September 2017 Revision 3 LPROU

Transcription

1 (Appendix C-3 to PDI WP) Remedial Design Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties New Jersey September 2017 Revision 3 LPROU

2 Sediment Waste Characterization Work Plan (Appendix C-3 to PDI WP) Remedial Design Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties New Jersey September 2017 Revision 3 LPROU PREPARED ON BEHALF OF Settling Party Glenn Springs Holdings, Inc. A Subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum 5 Greenway Plaza, Suite 110 Houston, TX PREPARED BY Supervising Contractor Tetra Tech Inc. 6 Century Drive, 3 rd Floor Parsippany, NJ P F tetratech.com

3 REVISION RECORD Revisions to this will be reviewed and approved by someone qualified to have prepared the original document. All revisions must be authorized by the Tetra Tech Project Manager and the Glenn Springs Holdings, Inc. Project Coordinator, or their designee(s) and documented below. Revision Date Portions Affected Reason Authorized By Agency Submittal 1 08/18/2017 All Comments received from EPA on Draft/Rev 0 J. Somoano (GSH); S. McGee (Tetra Tech) Yes (EPA, NJDEP) 2 09/19/2017 Sections 2.3 and 5 Comments received from EPA on Rev 1 J. Somoano (GSH); S. McGee (Tetra Tech) Yes (EPA, NJDEP) 3 09/28/2017 Section 3.1 and Table 3-2 Comments received from EPA on Rev 2 J. Somoano (GSH); S. McGee (Tetra Tech) Yes (EPA, NJDEP)

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION PROJECT BACKGROUND SEDIMENT WASTE CHARACTERIZATION OBJECTIVES DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES EXISTING SEDIMENT WASTE CHARACTERIZATION DATA PHASE I OF THE TIERRA REMOVAL RIVER MILE OU 2 SEDIMENT DATA DATA GAP ANALYSIS SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND TESTING SEDIMENT SAMPLING SEDIMENT WASTE CHARACTERIZATION TESTING DATA EVALUATION AND ANALYSES QUALITY CONTROL DELIVERABLES SCHEDULE REFERENCES LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1. Sediment Waste Characterization Evaluation Summary Table 3-1. Waste Characterization Sample Location Depth Summary Table 3-2. Waste Characterization Sample Locations and Depths LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1. Figure 1-2. Figure 3-1. OU 2 Location and Vicinity Map Waste Characterization Evaluation Flow Diagram Proposed Waste Characterization Sample Locations i

5 ACRONYMS / ABBREVIATIONS Acronym/Abbreviation 2,3,7,8-TCDD COC cy DDT EPA FFS GSH LPR OU OU 2 PAHs PCBs PDI PDI WP Project QA QC RA RCRA RD RI RM ROD Settlement Agreement Site SOP SOW SVOC TC TCLP Definition 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin contaminant of concern cubic yard dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Focused Feasibility Study Glenn Springs Holdings, Inc. Lower Passaic River Operable Unit Operable Unit 2 (the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River); the Project polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon polychlorinated biphenyls pre-design investigation Pre-Design Investigation Work Plan Lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River (Operable Unit Two) of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, located in and about Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties, New Jersey quality assurance quality control remedial action Resource Conservation and Recovery Act remedial design Remedial Investigation river mile Record of Decision Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Remedial Design Diamond Alkali Superfund Site standard operating procedure Statement of Work semivolatile organic compound Toxicity Characteristic Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure ii

6 Acronym/Abbreviation Tetra Tech TSCA UFP-QAPP UHC UTS VOC WP Definition Tetra Tech, Inc. Toxic Substances Control Act Uniform Federal Policy Quality Assurance Project Plan underlying hazardous constituent Universal Treatment Standards volatile organic compound Work Plan iii

