Quality Assurance Responsibility

4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE OBJECTIVES FOR MEASUREMENT DATA4.1 Regulatory or Legal Requirements4.2 Level of QA Effort4.3 Accuracy, Precision, and Sensitivity ofAnalyses4.4 Conpleteness, Representativeness andComparability4.5 Field Measurements

5.0 SAMPLING PROCEDURES6.0 SAMPLE CUSTODY7.0 CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY8.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES9.0 DATA REDUCTION, VAUDATICN AND REPORTING

10.0 INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES11.0 PERFORMANCE AND SYSTEM AUDITS12.0 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE13.0 DATA ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES14.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION PROCEDURES15.0 QA fcEtORIS

Vfork Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: 4Revision: 0July 29, 1985Page: 4.5 of 13

Assumptions:

Deliverables:Subtask 5.2Objective:

Assumptions:

Deliverables:

This subtask has been included in accordance with EPASuperfund requirements.The existing draft Quality Assurance Project Planprepared by OLM-Hill and modified by U.S. EPA RegionV will be used as the FEM II Quality Assurance ProjectPlan and will require minimal revision.Quality Assurance Project PlanSampling and Analysis PlanReview and evaluate the existing Sampling and AnalysisPlan prepared by OUf-Hill. Changes to this o^cumentwill be made as necessary to meet the specificrequirements of the project. Hie plan will includedetailed statements of the sampling and analyticalrequirements. The revised RI/FS program may includesampling of soil, surface water, sediment andgroundwater, as well as any wastes stored above groundin lagoons or in drums. This plan will also listanticipated waste types generated as a result ofgeneral field investigations. A waste disposal planwill be included outlining procedures and precautionsconcerning the containment and removal of theanticipated wastes.The existing draft Sampling and Analysis Plan preparedby oyi-Hill will be/dyed as the basis for thepreparation of the REM II Sampling and Analysis Planand will be revised as necessary.The Sampling and Analysis Plan will be included in theQAPP as an appendix.

TASK 6. Prepare Project PlansObjective:

Data Sources:

Prepare those project plans necessary for (1)execution of the work, and (2) to ensure that the workis conducted i n a consistent manner that satisfiesthe authorizing agencies1 requirements.1. Information collected from site file obtained inTask 2 and from an initial site inspection.2. REM II Guidance Documents.3. Region V directives and procedures.

Work Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: 4Revision: 0July 29, 1985Page: 4.6 of 13

4. State and local directives and procedures.5. U.S. ERA-approved REM II Health and SafetyAssurance Manual.6. Quality Assurance Program Plan for Performance and

Remedial Response Activities of UncontrolledHazardous Waste Sites (REM II).

7. User's Guide to the Contract Laboratory Program -U.S. ERA, July 1984. _.

PC/fV8. oyi-Hill draft/Wk Plan.9. CH_M-Hill Quality Assurance Project Plan.

10. OLM-Hill draft Sampling and Analysis Plan.Assumptions: The U.S. ERA-Region V-approved project plans will formthe basis for the respective site specific plans.Subtask 6.1 Health and Safety PlanObjective: Prepare site-specific Health and Safety Plan using

input from Task 2. The plan will be organized toapply to all RI field work and include:1. personnel protective equipment requirements, keyed

to generalized site location and activity.2. Safety equipment inventory.3. Training requirements.4. Medical surveillance program.5. Specific medical procedures, as appropriate.6. personnel hygiene requirements.7. Contingency plan and emergency procedures.8. Site personnel/activity safety monitoring program.9. Decontamination procedures.

10. Site management procedures.

Work Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: 4Revision: 0JUly 29, 1985Page: 4.7 of 13

Deliverables: Health and Safety Plan.TASK 7. Work Plan PreparationSubtask 7.1Objectives:

Data Sources:

Assumptions:

Deliverables:

Prepare Draft Work PlanReview and evaluate the existing draft Work Planprepared by dOE-Hill. Oranges to this document willbe made as necessary to satisfy the U.S. EPA Statementof Work, and the REM II contractual requirements.A typical Table of Contents for the Work Plan is shownin Table 2.1. Products of Tasks 2 and 3.2. REM II Guidance Documents.3. Region V directives and procedures.4. oyf-Hill draft Work Plan.The RI/FS scope of work proposed by OLM-Hill is atechnically valid approach to the situation at the EauClaire Well Field; however a review of this documentis required in order for the REM II contractors toproperly inplement the intent of the approach.Revisions to this technical approach are expected to beminimal*A two volume draft work plan including estimatedbudgets and schedules, equipment requirements andpreliminary assessment of Remedial Alternatives. TheWork Plan will include specific, discrete tasks to beperformed in accordance with the U.S. EPA WorkAssignment. The plan will include the followingitems:Volume 1o Introduction

