technical memorandum- treatability study report lava · pdf filetechnical...

Technical Memorandum-Treatability Study Report

Lava Cap Mine Superfund SiteNevada County, California

U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyContract No. 68-W-98-225

CH2M HILL, Inc.and Team Subcontractors:URS Greiner Woodward Clyde Federal Services, Inc.E2 Consulting Engineers, Inc.

SFUND RECORDS CTR118825

Technical Memorandum-Treatability Study Report

Lava Cap Mine Superfund SiteNevada County, California

Prepared for:Contract No. 68-W-98-225/WA No. 21-RICO-093Y

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, California 94105

Prepared by:CH2M HILL, Inc.

2525 Airpark DriveRedding, California 96001

April 2002

T E C H N I C A L MEMORANDUM_________________________CH2MHILL

Treatability Study ReportLava Cap Mine Superfund SitePREPARED FOR: David Seter/U.S. EP A

PREPARED BY: Rebecca Maco/CH2M HILLKevin Porter/CH2M HILL

COPIES: David Bunte/CH2M HILLDavid Towell/CH2M HILL

DATE: April 5,2002

1.0 IntroductionThis technical memorandum presents the results of Lava Cap Mine Treatability Study. Thetreatability study was conducted in accordance with the Work Plan for Treatability Study, LavaCap Mine Superfund Site (CH2M HILL, 2001a).

The Lava Cap Mine Treatability Study included bench-scale studies for iron coprecipitationof the mine seepage and tailings dewatering and solidification for the mine tailings on thesite.

These tests were conducted by CH2M HILL's Applied Sciences Laboratory (ASL) inCorvallis, Oregon, on samples collected from the Lava Cap Mine site. The tests wereconducted between August 2001 and October 2001.

The purpose of the tests was to collect data to support the Feasibility Study (FS) for the LavaCap Mine. The FS is being prepared as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's(EPA's) ongoing Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) for the Lava Cap MineSuperfund Site. This memorandum describes the objectives, methods, results, and conclu-sions of the treatability study.

2.0 Objectives2.1 Mine Seepage TreatmentThe objective of the bench-scale tests on mine seepage was to identify ferric chloride copre-cipitation parameters for treatment of the mine adit seepage that would result in an effluentquality below the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for arsenic. Parameters to be identi-fied included:

• Oxidation requirements to convert arsenic to As+5 oxidation state• Required ferric chloride dose without additional pH adjustment• Required ferric dose with pH adjustment by addition of sulfuric acid

RDCMAVA CAP TREAT.OOC

TREATABIUTY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE________

• Optimum treatment pH• Resultant water quality after treatment• Estimated sludge production rate and residual sludge characteristics

2.2 Tailings Dewatering and SolidificationThe objectives of the bench-scale tests on tailings were to:

• Obtain information on how the tailings could be dewatered and solidified• Evaluate the strength characteristics of the solidified materials• Evaluate the effectiveness of the solidification process in reducing contaminant mobility• Evaluate the revegetation potential of the raw tailings

3.0 MethodsThe test plan and methods for the treatability study are described in the Work Plan forTreatability Study, Lava Cap Mine Superfund Site (CH2M HILL, 2001a). Several changes weremade to the Work Plan in response to EPA comments. These changes are documented in theLava Cap Treatability Study Workplan Response to EPA Comments dated August 21,2001(CH2M HILL, 2001b). Treatability study methods and procedures for both the iron copre-cipitation study and the tailings dewatering and solidification study are summarized in thissection.

3.1 Iron Coprecipitation Study on Mine Adit SeepageThe iron coprecipitation study included the following steps, which are described below:

• Sample collection• Raw water characterization• Raw water oxidation• Iron coprecipitation jar tests• Residual sludge characterization

A water sample (approximately 20 gallons) was collected from the collapsed adit seepage atLava Cap Mine on August 21,2001, and shipped to ASL for use in this study. Several testsand analyses were conducted on the raw water, including:

• Alkalinity-pH titration curve• Dissolved arsenic - As+3 & As"1"5

• Total metals (TCLP and STLC list metals)• Chloride• Hardness• Iron (total and dissolved)• Nitrate• Silica• Sulfate• Turbidity• Total organic carbon (TOC)• UV254

ROD/LAVA CAP TREAT.DOC

TREATABIUTY STUDY REPORT______________________________________________________________LAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE

Arsenic speciation performed during raw water characterization revealed that all arsenicwas already present in the oxidized form (As+5); therefore, oxidation was not required. Priorspeciation tests conducted on the adit seepage water have shown that 23 percent of thearsenic present in the adit seepage water is As+3 (CH2M HILL, 2002a); therefore, it is sus-pected that the sample for the current test was oxidized during collection and transportprior to speciation analysis, and that the speciation test results for the treatability studysample are not representative of the seepage waters. As a result, pre-oxidation requirementswere not evaluated as part of this study and will require further study prior to systemdesign.

Following raw water characterization, three sets of jar tests were performed to evaluatearsenic treatment with iron coprecipitation. General procedures for each jar test included:

• Ferric chloride addition• Flocculation• Gravity settling• Filtration (0.45 micron filter)• Resultant water quality analyses: pH, chloride, sulfate, arsenic• Resultant sludge analyses: volume, weight, total suspended solids (TSS)

Each jar test consisted of a series of six jars, each with different treatment conditions. The jartests are summarized as follows:

• Test 1: Evaluate an optimum ferric chloride dose (as FeCls) for arsenic treatment at lowpH, by adding varying ferric chloride concentrations at a constant test pH of 6.0.

• Test 2: Evaluate an optimum treatment pH, using the optimum ferric chloride dose fromTest 1, over pH range of 5.5 to 7.5.

• Test 3: Evaluate treatment effectiveness by the addition of ferric chloride without pHadjustment.

At the conclusion of the jar tests, the optimum treatment conditions were selected (44 mg/Lferric chloride and pH 6.5), and a larger batch of water (12 liters) was treated, using theseoptimum conditions, to create a large enough volume of sludge with which to perform totalmetals analyses.

3.2 Tailings Dewatering and Solidification StudyThe tailings dewatering and solidification study included the following steps, which aredescribed below:

• Sample collection• Raw tailings characterization• Tailings dewatering• Tailings solidification• Analyses of solidified tailings

Tailings samples were collected in late August 2001 from four tests pits on the Lava Cap Site(Samples TP6, TP7, TP8, and TP9 as described in the Lava Cap Mine RI/FS Data Gaps

RDO\UWA CAP TREAT.DOC

TREAT ABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE

Investigation - Geotechnical Exploration (CH2M HILL, 2002b)). Samples were placed in5-gallon buckets and shipped to ASL for use in the treatability study. Tailings from TP7were selected for use in the treatability study as they were determined to be the most repre-sentative of tailings at the site. The sample comprised moist gray clays and sands.

Several tests and analyses were conducted on the raw tailings, including:

• Soil-water characteristic curve• Grain size• Specific gravity of solids• In situ moisture• Total arsenic and metals• Nitrogen (NO3-N)• Ortho-phosphate• pH• Organic matter content• Cation exchange capacity

Following characterization of the raw tailings, the tailings were dewatered by gravity, andthe following analyses were performed on the dewatered tailings:

• In situ moisture• Unit weight• Shear strength

Shear strength of the raw tailings and compaction of the dewatered tailings were not evalu-ated as part of this work (as stated in the Work Plan), but were included in the geotechnicalexploration portion of the data gaps investigation conducted in 2001 (CH2M HILL, 2002b).