7 1 INTRODUCTION This (WP) has been prepared as part of the Pre-Design Investigation Work Plan (PDI WP) pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Remedial Design (Settlement Agreement) between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Settling Party, effective September 30, 2016, for the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River (Operable Unit Two [OU 2]) of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site (the Site), located in and about Essex, Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic Counties, New Jersey (the Project); refer to Figure 1-1. The Settling Party, as defined in the Settlement Agreement, is Occidental Chemical Corporation. Communications associated with, and execution of, the Settlement Agreement are being led by Glenn Springs Holdings, Inc. (GSH) on behalf of Occidental Chemical Corporation. The Settlement Agreement provides that the Settling Party shall undertake a Remedial Design (RD), including various procedures and technical analyses, to produce a detailed set of plans and specifications for implementation of the Remedial Action (RA) selected in EPA s March 3, 2016 Record of Decision (ROD; EPA, 2016a). RD activities include the completion of all pre-design and design activities and deliverables associated with implementation of the RD for the remedy selected in the ROD. The selected remedy was chosen by the EPA in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended, 42 United States Code , and, to the extent practicable, the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. As stated in the EPA Statement of Work (SOW), pre-design investigation (PDI) activities are to be conducted to gather additional site-specific information that is required to develop the RD, as outlined in the Remedial Design Work Plan (RDWP; Tetra Tech, 2017b). As outlined in this plan, certain PDI activities include preliminary waste characterization of sediment to support evaluations of treatment and disposal options (hazardous characteristic vs. non-hazardous) in the design. At later stages of the Project, additional sampling and evaluations may be required based on identified potential disposal location requirements. This Waste Characterization WP provides background research on the available data and studies, and outlines the study objectives, proposed sample locations, sample methods, number of samples and sample testing. This Waste Characterization WP is organized as follows: Section 1 Introduction: Presents a brief description of the Project, previous waste characterization, and objectives of waste characterization testing. Section 2 Existing Sediment Waste Characterization Data: Presents previous waste characterization data and sediment data related to waste characterization. Section 3 Sediment Sampling and Testing: Presents the field methodology for sampling of sediment, the technical approach, and a description of the methodology for the waste characterization. Section 4 Data Evaluation and Analyses: Presents discussion of how the waste characterization results will inform the RD. Section 5 Quality Control: Describes GSH s approach for quality during waste characterization sampling and testing. 1-1

8 Section 6 Deliverables: Presents a description of the waste characterization testing report to summarize the findings of the test. Section 7 Schedule: Provides the schedule for field work, testing, and reporting. Section 8 References: Cites references used in compiling this planning document. 1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND OU 2 extends from the confluence of the Lower Passaic River with Newark Bay at river mile (RM) 0 to RM 8.3. The EPA selected the remedy for OU 2 in the ROD to address contaminated sediments found in the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River (EPA, 2016a). Contaminants of concern (COCs) in the sediment include dioxins and furans, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), mercury, copper, lead, DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) and its primary breakdown products, dieldrin, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). PDI activities will be conducted in accordance with the PDI WP. The primary objective of the PDI is to gather the additional site-specific information that is required to develop the RD for the selected remedy as identified in the ROD and in the SOW (EPA, 2016b). PDI activities include preliminary waste characterization of sediments, which is the subject of this WP. This study will be coordinated with the sediment chemical coring collection (refer to Appendix C-1 to the PDI WP) for efficiency and to avoid redundant field and laboratory testing. 1.2 SEDIMENT WASTE CHARACTERIZATION OBJECTIVES The main objective of the sediment waste characterization is to collect an initial round of data to determine disposal requirements and options for consideration in the RD. The data collected under this plan will be used along with future data collection efforts to meet the needs of the generator and waste disposal facilities to classify the material. Future sampling is expected to be completed to fulfill specific disposal facility requirements, as those facilities are identified. In addition, a treatability study is being prepared to evaluate (1) the ability to separate sand from the sediment, and (2) post-dredged processed material for potential beneficial use. Details on testing and analyses for these evaluations will be included as part of the treatability study. The questions regarding waste characteristics to be evaluated as part of this plan include the following: Is the sediment considered to be Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous or non-hazardous for disposal (Figure 1-2)? o Delineate areas of sediment with RCRA hazardous characteristic material from sediment that are RCRA non-hazardous material. For hazardous material, do underlying hazardous constituents (UHC) exceed the Universal Treatment Standards (UTS) (Figure 1-2)? If present, are areas of sediment present that contain concentrations requiring disposal under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)? The following waste characteristics and testing will be used in evaluating disposal options: hazardous/nonhazardous (RCRA), UHCs/UTS, total organic carbon, total petroleum hydrocarbons, and moisture content. In addition, the core logs for the samples collected for the waste characterization program and the core sampling program will be reviewed for the presence of non-aqueous phase liquids (LNAPL and DNAPL). GSH has reviewed pertinent background data provided in the Remedial Investigation (RI) (EPA, 2014a) and 1-2

