U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYREGION 4, SCIENCE and ECOSYSTEM SUPPORT DIVISION

ATHENS, GEORGIA 30605-2700

4-SESD2 C ttga.

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT.

FROM:

THRU:

TO:

SESD-HWS Comprehensive Ground Water MonitoringEvaluation for Solutia, Inc; Anniston, AlabamaEPA ID No. ALD 004 019 048;SESD Project No. 99-0370

S. E. Matthews, P.G.Hazardous Waste Section

Archie Lee, ChiefHazardous Waste Section

Laurie BentonSouth Enforcement and Compliance SectionEnforcement and Compliance BranchWaste Management Division

YELLOW COPYInitials

Originator

Unit Chief

hief ,-,

Date

Attached is the CME report for the subject facility. A copy of this report has beenrequested by:

Ms Kathy KellerAlabama Department of Environmental ManagementPO Box 3014631751 Cong. W. L. Dickinson Drive 36109

Mr. Jerry HopperSolutia, Inc.300 Birmingham HighwayAnniston, Alabama 36201

If you have any questions about this document, please contact me at (706) 355-8608 or atemail matthews. sharon@epamail. epa.gov.

COMPREHENSIVE GROUND WATER MONITORING EVALUATIONSOLUTIA, INC.

ANNISTON, ALABAMA99-0370

INTRODUCTION

On April 7-9, 1999, a comprehensive ground water monitoring evaluation (CME) wasconducted at the Solutia, Inc. facility in Anniston, Alabama. This CME was requested by theUSEP A RCRA Enforcement and Compliance Branch to determine compliance with the applicableground water monitoring regulations and to evaluate quality assurance and quality control(QA/QC) of the ground water sample collection/handling procedures. The CME also determinesif the monitoring well system will yield representative ground water samples, reliable hydrologicdata and to identify any deficiencies in the present ground water monitoring system.

The CME was performed by USEPA Science and Ecosystem Division (SESD) HazardousWaste Section (HWS) personnel S.E. Matthews. The CME consisted of a review of the USEPARegion IV files, facility files and a site visit. The Alabama Department of EnvironmentalManagement (ADEM) performed an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) inspection at the sametime. The following personnel were present during all or most of the well sampling:

Jerry Hopper Solutia, Inc. (205)231-8483Richard Williams R.S. Williams & Assoc. (630) 579-0275KathyKeller ADEM (334)271-7700JimGrassiano ADEM (334)271-7700Gayle Pittman Colder Assoc. (770) 496-1893Jon Radtke Golder Assoc. (770) 496-1893Loval Nifong HGS Engineering (256) 835-3800Jason Braxton HGS Engineering (256)835-3800

ADEM personnel elected not to split samples with Solutia for the ground watermonitoring wells. SESD-HWS personnel requested lab data packages for monitoring wells MW-1B, MW-11 A, OW-16A and OW-19 for laboratory QA/QC evaluation. The evaluation of the labdata packages will be reported in a separate memo prepared by the SESD Office of QualityAssurance.

ADEM personnel conducted the CME in a professional and knowledgeable manner andwere very familiar with facility operations and applicable regulatory requirements. Solutiapersonnel answered questions and conducted well purging and sample handling techniques in acompetent manner. All documents requested as part of the SESD-CME were made readilyavailable for review. At the time of the SESD-CME, the ground water monitoring system was incompliance with the applicable ground water monitoring requirements. Problems noted duringthe April 1997 ADEM CME had been adequately corrected. A copy of the USEPA CMEChecklist used during the evaluation is included in Appendix A.

SITE BACKGROUND

Facility Description and Operations

The Solutia plant is located on Alabama Highway 202, west of the City of Anniston, inCalhoun County (Figure 1). The facility began operations in 1917, with the formation of theSouthern Manganese Corporation (SMC). The company initially manufactured ferro-manganese,ferro-silicon, ferro-phosphorus and later phosphoric acid. In the 1920's, the facility beganproducing Aroclor (PCBs), phosphoric acid and polyphenyl, which is still today one of the majorproduct families. Monsanto held a permit to discharge its process wastewater from the operationto Snow Creek. SMC became Swann Chemical Company in 1930. The facility was purchased byMonsanto in 1935 and became the new Phosphate Division. The plant became the InorganicDivision in 1954, but was then transferred to the Organic Chemicals Division. The plant remainedpart of that division until the early 1970's, when the site passed to the Agricultural ProductsCompany.

In 1957, parathion and methyl parathion production began and the production of biphenylwas started in 1960. From the 1950's to 1969 the facility also manufactured chlorine for use inthe synthesis of other products. In 1971 Aroclor production ceased and in 1972 the productionunit was dismantled. In 1985 Monsanto announced its intent to withdraw from the parathion andmethyl parathion pesticide manufacturing business and in June 1986, ceased operations. Thatidled about two-thirds of the plant, leaving only the manufacturing of industrial organic chemicals.In January 1987, the Chemical Company of Monsanto took over control of the plant site.P-nitrophenol production began in 1965 and is manufactured through the hydrolysis of para-nitrochlorobenzene. Polyphenyl, produced by the pyrolysis of benzene, began production in 1960.Para nitrophenol (PNP) and polyphenyl are still produced at the facility. Monsanto spun itschemical business off as a separate company under the name Solutia, Inc. in September 1997.

Monsanto owned and operated a fully permitted hazardous waste landfill, containerstorage area, and storage tank until they were closed as per ADEM-approved closure plans in1989 and 1993. The landfill is currently maintained under a post-closure care plan. The landfillwas used for the disposal of production wastes that were collected into dumpsters. The landfillwas closed in June 1989. The container storage area was inside an existing warehouse and wasused to store wastes in drums prior to shipment for disposal in off-site permitted hazardous wastetreatment, storage and disposal facilities. The container storage area was certified closed byADEM in August 1989. The hazardous waste storage tank containing Therminol® ends (benzenecontent of 1.0 ppm) became hazardous in September 1990 due to the Toxicity CharacteristicRule. The tank was certified closed by ADEM in October 1993.

Aqueous production wastes flow through sewers to a facility-owned and operatedbiological industrial wastewater treatment plant. This treatment plant was built in 1961 to carryout primary and secondary waste treatment prior to discharge to the Anniston Publicly OwnedTreatment Works. A portion of the wastewater influent was partially neutralized prior tobiological treatment in a non-disposal surface impoundment limestone bed. This unit was certifiedclosed by ADEM in July 1988.

-2-

The facility currently operates only mixed laboratory solvents (F003/F005) and wastebenzene solutions (U019) which are stored less than 90 days prior to being shipped off fordisposal at a permitted hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facility.

There are two closed permitted hazardous waste management areas where wastes weredisposed of or where waste residues remain. These areas require ground water monitoring. Theareas include landfill Cells 4E and 5E known as Waste Management Area I (WMA-I) and thenon-disposal limestone bed surface impoundment known as Waste Management Area II (WMA-II). In addition to the waste management areas, the facility is required to monitor the groundwater remediation activities at Solid Waste Management Units (SWMUs), which include aneutralization impoundment and seven closed landfill cells.

Monsanto received EPA and ADEM Hazardous Waste permits in September 1986, forthe operation of a hazardous waste container storage areas, a surface impoundment and twolandfill cells. The permit also included ground water corrective action systems for the closedlandfills and a closed surface impoundment to remediate parathion and PNP contamination.

In January 1997, the Renewed Post-Closure Permit was issued to Monsanto incorporatinga combined ground water monitoring program for the SWMUs and the WMAs. Under thecurrent permit, the facility is required to monitor ground water quality from selected wells at theSWMUs and WMAs on a semi-annual basis and report the ground water flow rate and directionon an annual basis.

Landfill Cells 4E and 5E (WMA-D - SWMU 1

Landfill cells 4E and 5E were used for the disposal of general trash generated within theparathion and p-nitrophenol production areas. This trash was potentially contaminated withparathion (P089), methyl parathion (P071) and p-nitrophenol (U170). These wastes werecollected in dumpsters located at various points within the manufacturing area. The landfill cellswere also permitted for the disposal of residue or contaminated soil and other debris resultingfrom the cleanup of spills of acetone (U002), benzene (U019), cumene (U055), methylenechloride (U080), methanol (U154) and/or xylene (U239).

Landfill cell 4E was built in the mid 1970's on an undisturbed natural clay base and did notinclude a liner. Landfill cell 5E was built in 1980-81 on an undisturbed natural clay layer with apermeability of about 1 x 10~7 cm/sec and had a three layer liner system.

Non-disposal Surface Impoundment Limestone Bed (WMA-ID - SWMU 8

This unit was used to partially neutralize an aqueous process wastewater stream havingthe characteristic of corrosivity (D002). Also, the column bottoms from an acetone recoverydistillation column (F003) flowed through this surface impoundment. This impoundment wasclosed as a landfill cell in 1988 with about 25 pounds of p-nitrophenol and 200 pounds ofparathion incorporated into about 4800 cubic yards of clay soil.

-3-

REGULATORY HISTORY

ADEM has jurisdiction over most of the environmental matters at this site by way ofoverseeing implementation of all existing state and federal environmental laws and regulations.Pursuant to these laws, ADEM has determined that the Solutia facility and adjacent off-site areasof contamination (drainage ditches exiting the property, Snow and Choccolocco Creeks, etc.) aresubject to regulation under several state and federal environmental laws. The post-closure permitaddresses contamination from PCB materials and also soil and ground water contaminationresulting from the manufacture of other chemicals such as para-nitrophenol, polyphenyl,Therminol 59, parathion and phosphorous pentasulfide. Solutia has implemented a ground waterrecovery and treatment system to address defined areas of contamination unrelated to PCBs.PCB-related contamination has affected on-site and adjacent off-site areas generally described aslocated downstream and within the watershed basin of the facility. Studies are still underway toevaluate the impacts of PCB contamination in downstream areas of Snow Creek, ChoccoloccoCreek and Lake Logan Martin.

SITE CHARACTERIZATION

Geology/Hydrology

Approximately 90 percent of Calhoun County lies within the Valley and Ridgephysiographic province. The geology of the area is characterized by folding and thrust faulting.The dominant structural features in this province are the numerous thrust faults. The upwardfolding of rocks and cutting to streams has formed a series of sharp ridges and valleys. Theremaining area of Calhoun County, which is located in the extreme southeastern part of thecounty, lies within the Piedmont physiographic province. The Piedmont province consists of well-dissected uplands developed on metamorphic rocks. The Talledaga-Cartersville fault separatesthese two physiographic provinces. Various tributaries in the eastern and southern portions of thebasin originate in the Piedmont province.

Topography of the area is flat to gently rolling, with northeastward-trending valleys thatare paralleled by ridges and low mountains. Maximum relief in the area is about 1,500 feet. Thehighest points in Calhoun County are about 2,100 feet above mean sea level (msl) along the crestof Coldwater Mountain.

The area is underlain by sedimentary and slightly metamorphosed sedimentary rocksranging in age from Cambrian to Ordovician. Fluvial deposits and residuum overlie these rocks insome areas. The ridges are composed of sandstone units and the valleys are composed of the lessresistant carbonate units.

Available literature indicates that there are several water-bearing units in the area. TheLower Cambrian Shady Dolomite and its overlying weathered zone lie directly beneath thefacility. The residuum consists of low permeability silts and clays which are products of residualweathering. The residuum extends in excess of 100 feet. Karst topography, characteristic of the

-4-

Shady Dolomite, has been produced by solution channeling and fracturing near the top of theformation. The Shady Dolomite deposits consist primarily of limestone containing occasionallenses of shale and clay.

Borings constructed on-site indicate an upper stratum of fine to coarse-grained sandy clay,ranging from about 5 to 20 feet in thickness and extending areally throughout most of the site.Below the sandy clay is a layer of slightly to moderately silty clay with localized lenses of very fineto fine-grained sand and tight, dense clay. The surficial deposits consist of low-permeablematerials that act as confining deposits to the underlying limestone units of the Shady Dolomite.Core samples collected during boring activities were analyzed for the determination of verticalhydraulic conductivities. The range was from 2.1 x 10 ~7 to 1.3 x 10~9 cm/sec. Horizontalhydraulic conductivity has been calculated to be between 1.3 x 10 ~5 to 3.8 x 10~5 cm/sec.Vertical flow rate has been calculated to range from 0.05 ft/yr to 0.87 ft/yr.

According to the "Second 1998 Semi-Annual and 1998 Annual Groundwater DetectionMonitoring and Corrective Action Effectiveness Report" the geometric mean hydraulicconductivity value of the surficial sediments at WMA-I is 8.22 x 10~2 ft/day and the hydraulicgradient is 0.0856 feet/foot. The horizontal ground water flow was calculated to be about 12.5ft/yr. The hydraulic conductivity value of the surficial sediments at WMA-II is 8.22 x 10~2 ft/dayand 30 ft/yr. The hydraulic gradient is 0.0266 feet/foot and the horizontal ground water flow wascalculated to be about 3.9 ft/yr.

Data from piezometers indicates that shallow ground water movement at the landfill isbasically in a northerly direction and at the surface impoundment is north-northwest. A steep anduniform gradient exists at the landfill, which reflects the high topographic relief in this area. Thecorrective action system at WMA-II is influencing ground water flow in the area. A cone ofdepression has developed around the recovery wells system which is capable of capturing groundwater flow from upgradient portions of this area. Historical data shows that prior to installationof the recovery well system, ground water flow was to the northwest, consistent with thetopography of the area. The topography in the vicinity of WMA-II is not as steep as thetopography in the vicinity of WMA-I; therefore, the influence of the recovery well systemadjacent to WMA-II is more pronounced.

COMPREHENSIVE GROUND WATER MONITORING EVALUATION

Evaluation of the Ground Water Monitoring System

The following is an evaluation of the ground water monitoring program implemented atthe facility and is based on field observations, discussions with State and facility personnel and filereviews. A map of the well locations is given as Figure 2. The USEPA CME checklist wasused as a reference and is included as Appendix A. Recent potentiometric maps are included asAppendix B. A table summary of well construction details is included in Appendix C. Wellconstruction diagrams are given in Appendix D and lithologic logs are included as Appendix E.

-5-

Applicable Requirements

As stated previously, ADEM has jurisdiction over most of the environmental matters atthis site by way of overseeing implementation of all existing state and federal environmental lawsand regulations. The facility's RCRA ground water monitoring system is part of the post-closurepermit, issued in January 1997, pursuant with the Alabama Hazardous Wastes Management andMinimization Act, Code of Alabama. Section 22-30-1, et.seq.. as amended. The permit coverspost-closure care for cells 4E and 5E of the closed hazardous waste landfill WMA-I and thesurface impoundment closed as landfill WMA-II. The permit also included corrective action forground water contamination at the facility.