This section will identify the site location andprovide a brief narrative of the site history and


TABU; 2WORK PIANTABTE OF CONTENTS

VOIUME 1 - WORK PIAN TECHNICAL SUEMTITALSection Title pageExecutive Summary1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Site location1.2 Project History1.3 Objectives

2.0 INITIAL SITE EVALUATION2.1 Site Description2.2 Contamination Problem Definition2.3 Contaminant Migration and Environmental/Health Effects2.4 Initial Remedial Measures

3.0 PRKT.TMINARY ASSESSMENT OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES4.0 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SCOPE OF WORK

4.1 Hydrogeologic Investigation4.2 Endangerment Assessment4.3 Remedial Investigation Report

5.0 FEASIBHJTY STUD* SCOPE OF WORK5.1 Development and Analysis of Alternatives5.2 Preparation of Feasibility Sti*Jy Report5.3 Pre-Design Report

6.0 SCHEDUIE AND OEUVERAHLES7.0 STAFFING PIAN8.0 SUBCONTRACTING PIAN9.0 SPECIAL EQUIPMENT NEEDS

Work Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: 4Revision: 0July 29, 1985Page: 4:9 of 13

VOIIJME 2 - WORK PLAN POST SUEMITTALSection Title Page

1.0 INTRDIUCnCN2.0 BUDGET

2.1 Labor Costs2.2 Expenses2.3 Other Direct Costs2.4 Phase Costs2.5 Firm Level Costs

ATTACHMENTSA Cost Summary WorksheetB Labor Worksheet for Each Participant FirmC Expense Worksheet for Each Participant FirmD ODC Worksheet for Each Participant FirmE Optional Form 60 for CEMF,G,H Optional Form 60 f s for Each Participant Firm

Work Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: 4Revision: 0July 29, 1985Page: 4 . 10 of 13

its status prior to remedial action. In addition,this section will provide a synopsis of theinformation contained in the work plan.o Initial Site Evaluation

Ihis section will provide a summary of theevaluation of all available information and data onthis' site to describe the environmental setting ofthe site, provide a definition of the known sitecontamination, describe potential contaminantmigration pathway and environmental health effectsand initial remedial measure implemented on-site(e.g. actions taken by the U.S. EPA On-SceneCoordinator during the Superfund Immediate RemovalAction),

o Preliminary Assessment of Remedial AlternativesThis section will further elaborate and refine theremedial alternatives addressed in Section 3 ofthe work Plan Memorandum (this document).

o Remedial Investigation Scope of WorkThis section will describe in detail the area ofstudy, the characterization of the sources ofccritamination, characterization of theenvironmental media involved and affected at thesit, site investigation methodology and analyses,initial feasibility study testing on a bench-scalelevel, evaluation of public health impact, qualityassurance methods, chemical and financialmanagement methods, community relations supportmechanics and report requirements.

o Feasibility Study Scope of WorkThis section will describe the development ofremedial alternatives; screening of remedialalternatives based on technical feasibility, costand environmental and public health issues,evaluation of each alternative and preparation ofpreliminary and final reports.

o Schedule and DeliverablesThis section will describe the schedule of allactivities and deliverables for the Remedial


Investigation and Feasibility Study Work Phase(RI/FS).

o Staffing PlanThis section will identify the staff involved inperforming the RI/FS.

o Subcontracting PlanIhis section will address the subcontractingrequirements for the project. The plan willidentify the subcontractors, their responsibilitiesand cost estimates for their work. The siteManager will be responsible for coordinating allsubcontracting activities.

o Special Equipment NeedsThis section will identify any special equipmentneeds for the project along with the proposedperiod of use for the equipment.

o AppendicesThe appendices will include the Schedule ofActivities, Schedule of Deliverables, siteManagers resume, and Conflict of interestDeclaration for Key staff.