Dewatered tailings were solidified at three different amendment ratios (5,10, and 20 per-cent, by weight) of Portland cement. At each amendment ratio, three batches of tailings andcement were prepared. Samples from each of the three batches were then composited tocreate one batch of solidified material at each amendment ratio. The following parameters ofthe solidified materials were measured:

• Unit weight• Compressive strength• Permeability• Arsenic and metals teachability

4.0 Summary of DataThis section summarizes the data collected during the iron coprecipitation and tailingsdewatering and solidification treatability studies. Data packages are provided in Attach-ments 1 and 2, respectively.

4.1 Iron Coprecipitation StudyThis section presents the results of the iron coprecipitation bench-scale studies, includingthe results of raw water characterization, jar test results, and residual sludge characteristics.

ROD/LAVA CAP TREAT.DOC

THEATABIUTY STUDY REPORT______________________________________________________________LAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE

4.1.1 Raw Water CharacterizationResults of the raw water characterization are presented in Table 4-1. The pH-alkalinity titra-tion curve is provided in Attachment 1. In general, the sample water is characterized as veryhard, containing a high concentration of minerals. The high mineral content of the wateralso contributes to high alkalinity, or buffering capacity. The water is also relatively high iniron, although the vast majority (more than 93 percent) is not dissolved, but rather presentas suspended solids and colloidal matter.

TABLE 4-1Summary of Results - Raw Water Analyses (detected constituents only)Lava Cap Mine Treatability Study Report

Parameter

Arsenic, dissolved (all As*5)Barium, totalIron, total a

Magnesium, totalSilica, totalZinc, totalTurbidityAlkalinityHardnessChlorideSulfatePHTOG

Units

H9/L

^g/Lug/Ljig/Lng/LWI/Lntu

mg/L as CaCO3

mg/L as CaCOsmg/Lmg/Lunitsmg/L

Value

320

62.8

1,43010,70022,00020.95.4171

220

1.068.37.850.78

a Dissolved iron was not detected (detection limit 100 WJ/L).

4.1.2 Ferric Chloride Coprecipitation Jar TestsA summary of results for each of the three sets of jar tests is presented in this section. Com-plete jar test results are provided in Attachment 1. Results are slightly variable from one jartest to another; for example, at a pH of 6.0 and a ferric chloride dose of 44 mg/L, the finalarsenic concentration was 4.42 /ig/L for Test No. 1, and 1.32 /ig/L for Test No. 2. Thisvariation could be attributed to a number of factors, including incomplete mixing andchemical or biological changes within the solution over time (the jar tests were performedup to 2 weeks apart). General trends, however, are consistent among the three jar tests.

Jar Test No. 1The first jar test utilized sulfuric acid to maintain the solution pH at 6.0 while ferric chloridedose was varied between 30 and 100 mg/L. The results of this test are presented in Fig-ure 4-1 (all figures are provided at the back of this document). All ferric chloride dosesevaluated, with the exception of the 30 mg/L dose, resulted in final effluent arsenic concen-trations below the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 10 iig/L. At a ferric chloride doseof 30 mg/L, the final effluent arsenic concentration was 13 ug/L. The lowest ferric chloridedose that resulted in an effluent arsenic concentration less than the MCL was 44 mg/L.

RDCALAVA CAP TREAT.DOC

TREATABUJTY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE____________________________________________________________________

Minimal benefit was achieved with ferric chloride doses greater than 44 mg/L; therefore44 mg/L was selected as the optimum dose.

Jar Test No. 2The objective of the second jar test was to determine an optimum treatment pH within therange of 5.5 to 7.5, using the optimum ferric chloride dose determined during Jar Test No. 1(44 mg/L). Results of Jar Test No. 2 are presented in Figure 4-2. As shown in the figure, thehighest degree of arsenic removal was achieved at a pH of 6.2. However, it should be notedthat effluent concentrations below the MCL were achieved for the entire range of pH tested.The maximum effluent arsenic concentration for the series of jar tests was 3.3 ug/L at a pHof 7.4.

Jar Test No. 3The objective of the third jar test was to determine the effectiveness of ferric chloride copre-cipitation without pH adjustment. Results of this test could be used to determine whether itis more cost-effective to control pH with acid addition or excess ferric chloride addition. Theresults of Jar Test No. 3 are presented in Figure 4-3. Effluent arsenic concentrations werebelow the MCL for all ferric chloride doses evaluated (15 to 140 mg/L). The pH of thesolution ranged from a high of 7.3 at a ferric chloride dose of 15 mg/L to a low of 6.0 at aferric chloride dose of 140 mg/L. Residual sludge production ranged from 15 to 88 dry mil-ligrams (mg) per liter of treated water.

4.1.3 Residual Sludge CharacteristicsAs demonstrated in Figure 4-3, the rate of sludge production is highly dependent on ferricchloride dose. Based on the results of the three jar tests, a set of optimum treatment condi-tions was selected for use in preparing a larger volume of treated water for analysis ofresidual sludge characteristics. The greatest arsenic removal was achieved in jar test No. 2with pH 6.2 and a ferric chloride dose of 44 mg/L. However, at the same ferric chloridedose, the final arsenic concentration was also well below the MCL at pH higher than 6.2 (seeFigure 4-2). Full-scale iron chloride plants typically operate around pH 6.5; therefore, for thelarger batch study, the selected test conditions were pH 6.5 (controlled by sulfuric acid addi-tion) and a ferric chloride dose of 44 mg/L.

Twelve liters of raw water were treated, and 1,800 mg (dry) of sludge were produced. Thistranslates into a sludge production rate of 150 mg per liter of water treated, or 1.25 poundsof sludge per 1,000 gallons of water treated.

As part of this test, and to support a metals mass balance for the treatment process, thefollowing samples were analyzed for total metals (sample IDs listed in parentheses areincluded in the Attachment 1 data package):

• Raw water (LC-Raw)• Raw, filtered water (LC-Raw-Filt)• Treated water (LC-JT-4-Settled)• Treated, filtered water (LC-JT-4-Filt)• Residual sludge (LC-JT-4-Sludge)

None of the metals analyzed for, including arsenic, were detected in the treated, filteredwater, with the exception of barium, which was detected at 50.3 jig/L. The detection limit

RDD/LAVA CAP TREAT.DOC

TREATABIUTY STUDY REPORTUVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE

for arsenic was 2 fig/L. Metals concentrations detected in the sludge are presented inTable 4-2 in mg/kg dry weight. Based on these results, corresponding metals concentrationsfor a variety of dewatered sludge solids concentrations were calculated and presented inTable 4-2. As discussed in the Preliminary Draft Feasibility Study Report for the Lava Cap MineSuperfund Site (CH2M HILL, 2002a), the expected sludge solids content at disposal is 22 per-cent. It should be noted that iron was not analyzed for in the sludge, and is therefore notpresented in Table 4-2, although a significant quantity is likely present in the sludge.

TABLE 4-2Residual Sludge Metals Content (Detects Only)Lava Cap Mine Treatability Study Report

Calculated Sludge MetalsSludge Total Concentration (mg/kg wet weight) for

Metals Various Sludge SolidsConcentration Concentrations

AluminumArsenicBariumCobaltCopperLeadMercuryZinc

llll«|/i\JJ Ul J

weight)

8415,33010610.628.313.976.752.5

1%

8.4531.10.10.30.10.80.5

5%

42.12675.30.51.40.73.82.6

10%

84.153310.61.12.81.47.75.3

22%

1851,17323.32.36.23.116.911.6

• 1 bW

(mg/kg)

NS500100NSNS

1,00020

5,000

• w *\ w i ••• v

(mg/kg)

NS50

1,000NSNS502

2,500

&w f\ i vkr

(mg/kg)

NS100

2,000NSNS1004

NSTTLC = Total Threshold Limit ConcentrationSTLC = Soluble Threshold Limit ConcentrationTCLP = Toxicity Characteristics Leaching ProcedureNS = Not Specified

Also presented in Table 4-2 are the Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC), ten timesthe Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration (STLC), and 20 times the Toxicity CharacteristicsLeaching Procedure (TCLP) limit for each compound detected. The TTLC and STLC areused when determining the hazardous waste characterization under California state regula-tions. The TCLP is used when determining a hazardous waste characterization under fed-eral regulations.