Monitoring Well History/ Design/Construction and Maintenance

WMA-I and WMA-II Monitoring Well Systems

A ground water monitoring system was installed in 1981 for the entire landfill area(WMA-I) and surface impoundment (WMA-II) to comply with the 40 CFR Part 265 Subpart FGround Water Monitoring regulations. A network of one upgradient (MW-1) and fivedowngradient (MW-2, MW-3, MW-7, MW-8 and MW-9) wells were installed around the wastemanagement areas. Monitor wells MW-4, MW-5 and MW-6 were installed around the closedportion of the landfill. During monitor well installation, a soil-boring program was conducted tocharacterize the subsurface geologic conditions with a total of 46 borings installed. Selectedborings were converted to monitor wells by reaming the borehole to a larger diameter andinserting 2 or 4-inch diameter schedule 40 PVC pipe with a 5-foot well screen attached to thebottom. A fine-grained gravel pack with a sand cap was then installed with the tremie method.Grout of Class A cement was placed by the tremie method to land surface to prevent surface-water infiltration. The wells were developed by surging and air-lift for a minimum of one hour oruntil clear formation water was removed from the well.

To better determine ground water flow direction, several of the borings were convertedinto piezometers. Selected borings were converted by reaming the borehole to a 4-inch diameterand inserting 1.25-inch diameter PVC pipe with a 5-foot well screen attached to the bottom. Thepiezometers were gravel packed and a cement grout placed by tremie method to land surface.

In 1985, nine additional monitor wells were installed around WMA-I and WMA-II. Themonitoring well network was expanded by the installation of new upgradient well MW-1B, andnew downgradient wells MW-11, MW-12 and MW-13. Well MW-3 was consistently dry and wasreplaced by wells MW-11, MW-12 and MW-13. Those three wells were also consistently dry andwere replaced in October 1985 by wells MW-11 A, MW-12A and MW-13 A. They were locatedimmediately next to the wells they replaced; however, they were drilled to a greater depth to gainmore water. Wells MW-4, MW-5 and MW-6 remained as observation wells OW-6, OW-5 andOW-15, respectively.

-6-

The WMA-II monitoring well network was also modified in 1985-86. An additionaldowngradient well MW-14 was installed in 1985. New downgradient wells MW-15 thru MW-19were installed around WMA-H Monitoring wells MW-17, MW-18 and MW-19 weredowngradient observation wells for the Old Limestone Bed Surface Impoundment (OLBSI) andtheir designations were changed to OW-18, OW-19 and OW-20, respectively. MW-20 wasinstalled immediately adjacent to WMA-II in June 1986. This well was destroyed in March 1988and replaced with MW-20A in May 1988. In 1998, wells OW-6, OW-8 and OW-16 werereplaced with monitoring wells OW-6 A, OW-8 A, and OW-16 A.

Well construction for the additional wells was similar to that of the original six, with theexception of reaming the borehole to a 6-inch diameter and installing 2-inch diameter PVC casingand screen. The annular space was filled with fine-grained sand from the bottom of the boreholeto about 5 feet above the screen setting. The remaining annular space was then grouted to landsurface by the tremie method with either Class A neat cement or bentonite pellets.

The present ground water monitoring system consists of three downgradient Point-of-Compliance monitoring wells and one background well, which monitor WMA-I. Under theHazardous Waste Facility Permit issued to Solutia in January 1997, four ground water correctiveaction systems were combined into the monitoring system for WMA-II and SWMU 1. TheWMA-II Corrective Action System (CAS) addresses potential impacts from the Old LimestoneBed Surface Impoundment (OLBSI), SWMU 8 and SWMU9. The SWMU 1 CAS combines theWestern and Northern CAS for the South Landfill along with the Plant Site CAS. Each of theCAS includes a series of recovery wells (IW series and DW-1) and monitoring wells (OW, MWand SBP series). The monitoring wells are designated as Effectiveness wells, Point-of-Compliance wells and Boundary wells.

Detection Monitoring Program

The Detection Monitoring Program applies to WMA-I, which includes closed SouthLandfill cells 4E and 5E. The WMA-I monitoring system consists of three point-of-compliancewells MW-11 A, MW-12A, and MW-13A and the background well MW-1B. Wells MW-11 A,MW-12 A, and MW-13A are located hydraulically downgradient from WMA-I and monitorground water within the bedrock. Each monitoring well is equipped with a dedicated Teflonbladder pump for purging and sample collection.

WMA-II Corrective Action System

The WMA-n CAS consists of seven recovery wells: IW-16, IW-17, IW-18, IW-19, IW-20, IW-21 and DW-1 and nine monitoring wells: MW-1B, MW-15, MW-16, MW-20A, OW-19,OW-21, OW-22, OW-24 and SBP-5. The IW recovery wells were installed in late 1988. DW-1was added to recover ground water from the OLBSI. The recovery wells are equipped with asubmersible pump, automatic level control start/stop switch and a totalizer flow meter to measuretotal discharge from all recovery wells.

-7-

Groundwater from the recovery wells is pumped to a collection tank and then to an on-sitebiological wastewater treatment facility. All monitoring wells associated with WMA-II, exceptfor MW-20A, are located hydraulically downgradient from the recovery well system and are usedto evaluate the effectiveness of the CAS in capturing and containing ground water. Thesemonitoring wells are equipped with dedicated Teflon bladder pumps for purging and samplecollection.

SWMU 1 Corrective Action System

SWMU 1 CAS is comprised of the western and northern portions of the closed SouthLandfill and the Plant Site area. There are 11 recovery wells in the system: IW-2, IW-5, IW-6,IW-7, IW-8, IW-9, IW-10, IW-11, IW-12, IW-13 and IW-14. The eight monitoring/observationwells are MW-1B, OW-2, OW-4, OW-6A, OW-7, OW-8A, OW-15 and OW-16A. IW-2 wasinstalled in 1982 to intercept and recover shallow ground water from the western side of theclosed South Landfill. IW-5 and IW-6 were installed in 1982; IW-7 thru IW-14 were installed in1987-88 to intercept and recover shallow ground water along the northern side of the closedSouth Landfill. The pumping system was installed in early 1988 to intercept and recover shallowground water from the Plant Site area. Recovery wells IW-1, IW-3, IW-4 and IW-15 wereremoved from the CAS pursuant to the Permit.

Each recovery wells is equipped with a submersible pump, an automatic level controlstart/stop switch, and a count recorder to monitor pumping cycles. Groundwater from therecovery wells is pumped to a collection tank and then to an on-site biological wastewatertreatment facility. All monitoring wells associated with SWMU 1, except for MW-1B, are locatedhydraulically downgradient from the recovery well system and are used to evaluate theeffectiveness of the CAS in capturing and containing ground water. These monitoring wells areequipped with dedicated Teflon bladder pumps for purging and sample collection.

Corrective Action Systems (CAS)

In addition to the ground water monitoring system for the RCRA regulated units WMA-Iand WMA-II, ground water monitoring is also conducted in connection with four solid wastemanagement units (SWMUs) These are the Western Landfill, the Northern Landfill, the Plant Siteand the Old Limestone Bed Surface Impoundment (OLBSI). These systems consist of interceptorwells (IW) designed to recover ground water flowing hydraulically downgradient from eachSWMU. A network of observation wells (OW) have also been installed to measure ground waterquality and the effectiveness of the correction action system designed for each SWMU.

Western Landfill CAS

This system consists of four interceptor wells IW-1 thru IW-4 designed to recover groundwater from the upper water-bearing zone along the western border at the closed landfill area. Thewells are 25 to 26 feet deep. Observation wells OW-1 thru OW-4, OW-11 and OW-12 werewere installed to evaluate the effectiveness of the interceptor well system in capturing constituentsin the upper water bearing zone. These wells range from 24 to 27 feet deep.

-8-

Northern Landfill CAS

This system consists of nine interceptor wells IW-5 thru IW-13 designed to recoverground water that flows north across the landfill area in the upper water-bearing zone. Thesewells are 39 to 68 feet deep. Observation wells OW-5, OW-6, OW-13, OW-14, OW-16 andOW-17 were installed to evaluate the effectiveness of the interceptor well system in capturingconstituents in the upper water bearing zone. These wells range from 24 to 27 feet deep.

Plant Site CAS

This system consists of two interceptor wells IW-14 and IW-15 designed to recoverground water from the upper water-bearing zone. These wells are 45 to 46 feet deep.Observation wells OW-7, OW-8, OW-9, OW-10 and OW-15 were installed to evaluate theeffectiveness of the interceptor well system in capturing constituents in the upper water bearingzone. These wells range from 40 feet deep.

Old Limestone Bed Surface Impoundment CAS

This system consists of six interceptor wells (IW-16 thru IW-21) designed to recoverground water from the upper water-bearing zone that flows northeast across the OLBSI area.These wells are 30 to 35 feet deep. Observation wells OW-18 thru OW-24 were installed toevaluate the effectiveness of the interceptor well system in capturing constituents in the upperwater bearing zone. These wells range from 23 to 36 feet deep.

Bedrock Wells

Five bedrock wells have been installed at the facility to evaluate the lithology and waterquality of the lower water bearing zone. Well depths range between 149 ft BLS and 419 ft BLS.The wells were constructed with telescoping casing diameter from 10 inch steel casing to 4-inchPVC casing threaded to 0.010-inch slotted PVC screen. A 20/40 graded silica sand pack wastremied into the annular space and extended from bottom of the borehole to 3 feet above thescreen. A bentonite seal was placed on the sand pack and extended to about 6 feet BLS, followedby grout to land surface. Wells were developed with the air lift method.

Ground Water Quality Summary

Monitor wells MW-1, MW-2, MW-3, MW-7, MW-8 and MW-9 were sampledperiodically since December 1981 for the water quality analyses required by RCRA. Somemetals were above the maximum levels, but the facility contended that the clayey sediments werethe source of those constituents. The high pH and conductivities were attributed to groutinterference. The variations in TOX were attributed to changes in the water quality laboratoriesperforming the analyses. Semi-annual reporting of ground water monitoring well data for WMA-Iand WMA-II has been sent to ADEM and USEPA Region 4 since 1987. Some wellsdowngradient of WMA-II indicated the presence of parathion and 4-nitrophenol. A correctiveaction system was implemented to address this concern.

-9-

Analytical data collected from July to December 1998 indicated there were no detectionsof constituents above the Permit-established Concentration Limits in any of the monitoring wellsfor WMA-I and the only potential constituent of potential concern was o,o,o-triethylphos-phorothioate. For the WMA-II monitoring system, cobalt, 2,4,5-trichlorophenol, 2,4,6-trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol were detected above the concentration limit in one ormore of the wells. Mercury, o-dichlorobenzene, aroclor 1242 and aroclor 1254 were alsodetected in one or more of the WMA-II wells during the November 1997 through June 1998sampling period. For the SWMU 1 CAS, cobalt, aroclor 1221 and aroclor 1242 were detectedabove the concentration limit in one or more of the wells. Chlorobenzene and aroclor 1248 werealso detected in one or more of the SWMU 1 wells during the November 1997 through June 1998sampling period.

Ground Water Sampling and Analysis Procedures

The facility routinely inspects the monitoring wells for damage and signs of deteriorationIn high traffic areas, monitoring wells are protected by steel pipe bumper guards. At the time ofthe CME all wells were locked and most were numbered for identification. Most wells hadconcrete pads, except in those areas still undergoing remediation. Pads will be added after thatwork is completed.

Ground water samples are collected by Colder Associates and HGS Engineeringpersonnel. Samples are shipped to Gulf Coast Analytical Laboratories and Savannah Laboratoriesand Environmental Services for analysis with a chain-of-custody that documents what analyses arerequired.

Water levels are measured with a QED Sample Pro water level indicator to the nearest0.01 foot prior to purging. This number is subtracted from the total depth and plugged into theformula for calculating the static volume to determine the well volume to be purged. Wells arepurged for a minimum of three well volumes or to dryness and until the field parametermeasurements for pH, temperature, specific conductivity, turbidity, dissolved oxygen and Redoxstabilize. Field meters include Horiba, Hanna and Lomotte equipment and are calibrated in themorning prior to field work. For the CAS wells, the low flow purge technique is used in an effortto reduce turbidity. Some wells are low-flow purged up to three days to obtain a representativesample. Purge water is collected for ultimate disposal into the wastewater treatment plant on-site.

It was noted that the well purging/sampling procedures used in the field had been modifiedfrom the procedures given in the sampling and analysis plan in the Permit. Because of the highturbidity problem in some of the wells, the facility filters samples for PCBs and metals, in additionto collecting total PCB and metals. Ground water is filtered thru an in-line 0.45 micron filter.This water is then pumped thru a 0.1 micron tripod filter system. This modification has beensubmitted to ADEM for review.

-10-

Samples are collected using the dedicated Teflon bladder pumps. The wells are sampledfrom least to most contaminated with the most volatile samples collected first. Disposable glovesare worn for well purging/ sampling and changed between each well. Samples are collecteddirectly into the appropriate sample containers, pre-cleaned by the lab, with labels affixed to eachcontainer documenting the sample location, time, analysis required, etc. Sample containers arepre-preserved, as needed. Trip blanks, field blanks and matrix spike/duplicates are collected forQA/QC purposes.

The following EPA SW-846 analyses are performed on the samples:

Method 8260 for Volatile Organics Method 8080 for PCBs,Method 8270 for Semivolatile Organics, Method 6010 for Cobalt andMethod 8141 for Organophosphorus Pesticides, Method 7470 for Mercury.

Samples were tagged, bagged and iced for transport to the lab. Chain-of-Custody formswere completed in the field for the samples. The field techniques for performing water level andtotal depth measurements, well purging/sampling procedures, sampling sequence, samplepreservation and handling, equipment decontamination procedures, and QA/QC procedures wereevaluated for adequacy. No problems were noted and any questions asked by the SESD HWSinspector were answered in a knowledgeable manner.

Maintaining Ground Water Monitoring Data - Record keeping and Reporting

A review of the files indicated that reports and work plans are submitted in a timelyfashion. At the time of the CME evaluation, all documents requested by the USEPA inspectorwere made readily available for review.

CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS

Facility and sampling personnel answered questions and conducted well purging andsample handling techniques in a competent manner. Documents requested as part of the overviewwere made readily available for review. At the time of the overview, sample collection andhandling techniques were basically in accordance with the most recent Sampling and AnalysisPlan. Modifications to the plan have been submitted to the State for review. State personnelconducted their O&M in a professional and knowledgeable manner and were very familiar withfacility operations and applicable regulatory requirements. Problems noted during an April 1997CME had been adequately corrected. It was recommended that all wells have some type ofidentification in the field.

-11-

REFERENCES

"Second 1998 Semi-Annual and 1998 Annual Groundwater Detection Monitoring and CorrectiveAction Effectiveness Report", prepared by Solutia, Inc. for the Alabama Department ofEnvironmental Management, March 1999.

"Supplemental R.I. Work Plan" prepared by Blasland, Bouck & Lee for Solutia, Inc.;October 1998.

"First 1998 Semi-Annual Groundwater Detection Monitoring and Corrective Action EffectivenessReport", prepared by Golder Associates for Solutia, Inc., August 1998.

"Sampling and Analytical QA/QC Plan" prepared by Solutia, Inc. for the Alabama Department ofEnvironmental Management, June 1998.

"Second 1997 Semi-Annual and 1997 Annual Groundwater Detection Monitoring and CorrectiveAction Effectiveness Report", prepared by Golder Associates for Solutia, Inc., December1997.

" Hazardous Waste Facility Post-Closure Permit" prepared by the Alabama Department ofEnvironmental Management for the Monsanto Company, January 1997.

"RCRA Part B Permit Revision" prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency byMonsanto Chemical Group, May 1996.

"RCRA Part B Permit Revision" prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency byMonsanto Chemical Company, March 1991.