9 Focused Feasibility Study (FFS) (EPA, 2014b). Evaluation of separating coarse sand from the sediment for potential beneficial use will be performed under a treatability study work plan. The background waste characterization information of the OU 2 sediment is summarized in Section 2. Proposed waste characterization sampling to determine proper handling and disposal of material is discussed in Section 3, and data evaluation is presented in Section DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES This investigation will be performed per the Uniform Federal Policy-Quality Assurance Project Plan (UFP- QAPP; Tetra Tech, 2017b), which is the basis for the quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) elements of the entire Project. The UFP-QAPP serves as a project-specific quality plan for the Project and encompasses elements of a Field Sampling Plan and a Quality Assurance Project Plan. The plan integrates technical and quality aspects for OU 2 to ensure scientifically sound data of known and documented quality are collected to meet the data quality objectives (DQOs) for the Project. Development of DQOs for this waste characterization task followed the seven-step process outline in Worksheet #11 of the UFP-QAPP. The DQOs include: Steps 1 and 2 Problem statement and goals of the study are presented in Section 1.2. Data will be collected for evaluation of waste disposal options for inclusion in the RD. Step 3 Information inputs, prior waste characterization data and data for potential sediment, are summarized in Section 2, along with an analysis of data gaps. Prior waste characterization sampling has determined sediment from some areas to be hazardous and from other areas to be nonhazardous. The data gaps analysis in Section 2.4 indicates data are required to evaluate the sediment for OU 2 for waste characterization. Steps 4, 5, 6, and 7 The waste characterization sampling and analytical testing program, the performance and acceptance criteria, and any specific QC requirements of this proposed investigation were developed based on the data gap identified in Step 3, the RD objectives, and additional data needs (Sections 3, 4, and 5). A total of 365 samples will be collected for analysis to determine if sediment in certain areas is considered RCRA hazardous and, if necessary, to determine if the sediment contains UHCs above the UTS. Additional sampling may be required to delineate areas with RCRA hazardous material. Additional sampling will be conducted after evaluation of the data collected under this work plan. Additional sampling will be proposed to refine areas of the river based on locations and extents of the identified RCRA hazardous material. Proposed additional sampling will be developed as an addendum to this work plan and submitted for review and approval. 1-3

10 2 EXISTING SEDIMENT WASTE CHARACTERIZATION DATA GSH has reviewed pertinent background data provided in the RI and FFS (EPA 2014a, 2014b). The project database has electronic data from over 60 studies that were funded through various federal, state, and private programs. Two early actions in the Lower Passaic River provide waste characterization data to guide this Waste Characterization WP. Within OU 2, a non-time-critical removal action (referred to as Phase 1 of the Tierra Removal ) was completed in It addressed contaminated sediments adjacent to the former Diamond Alkali facility located at Lister Avenue in Newark, New Jersey (OU 1) at approximately RM 3.4. Predesign activities during Phase 1 of the Tierra Removal included waste characterization of the sediment that was identified to be removed in that area (Tierra, 2011). An additional removal action was performed at RM 10.9 to address approximately 5.6 acres of sediment contaminated with 2,3,7,8-TCDD, PCBs, PAHs, mercury, and other contaminants (CH2M Hill, 2013). 2.1 PHASE I OF THE TIERRA REMOVAL During Phase I of the Tierra Removal, sediment sampling for waste characterization determined that 34,400 cubic yards (cy) of the sediment was non-hazardous and 6,600 cy of the sediment was hazardous and required incineration with ash disposal at a Subtitle C landfill. Samples were collected at a frequency of approximately one for every 500 cy of sediment. The non-hazardous sediment was disposed of at one of two Subtitle C landfills (Lone Mountain, Oklahoma; or Grassy Mountain, Utah) without treatment. Sediment from the Phase I area found to be hazardous had exceedances of the RCRA Toxicity Characteristic (TC) limits for 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, endrin, heptachlor, heptachlor epoxide, 2,4,6-trichlorophenol, 2,4- dinitrotoluene, benzene, chlorobenzene, cadmium, and lead (Tierra, 2011). The hazardous-identified sediment was treated by incineration for the UHCs of cadmium, lead, PCBs, dioxins, herbicides, pesticides, semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC), and volatile organic compounds (VOC). The hazardous sediment was treated at the Aragonite Incinerator, Clive, Utah, and the ash was disposed at the Grassy Mountain, Utah, Subtitle C landfill. 2.2 RIVER MILE 10.9 During the RM 10.9 removal action, sediment sampling for waste characterization determined that the entire 18,000 cy of sediment targeted for removal was RCRA non-hazardous. Samples were collected at a frequency of approximately one for every 700 cy of sediment disposed, as a predetermined requirement of the disposal facility. The non-hazardous sediment was disposed at a Subtitle C landfill (Lone Mountain, Oklahoma). 2.3 OU 2 SEDIMENT DATA The EPA has determined that the sediment from the Passaic River is not a RCRA-listed hazardous waste (EPA, 2008). The sediment may be characteristically hazardous. A common practice for conservative evaluation of potential hazardous material is known as the 20 times rule. Sediment data can be evaluated by comparing sediment concentrations to 20 times the hazardous TC limits. This comparison provides a very conservative evaluation for the sediment by assuming that all of the contaminant would leach into the water in the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) extraction. Material with exceedances of this evaluation most often are found to be non-hazardous with a TCLP extraction/analysis. 2-1