Neither the STLC nor TCLP tests were conducted as part of this treatability study becausethe tests each require 50 to 100 grams of sludge to perform the analysis. At the observed rateof sludge production (150 mg per liter treated), 667 liters (approximately 175 gallons) ofwater would need to be treated to generate 100 grams of sludge, which was not feasible forthis bench-scale study. However, the total metals results obtained can be compared withTTLC, STLC, and TCLP limits to assess the hazardous characteristics of the sludge. A briefexplanation of TTLC, STLC, and TCLP, and how the results of this study may be comparedto each, is provided in the following paragraphs.

RDDMAVA CAP TREAT.DOC

TREATABIUTY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE____________________________________________________________________

TTLCThe total metals test performed on the sludge measured the total concentration of the targetanalyte in the sample and is identical to the TTLC test; the only difference being that thetotal metals test is reported in mg/kg dry weight and the TTLC test is reported in mg/kgwet weight. Therefore, if the concentration obtained from the total metals test is scaled toaccount for the anticipated percent moisture in the sludge, the results of the two tests aredirectly comparable.

STLCThe intent of the STLC test is to simulate the conditions that may be present in a landfillwhere water may infiltrate into the landfill waste and migrate to the groundwater, carryingthe soluble materials with it. The STLC (California) test is similar to the TCLP (federal) test,although the methods and limit concentrations are slightly different. The extraction fluidused in the STLC test is a sodium citrate buffer solution. During the STLC test, the sample isdiluted 1:10; therefore, when comparing total metals results, the comparison should bemade to 10 times the STLC criteria. It could be anticipated that less than 100 percent of themetals present in the sludge would leach during an STLC test. Therefore, if the total metalsconcentration is greater than 10 times the STLC, the sludge could potentially be hazardousbut it is not necessarily so. An STLC analysis will be required to make the determination.Conversely, if the total metals concentration is less than 10 times the STLC, it can be rea-sonably assumed that the sludge would pass an STLC analysis.

TCLPThe TCLP test is similar to the STLC test in theory as discussed above. One of two extractionfluids is used in the TCLP test, depending on the initial alkalinity of the sample. For lowalkalinity samples, a sodium acetate solution at pH 4.93 is used; for high alkalinity samples,an acetic acid solution at pH 2.8 is used. The dilution factor for the TCLP test is 1:20; there-fore, total metals results should be compared to 20 times the TCLP criteria. As with theSTLC, if the total metals concentration is greater than 20 times the TCLP criteria, the sludgecould be hazardous and would require a TCLP analysis. If the total metals concentration isless than 20 times the TCLP criteria, it can be reasonably assumed that the sludge wouldpass a TCLP analysis.

In summary, if the total metals results (on a wet basis) do not exceed the TTLC, 10 times theSTLC limit, or 20 times the TCLP limit, then normally no further analysis is required, andthe material is classified as non-hazardous. Based on the results presented in Table 4-2,arsenic and mercury concentrations could cause the sludge to be classified as hazardous.Leaching analyses, such as TCLP or STLC, should be performed to determine the actualhazardous waste classification of the residual sludge.

4.2 Tailings Dewatering and SolidificationThis section presents the results of the tailings dewatering and solidification bench-scalestudies, including the results of raw tailings characterization, and analyses performed ondewatered and solidified tailings.

4.2.1 Raw Tailings CharacterizationLaboratory data packages for the raw tailings characterization are provided in Attachment 2and summarized in this section. The soil water characteristic curve is presented in

RDD/LAVA CAP TREAT.DOC

TREATABIUTY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE

Figure 4-4. According to the characteristic curve performed on the raw tailings, dewateringbased on gravity drainage may be accomplished, but moisture contents would not beexpected to decrease below about 12 percent.

Shear strength of the raw tailings (with as-received moisture content) was not investigatedas part of this work, but was analyzed as part of the geotechnical component of the datagaps investigation (CH2M HILL, 2002b). All other raw tailings characterization parametersare summarized in Table 4-3.

TABLE 4-3Summary of Results - Raw Tailings CharacterizationLava Cap Mine Treatability Study Report

Parameter

Grain size a

In Situ MoistureAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumCadmiumChromiumCobaltCopperLeadMercuryMolybdenumNickelSeleniumSilverThalliumVanadiumZincNitrate-NPHOrtho-phosphateOrganic Matter ContentCation Exchange Capacity

Units

-% dry weight

mg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weightmg/kg dry weight

mg/kgunits

mg/kg%

meq/100g

Value

36% Sand, 51% Silt. 13% Clay22.21.554920.3

<0.982.640.34.634.944.30.11<6.213.7<106.3

<2.59.22351.477.89

<0.010.29

1.4

a Particle size distribution curve provided in Attachment 2.

The results presented in Table 4-3 can also provide a basis for a preliminary review ofrevegetation strategies for the Lava Cap Mine Site. Tailings revegetation/restoration is analternative that will be explored in the FS for Lava Cap Mine. Revegetation can help tophysically stabilize cohesiveless tailings, accelerate soil formation processes, and create con-ditions that can stimulate soil biological activity; all of which can contribute to a sustainablesoil ecosystem.

RDDMAVA CAP TREAT.DOC


In general, no major concerns appear to exist regarding revegetation that cannot be over-come with the proper tailings restoration design. The texture of the tailings is a silty-sandwith medium to large pore space that may limit water-holding capacity. In those areas ofthe site where groundwater is too deep to be accessed by restoration vegetation and water-holding capacity of the tailings is low, irrigation maybe required during establishment ofvegetation or as a permanent system to supplement seasonal rainfall.

Based on the results presented in Table 4-3, nutrient concentrations are very limited. Thiscan be overcome with a regular fertigation (a practice which can be used to supply muchneeded essential nutrients to the restoration vegetation) system. The cation exchangecapacity of the tailings (1.4 meq/lOOg) is low for soils but typical for unweathered tailings.

To further assess the potential for revegetation/restoration of tailings at the Lava Cap Site,the following tests are recommended for the raw tailings: salinity, electrical conductivity,sodium adsorption ratio (SAR), and growth tests (both germination tests and longer-termgrowth tests).

4.2.2 Dewatered Tailings CharacterizationThe shear strength of the dewatered tailings (initial water content of 11.7 percent) wasevaluated, and results are presented in Attachment 2. Dry unit weight of the dewateredtailings was 95 pounds per cubic foot (lb/ft3). Compaction of the dewatered tailings was notinvestigated as part of this work, but was included in the geotechnical component of thedata gaps investigation (CH2M HILL, 2002b) conducted in February 2002.

4.2.3 Solidified Tailings CharacterizationResults of unit weight and compressive strength analyses performed on solidified tailingsare summarized in Table 4-4. Complete results are provided in Attachment 2.

TABLE 44Unit Weight, Compressive Strength, and Permeability Test Results - Solidified TailingsLava Cap Mine Treatability Study Report

Results at Each Amendment RatioParameter

Wet DensityDry DensityUnconfined Compressive StrengthAverage Permeability

Unit

lb/ft 3lb/ft 3psi

cm/sec

5%

117.197.9124.33x1 0'6

10%

121.9102.3427

1x10'6

20%

11497.7729

4x1 cr6

The wet density was measured on the solidified material at the water content at which itwas received. To measure the dry density, the solidified material was dried in a 110° C ovento a constant weight prior to density measurement.