"RCRA Part B Permit Application" prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency byMonsanto Chemical Company, October 1989.

"RCRA Part B Permit Application" prepared by Roy F. Weston and Geraghty & Miller forMonsanto Agricultural Products Company, January 1985.

FIGURES

(On Site Base Map)

L*oy ^Uvwv^

Ine Graph (DIG)

PROJECT/FILE No: JFKSURE

I Q:V..\GW-alte.Bpf |

1Mosei

:iEHCb :::

O cD

..Qs."CD-"£?;/C?O

Select SWMUs, WMAs, andJ» • A _J IMf 11-~p ^o^uuiciivu vveio

•_^ Groundwater Detection Monitoring and:" - Corrective

ochd LEGEND

0 j

, Q a"-T A/ On-SHe BoundaryS •? r3 -A/ Major Roads^TT-1 0 b .\ .•

O

^~^f0imtmjg-C

o L! .•• v' Minor Roads/v Drainage Basin,A/ RailroadsI _ \i Buildings

>^a ED Alabama Powerj4xSR

0

\[T] Solutia Inc.|Vv- 1 Paved Surface

Action Effectiveness ReportSolutia Inc.

Annlston, Alabama

^ Recovery Well^ Shallow Residuum Monitoring/

Observation Well© Deep Residuum Monitoring/

Observation Well* Bedrock Monitoring Well

<£D SWMU AreaCD Waste Management Area

NOTES

ZONEAlabama East 101

SOURCEColder Associates (on-srte base map)USGS 1:2400 Quad Maps

MAP PROJECTION

US State Plane

DATUM

NAD83

LOCATION MAP

N

A

*. • */4iplkd Chemijtr); Creative Solutions

DATE: PRODUCED BY:

JES

tesPROJECT/FILE No:

943-3680

FIGURE NO.

CH. 2

APPENDIX A

USEPA-CME CHECKLISTSOLUTIA, INC.

ANNISTON, ALABAMA99-0370

CHECKLISTFOR

COMPREHENSIVE GROUND WATERMONITORING EVALUATION (CME)

ATRCRA FACILITIES

FACILITY NAMEEPA ID// 004- 0/9FACILITY ADDRESS ^

JFACILITY CONTACT/TITLEC

INSPECTORS NAMEDATETYPE OF FACILITY (TSD)REGULATED UNIT(S):

Ox l

<* ll 9950.2I

APPENDIX A

COMPREHENSIVE GROUND-WATER MONTTORIlC EVALUATION WORKSHEET

The following worksheets have been designed to assist the enforcenentofficer/technical reviewer in evaluating the ground-water monitoring system anowner/operator uses to collect and analyze samples of ground water. The focusof the worksheets is technical adequacy as it relates to obtaining and analyzingrepresentative sanples of ground water. The basis of the worksheets is thefinal RCRA Ground Water Monitoring Technical Enforcement Guidance Documentwhich describes in detail the aspects of ground-water monitoring which EPAdeems essential to meet the goals of RCRA.

Appendix A is not a regulatory checklist. Specific technical deficienciesin the monitoring system can, however, be related to the regulations as illustratedin Figure 4.3 taken from the RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring Compliance Order Guide(COG) (included at the end of the appendix). The enforcement officer, indeveloping an enforcenent order, should relate the technical assessment fromthe worksheets to the regulations using figure 4.3 fron the COG as a guide.

I. Office Evaluation - Technical Evaluation of the Design of the Ground-water Monitoring System

A. Review of relevant documents:

1. Vtiat documents were obtained prior to conducting the inspection:

a. RCRA Part A permit application? (Y/N)b. RCRA Part B permit application? (Y/N)c. Correspondence between the owner/operator and

appropriate agencies or citizen's groups? (Y/N)d. Previously conducted facility inspection reports? (Y/N)e. Facility's contractor reports? (Y/N)f. Regional hydrogeologic, geologic, or soil reports? (Y/N)g. The facility's Sampling and Analysis Plan? (Y/N)h. Ground-water Assessment Program Outline (or Plan,

if the facility is in assessment monitoring)? (Y/N)i. Other (specify) _______________________

B. Evaluation of the Owner/Operator's Hydrogeologic Assessment:

1. Did the owner/operator use the following direct techniques in thehydrogeologic assessment:

a. Logs of the soil borings/rock corings (documentedby a professional geologist, soil scientist, or .geotechnical engineer)? • (Y/N) /

b. Materials tests (e.g., grain size analyses,standard penetration tests, etc.)? (Y/N)

c. Piezometer installation for water level measure-ments at different depths? (Y/N) _k/_

d. Slug tests? (Y/N)

e. Pump testa? (Y/N)f. GeochemLcal analyses of soil sanples? (Y/N)g. Other (specify) (e.g., hydrochentical diagrams

and wash analysis) ___________________

2. Did the owner/operator use the follcwing indirect techniquesto supplement direct techniques data:

a. Geophysical well logs? (Y/N)b. Tracer studies? (Y/N)c. Resistivity and/or electraragnetic conductance? (Y/N)d. Seismic Survey? (Y/N)e. Hydraulic conductivity measurements of cores? (Y/N)f. Aerial photography? (Y/N)g. Ground penetrating radar? (Y/N) __h. Other (specify) C^hvjfl Qy/vuA./^vJX^v^ \t<7^

3. Did the owner/operator document and present the raw data from *the site nydrogeologic assessment? (Y/N) J

4. Did the owner /operator document methods (criteria) ^used to correlate and analyze the information? (Y/N) _S

5. Did the owner/operator prepare the following:

a. Narrative description of geology? (Y/N) yb. Geologic cross sections? (Y/N)c. Geologic and soil naps? (Y/N)d. Boring/coring logs? (Y/N)e. Structure contour imps of the differing water

bearing zones and confining layer? (Y/N) __f. Narrative description and calculation of ground- s

water flews? (Y/N) </g. Vbter table/potentiometric nap? (Y/N)h. Hydrologic cross sections? (Y/N) __

6. Did the owner/operator obtain a regional imp of .,the area and delineate the facility? (Y/N) s

If yes, does this nap illustrate:

a. Surficial geology features?b. Streams, rivers, lakes, or wetlands near .the

facility?c. Discharging or recharging wells near the facility? (Y/N)

9950.23

7. Did the owner/operator obtain a regional hydro-geologic rap?

If yes, does this hydrogeologic imp indicate:

a. Major areas of recharge/discharge?b. Regional ground-water flow direction?c. ftotentioroetric contours which are consistent

with observed water level elevations?

8. Did the owner /operator prepare a facility site nap?

If yes, does the site nap shows

a. Regulated units of the facility (e.g., landfillareas, impoundments)? (Y/N)

b. Any seeps, springs, streams, ponds, or wetlands? (Y/N)c. Location of monitoring wells, soil borings, or

test pits? (Y/N) .Xd. How many regulated units does the facility nave? CXcyJl ItvTX

If rore than one regulated unit then,o Does the waste management area encctipass all

regulated units? (Y/N) __.OrI Is a waste mnagement area delineated for each'regulated unit? (Y/N) S

C. Characterization of Subsurface Geology of Site

1. Soil boring/test pit program:

a. Vfere the soil borings/test pits performed underthe supervision of a qualified professional? (Y/N)

b. Did the owner/operator provide documentation .for selecting the spacing for borings? (Y/N) *s^

c. Vfere the borings drilled to the depth of thefirst confining unit below the uppermost zoneof saturation or ten feet into bedrock? (Y/N)

d. Indicate the method(s) of drillingto Auger (hollow or solid stem)o Mud rotary 'o Reverse rotary ___o Cable tool ___o Jetting ___o Other (specify) _^________:_____ /

e. Vfere continuous sample corings taken? (Y/N) \/

9950.2

f. How were the samples obtained (checked nethod[s1>xo Split spoon so Shelby tube, or similar ___o Rock coring ___o Ditch sampling ___o Other (explain) ___

g. Were the continuous sanple corings logged by aqualified professional in geology? (Y/N)

h. Does the field boring log include the followinginformation:o Hole nane/nunber? (Y/N)o Date started and finished? (Y/N)o Driller's name? . (Y/N)o Hole location (i.e., nap and elevation)? (Y/N)o Drill rig type and bit/auger size? (Y/N)o Gross petrography (e.g., rock type) ofeach geologic unit? (Y/N)

o Gross mineralogy of each geologic unit? (Y/N)o Gross structural interpretation of eachgeologic unit and structural features(e.g., fractures, gouge material, solutionchannels, buried streams or valleys, identifi-cation of depositional raterial)? (Y/N)

o Development of soil zones and vertical extentand description of soil type? (Y/N)

o Depth of water bearing unit(s) and verticalextent of each? (Y/N)

o Depth and reason for termination of borehole? (Y/N)o Depth and location of any contaminant encounteredin borehole? (Y/N)

o Sanple location/number? (Y/N)o Percent sample recovery? (Y/N)o Narrative descriptions of:— Geologic observations? (Y/N)— Drilling observations? (Y/N) __

i. Ware the following analytical tests performed . (on the core samples: pO*- O cV

o Mineralogy (e.g., microscopic tests and x-ray { < k» l<- *)diffraction)? (Y/N)

o Petrographic analysis:- degree of crystallinity and cementation ofmatrix? • (Y/N)

- degree of sorting, size fraction (i.e.,sieving), textural variations? (Y/N) __

- rock type(s)? (y/N)- soil type? (y/N)- approximate bulk geochemistry? (Y/N)- existence of microstructures that may effector indicate fluid flow? (Y/N)

o Falling head tests?o Static head tests?o Settling measurements?o Centrifuge tests?o Column drawings?

D. Verification of subsurface geological data

1. Has the owner/operator used indirect geophysical methods OPTto supplement geological conditions between boreholelocations? (Y/N) _Js/'

2. Do the number of borings and analytical data indicatethat the confining layer displays a low enoughpermeability to impede the migration of contaminants toany stratigraphically lower water-bearing units? (Y/N)

3. Is the confining layer laterally continuous acrossthe entire site? (Y/N)

4. Did the owner/operator consider the chemicalcompatibility of the site-specific waste types andthe geologic materials of the confining layer? (Y/N)

5. Did the geologic assessment address or providemeans for resolution of any information gaps ofgeologic data?

6. Do the laboratory data corroborate the fielddata for petrography?

7. Do the laboratory data corroborate the fielddata for mineralogy and subsurface geochemistry?

E. Presentation of geologic data

1. Did the owner /operator present geologic cross ssections of the site? (Y/N) */

2. Do cross sections:a. identify the types and characteristics of

the geologic materials present? (Y/N) __b. define the contact zones between different

geologic materials?c. note the zones of high permeability or s

fracture? (Y/N) ,/d. give detailed borehole information including:

o location of borehole? . (Y/N) /o depth of termination? (Y/N) /o location of screen (if applicable)? (Y/N) __o depth of zone(s) of saturation? (Y/N) __o backfill procedure?

9950.2(o

3. Did the owner/operator provide a topographic napwhich was constructed by a licensed surveyor?

4. Does the topographic nap providesa. contours at a naxurum interval of two-feet?b. locations and illustrations of man-made

features (e.g., parking lots, factorybuildings, drainage ditches, storm drains, *pipelines, etc.)? (Y/N) tf

c. descriptions of nearby water bodies? (Y/N) ..•-"d. descriptions of off-site wells? (Y/N) __e. site boundaries? (Y/N) .f. individual RCRA units? (Y/N) Sg. delineation of the waste management area(s)? (Y/N) /h. well and boring locations? (Y/N)

5. Did the owner /operator provide an aerial photo-graph depicting the site and adjacent off-sitefeatures? (Y/N)

6. Does the photograph clearly show surface waterbodies, adjacent nunicipaliti.es, and residences /and are these clearly labelled? (Y/N) y

F. Identification of Ground-Water Flowpaths

1. Ground-water flow direction

a. Was the well casing height measured by a licensedsurveyor to the nearest 0.01 feet? (Y/N) /

b. Were the well water level measurements takenwithin a 24 hour period? (Y/N)

c. Were the well water level measurements takento the nearest 0.01 feet? (Y/N)

d. Were the well water levels allowed to stabilizeafter construction and development for a minimumof 24 hours prior to measurements? (Y/N)

e. Was the water level information obtained from(check appropriate one):o nultiple piezometers placed in single borehole?o vertically nested piezometers in closely spacedseparate boreholes?

o monitoring wells

9950.27

f. Did the owner/operator provide constructiondetails for the piezometers? (Y/N) \/

g. How were the static water levels measured(check method(s). /o Electric water sounder yo Wetted tape ___o Air line ___o Other (explain) ___

h. Was the well water level measured in wells withequivalent screened intervals at an equivalent ydepth below the saturated zone? (Y/N) y

i. Has the owner/operator provided a site water table(potentiometric) contour map? If yes,o Do the potentiometric contours appear logicaland accurate based on topography and presented /data? (Consult water level data) (Y/N) V

o Are ground-water flow-lines indicated? (Y/N) _±/'o Are static water levels shown? (Y/N) A/o Can hydraulic gradients be estimated? (Y/N) _^"^

j. Did the owner/operator develop hydrologic yucA"cross sections of the vertical flow component i\/>l«A . Aacross the site using measurements from all wells? (Y/N) f ,

k. Do the owner/operator's flow nets include: \\ \J*-5>o piezometer locations? (Y/N)o depth of screening? (Y/N)o width of screening? (Y/N)o measurements of water levels from all wells

and piezometers? (Y/N)

2. Seasonal and temporal fluctuations in ground-water level

a. Do fluctuations in static water levels occur? (Y/N) ./o If yes, are the fluctuations caused by any of

the following:— Off-site well pumping . (Y/N) __— Tidal processes or other intermittent natural

variations (e.g., river stage, etc.) (Y/N) __— On-site well pumping (Y/N) S— Off-site, on-site construction or changing

land use patterns (Y/N) __— Deep well injection (Y/N)— Seasonal variations (Y/N)— Other (specify) _______________•____

9950.2e>

b. Has the owner/operator documented sources andpatterns that contribute to or affect the ground-water patterns below the waste management? (Y/N)

c. Do water level fluctuations alter the generalground-water gradients and flow directions? (Y/N)

d. Based on water level data, do any head differ-entials occur that nay indicate a vertical flowcomponent in the saturated zone? (Y/N) j,

e. Did the owner/operator implement means forgauging long term effects on water movement thatnay result from on-aite or off-site construction ,or changes in land-use patterns? (Y/N) _,/

3. Hydraulic conductivity

a. How were hydraulic conductivities of the subsurfacematerials determined?o Single-well tests (slug tests)? (Y/N) __xo Multiple-well tests (pump testa) (Y/N) ~~^So Other (specify)

b. If single-well tests were conducted, was it doneby: ,/Ao Adding or removing a known volume of water, (Y/N)

oro Pressurizing well casing (Y/N)

c. If single well tests were conducted in a highlypermeable formation, were pressure transducersand high-speed recording equipment used to recordthe rapidly changing water levels? (Y/N)

d. Since single well tests only measure hydraulicconductivity in a limited area, were enough testsrun to ensure a representative measure of conduc-tivity in each hydrogeologic unit? (Y/N)

e. Is the owner/operator's slug test data (ifapplicable) consistent with existing geologicinformation (e.g., boring logs)? (Y/N)

f. Were other hydraulic conductivity propertiesdetermined? (Y/N)

g. If yes, provide any of the following data, ifavailable!o Transndssivity ___o Storage coefficient ___o Leakage ___o Permeability ___o Porosityo Specific capacityo Other (specify) Ku&VfuAvU

\

9950.29

4. Identification of the uppermost aquifer

a. Has the extent of the uppermost saturated zone(aquifer) in the facility area been defined? If yes, (Y/N)o Are soil boring/test pit logs included? (Y/N)o Are geologic cross-sections included? (Y/N)

b. Is there evidence of confining (competent,unfractured, continuous, and low permeability)layers beneath the site? (Y/N)o If yes, hew was continuity demonstrated?