11 To provide a preliminary assessment of the potential for the sediment material to be determined hazardous, the historical data for sediment collected from OU 2 between 0 and 2 feet below the mudline were reviewed for the RCRA hazardous constituents across the entire river and to depth of core collection in the navigation channel between RM 0 and RM 1.7 (Table 2-1). For the concentrations detected in the sediment samples, less than 1 percent exceeded 20 times the TC limit for 2,4,6-trichlorophenol and arsenic, approximately 5 percent exceeded the 20 times TC limit for cadmium, 33 percent exceeded the 20 times level for mercury, and approximately 85 percent exceeded the 20 times TC limit for lead. Table 2-1. Sediment Waste Characterization Evaluation Summary Number of Samples with Concentrations Greater than TCLP Limit TCLP Limit (20 times RCRA Leachate Limit) (mg/kg) Number of Parameter Samples 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) ,4,5-Trichlorophenol ,4,6-Trichlorophenol Arsenic 1, Cadmium 1, Lead 1, Mercury 1, mg/kg milligram per kilogram; RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure 2.4 DATA GAP ANALYSIS GSH has reviewed the existing sediment characterization data and prior waste characterization and developed the sediment sampling and waste characterization testing program based on the data needs. Preliminary observations and data gaps are summarized as follows: Sediment data indicate that most sediment samples collected have concentrations for RCRA waste characterization parameters greater than 20 times the RCRA TC hazardous waste limits. The sediment in OU 2 from 0 feet to 2 or 2.5 feet below the mudline outside the navigation channel and greater than 2.5 feet below the mudline within the navigation channel between RM 0 and RM 1.7 has not been characterized for waste disposal. 2-2

12 3 SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND TESTING Sediment cores will be collected for waste characterization testing during the sediment coring program (refer to the Sediment Core Collection and Chemical Analysis WP, Appendix C-1 to the PDI WP). The cores will be logged, and waste characterization samples will be collected for the testing. 3.1 SEDIMENT SAMPLING Boring locations are selected based on collecting preliminary waste characterization data across the site to provide a sample for approximately every 10,000 cy of sediment targeted for removal (Figure 3-1). The sample locations were selected to provide areal coverage from locations evenly spaced to collect representative data for all areas of the site. For locations in the river channel, every third transect location was selected for the collection of waste characterization samples. For Kearny Point, every other grid location was selected for the collection of waste characterization sample. The sampling for this phase will be supplemented by sampling that will be conducted for the remedial action after discussions with the specific disposal facilities for the project to determine the data required to meet the facility requirements. Subsequent sampling may be conducted based on the needs and requests of the specific disposal facilities, as they are identified. The waste characterization borings will be advanced to the depth of proposed dredging (2.5 feet above RM 1.7 and up to 23 feet below RM 1.7). The depths for locations of the borings are summarized in Table 3-1. The boring locations will be finalized after the bathymetry and geophysical surveys are completed based on findings of potential utility crossings and other identified debris. The waste characterization boring locations will be coordinated with and included as part of the sediment coring program. Sediment cores for waste characterization will be collected using the same field sampling procedures, equipment, and field personnel as the sediment coring program (refer to the Sediment Core Collection and Chemical Analysis WP, Appendix C-1 to the PDI WP). As noted in Section of Appendix C-1, the project target for sediment core recovery is 80 percent. If the initial sediment core does not obtain at least 80 percent recovery, two additional attempts will be made using the equipment and methods determined most appropriate by the Field Manager or his/her designee in the field. If, after two attempts, 80 percent recovery is not achieved, an alternative coring technique will be attempted. The sediment core with the highest percent recovery from either coring technique will then be retained. Table 3-1. Location Waste Characterization Sample Location Depth Summary Estimated Range Dredge Depth Estimated Number of Samples Notes RM 0 RM feet 73 Sediment collected over the sample intervals of 2.5 feet up to estimated dredge depth. Core logs will be evaluated for locations with samples deeper than 2.5 feet to determine the final sample intervals. Where a native material is present, the 2.5-foot sample interval will be divided between the sediment materials present. RM 0 RM 1.1 (Kearny Point) 2.5 feet 34 Sediment collected over the sample interval from 0 to 2.5 feet below the mudline. RM 0.6 RM feet 100 Sediment collected over the sample intervals of 2.5 feet up to estimated dredge depth. Core logs will be evaluated for locations with samples deeper than 2.5 feet to determine the final sample intervals. Where a native material is present, the 2.5-foot sample interval will be divided between the sediment materials present. 3-1