As described in the Work Plan for Treatability Study. Lava Cap Mine Superfund Site (CH2MHILL, lOOla), Type 2 Portland cement was selected as a stabilizing agent. Three amendmentratios, 5,10, and 20 percent by weight, were tested. The amendment ratios were based onthe "as received" weight of the materials. As shown in Table 4-4, unconfined strengthresults increased with cement content, as expected. However, based on the data obtained,

10 RDD/LAVA CAP TREAT.DOC

TREATABIIITY STUDY REPORT____________________________________________________________________LAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE

there was no obvious decrease in permeability with increasing cement content. Permeabil-ities were consistently in the 1O6 cm/sec range. Permeabilities were expected to decreasewith increasing cement content. However, laboratory personnel indicated nothing unusualwas observed during testing, and that there was no leakage along the sample/membraneinterface.

A study of the characteristics of the solidified tailings was performed to evaluate the feasi-bility of leaving the solidified tailings in place at the Lava Cap Site. One primary concernwith this alternative is leaching of metals from the solidified tailings into surface water andgroundwater. Metals' leachability of the solidified tailings was evaluated using the SyntheticPrecipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP).

The SPLP procedure is particularly useful in those situations where a determination must bemade if a potentially contaminated material, left in situ, will leach toxic substances whenexposed to normal weathering. Instead of the landfill leachate simulating acetic acid mixtureused in the TCLP method, nitric and sulfuric acids are used in an effort to simulate the acidrains resulting from airborne nitric and sulfuric oxides. Results of the SPLP analysis may becompared to TCLP (federal) and STLC (California) limits to evaluate the feasibility of leav-ing the solidified materials in situ. Results of the solidified tailings SPLP analyses (detectedconstituents only), and the corresponding TCLP and STLC limits are presented in Table 4-5.As shown in the table, all amendment ratios tested resulted in solidified materials withmetals leachability well below regulatory limits. Leaching analyses were not performed onthe raw tailings, although such analyses are recommended for future studies as it is possiblethat the raw tailings would pass STLC and TCLP limits without amendment.

TABLE 4-5Solidified Tailings Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure Results (Detected Constituents Only)Lava Cap Mine Treatability Study Report

SPLP Result (mg/L) for Various Cement Amendment Ratios

5% 10% 20% STLC (mg/L) TCLP (mg/L)

ArsenicBariumChromiumCopper

0.0166ND

0.0417ND

0.01520.138

0.03670.0289

0.01330.2660.02270.0226

51005

25

51005

NSSTLC = Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration; TCLP = Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure; ND = Not Detected;NS = Not Specified

5.0 ConclusionsThe following conclusions resulted from an analysis of the treatability study data. Theseconclusions have been used to support the development of the Preliminary Draft FeasibilityStudy Report for the Lava Cap Mine Superfund Site (CH2M HILL, 2002a).

RDDMAVACAPTREAT.DOC 11

TREATABIUTY STUDY REPORTUVA CAP MINE SUPERFUNO SITE

5.1 Iron Coprecipitation Treatability Study• Pre-oxidation requirements require further study. The water sample collected for this

study was oxidized during sample collection and transport and therefore could not beused to determine oxidation requirements. Additional bench-scale or pilot-scale tests arerecommended to estimate oxidant dosage requirements.

• Optimum treatment conditions are 44 mg/L ferric chloride dose (as FeCls) and pH 6.2.Adequate treatment was also realized during Jar Test No. 3 with 15 mg/L ferric chloridedose, which could theoretically be a more cost-effective process than the 44 mg/L dose;however, Jar Test No. 1 demonstrated inadequate treatment at a dose of 30 mg/L.Therefore, optimum treatment conditions were conservatively selected to be 44 mg/Lferric chloride and pH 6.2.

• Under optimum treatment conditions, sludge is produced at a rate of 1.25 dry poundsper 1,000 gallons of water treated.

• Total metals tests performed on the residual sludge as part of this study indicate that theresidual sludge could be hazardous, although STLC and TCLP testing is required to fur-ther evaluate the leaching potential and waste classification of the sludge.

• Effluent arsenic concentrations below the MCL are achievable with iron coprecipitationat Lava Cap Mine.

5.2 Tailings Dewatering and Solidification Treatability Study• The tailings may be dewatered by gravity drainage methods to a moisture content of

about 12 percent. Dewatering the tailings provides an increase to the material shearstrength.

• With increased cement content, material shear strength increases and permeabilityremains consistently low.

• The metals leaching rate from the solidified tailings (solidification with Portland cementin amendment ratios of 5,10, and 20 percent) is well below STLC and TCLP limits.Therefore, leaving the solidified materials in situ is a feasible alternative and will beevaluated further in the FS.

• In general, there do not appear to be any major concerns regarding revegetation thatcannot be overcome with the proper tailings restoration design. Additional testing,including salinity, electrical conductivity, SAR, and growth tests (both germination testsand longer-term growth tests) is recommended.

6.0 ReferencesCH2M HILL, 2002a. Preliminary Draft Feasibility Study Report for the Lava Cap Mine SuperfundSite. January.

CH2M HILL, 2002b. Lava Cap Mine RI/FS Data Gaps Investigation - Geotechnical Exploration.February.

12 RDD/LAVACAPTREAT.DOC


CH2M HILL, 2001b. Lava Cap Treatability Study Workplan Response to EPA Comments. August.

CH2M HILL, 2001a. Work Plan for Treatability Study, Lava Cap Mine Superfund Site. July 2001.

RDO\LAVACAPTREAT.DOC 13

= 6.0

30 40 50 60 70

FERRIC CHLORIDE DOSE, AS FeCI3 (mg/L)80 90 100

LCJreat-figs.xls\Flgure 4-1

FIGURE 4-1JAR TEST NO. 1 RESULTSTREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITENEVADA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

3.5

2.5

Ferric Chloride Dose, as FeCI3 = 44 mg/L

= 2

ocIo

I

1.5

0.5

5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5

pH (units)

7.0 7.5

FIGURE 4-2JAR TEST NO. 2 RESULTSTREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITENEVADA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

LC_treat-figs.xls\Figure 4-2

o

k1<Q

3

TREATED WATER, RESIDUAL ARSENICCONCENTRATION (j/g/L) OR pH

S5I32

m3D3Dos5305m

IJ"

o

i

RESIDUAL SLUDGE PRODUCTION(dry mg per liter of treated water)

§ S 3 S 8 8

m333DOO

53DOm

mI

8

§

8 1

\

i

IooUJcciiCOo

20

18

16

14

12

10

8PRESSURE (bars)

10 12 14 16

LCJreat-figs.xlsVFigure 4-4

FIGURE 4-4SOIL-WATER CHARACTERISTIC CURVE, RAWTAILINGSTREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITENEVADA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

ATTACHMENT 1

Iron Coprecipitation Study Data

Raw Water Characterization

16

CH2MHILL Titration Curve

Sample InformationClientSourceSample Date/TuneProject NumberClient Sample IDLab Sample ID

Lava Cap

LC-Raw602001

Test InformationAnalystTest Date/TimeSample Volume

ET8/29/2001 1:00

50 mL

Titration Curve

5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.54.5

Reagent CharacteristicsTypeChemicalReagent Strength

AcidH2SO40.02 N

BaseNaOH

Total Alkalinity

171 mg/L as CaCO3

Measurements ||

PH7.857.807.737.677.607.567.487.407.347.277.217.14

H2SO4(mL)0.000.100.250.500.751.001.251.501.752.002.252.50

7.09 2.757.03 3.006.986.95

3.253.50

6.90 ; 3.756.85 4.006.81 , 4.256.76 4.50

NaOlI(mL)