Vhat is hydraulic conductivity of the confining unit ^,(if present)? U)rtV/Kfl * >D» 'How was it determined?Does potential for other Hiydraulic communication exist(e.g., lateral incontinuity between geologic units,facies changes, fracture zones, cross cuttingstructures, or chemical corrosion/aIteration of .geologic units by leachage? (Y/N) \sIf yes or no what is the rationale? tuL^Ucl m*CJ/

G. Office Evaluation of the Facility's Ground-Water Monitoring System

Monitoring Well Design and Construction:These questions should be answered for each different well designpresent at the facility.

1. Drilling Methods

a. Vhat drilling method was used for the well?o Hollow-stem auger ^/_o Solid-stem auger ___o Mud rotary ___o Air rotary ___o Reverse rotary ___o Cable tool ~^^_o Jetting ___o Air drill with casing hammer ___o Other (specify) __^_____________________

b. Were any cutting fluids (including water) or additives usedduring drilling? (Y/N)If yes, specifyType of drilling fluid ________________________Source of water used _________________________Foam __ftslymersOther

9950.210

c. Was the cutting fluid, or additive, identified? (Y/N) __d. Was the drilling equipment steam-cleaned prior to

drilling the well? (Y/N) VOther methods ___________________________ ~~T~

e. Was compressed air used during drilling? (Y/N) Aiilr AoK?o If yes, was the air filtered to remove oil? (Y/N)

f. Did the owner/operator document procedure forestablishing the potentioretric surface? (Y/N)o If yes, hew was the location established? 1-

Formation sampleso Were formation sanples collected initially during

drilling? (Y/N)o Were any cores taken contimcus? (Y/N)

If not, at what interval were sanples taken? ^y 5 -

o How were the sanples obtained?- Split spoon- Shelby tube- Core drill- Other (specify)

o Identify if any physical and/or chemical tests wereperformed on the formation samples (specify) ______

2. Monitoring Well Construction Materials

a. Identify construction materials (by nmtoer) and diameters(ID/OD)

DiameterMaterial (ID/OD)

o Primary Casing 4<^U<-^0 ^fr P\/Co Secondary or outside casing *\ - (j11

(double construction)o Screen '

b. How are the sections of casing and screen connected?o Pipe sections threadedo Couplings (friction) with adhesive or solvento Couplings (friction) with retainer screwso Other (specify) ______________________

9950.2

Were the rater ia la steam-cleaned prior to (Y/N) \/installation? ~T~If no, how were the naterials cleaned? ____

3. Vfell Intake Design and Vfell Development

a. Was a well intake screen installed? (Y/N) V_o What is the length of the screen for the well? '

**?jfc? 5 U i Q $**4'________o Is the screen imnufactured? (Y/N)

b. Mas a filter pack installed? . (Y/N)o What kind of filter pack was enplcyed?o Is the filter pack compatible with fonmticn

materials? , . (Y/N)o How was the filter pack installed?o What are the dimensions of the filter pack? 3 ^ Lo

r Io Has a turbidity measurement of the well water everbeen made? (Y/N)

o Have the filter pack and screen been designed forthe in situ materials?

Well developmentWas the well developed?o What technique was used for well development?

- Surge block _- Bailer _- Air surging- Water pumping- Other (specify) __

4. Annular Space Seals

a. What is the annular space in the saturated zone directly abovethe filter p ick filled with?

- Sodium bentonite (specify type and grit)_______\Oty\JJrryydtf \p P11 RJT- Cement (specify neat or concrete)_______- Other (specify) ____________________________

o Was the seal installed by?- Dropping material down the hole and tamping- Dropping imterial down the inside of

hollow-stein auger- Trende pipe method- Other (specify)

b. Was a different seal used in the unsaturated zone? (Y/N) \sIf yes,o Was this seal made with?- Sodium bentonite (specify type and grit)

- Cement (specify neat or concrete)- Other (specify) _______________

9950.2IZ

o Was this seal installed by?- Dropping material down the hole and tanping- Dropping material down the inside of hollowstem auger

- Other (specify)

c. Is the upper portion of the borehole sealed with aconcrete cap to prevent infiltration from the surface? (Y/N)

d. Is the well fitted with an above-ground protectivedevice and bumper guards? (Y/N) t- A W> Vv

e. Has the protective cover been installed with locks toprevent tanpering (Y/N) ,/

H. Evaluation of the Facility's Detection Monitoring Program

1. Placement of Downgradient Detection Monitoring Wells

a. Are the ground-water monitoring wells or clusterslocated immediately adjacent to the waste nnnagenentarea? (Y/N) y

b. Hew far apart are the detection monitoring wells? 7' IffJt

c. Does the owner/operator provide a rationale for thelocation of each monitoring well or cluster? (Y/N)

d. Has the owner/operator identified the well screenlengths of each monitoring well or clusters? (Y/N)

e. Does the owner/operator provide an explanation forthe well screen lengths of each monitoring well or Icluster? (Y/N) **

f. Do the actual locations of monitoring wells orclusters correspond to those identified by theowner/operator? (Y/N)

2. Placement of Upgradient Monitoring Wells

a. Has the owner/operator documented the location ofeach upgradient monitoring well or cluster? (Y/N)

b. Does the owner/operator provide an explanation for ^the location(s) of the upgradient monitoring wells? (Y/N) s

c. Vtiat length screen has the owner/operator enployed inthe background monitoring well(s)?

Does the owner/opera tor provide an explanation for \othe screen length(s) chosen? (Y/N)Does the actual location of each background monitoringwell or cluster correspond to that identified by theowner/operator? (Y/N)

9950.2

Office Evaluation of the Facility's Assessment Monitoring Program AJ/VDoes the assessment plan specify: \(\a. The number, location, and depth of wells? (Y/N)b. The rationale for their placement and identify the

basis that will be used to select subsequent samplinglocations and depths in later assessment phases? (Y/N)

Does the list of monitoring parameters include allhazardous waste constituents from the facility? (Y/N)a. Does the water quality parameter list include other

important indicators not classified as hazardouswaste constituents? (Y/N)

b. Does the owner/operator provide documentation forthe listed wastes which are not included? (Y/N)

Does the owner/operator's assessment plan specify theprocedures to be used to determine the rate of con-stituent migration in the ground-water? (Y/N)Has the owner/operator specified a schedule of imple-mentation in the assessment plan? (Y/N)Have the assessment monitoring objectives been clearlydefined in the assessment plan? (Y/N) _ __a. Does the plan include analysis and/or re-evaluation

to determine if significant contamination has occurredin any of the detection monitoring wells? (Y/N) _ _

b. Does the plan provide for a comprehensive program ofinvestigation to fully characterize the rate andextent of contaminant migration from the facility? (Y/N)

c. Does the plan call for determining the concentrationsof hazardous wastes and hazardous waste constituentsin the ground water? (Y/N)

d. Does the plan employ a quarterly monitoring program? (Y/N)Does the assessment plan identify the investigatorymethods that will be used in the assessment phase? (Y/N)a. Is the role of each method in the evaluation fully

described? (Y/N)b. Does the plan provide sufficient descriptions of the

direct methods to be used? (Y/N)c. Does the plan provide sufficient descriptions of the

indirect methods to be used? (Y/N)d. Will the method contribute to the further characteri-

zation of the contaminant movement? (Y/N)Are the investigatory techniques utilized in the assess-ment program based on direct methods? (Y/N)a. Does the assessment approach incorporate indirect

methods to further support direct methods? • (Y/N)b. Will the planned methods called for in the assessment

approach ultimately meet performance standards forassessment monitoring? (Y/N)

V

9950.2

f Ac. Are the procedures well defined? (Y/N)d. Does the approach provide for nonitoring wells

similar in design and construction as the detectionmonitoring wells? (Y/N)

e. Does the approach employ taking samples during drill-ing or collecting core samples for further analysis? (Y/N)

8. Are the indirect methods to be used based on reliableand accepted geophysical techniques? (Y/N)a. Are they capable of detecting subsurface changes

resulting from contaminant migration at the site? (Y/N)b. Is the measurement at an appropriate level of

sensitivity to detect ground-water quality changesat the site? (Y/N)

d. Is the method appropriate considering the natureof the subsurface materials? (Y/N)

e. Does the approach consider the limitations ofthese methods? (Y/N)

f. Will the extent of contamination and constituentconcentration be based on direct methods and soundengineering judgment? (Using indirect methods tofurther substantiate the findings) (Y/N) _ __

9. Does the assessment approach incorporate any mathe-matical modeling to predict contaminant movement? (Y/N)a. Will site specific measurements be utilized to

accurately portray the subsurface? (Y/N)b. Will the derived data be reliable? (Y/N)c. Have the assumptions been identified? (Y/N)d. Have the physical and chartLcal properties of the

site-specific wastes and hazardous waste constituentsbeen identified? (Y/N)

J. Conclusions

1. Subsurface geology

a. Has sufficient data been collected to adequatelydefine petrography and petrographic variation? (Y/N)

b. Has the subsurface geochemistry been adequatelydefined? (Y/N)

c. Was the boring/coring program adequate to definesubsurface geologic variation? (Y/N)

d. Has the owner/operator's narrative descriptioncomplete and accurate in its interpretationof the data? (Y/N) _v/

e. Does the geologic assessment address or providemeans to resolve any information gaps? (Y/N)

9950.2

2. Ground-water flowpatha

a. Did the owner/operator adequately establish the hori-zontal and vertical components of ground-water flow?

b. Were appropriate methods used to establish ground-water flcwpatha?

c. Did the owner/operator provide accurate documenta-tion? (Y/N)

d. Are the potentionetrie surface measurements valid? (Y/N)e. Did the owner/operator adequately consider the

seasonal and temporal effects on the ground-water? (Y/N)f. Were sufficient hydraulic conductivity tests

performed to document lateral and vertical variationin hydraulic conductivity in the entire hydrogeologicsubsurface below the site? (Y/N) __

3. Uppermost aquifer

a. Did the owner/operator adequately define the upper- (Y/N) smost aquifer?

4. Monitoring Well Construction and Design

a. Do the design and construction of the owner/operator'sground-water monitoring wells permit depth discrete .ground-water samples to be taken? (Y/N) *X

b. Are the samples representative of ground-waterquality? (Y/N)

c. Are the ground-water monitoring wells structurallystable? (Y/N) __

d. Does the ground-water monitoring well's design andconstruction permit an accurate assessnent of aquifer scharacteristics? (Y/N) >X

5. Detection Monitoring

a. Downgradient WellsDo the location, and screen lengths of the ground-watermonitoring wells or clusters in the detection ncnitoringsystem allow the immediate detection of a release ofhazardous waste or constituents from the hazardous wastemanagement area to the uppermost aquifer? (Y/N)

b. Upgradient WellsDo the location and screen lengths of the upgradient(background) ground-water monitoring wells ensure thecapability of collecting ground-water samples repre-sentative of upgradient (background) ground-waterquality including any ambient heterogencus chemicalcharacteristics? (Y/N)

9950.2

6. Assessment Monitoring -r

a. Has the owner/operator adequately characterized sitehydrogeology to determine contaminant migration?

b. Is the detection monitoring system adequately designedand constructed to immediately detect any contaminantrelease?

c. Are the procedures used to make a first determinationof contamination adequate?

d. Is the assessment plan adequate to detect, charac-terize, and trade contaminant migration? •

e. Will the assessment monitoring wells, given sitehydrogeologic conditions, define the extent andconcentration of contamination in the horizontal andvertical planes?

f. Are the assessment monitoring wells adequatelydesigned and constructed?

g. Are the sampling and analysis procedures adequateto provide true measures of contamination?

h. Do the procedures used for evaluation of assessmentmonitoring data result in determinations of the rateof migration, extent of migration, and hazardousconstituent composition of the contaminant plume?

i. Are the data collected at sufficient frequency andduration to adequately determine the rate ofmigration?

j. Is the schedule of implementation adequate?k. Is the owner /operator's assessment monitoring plan

adequate?o If the owner/operator had to implement hisassessment monitoring plan, was it implementedsatis factorily?

II. Field Evaluation

A. Ground-water monitoring system:Are the numbers, depths, and locations of monitoringwells in agreement with those reported in the facility'smonitoring plan? (See Section 3.2.3 )

B. Monitoring well construction:1. Identify construction material

(Y/N)

(Y/N)

(Y/N)

(Y/N)

(Y/N)

(Y/N)

(Y/N)

(Y/N) . _

(Y/N)(Y/N) ;(Y/N) _

(Y/N) _

V

(Y/N) y/

Material Diameter

a. Primary Casing

b. Secondary oroutside casing

9950.2

2. Is the upper portion of the borehole sealed with con-crete to prevent infiltration from the surface?

3. Is the well fitted with an above-ground protectivedevice?

4. Is the protective cover fitted with locks toprevent tampering?

If a facility utilizes nore than a single well design,answer the above questions for each well design.

III. Review of Sample Collection Procedures ~3>Uv.j \Z-A*

A. Measurement of well depths elevation: rw *•"*"J^fj*~ 1« Are measurements of both depth to standing water and;c£L>

(Y/N)

(Y/N)

(Y/N)

depth to the bottom of the well made?

2. Are measurements taken to the 0.01 feet?

3. Wiat device is used?

\PJ /N)

(Y/N) y

4. Is there a reference point established by a Licensedsurveyor?

5. Is the measuring equipment properly cleaned betweenwell locations to prevent cross contamination?

rviv ,(Y/N) y

(Y/N) y/

B. Detection of immiscible layers: '1. Are procedures used which will detect light phase ~"

immiscible layers?

2. Are procedures used which will detect heavy phaseimmiscible layers?

C. Sampling of immiscible layers:1. Are the immiscible layers sampled separately prior to

well evacuation?