13 Table 3-1. Location Waste Characterization Sample Location Depth Summary (continued) Estimated Range Dredge Depth Estimated Number of Samples Notes RM 1.7 RM feet 158 Sediment collected over the sample interval from 0 to 2.5 feet below the mudline. TOTAL: 365 Samples Note: Sample IDs and locations will be defined after the Sediment Core Collection and Chemical Analyses Sampling WP (Appendix C-1 of the PDI WP) is revised per the new bathymetric survey data and update of the geomorphic evaluation. The number of samples for waste characterization will be finalized in this revision. Samples for waste characterization will be collected as composite samples over a depth interval of 2.5 feet. For the areas of the river above RM 1.7, only the first 2.5 feet of sediment will be collected for waste characterization analyses. For areas of the navigation channel below RM 1.7, samples will be collected for each 2.5-foot interval to the estimated dredge depth to meet the authorized channel depths (-20 and -30 feet mean low water). For example, for the sediment profile proposed for collection within the RM 0.6 to RM1.7 area, samples will be collected from depths of 0 to 2.5 feet, 2.5 to 5 feet, 5 to 7.5 feet, 7.5 to 10 feet, and 10 to 12.5 feet below the mudline. For the deeper cores (> 2.5 feet), if native material is encountered and there is at least 1 foot of both overlying sediment and native sediment, the 2.5-foot sample interval will be split so that the overlying sediment and the native sediment are separate samples. Sampling along the side slopes within 75 feet of the navigation channel will be extended to a depth equal to those nearby in the navigation channel itself to account for the potential dredging related to slope stability. Proposed sampling locations and depth intervals are included in Table 3-2 (at the end of this section). A portion of each sample collected will be archived for potential future analysis based on the results from the initial sample analyses. 3.2 SEDIMENT WASTE CHARACTERIZATION TESTING The following waste characterization analyses will be conducted on collected samples to classify sediments for design purposes: TCLP Metals by SW-846 Method 1311/6010/7470 TCLP VOCs by SW-846 Method 1311/8260 TCLP SVOCS by SW-846 Method 1311/8270 TCLP Pesticides by SW-846 Method 1311/8081 TCLP Herbicides by SW-846 Method 1311/8151 Total Organic Carbon by the Lloyd Kahn method Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons for gasoline range organics and diesel range organics by SW-846 Method 8015 Total Dioxins and Furans reported as homologues by EPA Method 1613 Corrosivity by SW-846 Method 9040C Ignitability by SW-846 Method 1010A Reactivity by SW-846 Methods 9014/9034 Additional volume of sample material will be collected and archived for potential future analysis. If sample results indicate that sediment is hazardous, archived samples will be submitted for analysis of total metals, SVOCs, PCBs, pesticides, and herbicides to determine if any UHCs are above 10 times UTS (total dioxins 3-2

14 and furans data from first step will be included in the UHC/UTS evaluation), requiring sediment to be treated prior to disposal. The following analyses will be completed for the UHCs: Total Metals by EPA 6010/7471 Total SVOCS by EPA 8270 Total PCBs by EPA 8082 Total Pesticides by EPA 8081 Total Herbicides by EPA

15 Table 3-2. Waste Characterization Sample Locations and Depths Location ID River Mile Northing Easting Target Core Depth (feet below mudline) Number of Samples (2.5-foot intervals) Sediment Coring Method LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore 3-4

16 Table 3-2. Waste Characterization Sample Locations and Depths (continued) Location ID River Mile Northing Easting Target Core Depth (feet below mudline) Number of Samples (2.5-foot intervals) Sediment Coring Method LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore 3-5

17 Table 3-2. Waste Characterization Sample Locations and Depths (continued) Location ID River Mile Northing Easting Target Core Depth (feet below mudline) Number of Samples (2.5-foot intervals) Sediment Coring Method LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore 3-6

18 Table 3-2. Waste Characterization Sample Locations and Depths (continued) Location ID River Mile Northing Easting Target Core Depth (feet below mudline) Number of Samples (2.5-foot intervals) Sediment Coring Method LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore 3-7

19 Table 3-2. Waste Characterization Sample Locations and Depths (continued) Location ID River Mile Northing Easting Target Core Depth (feet below mudline) Number of Samples (2.5-foot intervals) Sediment Coring Method LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore 3-8

20 Table 3-2. Waste Characterization Sample Locations and Depths (continued) Location ID River Mile Northing Easting Target Core Depth (feet below mudline) Number of Samples (2.5-foot intervals) Sediment Coring Method LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Check Valve/Piston Corer/Russian Peat Borer/Vibracore LPR Vibracore All samples collected will be analyzed for TCLP Metals by SW-846 Method 1311/6010/7470, TCLP VOCs by SW-846 Method 1311/8260, TCLP SVOCS by SW-846 Method 1311/8270, TCLP Pesticides by SW-846 Method 1311/8081, TCLP Herbicides by SW-846 Method 1311/8151, Total Organic Carbon by the Lloyd Kahn method, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons by SW-846 Method 8015, Dioxins and Furans by EPA Method 1613,Corrosivity by SW-846 Method 9040C, Ignitability by SW-846 Method 1010A, and Reactivity by SW-846 Methods 9014/