Alkalinitymg/L as CaCO3

171.0169.0166.0161.0156.0151.0146.0141.0136.0131.0126.0121.0116.0111.0106.0101.096.091.086.081.0

PH6.736.666.626.616.546.466.426.386.306.206.126.025.905.655.224.554.50

H2SO4(mL)4.755.005.255.505.756.006.256.506.757.007.257.507.758.008.258.508.55

NaOH(mL)

Alkalinity ||mg/L as CaCO3;

76.071.066.061.056.051.046.041.036.031.026.021.016.011.06.01.00.0

Alkalinity 30: end point = pH 4.9Alkalinity 150: end point = pH 4.6Alkalinity 500: end point = pH 4.3

LC titration cuive.xls. Raw Page 1 of 1 01/17/2002 2 24PM

CH2MHILL Characterization

Sample InformationClientSourceDate/Time CollectedProject Number (login)Laboratory ID (login)Project Number (analysis)Laboratory ID (analysis)

Lava Cap MineRaw

156197.00.LC602001

ParametersAntimony, total ug/LBarium, total ug/LBeryllium, total ug/LCadmium, total ug/LChromium, total ug/LCobalt, total ug/LCopper, total ug/Lron, total ug/Lron, dissolved ug/LLead, total ug/LMagnesium, total ug/LMolybdenum, total ug/LNickel, total ug/LSelenium, total ug/LSilica, total ug/LSilver, total ug/LThallium, total ug/LVanadium, total ug/LZinc, total ug/LTurbidity ntuAlkalinity mg/L as CaC03

Hardness mg/L as CaC03

Chloride mg/LNitrate-N mg/LSulfate mg/LTOC mg/LUV-254 cm1

<562.8<4<5<10<10<101430<100<3

10700<25<20<7

22000<10<10<2520.95.41712201.0

<0.168.30.78

< 0.009

LC Characterization-water.xls Page 1 of 1 Print Date: 01/30/2002

Jar Test Results

CH2MHILL LAVA CAP JAR TEST

Test InformationClientSourceSample LocationSample Date/TimeProject NumberSeries NumberAnalystTest Date/Time

Lava CapADITADIT

8/21/2001 1808151319.TT.01

1DAH

9/6/2001 15:00

Test Water CharacteristicsTemperature 9/6/01 15:00pH 9/6/01 15:00Turbidity 9/6/01 15:00Alkalinity mg/LasCaC03UV254 cm-1TOC mg/LSUVA L/mg-mArsenic, soluble ug/L

23 °C7.60 units5.4 ntu

1710.0060.780.76320

Test Objectives

Evaluate various ferric chloride doses (ranging from 30-100 mg/L) at a constant pH of 6.0

Reagent CharacteristicsType2homicalStock StrengthStock Reagent Basis

... : - : V : - i : : . : : .Jar*:-::;*r :

Target pHAlkalinityVolumeSulfuricAcU

Lime

Ferric Chloride

pH after coag additionpH after adjustmentRapid Mix

Ftocculation

Ftoc Observations

unitsmg/LasCaCOs

Stock AddedDoseStock AddedDoseStock AddedDoseStock AddedDose

RPMDurationRPMDuration

Settling Period

Settling Observations

Settled Water PretreatmentpHORPChlorideSulfateIron, solubleArsenic, solubleSludge @ 30 minSludge @ 30 minTSS (sludge)TSS (sludge)

unitsmV

mg/Lmg/Lug/Lug/LmLcmmg

mg/L

AcidSulfuricAcidlOOOmeq/L

HzSO*1

6.021

2.0 L

6.00 mL30 mg/L

6.966.02

BaseLime

1000meo/LCaJOHfc

2 :6.021

2.0 L

8.80 mL44 mg/L

6.766.07

CoagulantFerric Chloride

10000 mg/LFeCt

3 : :;

6.021

2.0 L

11.60mL58 mg/L

6.686.03

Polymer

! 46.021

2.0 L

14.40 mL72 mg/L

6.566.06

Oxidant

5 - : . :

6.021

2.0 L

17.20 mL86 mg/L

6.446.03

66.021

2.0 L

20.00 mL100 mg/L

L 6.326.05

2001 min

60/40/205 min each

• @ 60 RPM: pin floe formed in all jars- 8 40 RPM: floe grew to small size in all jars, fluffy floe density- @ 20 RPM: floe grew to medium size in all jars, remained fluffy

15 min

- Fluffy sludge density- Majority of floe settled in the 15 min. settling period

0.45 um filtered6.8333422.0168

<10012.97

193.53719

6.9332032.0147

<1004.42376.66030

6.8931041.7138

<1003.31315.77739

6.9531051.7122

<1003.4258

10.79347

6.9029060.9111

<1002.0458

10.710955

7.0229070.498.5<1001.10509.912965

Lava Cap Jartest 9-2001.xls, LC-JT-1 (dose) Page 1 ol 3 Print Date: 01/24/2002



Lava CapADITADIT

8/21/2001 1808151319.TT.01

2TBMY

9/27/2001 PM

Test Water CharacteristicsTemperature 9/27/2001 PMpH 9/27/2001 PM

Turbidity 9/27/2001 PMAlkalinity mg/LasCaC03UV254 cm-1FOC mg/LSUVA L/mg-mArsenic, soluble ug/L

23.5 °C7.70 units

5.4 ntu171

0.0060.780.76320

Test Objectives

Evaluate various pH conditions with a constant ferric chloride dose at 44 mg/L

Reagent CharacteristicsTypeChemicalStock StrengthStock Reagent Basis

--: ' /. ' •? : :v;?3«rt;-,: ' ! -Target pHVolumeSulfuricAcid

Lime

Ferric Chloride

)H sftef (adjustmentRapid Mix

Flocculation

Floe Observations

units



Settling Period


pH after flocculation unitsSettled Water Pretreatment>H

ORPChlorideSulfateron, solubleArsenic, solubleSludge @ 30 minSludge 6 30 minTSS (sludge)TSS (sludge)

unitsmV


mg/L

Acid

Sulfuric AcidlOOOmeq/L

H2SO,, 1 ,.:...,

5.502.0 L

5.20 mL2.6meq/L

8.80 mL44 mg/L

5.5

BaseLime

10000 mg/LCatOHfc

26.002.0 L

3.15 mL1.6meqrt_

8.80 mL44 mg/L

6.0


10000 mg/LFed.,.;3:;,h6.252.0 L

2.55 mL1.3meq/L

8.80 mL44 mg/L

6.3

46.502.0 L

1.32mL

0.7meq/L

8.80 mL44 mg/L

6.5

,.;:.. 5 ,::-;. ;

7.002.0 L

0.63 mL3.2 mg/L8.80 mL44 mg/L

7.0

67.502.0 L

4.57 mL22.9 mg/L8.80 mL44 mg/L

7.52001 min

60/40/205 min each

Fme sized Roc Fine-Medium sized Hoc Fine Sized Floe

15 min

Most of the floe settled in 15 minutes, leaving a slightly turbid supernatant. The settled sludge had a fluffy density.