Volume 2 - Work Plan Sufcmittalo Budget

This section will identify the costs for each taskand subtask described in the Work Plan. Form 60'swill be completed for each major team firm. Theoverall project costs will be identified for laborcosts, expenses and other direct costs.

o AttachmentsThis section will consist of the following:- Cost Summary- IDE Estimate- ODC Estimate- Form 60

Assumptions:

Subtask 7.2Objective:Data sources:Subtask 7.3Objective:

Data Sources:Deliverables:


The existing draft work plan prepared by CHJI-Hillwill provide the basis for preparation of RI and FSScope of Work section of the HEM II Work Plan. Theremaining portions will be generated by the REM IIContractor.Agency Review (U.S.EPA and WENR)Provide agency input and concurrence to the work plan.Draft Work PlanPrepare Final Work PlanProduce documents to direct the Eau Claire MunicipalWell Field RI/FS, incorporating appropriate agencyirpit.The products of subtasks 7.1 and 7 .2 .Final Work Plan

TASK 8. Technical and Financial ManagementObjective:

Data Sources:

Assumptions:

Timely and cost-effective completion of the RI/FS.Subtasks will include those discussed in Task 1,Project Management Activities in the Statement ofWork.1. Results of Task 1 through Task 42. Federal, state and local agencies3. Management information system established for theREM II Contract (REMIS)1. Monthly reports will be prepared during theinitial period in conformance with standardmonthly report format.

Deliverables: Monthly Progress Reports and progress meeting minutes.TASK 9. QC ReviewObjective: Provide QC review of all project deliverables.Assumption: All project deliverables will be reviewed by Weston

Management, CEM Regional Manager and the NH4D.

Work Plan MemorandumEau Claire Well FieldSection: 4Revision: 0July 29, 1985Page:4-13 of Ij

TASK 10. QA ReviewObjective: Provide QA review of all project deliverables.Assurrgption: A single system audit will be conducted during theWork Plan Phase by the Region V REM II QualityAssurance officer.


SECTION 5

5.0 SCHEDULEThe Schedule of Activities by task and subtask is presented inFigure 3. As shewn, we estimate that the Draft Work Plan will besubmitted the week of September 10, 1985 and the Final Work Plan willbe submitted the week of October 1, 1985. The Schedule ofDeliverables is presented in Figure 4.This schedule has been developed with the understanding that drillingactivities should commence on or about October 1, 1985. If by August30, 1985 it appears that the work plan approval process will extendbeyond the October 1, 1985 target date, an Interim Work Assignment(IWA) for invitation of the drilling activities will be requested.

FIGURE 3SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITESEAU CLAIRE MUNICIPAL WELL FIELDEAU CLAIRE. WISCONSIN

Task

1.0 Work PlanMemorandum

2 . 1 Obtain and Eval-uate ExistingInformation

2 . 2 Conduct InitialSite Visit2.3 Summarize Historyof ResponseAction3.0 EPA Designated

Activity5.1 Quality Assurance

Project Plan5.2 Sampling andAnalysis Plan6.0 Project Plans7.1 Draft Work Plan7.2 Final Work Plan8 . 0 Technical and

Financial Mng't.9.0 QC ActivitiesO.o QA Activities

July1 8

mm15mm

22•af

29*l

Aug .51

mm

-mm

mm

mm

*

12I

,/U••

mm

•-••

BBS

19

C^tU

F<a*

mmM

***A

**r*

mm

26

l*£v\

*

»I*l*l*l••

*

Sept .2~r*1,

IIIIlll

Ill

111

Ka«

9

^

RBI

*J

16yl^

I JtJ,

o

III••

23i)\4ftU<{£

*TA

,^°Oct .

7/

1 4 2 1 28Nov.

4 1 1 18 25Dec .

2 9 1 6 23 30Jan.

6 1 3 20 2 7

••••REU II ACTIVITYY&*. REH II REVIEW PERIODIIIUlAQENCY RSVKW PERIOD

4r SUSMiTTAL TO BPA - REGION 00 ISSUANCE OP SUBCONTRACTOR SOLICITATION

*

*

Mot«i l . D«c*« •ho*B art the first vorkda? of th« *«>k (Kond«y). D»llT«rabl«* dn« date* «r« «ho*« ••Att«chB«ot D «nd «r« niualljr on Tu«*d«j of the v* *k *ho»n.