21 4 DATA EVALUATION AND ANALYSES Data evaluation and analyses will include a summary of sediment waste characterization testing data and a discussion of how the data will inform the RD. Evaluation of the waste characterization results will be focused on determining the hazardous and non-hazardous nature of the sediment and, if necessary, evaluating the UHCs for sediment determined to be RCRA hazardous. The data will also be used to define areas where RCRA hazardous material needs to be handled separately from non-hazardous material in the RD. In addition, the data will be utilized to inform the RD in regard to other potential constituents that may leach and influence the design of the cap. Data collected as part of the sediment coring work plan (Appendix C-1) will be considered in the waste characterization evaluation, as applicable. Primarily the data for PCBs and dioxins from the sediment core sampling will be used in the waste characterization evaluation. In addition, information on sediment characteristics from the core logs, including presence of non-aqueous phase liquid, will be evaluated for waste disposal. 4-1

22 5 QUALITY CONTROL This section describes the basic QC procedures and activities to be implemented during the waste characterization activities. The purpose of establishing QC procedures is to ensure that the data collected will be of the type, quantity, and quality required to meet the Project objectives. In this case, data are being collected to determine the preliminary disposal options for the sediment. To ensure efficiency and coordination with Project objectives, reliability of data collected, safety, and uniform recording and reporting formats, investigation activities will be conducted using EPA-approved, Project-specific plans, including the Project Management Plan (Tetra Tech 2017a), RDWP (Tetra Tech, 2017b), UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c) and Health and Safety Plan (Tetra Tech, 2017d). QC is integral to the reliability of the results of this investigation. Measures that will be taken to ensure reliable data will include the following: Personnel Qualifications All personnel will be trained and experienced in performing the tasks associated with this effort. All field personnel will be experienced in sediment coring, core logging, sample collection, and sample processing. Verification of Methods The waste characterization samples will be collected as part of the sediment coring program and will be collected and handled using the same field procedures, equipment and field personnel. The field standard operating procedures (SOPs) are included in Appendix L of the PDI WP. Specifications for sample containers, preservation and holding times are provided in Worksheets #19 and 30 of the UFP-QAPP. Sample handling and custody are included in Worksheets #26 and 27 of the UFP- QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2107c). Data Collection and Management Raw field data will be clearly and concisely recorded manually on data sheets or within logbook(s), or electronically on mobile computer tablets. Original field data sheets will be scanned and hard and electronic copies of all data will be retained in the Project files. The appropriate Task Lead will be responsible for ensuring that all data forms and related materials pertaining to the Project are properly logged, recorded and entered into the Project files following the requirements of Worksheet #29, Project Documents and Records, in the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c). Waste characterization samples will be analyzed using the methods noted in Section 3.2 and according to the analytical SOPs listed in Worksheets #23 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c). Field QC samples (consisting of field duplicates only) will be collected and tested at a rate of 1 field duplicate for every 20 field samples collected as outlined in Worksheet #20. Laboratory sample handling, custody, and disposal procedures are included in Worksheets #26 and #27. Waste characterization criteria are noted in Worksheet #15 with the laboratory reporting limits for TCLP extracts. As outlined in Worksheets #26 and #27 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c), to improve data access/usability and data ownership/transferability, GSH has contracted with GHD to serve as the Data Management and Laboratory Program Contractor for the Project. GHD will perform the following: Oversee contracted laboratory services. Resolve any laboratory quality issues, with input from GSH and Tetra Tech. Perform data verification/validation of laboratory data packages (Worksheet #35). Perform data quality review/reporting. Consolidate Project data into centralized database, including field and laboratory data. 5-1

23 Provide options for Project team to access data, including tables, figures, graphs, electronic deliverables, and e:dat TM (an integrated GIS data access tool/query engine). Field Instrument/Equipment Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection All field equipment will be used in accordance with manufacturer s specifications and the requirements of Worksheet #22 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c). All connections and switches will be in good condition to ensure acceptable performance and will be inspected each day by the Field Lead or designee. Malfunctioning and worn parts will be replaced immediately. Field Supplies/Consumables Supplies and consumables necessary for the investigation will be obtained through appropriate commercial markets and will meet supply-specific requirements outlined in this WP and corresponding SOPs. All supplies and consumables will be inspected for usability and suitability by field personnel prior to use. Any supplies/consumables that do not meet requirements will be discarded or returned to the supplier. Any certifications/documentation provided by the suppliers will be retained in the project files. Supplies and consumables will be stored so as to be protected from adverse conditions (e.g., weather, heat, etc.) to avoid possible contamination, breakage, etc. Data Review, Verification, and Validation All data for the Project will be compiled and summarized with an independent verification at each step in the process to prevent transcription/typographical errors. Information collected in the field through visual observation, manual measurement, and/or field instrumentation will be recorded in field notebooks, on data sheets, and/or via mobile computer tablets, and then forwarded to GHD for entry the Project database. During the investigation, raw field data will be sent to the office daily. The field data will be evaluated to check the consistency and reporting methods. Any inconsistency or incorrect methodology for field testing, sampling, or storage and transportation of samples identified in this evaluation will be corrected immediately. Inputs to data review, verification and validation are outlined in Worksheet #34 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c). Data verification procedures are provided in Worksheet #35, and Worksheet #36 contains the data validation procedures. The overall quality of data obtained during the waste characterization investigation will be evaluated, and checked for accuracy, consistency, and interpretation of the data following Worksheet #37. No field blank samples will be collected specifically for the waste characterization sampling, and laboratory method blank samples will be used to evaluate and qualify data. 5-2