5.4 6.0 6.2 6.5 6.9 7.40.45 um filtered

5.818526.6163

<1001.86214.06130

6.3192

26.5128

<1001.32193.75527

6.518526.9113

<1000.94214.26432

6.818027.188.8

<1002.30305.76130

7.118526.960.4

<1002.09346.66331

7.718027.359.6<1003.32244.67940

Lava Cap Jartest 9-2001 .xls, LC-JT-2 (pH) Page 2 of 3 Print Date: 01/24/2002



Lava CapADITADIT

8/21/2001 1808151319.TT.01

3TBMY

10/02/2001 PM

Test Water CharacteristicsTemperature 10/02/2001 PM»H 10/02/2001 PMTurbidity 10/02/2001 PMAlkalinity mg/LasCaC03UV254 cm-1TOC mg/LSUVA Umg-mArsenic, soluble ug/L

22.0 °C7.50 units

5.4 ntu171

0.0060.780.76320

Test Objectives

Evaluate various pH conditions using ferric chloride only (no acid addition)

Reagent CharacteristicsTypeChemicalStock StrengthStock Reagent Basis

."• • - . : - • Jar*Target pHVolumeSulfurlcAcid

Lime

Ferric Chloride

units


pH after ferric chloride additionRapid Mix

Rocculatlon

Floe Observations


Settling Period


)H after flocculation unitsSettled Water PretreatmentpHORPChlorideSulfateIron, solubleArsenic, solubleSludge @ 30 minSludge @ 30 minTSS (sludge)TSS (sludge)

unitsmV


mg/L

AcidSulfuricAcid1000meq/L

H2S04

17.242.0 L

3.00 ml15 mg/L

BaseLime

10000 mg/LCa(OH)2

26.982.0 L

6.00 mL30 mg/L


10000 mg/LFeCI3

36.722.0 L

11.00 mL55 mg/L

46.462.0 L

16.00 mL80 mg/L

56.202.0 L

22.00 mL110 mg/L

6.: ! ::}

5.902.0 L

28.00 mL140 mg/L

2001 min

60/40/205 min each

15 min

7.3 7.1 6.9 6.7 6.4 6.00.45 urn filtered

7.51939.9259.3

<1006.12

102.23115

7.318033.659.1

<1001.95193.65125

7.118618.959.2

<1001.50509.67839

6.8198

u_ 49i6

58.6<1001.0468

12.611156

6.6194

68.158.8

<1001.1776

14.312060

6.320486.257.7

<1001.2561

11.717588

lava Cap Jartest 9-2001 .xls, LC-JT-3 (ferric pH) Page 3 of 3 Phnt Date: 01/24/2002

Residual Sludge Data

18

CH2M HILL

Applied Sciences Group

2300 NW Walnut Blvd

Corvallis, OR

97330-3538

CH2MHILL . , - . , ,Applied Sciences Group

97339-0428

Tel 541.752.4271

October 22, 2001 FOX5017520276

Lava Cap

156197.00.LC

RE: Laboratory Report for Lava CapApplied Sciences Group Reference No. 6267

Rebecca Maco/SAC:

On October 10, 2001, CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group received five samples with arequest for analysis of selected parameters. All analyses were performed by CH2M HELLunless otherwise indicated below.

The analytical results and associated quality control data are enclosed. Any unusualdifficulties encountered during the analysis of your samples are discussed in the casenarrative.

CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group appreciates your business and looks forward toserving your analytical needs again. If you should have any questions concerning the data, orif you need additional information, please call Ms. Kathy McKinley at (541) 758-0235,extension 3120.

Sincerely,

0Judy GreydanusLaboratory Representative

Enclosures

Tim Maloney/CVO

OR100022PAGE1 of //

CLDZNT SAMPLE CROSS-REFERENCE

CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group Reference No. 6267

Sample ID626701626702626703626704626705

Client Sample ID/LC-JT-4-Filt -^

LC-JT-4-SIudpe/-LC-JT-4-Setded

/ LC-Raw -tW^^/ LC-Raw-Filt -^

DateCollected10/10/200110/10/2001

,/ c 10/10/2001l7^^ 10/10/2001

10/10/2001

TimeCollected

AMAMAMAMAM

- 2 -

CASE NARRATIVEMETALS

Client/Project: Lava Cap

I.

II.

in.

IV.

Holding Time:All acceptance criteria were met.

Digestion Exceptions:None.

Analysis:

A. Calibration:All acceptance criteria were met.

B. ICP Interference Check Sample:All acceptance criteria were met.

C. Spike Sample(s):All acceptance criteria were met.

D. Duplicate Sample(s):All acceptance criteria were met.

E. Laboratory Control Sample(s):All acceptance criteria were met.

F. ICP Serial Dilution:Not Required.

G. Other:None

Documentation Exceptions:None

Lab Reference No.: 6267

V. I certify that this data package is in compliance with the terms and conditions agreed to by theclient and CH2M HILT,, both technically and for completeness, except for the conditions detailedabove. Release of the data contained in this hardcopy data package has been authorized by theLaboratory Manager or his designee, as verified by the following signature.

Prepared by:

Reviewed by:

-3

CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Laboratory

Client Information

Client Sample ID:

Project Name:Project Manager:

Sampled By:Sampling Date:Sampling Time:

Type:Matrix:Basis:

Analyte

Aluminum, AlAntimony, SbArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead, PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn

LC-JT-4-Filt

Lava Cap

Lab Information

Lab Sample ID:

Date Received:Rebecca Maco/SACTim Maloney10/10/01AMGrabWaterAs Received

MRL

1005.02.0

25.04.05,0

40.010.010.03.0

0.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0

SampleResult

1005.02.050.34.05.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0

Qualifier

UUU

UUUUUUUUUUUUU

Report

Units

pg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/Lpg/L

Revision No.:Reported By:Reviewed By:

AnalysisMethod

EPA 200.7EPA 200.7SM3113BEPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7

626701

10/10/20010JG/YL/SH.^9^-

DateAnalyzed

10/15/0110/15/0110/16/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01

U=Not detected at specified reporting limits

CH2M HILLApplied Sciences Group

-4

2300 NW Walnut Blvd, CexvoWs. OR 973303538P.O. Box 428. CorvaWs. OR 97339-0428

Tel 541.752.4271 Fax 541.752.0276


Client Information

Client Sample ID:



Type:Matrix:Basis:

Analyte


LC-JT-4-Sludge

Lava Cap

Lab Information

Lab Sample ID:

Date Received:Rebecca Maco/SACTim Maloney10/10/01AMGrabSoilDry Weight (99%

MRL

1005.010.025.04.05.0io.o10.010.03.0

0.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0

moisture) *

SampleResult

8415.0

53301064.05.010.010.628.313.976.725.020.07.010.025.052.5

/ J^&**'/t^T^ 0

Qualifier

U

UUu

uuuuu

Report

,/,

-^^

Units

mg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kg


AnalysisMethod

EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7

626702

10/10/20010JG/YL/SH2>*Z&-

DateAnalyzed

10/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01

.̂ U=Not detected at specified reporting limits

CH2MHILLApplied Sciences Group

23OONW Walnut Blvd. CorvaSls. OR 9733&353SP.O. Box 428. Corvallls. OR 97339-0428

Tel 541.752.427} fax 541.752.0276


Client Information

Client Sample ID:



Type:Matrix:Basis:

Analyte


LC-JT-4-Settled

Lava Cap

Lab Information

Lab Sample ID:


MRL

1005.02.0

25.04.05.0

•10.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0

SampleResult

1005.036.352.14.05.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0

Qualifier

UU

UUUUUUUUUUUUU

Report

Units

Ag/LA^g/LA/g/LA/g/LfjQ/\~A/g/LA*g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L


AnalysisMethod

EPA 200.7EPA 200.7SM3113BEPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7

626703

10/10/20010JG/YL/SH-£2*4-

DateAnalyzed

10/15/0110/15/0110/16/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01



-6 -

2300 NW Walnut Blvd. Corvcfc OR 97330-3538P.O. Box 428, CoivafUs, OR 97339-0428

Tel 541.752.4271 Fax 541.752.0276


Client Information

Client Sample ID:



Type:Matrix:Basis:

Analyte


LC-Raw

Lava Cap

Lab Information

Lab Sample ID:


MRL

1005.010.025.04.05.0

-10.010.0-10.03.0

0.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0

SampleResult

1235.070764.64.05.010.010.010.03.0

0.1025.020.07.010.025.024.1

Qualifier

U

«

UUUUUUUUUUUU

Report

Units

A/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L//g/Lx/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L