2. Do the procedures used minimize mixing with watersoluble phases?

D. Well evacuation:1. Are low yielding wells evacuated to dryness?

Y/N)

(Y/N)

(Y/N) __

(Y/N)

(Y/N) J_

\VA

Are i 1 yielding wells evacuated so that atleast three casing volumes are removed? (Y/N)f

9950.2IB

3. What device is used to evacuate 'the wells?bEoLA&tW purwO — Vi AX yjuKg-XX^A ________

4. If ary problem are encountered (e.g., equipmentmalfunction) are they noted in a field logbook? (Y/N)

E. Sanple withdrawal:

1. For lew yielding wells, are samples for volatiles, pH,and oxidation/reduction potential drawn first afterthe well recovers? (Y/N) y

2. Are sanples withdrawn with either flurocarbon/resins orstainless steel (316, 304 or 2205) sanpling devices? (Y/N)

3. Are sampling devices either bottom^valve bailersor positive gas displacement bladder purcpsT^ (Y/N)

4. If bailers are used, is fluorocarbon/resin coated wire,single strand stainless steel wire, or nonof i lament usedto raise and lower the bailer? (Y/N)

5. If bladder punps are used, are they operated in acontinuous iranner to prevent aeration of the sanple? (Y/N)

6. If bailers are used, are they lowered slowly toprevent degassing of the water? (Y/N)

7. If bailers are used, are the contents transferredto the sanple container in a way that minimizesagitation and aeration? (Y/N)

8. Is care taken to avoid placing clean sanpling equip-ment on the ground or other contaminated surfaces priorto insertion into the well? (Y/N)

\^t

9. If dedicated sanpling equipment is not used, is equip-ment disassentoled and thoroughly cleaned betweensatrples? (Y/N)

10. If sanples are for inorganic analysis, does the clean-ing procedure include the following sequential steps:a. Dilute acid rinse (HNO3 or HC1)? (Y/N) r^o V?

11. If sanples are for organic analysis, does the cleaningprocedure include the following sequential steps:a. Nonphosphate detergent wash? (Y/N)b. Tap water rinse? (Y/N)

9950.2

c. Distilled/deionized water rinse?d. Acetone rinse?e. Pesticide-grade hexane rinse?

12. Is sanpling equipment thoroughly dry before use?

13. Are equipment blanks taken to ensure that sanplecross-contamination has not occurred?

14. If volatile samples are taken with a positive gasdisplacement bladder pcnp, are pumping rates below100 ml/nan? (Y/N) ^/

F. In-situ or field analyses:1. Are the following labile (chemically unstable) para-

meters determined in the field: /a. pH? . Mo^^vuJ,^' (Y/N)b. Temperature? ^ \-\j-r-»r>«- (Y/N)c. Specific conductivity? ' (Y/N)d. Redox potential? (Y/N) __e. Chlorine? (Y/N) __f. Dissolved oxygen? (Y/N) ^g. Turbidity? — LofJkO^C. *vCE*£/r (Y/N) i/^h. Other (specify) ___________________________

2. For in-situ determinations, are they nade after wellevacuation and sanple removal? (Y/N)

3. If sanple is withdrawn from the well, is parametermeasured front a split portion? (Y/N) _

4. Is nonitoring equipment calibrated according to Cccfc_^^/»-<* '\l/\._ *-*£«*manufacturers' specifications and consistent withSW-846? (Y/N) y

5. Is the date, procedure, and maintenance for equipmentcalibration documented in the field logbook? (Y/N) V

IV. Review of Sanple Preservation and Handling Procedures

A. Sanple containersi1. Are senples transferred from the sanpling device

directly to their compatible containers? (Y/N) y

2. Are sanple containers for metals (inorganics) analysespolyethylene with polypropylene caps? (Y/N) o/r*~

3. Are sanple containers for organics analysis glassbottles with fluorocarbonresin-lined caps? (Y/N) y

9950.220

4. If glass bottles are used for metals sanples arethe caps fluorocarbonresin-lined?

5. Are the sanple containers for metal analyses cleanedusing these sequential steps?a. Nonphosphate detergent wash?b. 1:1 nitric acid rinse?c. Tap water rinse?d. 1:1 hydrochloric acid rinse?e. Tap water rinse?f. Distilled/deionized water rinse?

6. Are the sanple containers for organic analyses cleanedusing these sequential steps?a. Nonphosphate detergent/hot water wash?b. Tap water rinse?c. Distilled/deionized water rinse?d. Acetone rinse?e. Pesticide-grade hexane rinse?

7. Are trip blanks used for each sanple container typeto verify cleanliness?

B. Sanple preservation procedures:1. Are sanples for the following analyses cooled to 4*C:

a. TOC?b. TOX?c. Chloride?d. Phenols?e. Sulfate?f. Nitrate?g. Colifortn bacteria?h. Cyanide?i. Oil and grease?j. Hazardous constituents (§261, Appendix VIII)?

2. Are sanples for the following analyses field acidified topH <2 with HNO3:a. Iron?b. Manganese?c. Sodium?d. Total metals?e. Dissolved metals?f. Fluoride?g. Ehdrin?h. Lindane?i. Methoxychlor?j. Toxaphene?

(Y/N)

(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)

(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N) ~ ~(Y/N) ~*~(Y/N)

(Y/N) VPC'S

(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)

(Y/N) P. '(Y/N) "(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N) ~(Y/N) -(Y/N) ~(Y/N)(Y/N) ~-(Y/N) ~

f

^\no

k. 2.4, D? (Y/N)1. 2,4.5, TPSilvex? (Y/N)m. Radium? (Y/N)n. Gross alpha? (Y/N)o. Gross beta? (Y/N)

3. Are sanples for the following analyses field acidifiedto pH <2 with H2S04: (Y/N)a. Phenols? (Y/N)b. Oil and grease? (Y/N)

4. Is the sanple for TOC analyses field acidified topH <2 with HC1?

5. Is the sanple for TCK analysis preserved with1 ml of 1.1 M sodium sulfite?

6. Is the sanple for cyanide analysis preserved withNaOH to pH >12?

C. Special handling considerations:1. Are organic sanples handled without filtering?

2. Are sanples for volatile organ!cs transferred tothe appropriate vials to eliminate headspace overthe sanple?

3. Are sanples for metal analysis split into twoportions?

4. Is the sanple for dissolved metals filteredthrough a 0.45 micron filter?

5. Is the second portion not filtered and analyzedfor total metals?

6. Is one equipment blank prepared each day of cvoground-vater sanpling? (Y/N)

V. Review of Chain-of-Custody Prcdecures

A. Sample labels1. Are sanple labels used? (Y/N) y

2. Do they provide the following information:a. Sanple identification number? . (Y/N) _ -b. Name of collector? (Y/N) ^c. Date and time of collection? (Y/N) ^d. Place of collection? (Y/N) ^e. Parameters) requested and preservatives used? (Y/N) ..

9950.2

3. Do they remain legible even -if **et?

B. Simple seals:1. Are swple seals placed on those containers to

ensure the samples are not altered?

(Y/N)

C. Field logbook:1. Is a field logbook maintained?

r .<hdx<*

2. Does it document the following:a. Purpose of sampling (e.g., detection or

assessment)?b. Location of well(s)?c. "total depth of each veil? £*w Wc*d. Static water level depth and measurement

technique?e. Presence of immiscible layers and

detection method?f . Collection method for immiscible layers

and sample identification numbers?g. Well evacuation procedures?h. Sample withdrawal procedure?i. Date and time of collection?j. Well sampling sequence?k. Types of sarple containers and sample

identification number(s)?1. Preservative (s) used?m. Parameters requested?n. Field analysis data and method(s)?o. Sample distribution and transporter?p. Field observations?

o Unusual well recharge rates?o Equipment malfunction(s)?o Possible sample contamination?o Sampling rate?

D. Chain-of -custody record:1. Is a chain-of -custody record included with

each sample?2. Does it document the following:

a. Sample number?b. Signature of collector?c. Date and time of collection?d. Sample type? ,e. Station location?f . Number of containers?g. Parameters requested?h. Signatures of persons involved in the

chain-of-possession?i. Inclusive dates of possession?

(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)

(Y/N)

(Y/N)

(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)

(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)

(Y/N) y'

(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N) ^(Y/N)(Y/N)(Y/N)

9950.2

E. Sanple analysis request sheet: ' ° **-1. Does a sample analysis request sheet acconpany

each sample?

2. Does the request sheet document the following:a. Name of person receiving the sample? (Y/N)b. Date of sample receipt? (Y/N)c. Laboratory sample number (if different than

field number)? (Y/N)d. Analyses to be performed? (Y/N)

VI. Review of Quality Assurance/Quality Control

A. Is the validity and reliability of the laboratoryand field generated data ensured by a OVQC program? °' * (Y/N)

B. Does the QA/QC program include:1. Documentation of any deviations from approved

procedures? (Y/N) y

2. Documentation of analytical results for:a. Blanks? (Y/N) yb. Standards? (Y/N) "tc. Duplicates? (Y/N) ^d. Spiked samples? (Y/N) ^e. Detectable limits for each parameter

being analyzed? (Y/N)

C. Are approved statistical methods used? (Y/N)

D. Are QC samples used to correct data? (Y/N)

E. Are all data critically examined to ensure ithas been properly calculated and reported? (Y/N)

VII. Surficial Well Inspection and Field Observation

A. Are the wells adequately maintained? t> ***-*•

B. Are the monitoring wells protected and secure?

C. Do the wells have surveyed casing elevations?

b. Are the ground-water samples turbid? (Y/N) __

E. Have all physical characteristics of the site been notedin the inspector's field notes (i.e., surface waters,topography, surface features)? (Y/N) y

24

F. Has a site sketch been prepared by the field inspectorwith a scale, north arrow, location(s) of buildings,location(s) of regulated units, location of monitoringveils, and a rough depiction of the site drainage pattern? (Y/N) >/

VIII. Conclusions

A. Is the facility currently operating under the correctnonitoring program according to the statistical analysesperformed by the current operator? (Y/N) 7

B. Does the grand-water monitoring system, as designed andoperated, allow for detection or assessment of any possibleground-water contamination caused by the facility? (Y/N) \/

C. Does the sampling and analysis procedures permit theowner/operator to detect and, where possible, assess thenature and extent of a release of hazardous constituentsto. ground water from the monitored hazardous wastemanagement facility? (Y/N) V_

APPENDIX B

POTENTIOMETRIC MAPSSOLUTIA, INC.

ANNISTON, ALABAMA99-0370

WMA-IandSWMUlPOTENTIOMETRIC MAPS

SOLUTIA, INC.ANNISTON, ALABAMA

99-0370

SWMU 1 and WMA I Mean ShallowPotentiometric Surface for 1998Groundwater Detection Monitoring andCorrective Action Effectiveness Report

Solute inc.Anriston, Alabama

/V On-Slte Boundary A Recovery WellO Shallow Residuum Monitoring/

Observation Well0 Deep Residuum Monitoring/

Observation WellBedrock Monitoring Well

A/ Major Roads/ ,• Minor Roads/V Drainage BasinA/ Railroads

BuildingsC~D Alabama Power

SokJtte Inc.QH3 Paved Surface Equlpotentlal Contour

(feet above mean sea level)

iipisD

civ 8r In MNOTES

Refer to Table F3 for water level elevation for individual wells.

SOURCEGolder Associates (on-stte base map)USGS12400 Quad Maps

MAP PROJECTION

LOCATION MAP

Associates' * • • Applied Chcmistty Creative Solution!

100 0 100 200 300 400 Feet

SCALE100 0 100 200 300 400 Feet

SWMU1 and WMAI Shallow PotentiometricSurface for August 1998

Groundwater Detection Monitoring andCorrective Action Effectiveness Report

Solute Inc.Annlston, Alabama

LEGEND

• V OvSte BoundaryA/ Major RoadsV Minor Roads

/V Drainage BasinA/RaHroads

ED Alabama PowerCD Solute Inc.Big Paved Surface

A Recovery WellO Shallow Residuum Monitoring/

Observation Well© Deep Residuum Monitoring/

Observation Well* Bedrock Monitoring Well

Equlpotential Contour(feet above mean sea level)

MOVES

Refer to Table F3 for water level elevations for Inolvldual walls.

ZONE

Alabama East 101

SOURCEColder Associates (on-ette base map)USGS15400 Quad Maps

MAP PROJECTION

US State Plane

DATUM

NAD83

LOCATION MAP

N

*. • ApplWChcminiY,GeativcSolutions

DATC: PRODUCED BY: PROJECT/FILE No: FIGURE NO.

SCALE100 0 100 200 300 400 Feet

i ana WMAI snaiiow KotemiometncSurface for November 1998

Groundwater Detection Monitoring andCorrective Action Effectiveness Report

Solute Inc.Anrdston, Alabama

LEGEND

/V Oiv-Ste BoundaryA/Major RoadsA/ Minor RoadsA/ Drainage Basin/V RailroadsCD ButtingsCD Alabama PowerCD Solute Inc.Sit] Paved Surface

A Recovery WellO Shallow Residuum Monitoring/

Observation Well0 Deep Residuum Monitoring/

Observation Well• Bedrock Monitoring Well

/S/ EqUpoterrbal Contour(feet above mean sea level)

NOTESRarer to Table F3 for water level elevations for Individual wells.

Interceptor well IW-15 not operating at time of measurement

Alabama East 101

SOURCEOdder Associates (on-sKe base map)USGS 1:2400 Quad Maps

MAP PROJECTION

US State Plane

DATUM

NAD83

LOCATION MAP

^ O L U T

. • "App&UChanimy, Creative SoLutiuot

PRODUCED BY:

JES

PROJECT/FILE No:

943-3680

FIGURE NO.

16

WMA-HPOTENTIOMETRIC MAPS

SOLUTIA, INC.ANNISTON, ALABAMA

99-0370

SCALE0 300 600 Feet

WMAII Mean ShallowPotentiometrlc Surface for 1998Groundwater Detection Monitoring andCorrective Action Effectiveness Report

Solute Inc.Armlston, Alabama

LEGEND

/V OivSto BoundwyA/Major RoadsAMinor RoadsA/RailroadsCDBuftUngsCU Alabama PowerCD SoMJa Inc.

I Paved Surface

A Recovery WellO Shallow Residuum Monitoring/

Observation Well

Equlpoterrtlal Contour(feet dome mean sea level)

NOTES

Refer to Table F3 for water level elevations for Individual wells.

ZONEAlabama East 101

SOURCEOdder Associates (on-slte base map)USGS12400 Quad Maps

MAP PROJECTION

US State Plane

DATUM

NAO83

LOCATION MAP

N

; ;S01UT! A• . • Applied Chanuti* dative Solution

DATE:

26-Feb-1999

PRODUCED BY:

JES

FGoiderAssociatesPROJECT/FILE No:

943-3680

FIGURE NO.

18

IW-21OWR-OJgJ OMW-20A

WMAII Shallow PotenttometrlcSurface for August 1998

Groundwater Detection Monitoring andCorrective Action Effectiveness Report

Solute Inc.Armlston, Alabama

LEGEND

A/ MaJor RoadsA/ Minor RoadsA/ RaHroadBI — 1 Buildings(ZZI Alabama Power

) Solute Inc.l Paved Surface

A Recovery WellO Shallow Residuum Monitoring/

Observation Well

EqUpotenttal Contour(feet above mean see level)

NOTESRefer to Table F3 for water level elevations for Individual wells.Recovery weHs IW-19 and IW-21 not operating attime of measurement

ZONEAlabama East 101

SOURCEGokter Associates (on-stte base map]USGS13400 Quad Maps

MAP PROJECTION

US State Plane

DATUM

NAO83

LOCATION MAP

N

A

'. • *AwJWChcmi«ixCrcMivc Solution*

DATE PRODUCED BY:

.IPS

Colder

PROJECT/FILE NO:9*3-3680

FIGURE NO.