2. D*llT«r>bl«i da* af t e r U . S . EPA r«vl«* of tht Draf t Work Pl»o «r« ba*«d on th« • • • •ey r«Tl«vparted •bowa.

HQURE 4SCHEDULE OF DELIVERABLESEAU CLAlffE MUNICIPAL WELL FIELDEAU CLAIRE, WISCONSIN

\j

TASK/DELIVERABLE

1.0 Work Plan Memorandum2.2 Initial Site VisitMemorandum3.1 Quality AssuranceProject Plan(Includes Samplingand Analysis Plan)3.3 Site Health and<*^**Saf tey Plan u4.1 Subcontractor Scopeof Work5.1 Draft Work Plan5.2 Finallfork Plan6.1 Monthly Reports

WORKASSIGNMENT

AUTH.

7/9/87/9/8

7/9/85

7/9/85

7/9/85

7/9/857/9/857/9/85

DUE

7/308/27

8/27

8/27

8/27

9/109/30

HEM II APPROVAL

oc7/238/2

8/2

8/20

8/20

9/39/23

On-Going

OH

7/25

8/22

8/22

8/22

9/59/2!

SCO

7/25

8/22

9/59/25

3u.

7/2

9/59/25

8

i/22

USEPAREVIEW

OQ.

7/3

9/109/30

OO

7/30

9/1C9/3C

-u n i l

OOLOC

7/30

9/109/30

3Q,/ DC

7/303/27

8/27

8/27

8/27

9/109/30

STATEREVIEW

WDN

R

8/18/2!

8/2!1

8/25

8/25

9/810/2

onRE\• ^^^^™

——

HERWE*• M^^

OT^ ^B


SECTION 66.0 Pro-lect Staffing1. Robert J. Karnauskas, P.O. , P.HS., Roy F. Weston, Inc. will besite manager for the Eau Claire Well Field site assignment. His

resume is included as Attachment A.2. John Hawthorne, P.E. , Camp Dresser & McKee, is the REM II REGION

V Manager.3. Camp Dresser & McKee will provide direction and input on healthsafety, quality assurance and on specific tasks as required.4. ICF will provide direction and input into the Community Relationsplan.5. Clement Associates will provide guidance on the exposure and riskassessment and on the endangerment assessment,6. C.C. Johnson and Associates may provide input on a task specific

basis.


SECTION 77.0 BUDGETProject budget for the various work elements discussed in Section 4are presented in this section. The total estimated cost is $44,648for the Work Plan phase. The budget presented below is based on theassumptions stated in each task presented in Section 4. The mostcritical assumption associated with this budget is that the existingdraft documents prepared by OL-Hill (Quality Assurance Project Plan,Sampling and Analysis Plan aixTWork Plan) will form the basis of theREM II Work Plan and the only revisions will be those necessary toconform to the REM II format.The budget provided in this volume identifies the level-of-effortrequired to do the work described in Volume I. The budget ispresented in Tables 3 through 6. Table 3 presents an overall summaryof the Work Plan phase costs. Table 4 presents the professional andsupport labor costs by category. Tables 5 and 6 present the estimatedexpenses and other direct costs that are anticipated to be incurredduring the Work Plan phase, respectively.The Community Relations Plan has been developed by CHJl-Hill and willbe implemented by ICF, Inc., with minimal relations. IDE hours forCRP implementation are included within the budget for Draft Work Planpreparation.

THLE3of Total Morit Plan Cottt


Sitt HjnaMM Butoit XarnawkMSBPNi 32&-46-4170

Sitt MBHI EM Clairt Municipal fell Field Phmi UP1SittftMbtri 07 Firm flFM

W Nuafavi _____ Datei 7/29/85iff Godti

REM IIFIWLEWL

PWFEB81QNRLTW

1.0 tor* Plan HMD2.0 Initial Sitt Eval'n.3.0 EPA activity4.0 Comity Rilationa5.0 QflPP (IncludM SJB-

HUB10*15252

836

I4,8986,0611,895

4571,740

SUPPORT EOUIPWCT TttKCLHOURS

161420—30

1311274399—

598

t I- 50

100 960_ —— —— —

ODFi 9UHQOL 6 1 P TUTRL*

355660633—

1,920

• * *- - 5,614- - 6,015- - 2,379- - 457- - 4,258

pling and flnalyvii Plan)6.0 Projcrt Plm7.0 ltor* Plan8.0 Tidmical and

Financial Nanafevnt9.0 QC Rtviw

10.0 OR IhjyiiNTDTflL

72202

803029

761

2,6797,8525,2372,3402,262

35,381

168632245

243

3231,707

64947399

4.B35

_ _- 75- 230__ _— —

100 1,365

—1,350

37519050

5,725

- - 3,004- - 10,984- - 6,691- - 2,993- 34 2,411

0 0 47,406

TMLE4T.U1 Mr*. n» Ufar CMtt

*• llto tatt EM Ualra MM!tttaftrtv! 2S7

W ^^^MC^BwV

TIB MFOHML4BBOff

LO tart n« MM2,0 hitld Uto Ewl«ti«2.0 EM fctivitte4.0 CMwity fcMliM5.0 MV IlKl i h*Hq