AnalysisMethod


626704

10/10/20010JG/YL/SH-s^fcj-

DateAnalyzed

10/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01



-1-

2300 NWWalnut Blvd., CorvalUs. OR 97330-3538P.O. Box428. CorvaaiS. OR 973394428

Tel 541.752.4271 Fax 541752.0276


Client Information

Client Sample ID:

Project Name:Project Manager


Type:Matrix:Basis:

Analyte


LC-Raw-Fllt

Lava Cap

Lab Information

Lab Sample ID:


MRL

1005.010.025.04.05.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0

SampleResult

too5.030854.64.05.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0

Qualifier

UU

UU.UUUUUUUUUUU

Report

Units

//g/Lywg/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L;/g/L//g/t-//g/LA/g/Lvgfl-j/g/LvgH-vgfl-

Revision No.:Reported By:

Reviewed By:

AnalysisMethod


626705

10/10/20010JG/YL/SH3*3&-

DateAnalyzed

10/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01



2300 NW Walnut 8/vcL Corvallls. OR 97330-3538P.O. Box 426. Ccxvallis. OR 97339-0428

Tel 54'1.752.4271 fax 541.752.0276


Client Information

Client Sample ID:



Type:Matrix:Basis:

Analyte

Aluminum, AlAntimony, SbArsenic, AsArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead, PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn

METHOD BLANK

Lava CapRebeccaNANANAQCWater

Maco/SAC

Lab Information

Lab Sample ID:

Date Received:Report Revision No.:

Reported By:Reviewed By:

6267

NA0JG/YL/SH2*£&-

As Received

MRL

1005.010.02.025.04,0•5.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0

SampleResult

1005.010.02.0

25.04.05.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0

Qualifier

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

AnalysisUnits Method

/jg/L EPA 200.7jug/L EPA 200.7fjg/L EPA 200.7jug/L SM31 1 3Bfjg/L EPA 200.7fjg/L EPA 200.7fjg/L EPA 200.7^g/L EPA 200.7fjg/L EPA 200.7fjg/L EPA 200.7fjg/L EPA 200.7ug/L EPA 245.1fjg/L EPA 200.7fjg/L EPA 200.7jjg/L EPA 200.7A/g/L EPA 200.7/yg/L EPA 200.7fjg/L EPA 200.7

DateAnalyzed

10/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/16/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01



2300 NW Walnut Blvd.. CotvalKs. OR 97330-3538P.O. Box 426. CoivaUIS, OR 97339-0428

Tel 541.752.4271 FaxS4l.752.O276

. -a1

CH2MHILL Applied Sciences LabCHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORDAND AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SERVICES

CVO 2300 NW Walnut BoulevardCorvalfls,OR 97330-3538(541)752-4271 FAX (541) 752-0276

COC#Project* Purchase Order #

Project Name

/SAC

rnRequested Completion Date:

rA^c.TOHx-50

Sampling

Date Time

Type MatrixW

Sample Disposal:

DltpoM (Mumn n

CLIENT SAMPLE ID(8 CHARACTERS)

LABQC

Requested Analytical Method *

V-1

Preservative

THIS AREA FOR LAB USE ONLYLab* Page of

ERA Tier QC Level

1 (Screening) 2 3

Alternate Description Lab ID

X X -L X X** X

XiXY J:̂ iit X

Instructions and Agreement Provisions on Reverse Side DISTRIBUTION:Original• LAB,Yellow- LAB, Pink • ClientPaw 2/01 ' =h f"TTl 34P

GH2MHILLApplied Sciences Group Sample Receipt Record

Batch Number

Client/Proect

, , • / •«/ ,Dateffime Received: {._/U//U/vr

Temerature:VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE CONDITIONS (verify all items) * HD = Client Hand delivered Samples

ObservationWere custody seals intact and on the outside of the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody inside the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody properly filled out?Were the sample containers In good condition?Was there tee In the cooler?

YES NO

if the answer to any of the questions above Is NO. a Sample Receipr Exceptions Report Must be written.VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE PRESERVATION (verify all preserved samples except HAAs, HANs and CH)

SampleNo1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829

NutrientspH<2

kJMffti

Metals pH<2.̂2-

=^^y* .

/

VolatilespH<2

/LOGIN AND pHVEE

MMML/ j Datemro/

CyanidespH>12

-

«FICATlO^/' .

i

TOCpH<2

.-.;.

Other Other(specify)

N/A(sofls/unprea)

'_

S PERFORMED BY

/0/io/fi// ' DahyTime


2300/WWbfrnrfBM. Conatts. Off W33CW53SP.O. BoxOHS.Catvatts. OR 973394428

Tol S41.7SZ4271 Fax S4J.7S2.0Z76

ATTACHMENT 2

Tailings Dewatering and SolidificationStudy Data

Raw Tailings Data

20

.11/21/01 13:37 ©541 752 0276

JOI\

CH2M HILL •*•»-» SACRAMENTO 0002/002

Client SaRple IDs 5TP7-COMPSample Descriptions None

Matrix: soilSite: N/A

Report of Analytical Rosults

Oat* Collected! 09/17/01 00:00 <Mon>Date Received: 09/21/01 09:45 (Fri) Reference No: DS669

Lab Sample ID: 05689001

CATEGORY NAMEAnalytical Parameter Reporting Date/Time

of Analysis

(17716)

Analytical Services -- Reddingi

00.16

•

•

100

90

8O

70LJ

H 60LL

z 50UloU 40a.

30

2O

1O

02C

Test20

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORTc

c c cC c c \ c ~ o o

— ,-• ._ * (M 00 O O O O -COI \\\ f — CM •# <0 * - C N

)0 1OO 1O.O

% +3"0 0

% GRAVEL0.0

^••

SSX»•- •s,

1.O O.1 O.O1 O.OO1GRAIN SIZE - mm

% SAND36. 1

% SILT50.8

% CLAY13. 1

LL PI DS50. 136

D60 D50O.0482

D30> O.O233

DIS0.0062

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Sandy s I t

Project No.: 2016014-610Project : Lava Cap Bench Study• Location: Ca i fo rn ia

Date: 10-O8-O1

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT

FEI TESTING AND INSPECTION, INC.

D10O.OO19

usesML

cc4.27

cu34.7

AASHTO

A-4(O.O)

Remarks :

Samp e: 5TP7

Fig. No . : 4

FEI Testing & Inspection, Inc.Lava Cap Bench StudyProject 2016014-610

Table 1. Specific Gravity of Soils(ASTM D 854)

SampleNumber

SampleDepth (feet)

Temperature

5TP7

5TP7

20

20

Table 2. Natural Water Contents

SampleNumber

5TP7

SampleDepth (feet)

——

Natural WaterContent (percent)

22.2

Table 3. Sieve Analysis

Sieve Size

#10

#20

#40

#60

#100

#200

Percent Passing

5TP7

100.0

99.6

99.3

98.2

88.0

63.9

2H2IVIHILLipplied Sciences Group

CH2M Hill

Applied Sciences Group

2300NWWolnufBlvd

CcxvoffiiOR

97330-3538

P.O. Box 428

CcKVdllis, OR

97339-0428

Tel 541.752.4271

Fox 541.752.0276November 1, 2001

Lava Cap

156197.00.LC


Tim Maloney/CVO:

On September 20, 2001, CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group received one sample with arequest for analysis of selected parameters. All analyses were performed by CH2M HILLunless otherwise indicated below.


This report does not meet NELAC requirements for the following reasons:• Samples were received at a temperature of 22C with no ice.• NELAC has not provided our lab with accreditation for the following tests:

E245.5.