WMAII Shallow PotentlometrlcSurface for November 1998

Groundwater Detection Monitoring andCorrective Action Effectiveness Report

Solute Inc.Annlston, Alabama

LEGEND

/V On-Ste Boondaiy/V Major RoadsA Minor RoadsA/RaBroedsCD ButtingsLH] Alabama PowerO Sotutte Inc.ElPavsdSurtaca

A Recovery WellO Shallow Residuum Monitoring/

Observation Well

Equlpotentel Contour(feet above mean sea level)

NOTESRefer to Table F3 for water level elevations for Individual wells.Recovery wete IW-18, IW-19. and IW-21 not operating attfme of measurement

ZONEAlabama East 101

SOURCEOdder Associates (oo-stte base map)

____USGS 1^400 Quad Maps_____MAP PROJECTION

US State Plane

DATUMNAD83

LOCATION MAP

N

?S O L U T ! A

• , • * AppUcJChonimvi Creative Solun<.id

DATE: PRODUCED BY:

JES

tesPROJECT/FILE No:

943-3680

FIGURE NO.

APPENDIX C

WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARYMONITORING WELL DESIGNATIONS

SOLUTIA, INC.ANNISTON, ALABAMA

99-0370

WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARYSOLUTIA, INC

ANNISTON, ALABAMA

:::;::;:;:::::::::;:::;:':::-:::;:*:-:':-:::::::-:::-;::::::-:-;-:-:':-:':':-::r-:-:-x-x-x':

: : :::::::::: ::::::::-:;:-:-:-:::: :•:•:•;• ::i::-::::i::::-::x::'x:::x;::::x:x:::x:x;:: -:-:':':-T':':'>:;>>:;:;X;:-:;:-:::;:::v:x:;;-:v:;X;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;X;X;:;Xv

MW-1B

MW-8

MW-9

MW-11A

MW-12A

MW-13A

MW-15

MW-16

MW-20A

IW-2

IW-5

IW-6

IW-7

IW-8

•^^i^^^^j^^.:!:;:;:::$i::;: :;::| i-j.|y'|S'|;y;:;: :;:;:;x;:;:;>:;:;:

•:':-:-:::':::::::;:::::::-:':':;:::'i';':':';':;:':':::':-:-:-:::::::':':':-:':'X-X'X:x-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:'»:-»:-»:-;-X'X'»»:'»:-X'Xv»:'>x-X'Xw:v>x-x->x<'X-X'X->Kv<-XvX%vX-:-XvXv:vXv:-

63

27

28

122.5

124.5

123.5

24.5

68.5

24

25

68

68

40

39.5

:::::x">::|:Jii|j!ii -jfi :: #:::: x- :i:::i-i;:;:;: !! :: :: :; ^ 'g $£::::::::::;:-;::::;» ':-:-::::i;:-: i ' xiii(t::x:x:x;x::;iv-i-i-x-x -fiKttaK -i-lJ:!:-:- :-!-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•$Z$$i$i^^:;:;:;:;:;:;X;:;:;:y:;:;:::::;:::;:;:::::::;:;:;x::;::x;x::v:::;:;::::X;:::::v-XvXv X'X-X-X-X •XvXvX-X-X-X-X-X-X-X'X-X'X

57.5-62.5

22-27

23-28

109-114

105-110

105-110

19-24

58-68

19-24

10-20

53-63*

*

*

!1

55-63

15-27

13-28

100-122.5

100-124.5

100-123.5

13-24

56-68

17-24

8-20

25-63

25-68

1-40

1-39.5

VSi^i^i^^Mmm%j^jllii*jJ!J^$m

:•:•:•:-:•:•:•:•:•:•:• •;•:• :¥:-:---:-:-:-x"x:: •••:•:• :-x-: •:•:•:•• : '••:•:•:-;•:•:•:•:•:•:•: :•:•:•:•»:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:-:-:-:•:•:•:•:•:•;•:•:•:•••:

1985

1981

1981

1985

1985

1985

1985

1985

1988

1982

1982

1982

1987

1987

':::::'::::::::::;:::::;:::;::';':-x- -:---•- .:;:•:•:•: .vX-x-X'X-x-X'XvXvXv x-x- :•:•:•;•:•;•:•::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:•;•:-:-;•:•:•:•'•:•: : : ::: : : : :: : '£ '• ij^j ':j;'±';'L:':/ji ': : ii •ii-iiiii'Ji'-iiri'ii"'' ii''i:i>'i'i: ' T'iii'Aivi:£'tiii:'i'£'ffiii':!ii' '•''''' ''•'"'Illlliill^1111111 1 liiiiiiiiii ill i in:;vXv:::':::'x'::x':::-x':::-:-::::x'x':' :- •:••-:•:•;•:-:-:• •••••••:'-"-:-:: •-:-:-:-:-:-:-:- •-:::-:'>'-:-x: •-•-••: yXvX-xox '•: :';-• ;•;•:•;•;• '.•:•:•:-:•:-:•:•:•:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:-:•:•: -: ;•:•:•:•:•:•: •:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:•:•:•:•:-:•:•:•:-:•>:•: •:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:• •:•:-:•:•:•;•;•:•:•:•: :• -:-x-XvX-;:;:;x-::::x:>:;>::::>::>>>::>:::::::::::::::- :-:•>: ::::':-::::::>:::::-x::::::::-:::::;::::::::>:::-:::-:->:::: :-:->:-: :::;:;:-x::'::X'T- :: :o:::-x::;x

WMA-I/II; SWMU 1/8/9;Background Well

WMA-II

WMA-II

WMA-I

WMA-I

WMA-I

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

SWMU 1

SWMU 1

SWMU 1

SWMU1

SWMU 1

;.;.;-:•;•:•:•:•:•:•:•••:•' •••-•••-:••-:-:•:-»:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•: :•: •:•:•:•:•:••:•:-:•:•:•:•:•:-:•:-:•:-:• •.•:•:•:-:•:-:•:>•:-:•:•;•:-:•:•:•:• :•:•:•:•:•:•:- •:• :•:•:•:•:•.

:x-X'X-x'x-x-:' •:•:•:•:-:•: ijx-i-xo:-:'; •:•;•:•:•:•:•:•:•:• :-:-:-:::::

IW-9

IW-10

IW-11

IW-12

IW-13

IW-14

IW-16

IW-17

IW-18

IW-19

IW-20

IW-21

DW-1

OW-2

OW-4

OW-6A

OW-7

50

68

68

50

50

46

45

48

49

49

50

50

93

24

27

49

43

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

83-93

19-24

22-27

39-49

38-43

liiiiiiliiiiiliIllilliillli l:!:!

1-50

1-68

1-68

1-50

1-50

1-46

1-45

1-48

1-49

1-49

1-50

1-50

81-93

8-24

14-27

37-49

28-43

;i;ii:l;iiiiilli;lllllilillll•:'::::::::::::x::::::::::;:;:::::::-::'::-'::-::::::::::::::::::::::::::x •::::::::'::::;::::';r:':::':':':':::::::::::::::V:::::::::v:::::::::::::v::

;:::::;::::::'::;:::::::::::::;';::x-::':x:::x-::::::':::::::::>x::;:';:

1987

1987

1987

1987

1987

1987

1988

1988

1988

1988

1988

1988

1991

1987

1987

1998

1987

illillll£'&!:!£*.•:•>.•••:•••:•:•:•:•:•••••• :•: :•:•:•:•:•:-:-:-:•: : :•:•:•: : fllffi*,jV|:/\p\ jfoj^XvX-x-x-x-x-x-x-i-x-x-x-x-x-. -.•.-:•:•

. - ::x : . : :•: •:•:•:•:•; : : : :: :; ::: ;: ;: ;: :: • : : : : : :: :: : : : ::::::::: "::: : : ' : :::: ::: : : : : : ::::-:;x ::: :::' x:: :::: :::: :::; '•:•; '• :: ; v:'::i-:v ::x:::x: ••••:•••••:•••••• :> •••• : ~: ~; ~: ' • • • • ~; • ••••:•:•: -:•:•:•:•:•:-:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-: :•:•:•:•:::•::•:•:•:•:•:•;•:•:•:•:-:•:•:•:•:•:•::-: :-;-:•:•:-:•;•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:-:-;•:-•.•.•-:-•••.-.•.•.•.•.•.•-•.•.•.•.•.•.•.-.-.•:•:-:-:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:•:•:•;•:•:•:-:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•;•:•;•:•:•:•••:;•:•:•:•;•: :•:•:-:-:• :-;-:-;viv :•;•:-:-•• ;-:••-•.--•.;.--•.•.•-•-•-•-•-'. •-•• . ••.-.•.-•-•.•.;: ::-:-X'X-:;:v:::-:;X-x -x •;;:;:;:•:• :::- :xX-:-:::;:: x-: : ::::•::: •:-;-: :•:;:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:• :•:•:•:•:• x-x-:-:':'X-:ox-:o:-:-x-x- :-:•:•:-:-..•:• . : . :. -. •• • . •>:•:• :-:: :: :: : :: :::: :: :: :: :: : : : : : : : :: : : ::x '•''•:•: :::: : : : : :x :: : : : : : : :: •:":":" : ::: ::: ::": -:' : - ; : :: ; ' :':' : •; ::':':-v':X x' •-• x- ; -:-Xx:-: •: - x- :•: -x •:•:•:•;•:•:•;•:• -•:-:•:•:•:•••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•;•:•;•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•: •:•:•:•;•:•:•:•::•:•:•:•:;•;•:•:•:•;•;•:•:• :-:•:•:•:•:• :•:-:•;• :•:-:•:••••••••••• •••••••• -.-. •• ' - ' -•--••• i . •••.•-•.•.-. -'•••: ->:•:•:•:•:•:•;•/:• r-x-:';-:-:-:-;-:-:-:-:-:-:-:':-: •;•:•:•:•:•: -:-:-:-:-;v: •:•:•:•:•:•:•:•: -x-:-; •:•;•;•: -M-X-X •:•:•:•:-:•:••• •.•.•---•.•.•-.•.•-•.•.•.•.•.•..•.•,•.•.•.•.•:-x-:-»:-~-x-::: x-: •:•::•;•:•:•:•;•:•:•: x-:-: ::•:•: :•:•:•:•; :•::•;•:•:•: -x •:-:-x-:-:-:v:-:v:-;- :-:•:•:•:• x-: •:•:•:•:•;•;•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:• :•:•:-.•:-:•:•:•:•:

SWMU1

SWMU1

SWMU1

SWMU1

SWMU1

SWMU1

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

SWMU1

SWMU1

SWMU1

SWMU 1

:;:;:;:;:|:;:;:;:;: ;i iii:i:;:i:i ii;i:|o;> Xyxoiiiiiiiiliiilili ; inllllllllli iiii :• ii:™lllilllii sill ;; ii

OW-8A

OW-15

OW-16A

OW-19

OW-21

OW-22

OW-24

SBP-5

*8 W §i*^>ip;*p;*:ii®;SW% ;:;||§||A| |11||£x S> iij( ^^ jjfVj : : W:^Hi i Jililipl;; illsii ^« ii f:ii •ill ii^mmm Ii;llii iiliiiiiliiiiii iiii

23

40

33

24

36

34

29

140

::::;v/::;vX'::;v:-':':'-'-:-';:-:'::::::;::';:::.':-.-L:.::::'x::::::::::::::::•;•:•:•;•:•:•:•:•:•:-:•:•:•:-:-;•:-:-:•:-:-:•:•:•:•:•:•;•:•:•:-:•:•:• :-x->:-:-: •:•:•:•:•

13-23

35-40

23-33

19-24

26-36

24-34

24-29

128-138

10.5-23

32.5-40

21-33

14-24

20-38

17-34

8.5-31

123-138

iiiliijii^^plliP*!::.;.;:::;:; :::;:::;:X.:EfTUE\i;:;:;:;x::::i:::::;:o

•:•:•:•:-:-••:•:-:-::>>> :•:•:•: v:_:::::y:y:-:;:-:-:-::XvXv:;:-:;:• . • • . • . - . • -,-.-.-.:.-.: :.:.;.v.;.v.-.-.v.'. •-•-• . ••••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•••. . . . . ......-...-.-.-.:.:................... . .......... ......................::::::::::::::::::':':-:':.:::::;::x-:-:::-.X:.:.>:-:.>:::::::::-::::::.:.

1998

1987

1998

1988

1988

1988

1988

1992

SWMU1

SWMU1

SWMU1

WMA-II; SWMU 8/9

WMA-II

WMA-II

WMA-II

WMA-II

BLS = below land surface* = concrete casing

February 1999

TABLE AMonitoring Well Designations

Solatia: Second 1998 Semi-annualand 1998 Annual Groundwater Detection

Monitoring and CorrectiveAction Effectiveness Report

Well Name Well Type Unit(s) Being MonitoredDW-01IW-02

IW-05

IW-06

IW-07

IW-08

IW-09IW-10IW-11IW-12IW-13IW-14IW-16IW-17

IW-18

IW-19

IW-20

IW-21MW-01BMW-08MW-09

MW-11A

MW-12A

MW-13A

MW-15

MW-16MW-20A

OW-02OW-04

OW-06A

OW-07

OW-08A

OW-15OW-16AOW-19OW-21OW-22OW24

SBP-05

RecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecoveryRecovery

BackgroundBoundaryBoundary

Point of CompliancePoint of CompliancePoint of Compliance

Point of Compliance & EffectivenessPoint of Compliance & EffectivenessPoint of Compliance & Effectiveness

EffectivenessEffectivenessEffectivenessEffectivenessEffectivenessEffectivenessEffectiveness

BoundaryBoundaryBoundaryBoundary

Effectiveness

WMAII, SWMU 8, SWMU 9SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1

WMA II, SWMU 8, SWMU 9

WMA II. SWMU 8, SWMU 9

WMA II, SWMU 8, SWMU 9

WMA II, SWMU 8, SWMU 9

WMA II, SWMU 8, SWMU 9WMA II, SWMU 8, SWMU 9

SWMU 1, WMA I, WMA II, SWMU 8, SWMU 9

WMA II

WMA II

WMA I

WMA I

WMA I

WMA II, SWMU 8, SWMU 9WMA II, SWMU 8. SWMU 9

WMA II. SWMU 8, SWMU 9SWMU1

SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1SWMU1

SWMU1SWMU1

WMA II, SWMU 8, SWMU 9WMA IIWMA II

WMA II

WMA II, SWMU 8. SWMU 9

Wells OW-6. O.V-8, and OW-16 were replaced with wells OW-6A, OW-8A and OW-16A in March 1998February 26,1999 Gmdwatr.mdb: rptWeUList 1oM

APPENDIX D

WELL CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAMSSOLUTIA, INC.

ANNISTON, ALABAMA99-0370

MW-1B

TEELE CASING ———————— »•

LAND SURFACE

55-FT. DEPTH ————

57.5-FT. DEPTH ———

63-FT. DEPTH

\}

r i

<S

:!:$:•:•:

lV:Vf

• * "»* . •

":i v

.••;.*.