•4 ftHlytii n*>LO frojKt n«W7.1 Braft fcr* Urn7.2 FlMl Hvt M»10 Trtntril art10 Cirri*

10.0 01 t*rimrow

TINMM

1•4—•

41t

323029 .

137

•M•

U4124312—

4243U(244U

2,4%2,340*,«*IO.IK

MFanEM.157.14 «/WMM 1

40 2,2«4 2E94 229

4574572C9457343

« 2,741_ __— —

IX 7,421

mm42.43HM

32%It—12XuX———m

ciMi mi

UML2vm•

1,3914,073

679—

509

1,3512,mUSEI———

12,221

FUU ftMtl W••tot 7/29/B

PVQBIGML 1 TECMOOL 2K.ttKM

£4X20——

243212———

14B

I/HI0

(30945323——

(30HO313———*,«

it, TO vmmm i

1 ISO• 130— —1 ISO

• ISO20 37410 117— —— —_ _

t2 l,ltl

TEOMOL 1 TOW TECH. UEvmMM 0 KM

- - 104- - 152- - 52- - 1- — X- - 72- - 132- - 70- - 80- - 30*h» -- pq

0 0 763

1

4.M6,0211,195

4571,7402,6795,011£,•413,2372,3402,2(2

A3I1

QHICSL325. *tMM

224—

6

4Bt1

4—

«

I/HI1

3151ice—

1531022042M204

102—

1 ,173


ofura.21156KM

1412It—24

12403024

203

197

•/Mi

2(0223257—

443

223742557447

37193

3,69

TOW. LIE

mm

120itt72iift•IK101lie343B

1,012

>

5,2096,2932,29*

4572,3313,00*3,9573,6023,U6

£,(132,353

40,229


TMLE5Total Work Plan Exptntt Cart

Sitt i Mtrt tontukai Sitt NMII E«u Claim Nunicipil Hell Field Phnti WP1Sitt Nwbtri 257 ktc: 7/39/05

WCodti

TRSKEOUIMBIT

I/DRYPER DIEM

90.001/WYTRflHSPORT-

flTIOHSUB-POO.

6 I At0.0*

TUTU

DAYS DAYB1.0 HOT* Plan to2.0 Initial Sitt EvalHtion3.0 EM Activity4.0 CotMiity felatiom5.0 flAPP (tnclodn Saaplini

and fvulysif Plan)6.0 fVojtct Plant7.0 Horit PlanB.O frojtct PfeMttttnt9.0 QC AtviM

10.0 flA MtvitM

« — —1 100 4_ _ —_ _ __— — —— — —_ — _- — 2— — —_ _ _

- 50360 600- 50— _— —— —- 75

180 50— —_ _

- - 50- - 1,060

*nM— — —— — —

— — —- - 75— — 330— — —_ _ _

TDTflL 100 540 625 1,465


Bitt i fctart KarnwnkatSBflNi 38&-46-4170

TMLE6Total Wort Plan (DC

Sitt Nawi EM CUirt Municipal fell FiildSitiftaten 837

MCodtiPhwti UP1Datt: 7/29/85

TflSK1.0 tori Plan too&0 Initial Sitt Eval'n.10 EPA fctivtty

XEROX•

iestoo130

BLUE- miuPRINTS COURIER* *

- 30100 10090 100

SUPPLIES<

50100100

TELE-PHONE*

505073

CONRJTER«

80810160

6IA TOTAL« *

- 335- 660- 635

4.0 Coawiity Dilation -3.0 OMV (Inclwdn Saap- 850

ling and Pnalyiii)6,0 Projact Plant 3007.0 Work Plan 3300,0 Tcdmical and 100

Financial NanaMMnt9.0 DC Nfvim 2510.0 on

100800800

100800ISO10030

3466

1008585

3466

1008003030

13084043015050

6481,2721,350

37318050

TDTRL 1,600 630 830 300 633 1,470 5,785

ATTACHMENT AProfessional Profile of Robert J. Karnauskai

Robert J. Karnauskas, P.G.