24 6 DELIVERABLES A description of field activities and laboratory test results will be reported as part of the PDI Evaluation Report. The report will include a description of the investigation activities, data summary tables and figures depicting sediment sampling locations for this investigation, sediment core logs, field notes, photographs, and observations. The test results will be summarized and evaluated against the RCRA and TSCA criteria, and estimated volumes of material targeted for removal will be categorized according to waste classification. The results will be reported to inform the design. Areas of the river with RCRA hazardous material and TSCA material, if present, will be summarized. Additional sampling may be required to delineate areas with RCRA hazardous material. Additional sampling will be conducted after evaluation of the data collected under this work plan. Additional sampling will be proposed to refine areas of the river based on locations and extents of the identified RCRA hazardous material. Proposed additional sampling will be developed as an addendum to this work plan and submitted for review and approval. The PDI Evaluation Report text will include a narrative summarizing the work completed, findings, and conclusions of the investigation. The PDI Evaluation Report will include results of the field investigation and testing activities and be submitted to the EPA for review and approval. 6-1

25 7 SCHEDULE The field schedule for the PDI is included in the PDI WP. The waste characterization sampling will occur as part of the field collection for the sediment coring proposed for the fall of This schedule is expected to follow the 2017 bathymetry survey, with the river reaches, geomorphic surface mapping, transect locations, and sample locations for the sediment coring program updated as applicable based on the current river conditions. This Waste Characterization WP will then be updated to incorporate the proposed sediment coring locations. Upon EPA-approval of this WP, the pre-field activities and field work will begin for the 2017 season. The waste characterization sampling will be completed as part of the sediment coring program using the same field crew, sampling procedures, and equipment. 7-1

26 8 REFERENCES CH2M Hill River Mile 10.9 Removal Action Final Design Report, Lower Passaic River Study Area. July EPA Memo to File from Water E. Mugdan, Director, and Eric Schaaf, Regional Counsel, regarding Consideration of Passaic River Sediments Pursuant to 40 CFR Section November 12, EPA. 2014a. Remedial Investigation Report for the Focused Feasibility Study. Prepared by The Louis Berger Group in conjunction with Battelle HDR HydroQual EPA. 2014b. Focused Feasibility Study Report for the Lower Eight Miles of the Lower Passaic River. Prepared by The Louis Berger Group, Inc. in conjunction with Battelle HDR HydroQual EPA. 2014c. National Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Superfund Data Review. Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI). OSWER EPA-540-R Washington, DC. EPA. 2016a. Record of Decision for Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River Part of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site Essex and Hudson Counties, New Jersey. EPA Region 2. March 3, EPA. 2016b. Statement of Work for Pre-Remedial Design and Remedial Design of the Lower 8.3 Miles Of Lower Passaic River Part of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site. Essex and Hudson Counties, State of New Jersey. EPA Region 2. September 26, EPA. 2016c. National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Organic Methods Data Review. Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI). OLEM EPA-540-R Washington, DC. NJDEP (New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection) Fill Material Guidance for SRP Sites. Version 3.0. April Tierra (Tierra Solutions, Inc.) Design Analysis Report, Phase I Removal Action. July Tetra Tech. 2017a. Project Management Plan, Remedial Design Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic Counties New Jersey. Parsippany, New Jersey. Revision 1, February Tetra Tech. 2017b. Remedial Design Work Plan, Remedial Design Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic Counties New Jersey. Parsippany, New Jersey. Revision 2, March Tetra Tech. 2017c. Uniform Federal Policy Quality Assurance Project Plan (UFP-QAPP), [Field Sampling Plan (FSP) and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)], Remedial Design Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic Counties New Jersey. Parsippany, New Jersey. Revision 0, April

27 Tetra Tech. 2017d. Draft Health and Safety Plan, Remedial Design Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic Counties New Jersey. Parsippany, New Jersey. Revision 0, April