,

vl*

ii

.;>

•

Miilill

J

vV

>$

Si

.';•'

•':_•:

« ————————

LOCK

CEMENT GROUT. TYPE 1

6.75-INCH DIAMETER BOREHOLE

2-INCH DIAMETER PVC CASING.SCHEDULE 40

BENTONITE PELLETS

20/30 GRADE SAND

5 OR 10-FT. 0.010 INCH SLOTTED.

2-INCH-DIAMETER PVC SCREEN

NOT TO SCALE

SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM SHOWING THE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS OF MONITOR WELL MW-1B.

r

15' Depth-

22' Depth-

271 Depfh-

-SECURITY CASING

-6"-DIAMETER BOREHOLE

2"-OIAMETER CASING, PVC"SCHEDULE 40

-CEMENT GROUT CLASS A

•FINE GRAINED SAND

_2"-DlAMETER, PVCWELL SCREEN

NOT TO SCALE

Schematic Diagram Showina the Well-ConstructionDetails of Monitor Well MW-8.

13' Depth-

23' Depth-

28' Depth-

, \

SECURITY 'CASING

•6 -DIAMETER BOREHOLE

2 -DIAMETER CASING, PVC"SCHEDULE 40

-CEMENT GROUT CLASS A

-FINE GRAINED SAND

2 -DIAMETER, PVCWELL SCREEN

NOT TO SCALE

Schematic Diagram Showing the Hell-ConstructionDetails of Monitor Well MW-9.

MW-11A

HINGESTEELPROTECTIVE CASING"

LAND SURFACE

100-FT. DEPTH

: 0 9 - F T . 3EPTH

114-FT. DEPTH

117-FT. DEPTH

V

LOCK

CEMENT GROUT. TYPE 1

6.75-INCH DIAMETER BOREHOLE

2-INCH DIAMETER PVC CASING.

SCHEDULE 40

8ENTONITE PELLETS

2 0 / 3 0 GRADE SAND

5 OR 10-FT. 0.010 INCH SLOTTE

2-INCH-OIAMETER PVC SCREES

NOT TO SCALE

Construction diagram for Monitor Well MW-11A

MW-12A

STEELE CASING ———————— •

LAND SURFACE

100-FT. DEPTH ————

105-FT. DEPTH ————

110-FT. DEPTH ————— i

A. e_CT npPTW ———— —

\

Yt.

\:'

..

.*.

•v.• "

I

f :MM

Xv

vX;

X*X

jigi

.- ':

. • •:*.".'.

••*.'.*,_•

, * . •• ...

.*•"••'•I •

• *."••* :':.&&i

J

A7

•4

i

• •• .

j

V

*

X]

•. «J

/

\ ———————

LOCK

CEMENT GROUT. TYPE 1

6.75-INCH DIAMETER BOREHOl

2-INCH DIAMETER PVC CASINC

SCHEDULE 40

BENTONITE PELLETS

2 0 / 3 0 GRADE SAND

5 OR 10-FT. 0.010 INCH SLOT"

2-INCH-OIAMETER PVC SCREE

NOT TO SCALE

Construction diagram for Monitor Well MW-12A

MW-13A

STEEL: CASING —————— i

LAND SURFACE

100-FT. DEPTH

:05 -FT . DEPTH ———— •

110-FT. DEPTH ———— |

^

VI

''(:':

'...

• '•".

I

feA.;.;.;

%vt*

:5*

:\\

....

•:•"•

.• •.;;*

•• •.

. '• ,

—— *•

::-:-'':'.-:-:-''.

^

J

*'{,**

: :::|

«tr

•"•MvC

'/>«•»

• • • ' . *

•' 'iij

/

i ————

LOCK

CEMENT GROUT, TYPE 1

6.75-INCH DIAMETER BOREHOLE

2-INCH DIAMETER PVC CASING.

SCHEDULE 40

BENTONITE PELLETS

2 0 / 3 0 GRADE SAND

5 OR 10-FT. 0.010 INCH SLOTTED.

2-INCH-DIAMETER PVC SCREEN

NOT TO SCALE

Construction diagram for Monitor Well MW-13A

MW-15

STEEL

LAND SURFACE

13-FT. DEPTH

19-FT. DEPTH —————

O J — C T r\CO*Tt-l

97-PT HFPTM ——————

V

V«.

•"•;

.*.•','

.'.

I

1V.-*

1*: •

*.*•*•

—

'!*.•• 'i*'.1" .V} *•*.— V- '*••

1

>•.•-<•

'.'•'.''.•jjiI****

•X-

•"*•'

.-

•..

•>

^

\V

•i

P

<•*

"*._'•

•'.*f .<"i'

/

^ ———————

l ————————

LOCK

CEMENT GROUT. TYPE 1

6.75-INCH DIAMETER BOREHOLE

2-INCH DIAMETER PVC CASING.

SCHEDULE 40

BENTONITE PELLETS

20/30 GRADE SAND

5 OR 10-FT. 0.010 INCH SLOTTED.

2-INCH-DIAMETER PVC SCREEN

NOT TO SCALE

SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM SHOWING THE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS OF MONITOR WELL MW-15.

MW-1G

IIII1UL. ———————————————— \

STEELPROTECTIVE CASING ———————— »

LAND SURFACE

56-FT. DEPTH

58-FT. DEPTH —————

fin.. FT ntTDTM

68.5-FT. DEPTH —————

^

V<

j:

-.*

'•..*•v

1

S

." '* *

..•«".*.*•• .*"

* .* *..*•

*.'*'•".*•*.". * .*

'•."•'•'«".*

———— _

Vv-!'V*''">

i>• ••i-

;||

i

{.*;

. .

...

.,*'.'

.*• •

«..'.-

>J

^±

w

ig

**."•

•.-V* .'

• •

....•;..•'.

/

^

^ ———————

i ———————

LOCK

CEMENT GROUT. TYPE 1

6.75-INCH DIAMETER BOREHOLE

2-INCH DIAMETER PVC CASING.

SCHEDULE 40

BENTONITE PELLETS

20/30 GRADE SAND

5 OR 10-FT. 0.010 INCH SLOTTED.

2-INCH-DIAMETER PVC SCREEN

NOT TO SCALE

SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM SHOWING THE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS OF MONITOR WELL MW-16

rHINGE

STEELPROTECTIVE CASINO

NING - ———————— *

rI

5 * nCDTLJ _

3TAL DEPTH ————

<J

1

• • Q ,

* •.'•.'•

• B^* *

•V»**'

• *• I •

• • • *

* •** ** • • •

*** **

*•** ••

ifA1*'***

' .* * ** '•' • •

• '«* . '. .- .•

*.*'• .'.'-.•.':

^^

_ XJ

1.'.'. y*.

Tfc :•

'•'•', .\

•;,'•/•• •*

•?•"•'.

ii>/irfr-• * *

* » • • i

•*•* * *• • • •,* • • •

*******,•••'

• • • •*A j**

II****»• ** * t f '

$$3

-•V'lM

.'• . i.

. » * B* .•".*.'• '•

'.'*•*.*..*•*.*"..; -j..

•'.'.«

:-'-.'«v:

LAND SURFACE

« —————————— CEMENT QROUT. CLASS A

^ O"L/ IAMtl tM UUnilMULc

——————————— 2"-DIAMETER PVC CASINO.SCHEDULE 40

——————————— BENTONITE PELLETS

—————————— 20/30 GRADE SILICA SAND

5'-0.10" SLOTTED 2"-DIAMPVC SCREENw W t. C. ^f

NOT TO SCALE

«r Table B-l.fc/Well Construction Diagram ofMonitor Well MW-20A.

CLIENT NAME:

Monsanto Chemical Company

B-l

MILLER, INC.nv\ronniental Services

MtAJMtlthCONSTRUCTION

DIAGRAM

D W - 1PROJECT

T F 5 2 509LOCATION

4nniston. Alabama MonaantoSURFACE ELEYATKJN MEASURNC POINT ELEVATION

OEOLOOST

Chris BonaOnLLJNQ COKTHACTOn

Graves Service Co. Inc.DRLLNQ METHOD

Hollow Stem AugerDHLLCB

Dwight Pruit

I

DEVELOPMENT METHOD

Air From Drill RigGALLONS EVACUATED

~1 50DATE WELL COMPLETED

9-09-91STATIC DEPTH TO WATER -,_„„FEET BELOW UP 78.88DATE- 9-16-91

LOCKING CAP

PROTECTIVE STEEL CASING

8-INCH STEEL SURFACE CASING

12 1/4-INCHBOREHOLE

CEMENT GROUT

2-INCHSCHEDULE 40PVC WELL CASING

4-INCH SCHEDULE40 PVC WELL CASING

8-INCH BOREHOLE

BENTONITE SEAL(1/2' PELLETS)

SAND PACK(20-40 GRADE, SILICA SAND)

4-INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVCSCREEN. 0.010 SLOT ———

BENTONrTE SEAL(1/4- PELLETS)

SAND PACK(20-40 GRADESILICA SAND)

2-INCHSCHEDULE 40 PVCWELL SCREEN

BOTTOM CAP

NOT TO SCALE

ALL MEASUREMENTS IN ft. BELOW LAND SURFACE

HINGE -

STEELPROTECTIVE CASING

LOCK

CEMENT GROUT, CLASS A

6"-OIAMETER BOREHOLE

2"-OIAMETER PVC CASING.SCHEDULE 40

BENTONITE SEAL

BENTONITE PELLETS

FINE GRAINED SAND

S'-O.OOG" SLOTTED.Z" DIAMETER PVC SCREEN

TOTAL DEPTH

NOT TO SCALE

Construction diagram of Observation Well OW-2.

HINGE -

STEELPROTECTIVE CASING

LOCK

CEMENT GROUT, CLASS A

6"-DIAMETER BOREHOLE

2"-DIAMETER PVC CASING.SCHEDULE 40

8ENTONITE SEAL

8ENTONITE PELLETS

FINE GRAINED SAND

S'-0.006" SLOTTED.2" DIAMETER PVC SCREEN

TOTAL DEPTH

NOT TO SCALE

Construction diagram of Observation Well OW-4.

STEELPROTECTIVE CASING

IjU ————————————^

SING *~

LAND SURFACE

TAI nCDTIl ——————

J

1 .

•<VI

I/,,1

:•";£:•':

*•"•*.*» * *

".';.v:

•'•*•*.*.

p." *•

i/

•. ^i-'•>•

i1jm

. ... ——————— uuv-rv

.

—————————— CEMENT GROUT. CLASS A

-* —————————— 6"-DIAMETER BOREHOLE

r'-DIAMETFR PVC C.ASINr,.SCHEDULE 40

——————————— BENTONITE SEAL

1 —————————— BENTONITE PELLETS

——————————— FINE GRAINED SAND

S'-0.006" SLOTTED.2" DIAMETER PVC SCREEN

NOT TO SCALE

Schematic diagram of Observation Wells OW-7 through OW-12

LAND SURFACE

5' DEPTH

10'DEPTH

32.51 DEPTH

40' TOTAL DEPTH

LOCKING PROTECTIVE CASING

CONCRETE PAD

12"-DIAMETER BOBEHOLE

CEMENT GROUT

6"-DIAMETER STEEL CASING

CEMENT GROUT

6"-DIAMETER BOREHOLE

BENTONITE

2"-DIAMETER PVC CASING

20/40 GRADE SILICA SAND

5'-0.010" SLOTTED2"-DlAMETER PVC SCREEN

NOT TO SCALE

Construction diagram of Observation Well OW-15.

STEELPROTECIIVh CASING •"

LAND SURFACE

14-FT. DEPTH

19-FT. DEPTH ————

24-FT. DEPTH —————

or. _ c T nrPTW ———————

k. J

I

%:'vX;

X-X-;•X*X*.

>>:£;

x£xSSS

11;Xw*>x*x-

vX;X

X'X'X

;XvX;;X;Xv*X*t*X*vX'X•.-.•.-.*.•

1

X;;.*

• * I • •

'.:•*?

*"i *.••*..1"' "J•****••*.**.*•• -•. •; V i ; "4

'.".*.*•;•."•.^- •'—

w&%

y1

.'• >;<'V

:||;:3:$

5 :•*sxSS::::::-::-W:i•x-x

•x*x•Xv>

I*•**•"•"

•";••*.

•••/"

'•* *• •.• ••.• ••*.*

• ....*.

";I :".•

/

•« ———————

1 ———————

I

/

LOCK

CEMENT GROUT. TYPE 1

6.75-INCH DIAMETER BOREHOLE

2-INCH DIAMETER PVC CASING.

SCHEDULE 40

BENTONITE PELLETS

20/30 GRADE SAND

5 OR 10-FT. 0.010 INCH SLOTTED.

2-INCH-DIAMETER PVC SCREEN

NOT TO SCALE

Construction diagram of Observation Well OW- iy .

HINGE .

STEELPROTECTIVE CASING.

LAND SURFACE

TOTAL DEPTH

V-

NOT TO SCALE

LOCK

CEMENT GROUT. CLASS A

6"-OIAMETER BOREHOLE

2"-OIAMETER PVC CASING.SCHEDULE 40

BENTONITE PELLETS

20/30 GRADE SILICA SAND

5'OR 10'-0.010" SLOTTED2"-DIAMETER PVC SCREEN

Construction diagram of Observation Well OW-21 through OW-24

V V l . l . l . C O N o i l U A . . I ION l.Oi;,

Pioji-'ci Name

Location.

Client

Annisjon, Alabnin.i

Monsanto Chemical

Well

Prepared Dy: Ken Miklos_____

SURFACECASING ^

ISfi '

NATURALFILL

70 fl* .

GROUT

PVCRISER

BORE_HOLE

BENTONITESEAL

tRBURDEN

Drilling Summary ,

Total Depth bis: HO"Boroholo Oiamoior(s): 17.5'0'to 113'6' 113" to 14Q-

Elevations (Survoycd)/Oatum:Land Surface 752.60Top of Well Casing 755.56Depth to Water: static 62.33

Drilling Contractor: Miller DfllinaDrillers: Kevin MilchollDrilling Method: Air Roiarv with water washDrilling Fluid (Amount/Type); Water

Well DesionSurface Casing: Material Steel

WELLSCREEN

FILTERPACK

• f f

Diamotor 61Longlh 113'

Setting 0'-113'bis

Casing: Material Schedule 40 PVC

'ft* Diameter 21ESTONE Len9th U&

Setting 2'als • 128'bis (2" sump)'Grout: Type Portland Type I w/ 3% benlonile

Setting 0'-119.5'bis

Screen: Material Schedule 40 PVC

Diameter 21Slot 0.0 fSetting 128'-138" bis

Filter Pack: Material Silica Sand(6/20)

Setting 123'-140" bis

Seals: Type Benlonile PelletsSetting 119.S-123'bis

Well Protection: 3' sleel protective casino with lockable cover.

CAP ANDSUMI5——

Time Log:Drilling:Installation:Development:

Started11/4/9211/7/9211/7/92

Compleled11/7/9211/7/9211/9/92

Woll Development:Method/Equipment: Air Lilt and BailerStatic DTW 8JL22

Water Removed During Development: approx. 300 gallons

pH:fiJ2 Conductivity: 2fiQ (umhos/cm)TerrpoC: Ifi

Remarks: A 10' steel surface casing was installed to 113' bis to hold back formationduring drilling o( the borehole. During the removal of the casina. the formation collapsedaround the 6' diameter casing Irom 1S' to approx. 70' bis.

•DEPTH BELOWLAND SURFACE

APPENDIX E

MONITORING WELL LITHOLOGIC LOGSSOLUTIA, INC.