RegistrationCertified Professional Geological Scientist and Cer-tified Professional Geologist in the state of Indiana.Fields of CompetenceGeological aspects relating to locational and designconsiderations of solid and hazardous waste disposalfacilities; evaluation of organic and inorganic ground-water contamination problems; aquifer restoration andrehabilitation; land disposal of municipal and industrialwastewaters and sludges; physical and chemical char-acterization of industrial waste materials to assessgroundwater contamination potential; groundwatermodeling; evaluation of hydrogeologic aspects of con-struction problems; and NPDES permit program coor-dination.Experience SummarySix years of professional experience in consult ing en-vironmental engineering. Project assignments haveblanketed a broad range of industries including pulp andpaper, solvent processing and recycling, electric powerutil ities, food processing, private and public solid wasteoperations, foundries, and agriculture. Experience in-cludes the hydrogeologic evaluation of a wide variety ofsubsurface environments and groundwater contamina-tion concerns. Research experience has included theevaluation of teachate characteristics from municipaland industrial wastes as well as the development ofmethods for assessing leakage rates from industrialwastewater lagoons.

-Univers ity of Wiscon-CredentialsB.A., Geology and Geophysics-sin, Madison ( 1975)M.S., Geology (Hydrogeology)—University of Wiscon-sin, Madison (1977)M.S., Water Resources Management—University ofWisconsin, Madison ( 1977)

University of Wisconsin, Madison—Part-time graduatestudies in Business Management (1983)National Water Well Association, Technical DivisionAmerican Institute of Professional GeologistsEmployment History1983-Present WESTON1977-1983 Warzyn Engineering Inc.Key ProjectsProject Hydrogeologist and/or Project Manager forseveral major fly ash disposal facilities for WisconsinElectric Uti l i t ies , including site selection, subsurfacefeasibility evaluations, technical input to engineeringdesign, construction and groundwater monitoring.Project Hydrogeologist and Project Manager on a majorgroundwater contamination study of private water sup-ply wells from cheese manufacturing waste processes.Scope of work included identification, evaluation andmitigation of groundwater contaminant sources.Project Hydrogeologist for the subsurface evaluationand design of a major county zone of saturation landfil l,including expert testimony at regulatory licensing hear-ings.Designed a detailed test monitoring area within a largefly ash disposal facility to evaluate leachate quality andquantity generated within and leaving the facility. Thetest program is designed to compare field results withpredicted leachate quality and environmental impactsfrom laboratory characterization of the ash.Project Manager on a detailed subsurface investigationevaluating PCB contamination in soils and groundwater.Project Hydrogeologist and Project Manager in-vestigating the scope and magnitude of solvent con-tamination in soils and groundwater at a solventreprocessing facility, including liaison with local andstate governmental agencies, and public relations.

Professional Profile10/83

Project Hydrogeologist and Project Manager in-vestigating contamination of a municipal water supplywell derived from food processing and canning wastes.Project Hydrogeologist for a regional groundwaterresource evaluation investigating agricultural water useand its effect on process water availability for a Wiscon-sin paper manufacturer.PublicationsKarnauskas, Robert J. and M. P. Anderson, "Ground-water Lake Relationships and Groundwater Quality inthe Sand Plain Province of Wisconsin—Nepco Lake",Groundwater Journal, 1978.

Ham, R. K. and R. J. Karnauskas, "Leachate Productionfrom Milled and Unprocessed Refuse", InternationalSolid Waste Association Information Bulletin, 1974.Karnauskas, R. J., C. E. R. Lawson and M. E. Horn, "TheFeasibility of Fly Ash Utilization for FGD ScrubberSludge Stabilization, Columbia Generating Station, Por-tage, Wisconsin". Proceedings of Second Annual Con-ference of Applied Research and Practice on Municipaland Industrial Waste, 1979.Karnauskas, R. J. and P. J. Huettl, "Land Application ofWhey", Dairy Field, May and June, 1981.

CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.7630 LITTLE RIVER TURNPIKE

SUITE 500ANNA.NDALE, VIRGINIA 22003

703 642-3500

PERFORMANCE OF REMEDIAL RESPONSE … Eau Claire Municipal Well Field is located northwest of the...

Documents

Transcript of PERFORMANCE OF REMEDIAL RESPONSE … Eau Claire Municipal Well Field is located northwest of the...