28 FIGURES

29 !! OU RM 3 TWP RR RM 8 OU 2 NORTH BOUNDARY / PASSAIC BERGEN New Jersey ESSEX HUDSON UNION Atlantic Ocean NEWARK RM 7 KEARNY RR Central Avenue RM 6 EAST NEWARK I-280 Bridge Street RR HARRISON New Jersey Turnpike RR NEWARK RR RM 5 RM 4 US 1 RM 2 Jackson Street US 1 Truck KEARNY RM 1 R:\PROJECTS\PASSAIC_RIVER_5837\LOCATION_MAP_ mxd Date: 8/28/2017 Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, ' OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community / Miles RM 3 NAVIGATION CHANNEL RIVER MILE NAVIGATION CHANNEL CENTERLINE 2 BOUNDARY RAILROAD (RR) NAVIGATION CHANNEL PHASE 1 REMOVAL ACTION BOUNDARY MUNICIPALITY RM 0 OU 2 SOUTH BOUNDARY JERSEY OU 2 Location and Vicinity Map Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River (OU 2) Figure 1-1

30 Figure 1-2 Waste Characterization Evaluation Flow Diagram Collect samples for 2.5 foot intervals for waste characterization. Analysis for TCLP VOCs, SVOCs, pesticides, herbicides and metals. Also, include analysis for total dioxins and furans, GRO, DRO, TOC, corrosivity, ignitability, and reactivity. Is sediment material hazardous characteristic? No Disposal of material to Subtitle C and/or D landfill without treatment deemed acceptable. Treatability study to evaluate potential for beneficial use. Yes Evaluate areas with hazardous characteristics and plan additional sampling if needed to refine delineation Analyze samples for UHC. Analysis for total SVOCs, PCBs, pesticides, herbicides and metals. Together with PCB data from the coring Program evaluate if greater than 50 ppm detected in sediment that requires disposal under TSCA. Are UHC above 10 times UTS? Yes No Disposal of material to Subtitle C without treatment or to a Subtitle D landfill with treatment deemed acceptable. Treatment options to be selected based on UHC > 10 times UTS (dioxins will require incineration). Design will proceed based on need for treatment and disposal of material to a Subtitle C landfill. TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Protocol VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds SVOCs Semi volatile Organic Compounds GRO Gasoline Range Organics DRO Diesel Range Organics TOC Total Organic Carbon UHC Underlying Hazardous Constituents TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act UTS Universal Treatment Standards PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls Waste Characterization Evaluation Flow Diagram Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River (OU 2) Figure 1-2

31 RM 6.6 RM 6.7 RM 6.8 RM 7.3 RM 7.6 RM 4.6 RM 2.9 RM 1.2 RM 1.3 RM 1.5 RM 1.4 RM 1.6 OU 2 SOUTH OU 2 NORTH BOUNDARY RM 8.3 RM 8.2 RR Atlantic Ocean RM 8 New Jersey RM 7.9 RM 7.8 RM 7.7 RM 7.5 RM 7.4 RM 7.2 RM 7.1 RM 7 RM 6.9 RM 6.5 RM 6.4 RM 6.3 RR RM 6.2 Central Avenue RM 6 I-280 RM 5.9 RR RM 5.7 Bridge Street RM 5.6 RM 5.5 RM 5.4 RM 5.3 RM 3.6 RM 3.5 RM 3.4 RM 3.3 RM 3.2 RM 3.1 RM 3 New Jersey Turnpike RM 2.6 RR RM 2.5 RM 2.4 RM 3.7 RM 5.2 RM 3.8 RM 2.3 RM 2.2 RM 5.1 RR RM 3.9 RM 2.1 RM 5 RM 4.9 Jackson Street RM 4.1 RM 4 RM 2 US 1 RM 4.8 RM 4.2 RM 1.9 RM 4.7 RM 4.5 RM 4.4 RM 4.3 RM 1.8 US 1 Truck RM 1.7 River Area Estimated Dredge Volume (Cubic feet) Number of Sample Locations Total Number of Samples RM 0.6 TO RM 1.7 NAVIGATION CHANNEL RM 1.7 TO RM 8.3 ENTIRE CHANNEL RM 0 TO RM 0.6 NAVIGATION CHANNEL KEARNY POINT RM 0 TO RM 1.7 OUTSIDE NAVIGATION CHANNEL RM 0.8 RM 1.1 RM 1 RM 0.9 RM 0.7 RM 0.6 Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community RM 0.5 RM 3 NAVIGATION CHANNEL RIVER MILE SAMPLE LOCATION DREDGE DEPTH (FT) 5-8 BOUNDARY NAVIGATION CHANNEL CENTERLINE PROPOSED WASTE CHARACTERIZATION CORE LOCATION RM 0.4 OU2 BOUNDARY RAILROAD (RR) NAVIGATION CHANNEL PHASE I WORK AREA PHASE II WORK AREA PROPOSED CORE LOCATION TRANSECT DREDGE DEPTH ZONE BOUNDARY ft -33 ft Proposed Waste Characterization Sample Locations Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River (OU 2) RM 0.3 RM 0.2 MUNICIPALITY Figure 3-1 RM ,000 2,000 Feet Document Path: R:\PROJECTS\PASSAIC_RIVER_5837\WASTE_CHARACTERIZE_WP_PROP_SAMPLE_LOCS_ mxd Date: 9/1/2017