ANNISTON, ALABAMA99-0370

LITHOLOGIC LOG OF BORING B-67 (MW-1B)

Depth ThicknessI-escristion_________________________ ( ft) ( ft)

S i l t , t a n ; minor amounts of very f i n e tof ine sand; minor amounts of c lay; cher t ;minor organics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 - 2 2

Clay, w h i t e , orange, red, crimson, tanminor amounts of silt and fine-grainedsand..................................... 2 - 1 0 a

Clay, r ed , orange, purple , mo t t l ed . . . . . . . 1 0 - 1 5 5

Clay, w h i t e , red, orange, yel low, crimsonmot t l ed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - 59 44

Clay, yel low; minor amounts of silt;minor amounts of f ine to coarse-grainedsand; trace cher t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 - 60 1

Clay, red, orange, w h i t e , mot t led . . . . . . . . 60 - 62.5 2.5

Chert , whi te . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62.5 - 63 0.5

Gcraghty & Miller, Inc.

Lithologic Log of Boring B-45 (Monitor Well MW-8)

Depth ThicknessDescription__________________________ (ft) (ft)

Clay/ slightly sandy, soft to stiff, damp,reddish-brown to brown.................... 1.0 - 5.5 4.5

Clay, silty, slightly sandy to sandy,stiff to very stiff, damp, reddish-brownand orange................................ 5.5 - 18.0 12.5

Clay, stiff, damp, tan and brown.......... 18.0 - 20.5 2.5

Clay, sandy, stiff, wet, orange and brown;3-inch lense of clayey, medium-grainedsand...................................... 20.5- 23.0 2.5

Clay, slightly silty, slightly sandy,stiff, damp, orange and tan; gravelthroughout samples........................ 23.0 - 30.0 7.0

Lithologic Log of Soring B - 4 4 (Moni tor Well MW-9

Descr

Clay,f i mi,

Clay,orangi

Clay,damp,

Clay,brown

Clay,brown

Clay,whi te

Clay,

Clay,

Sand ,loose

Clay,car.p ,lave n

lotion

siltydamp,

si ighis and <

slighreddi:

very :

sandy; gravi

stiff, gray

silty

stiff

fine, we t ,

slichwhi te

der . . .

Depth T(ft)

, slightly sandy, very soft toreddish-brown. ................ l.o - 5.5

tly sandy, very stiff, damp,jray.. ......................... 5.5 - 8.0

tly silty, stiff to very stiff,sh-brown. ...................... 8.0 - 13.0

sandy, stiff, wet, reddish-............................... 13.0- 15.5

, very stiff, damp, recdish-el throughout ssnoles .......... 15.5 - 17.0

to very stiff, damp, orange,, and lavender ................. 17.0 - 23.0

, sandy, soft, wet, brown...... 23.0 - 27.0

, camp, orange, gray, and red.. 27.0 - 28.0

to coarse-grained, very clayey,brown. ......................*. 28.- 0 - 30.5

tly silty, stiff to very stiff,, orange, gray, brown, and............................... 30.5 - 40.0

h i c k n e s s(ft)

4.5

2.5

5.0

2.5

1.5

6.0

4.0

1.0

2.5

Q . «;

l.rrilCLOGIC LOG OF BORING B-GO (MW-11A)

Deptili ThicknessDescr iption___________________________ (Ct:) (Ct)

Sand, very Cine grained, silty; someclay, red-brown, organics................ 0 - 3 3 .

Sandstone, fine to medium-grained, white. 3 - 3.5 0.5

Clay, red; some silt and very fine sand;sandstone, fine to medium-grained, white,friable.................................. 3.5- 12 8.5

Clay, red-orange; some silt and veryfine-grained sand........................ 1 2 - 1 4 2

Clay, red-orange; minor silt............. 1 4 - 1 8 4

Clay, red-orange; some silt and fine tomedium-grained sand; trace chert......... 1 8 - 2 7 9

Clay, red-orange; moderate amounts offine-grained sand; trace chert........... 2 7 - 2 8 1

Clay, red-orange......................... 2 8 - 3 7 9

Clay, red-orange; some chert............. 37 - 54 17

Chert.................................... 5 4 - 5 5 1

Chert, soft with clay.................... 55 - 64.5 9.5

Chert, varying in hardness............... 64.5 - 95.0 5.5

Chert, with clay......................... 9 5 - 9 9 4

Limestone, gray.......................... 99 - 122.5 23.5

OiiKACJI-rrYfJ'MIIJJ-R.INC

LITHOLOGIC LOG OK BORING 13-69 (MW-12A)

DepLh ThicknessDescc iption___________________________ (f t) ( C t)

Clay, red-brown; silty; organics......... 0 - 3 3

Clay, red-orange, silty, some Cine-grained sand; some sandstone, fine tomedium-grained, white, friable........... 3 - 9 6

Clay, orange, yellow; silty; some fine-grained sand............................. 9 - 16 7

Clay, orange, yellow, white, mottled..... 1 6 - 1 8 2

Clay, orange, yellow, white (chalky),mottled; chert........................... 18 - 47 29

Chert; some clay, orange, mottled........ 4 7 - 4 8 1

Clay, orange; chert...................... 4 8 - 5 4 6

Chert.................................... 5 4 - 5 5 1

Chert with clay.......................... 55 - 76 21

Chert, hard, with clay................... 7 6 - 8 0 4

Chert; limestone, gray, interbedded...... 80 - 94 14

Limestone, gray........................... 94 - 107 13

Limestone, gray, soft.................... 107 - 117 10

Limestone, gray, hard.................... 117 - 124.5 7.5

LITIIOt.OGIC LOG OF BORING 13-70 (MW-13A)

Depth Th icknessDescr iption_____________________________ (C L) ( C t)

Sand, very Cine to medium-grained, red;minor silt; minor organics; chert........ 0 - 1 0 10

Clay, orange, mottled; minor silt........ 1 0 - 1 4 4

Clay, orange, mottled; chert; inclusionsof fine to medium-grained sand, yellow.,.. 1 4 - 1 7 3

Sandstone; fine to medium-grained whiteto light gray, friable................... 17 - 17.5 0.5

Clay, orange and white; some fine-grainedsand; some rock.......................... 17.5-19 1.5

.Clay, red-orange, mottled? cherts;some medium-grained sand................. 19 - 29 10

Clay, orange, mottled.................... 29 - 53 24

Chert.................................... 5 3 - 5 4 1

Chert, with clay......................... 54 - 67.5 12.5

Limestone, hard, gray.................... 67.5 - 70 2.5

Limestone, gray.......................... 7 0 - 7 2 2

Limestone, gray; chert, interbedded...... 72 - 81.5 9.5

Limestone, gray; chert and clayinterbedded.............................. 81.5 - 106.5 25

Limestone, gray; chert, interbedded...... 106.5 - 123.5 17

LITHOLOGIC LOG OF I3OR1NG B-71 (MW-15)

xjscript ion

Till and gravel..........................

Chert; sand, fine to medium-grained,orange , tan ..............................

Clay, some sand, fine to medium-grained,orange; chert............................

Clay, orange; some sand, fine to medium-grained ..................................

Sand, fine to medium-grained, brown;some clay. ...............................

Clay, orange; some sand, fine-grained,orange ...................................

Sand, fine to coarse-grained, red-orange;some clay; chert .........................

Clay, orange; some sand, fine to medium-grained, orange; chert ...................

Sand, fine to medium-grained, orange.....

Clay, orange with black .silt; some fine

Depth( ft)

0

4

5

11.5 -

n _

16

17

1 Qlo —

19

23

4

5

11.5

13

16

17

1 OJLO

19

23

27

Th ickness(ft)

4

1

6.5

1.5

3

1

1

1

4

6.

Clay, orange with black silt; minoramounts of fine to medium-grained sand... 27 - 39 12

I .ITIIOLOGIC LOG OF BORING U-71 ( M W - L G )

Descr iption

Fill and gravel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Clay, red-orange, soft; some sand, f ineto medium-grained; chert .................

Sand, fine to coarse grained; chert;minor amounts of silt and clay ...........

Clay, red-orange, soft; some sand, f ineto medium-grained, chert .................

Clay, red-orange, mottled; trace chert...

0

2

9

12

21

Depth( E t )

2

9

- 12

- 21

- 68

Th ickness( £ t )

2

7

3

9

47

LITHOLOGIC LOGS FOR MONITOR WELL MW-20A

Description

Fill material (clay, sandy, reddish-brown;concrete and dolomite fragments )..........

Clay, silty, mottled gray, reddish-brown,and light orange. .........................

Depth Thickness(ft) (ft)

0.0 -

5.0 -

8.0 -

9.0 -

13.0 -

2.0

7.0

9.0

10.0

15.0

2.0

2.0

1.0

1.0

2.0

Clay, sandy, mottled reddish-brown andlight brown; sandstone fragments,course-to fine-grained, gray (fresh) toreddish-brown (weathered), with blackorganic inclusions........................ 18.0 - 20.0 2.0

Clay (as above); sandstone (as above)..... 23.0 - 25.0 2.0

A-l550/53

LITHOLOGIC LOG AND PHYSICAL DESCRIPTIONOF MONITOR WELL DW-1

Monsanto Chemical CompanyAnniston, Alabama

Depth ThicknessDescription_______________________________ ( f t ) (M

Sandy clay. Moderate brown with some dark yellowish orangeat top. Small sandstone and dolomite pebbles present. Somelimestone gravel as well as coarse-grained sandstone fragments.Slight odor detected at 23 feet with minor amounts of blackstaining; Dense clay lenses at 24.5 and 29.5 feet. . . . . . . . . . . . 0 - 3 4 34

Clay. Mottled colors. Various shades of brown, red, yellow,orange, yellow-green. Clay is dense, dry, and brittle. Blackstaining evident from 48 feet with slight detectable odor.Small sandy clay lens at 36 feet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 - 78 44

Clay. Moderate brown. Dry. Contains 5-10% small sandstoneand shale clasts. Thin lenses of soft weathered shale present."Detectable odor observed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 - 80 2

Bedrock. Light grey competent limestone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 - 96 15

Geologist: Chris BonaDate Drilled: September 1991

Lithologic Log of Observation Well OW-2 (P58)

Depth Thicknessinscription__________________________ ( f t ) ( f t )

and, c layey/ s i l ty, cobbles, gravel andccassional boulders, orangish-brown to. range. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 - 5 5

lay, silty, sandy, gravel, cobbles, andoulders, reddish-orange to orange........ 5 - 1 5 10

lay, slightly silty, light maroon,ight gray and orange, verticallyaminated,.waxy........................... 1 5 - 2 1 6

lay, slightly sandy, slightly silty,aroon and orange, vertically laminated,hin sandy lenses......................... 2 1 - 2 5 4

lay/ slightly sandy, slightly silty,aroon and orange, vertically laminated/ery sandy lenses......................... 2 5 - 3 4 9

lay, medium gray, massive................ 3 4 - 3 5 1

Lithologic Log of Observation Well OW-4 (P56)

•^ .ription

md, gravelly, clayey, orangish-brown. . . .

sulders, cobbles/ and pebbles in sandyLay matrix, orange. ......................

Lay, sandy, silty, gray, reddish-orange,

Lay, silty, sandy, orange to reddish-

Lay, silty, slightly sandy, gray,

0

3

11

15

21

Depth(ft)

3

- 11

- 15

- 21

- 30

Thickness(ft)

3

4

6

9

L I T H O L O G I C LOG FCW D O R I N G CB-86 ( O W - 1 5 )

Depth Th icknessDescription____________________________ ( f t) ( C t)

Sand, q u a r t z , very C i n e - g r a i n e d , s i l t y ,dark b r o w i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0 - 0.5 0.5

Clay, dry, sandy, dark brown.............. 0.5 - 2.0 1.5

No recovery............................... 2.0 - 7.0 5.0

Clay, dry, mottled dark reddish-orange,light yellowish-brown, and dark gray...... 7.0 - 8.0 1.0

Clay, sandy, dark brown to tan............ 8.0 - 9.0 1.0

Clay, damp, tan........................... 9.0 - 9.5 0.5

Clay, damp, mottled light gray, yellowish-brown, and dark gray...................... 9.5 - 10.0 0.5

No recovery............................... 10.0 - 12.0 2.0

Clay, wet, yellowish-brown................ 12.0 - 14.0 2.0

Clay, wet, mottled yellow, dark brown,dark gray and light gray; clay, very dry,reddish-orange............................ 14.0 - 28.0 14.0

Clay, damp, soft, mottled dark grayish-brown, light gray and yellowish brown..... 28.0 - 29.5 1.5

Clay, stiff, dry, mottled light gray,yellowish-brown, and purplish-red......... 29.5 - 30.0 0.5

Clay, damp, mottled yellowish-brown andgrayish-brown............................. 30.0 - 33.0 3.0

Clay, stiff, mottled yellowish-brown andreddish-brown............................. 33.0 - 34.0 1.0

Litho logic Log (Continued)

Description

Clay, wet, loose, gray

Clay, sandy, mottled 1and yellowish-brown...

Clav, wet, loose, arav

ish brown ...........

ight gray, purple,

ish-brown ...........

Depth(ft)

34.0 - 35.0

35.0 - 36.0

36.0 - 37".0

Thickness(ft)

1.0

1.0

1.0

Clay, sandy, mottled light gray purple,and yellowish-brown....................... 37.0 - 38.0 1.0

Clay, mottled, orangish-brown, light gray,and yellowish-brown....................... 38.0 - 40.0 2.0

LITHOLOGIC LOG OF BORING B-76 (MW-18) (OW-19)

Depth Thicknessscri.ption___________________________ ( ft) ( ft)

ay, reel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 - 2.5 2.5

ay, red-orange, mot t led . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 - 10 7.5

nd, C ine to medium-grained; minor clay. 10 - 12.5 • 2.5

ny, reel-orange, mo t t l ed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.5 20 7.5

ert; sand, medium t o coarse. . . . . . . . . . . . 2 0 - 2 3 3

ay, ornnge-red, mottled; cher t . . . . . . . . . 23 - 32.5 9.5

LITHOLOGIC LOG FOR BORING NUMBER B-81 (DWr22)

Description

Sand, fine-grained, black.

Clay, red, orange, white, mottled; sandfine to coarse grained (few streaks<0.5', from 5-15'); slag at 10'.........

Depth(ft)

5.0

5.0 - 40.0

Thickness(ft)

5.0

35.0

Description

LITHOLOGIC LOG FOR BORING NUMBER B-84

Depth________________________ ___(ft)

Road gravel, fill,

Clay, red orange, mottled; sand, fineto coarse grained (few streaks <0.5', from11-13' and 23-25') minor gravel...........

2.0

2.0 - 40.0

Thickness(ft)

2.0

38.0

LITHOLOGIC LOG AND PHYSICAL DESCRIPTIONOF SHALLOW BEDROCK PIEZOMETER SBP-5

Monsanto Chemical CompanyAnniston, Alabama

Depth ThicknessDescription_____________________________ (ft) (ft)

Clay. Moderate reddish orange. Sandy. Fine grainedSilty. Moist, becoming wet at 25' bis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 - 97 97

Dolomitic limestone. Medium gray, very competent . . . . . . . . . 97 - 98.5 1.5

Dolomitic limestone, fractured . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98.5 - 105 6.5

Dolomitic limestone. Medium gray, fairly competent,with some fracturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 - 140 35