CH2M HELL Applied Sciences Group appreciates your business and looks forward toserving your analytical needs again. If you should have any questions concerning the data, orif you need additional information, please call Ms. Kathy McKinley at (541) 758-0235,extension 3120.

Sincerely,

Doug HardyLaboratory Representative

Enclosures

OR100022PAGE1

1 i I I I I 1CH2MHILL Applied Sciences LabCHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORDAND AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SERVICES

CVO 2300 NW Walnut BoulevardCorvaflis. OR 97330-3538(541)752-4271 FAX (841) 752-0278

coc#_Project*

l5WFTl.nft.LCPurchase Order *

'reject Name ,

-AM &vp ue/rvh <^Su vd/v|Company Name | /

Ctt?^ HrTZL AW,Report to: Phone No:

Requested Completion Date: /

C-/64

Sampling

Date

?H"̂Time

1V|»CoMP

X

QRAB

MatrixWATER

SO1L

X

A

R *

(

Sample Disposal:

Dlipon RvtumD D

CLIENT SAMPLE ID(8CHARACTERS)

^77)"j - 0,or

Relinquished By

Sampled By and Tftle IPI«H n«n wd prmt nun»)

fHbffloi&^rtWffXff1* cVJMceived BJf\ (PlMMiignindJrintnuiM)

^P

LABQC

Data/Time

Date/Time

DitemiA yffiopf/Date/lime

Special Instructions:

T0TAL

*

0F

C0NTA1NERS

Requested Analytical Method *i-2

I2 O

-3:0-

.

Preservative

X X X X

Received By

Relinquished By (Pi«s« «ign «nd i»(nt nam)

Relinquished By (PI»M» «lgn and print n«m»)

Shipped ViaUPS Fed-Ex (Hher ...........

THIS AREA FOR LAB USE ONLY

Lab*

(tier

ERA Tier QC Level

1 (Screening) 2

Page. "i

3 4Alternate Description .

* As .. Sb , B<\, fe:cd cV Co cu p^Ha Mn Ni» 5s AarP'v.^n '"; v ̂ —

/ '

Lab ID

"~/

'

Date/Time

Date/Time

Date/Time

Shipping *

Instructions and Agreement Provisions on Reverse Side DISTRIBUTION:Original• LAB,Yellow- LAB,Pink• ClientR«v 2/01 Lab form 340


Batch Number

Client/ProjectVERIFICATION OF SAMPLE CONDITIONS (verify all items) * HD = Client Hand delivered Samples

Date/Time Received: | 7

Temperature:

ObservationWere custody seals intact and on the outside of the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody Inside the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody property filled out?Were the sample containers jn good condition?Was there ice In the cooler?

YES

If the answer to any of the questions above is NO, a Sample Receipt Exceptions Report Must be written.VERIRCATION OF SAMPLE PRESERVATION (verify all preserved samples except HAAs, HANs and CH)

SampleNo123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930

NutrientspH<2

Metals pH<2.

^'

\

VolatilespH<2

CyanidespH>12

TOCpH<2

Other(specify)

-

Other(specify)

N/A(soils/ugptts)

X^

-

_

LOjSjN AND pH VERIFICATIONS PERFORMED BY

LDataTime

CH2MHILLApplied Sciences Group -8 -

2300NWWbfriu/8Ml. CwvaSS. Of? 9733O3S3SP.O. 8<»42a Cwvoite Off 97339-0428

TOI541JS2.4271 Fox 54 1.752.0276

iu >a

Mr. Tim MaloneyCH2M HILL/CVO2300 NW Walnut BLVD.CH2M HILLCorvallis, OR 97339-3538

ColumbiaAnalyticalServicesINC

An Emp/oyee-Ot/vned Company

Columbia Analytical Services ReportLava Cap Bench Study

D0105689/D5689

October 9, 2001

Submitted by:

Bryan JonesProject Manager/Client Services

This report contains a total of 12 pages. v ' J * ' 1

5090 Caterpillar Rood • Redding, CA 96003 • Telephone (530) 244-5227 • Fax (530) 244-4109

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CAS Lab Reference No.: D5689Level 1C

PageNo.

Cover Page........................................................................................................................lTable of Contents..............................................................................................................2Current CAS Redding Accreditation Programs................................................................3Sample Identification Cross-Reference ............................................................................5

GENERAL CHEMISTRY................................................................................................6Case narrative........................................................................................................?Sample results.......................................................................................................8

Chain of Custody Documentation................................................................................... 10

0002

Sample ID Cross-reference Table

CAS Client ReceiveCollectLab Sample ID Sample ID Date date Sample Matrix Additional Description

FS = Field Sample

D5689001 FS 5TP7-COMP 09/21/01 09/17/01 00:00 Soil

The above lab sample ID'S and cross reference information apply to samples as received by the laboratory. Modifiersto the lab sample ID may be added for internal tracking purposes. Any modified sample ID will be reflected in theappropriate case narrative only.

0005

GENERAL CHEMISTRY

0006

Case NarrativeGeneral Chemistry

CAS Lab Reference No./SDG.: D5689

Pro j ect : Lava Cap Bench Study

I . RECEIPTNo exceptions were encountered unless a Sample Receipt Exception Report isattached to the Chain-of -Custody included with this data package.

II. HOLDING TIMESAll holding times were met.

Ill . METHODThe method used is cited in the corresponding Form I .

IV. PREPARATIONSample preparation proceeded normally, if applicable.

V. ANALYSISA. Calibration: All acceptance criteria were met.

B . Blanks : All acceptance criteria were met .

C. Spikes: All acceptance criteria were met.

D. Duplicates: All acceptance criteria were met.

E. Laboratory Control Samples: All acceptance criteria were met.

F. Samples: Sample analyses proceeded normally.

G. Other: No QA/QC except client requested QA/QC has been reported.

I certify that this data package is in compliance with the terms and conditions agreedto by the client and CAS, Inc., both technically and for completeness, except for theconditions noted above. Release of the data contained in this hardcopy data packagehas been authorized by the Laboratory Manager or designated person, as verified by thefollowing signature.

SIGNED: "cw .-w - DATERicEy 'uensenResource Chemist

: |O/1/P |

Columbia 5090 Caterpillar Rd Phone No.: (530) 244-5227Analytical Services Redding, CA 96003-1412 Fax No.: (530) 24^4109

0007

Report of Analytical Results

Client Sample ID: 5TP7-COHPSample Description: None

Sample Matrix: SoilSite: N/A

Date Collected: 09/17/01 00:00 (Mon)Date Received: 09/21/01 09:45 (Fri)

Reference No: 05689Lab Sample 10: D5689001

CATEGORY NAMEAnalytical Parameter Result Units

Reporting Date/Time AnalyticalLevel of Analysis Method(s)

(17518)

Columbia Analytical Services -- ReddingFORM I

0008

Report of Analytical Results

Client Sample ID: METHOD BLANKSample Description: None

Sample Matrix: SoilSite: N/A

Date Collected: NoneDate Received: None

Reference No: LABQCLab Sample ID: Various

CATEGORY NAMEAnalytical Parameter Result

Reporting Date/Time AnalyticalUnits Level of Analysis Method(s)

Illlll

(17518)

Columbia Analytical Services -- ReddingFORM I

0009

CHAIN OF CUSTODY DOCUMENTATION

0010

*-/ J 1 1 1 1 1 1CH2MHILL Applied Sciences LabCHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORDAND AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SERVICES

cvo 2300 Nwwainut Boulevard^^ 7S2-02T6

* (M1) 75M276

coc#.Project*

I5UTKOO.LCProject Name

Cg/pime ICompany Name /

C2M HILL /SAC

Sampling

Date Time

Type MatrixW


LABQC

t

o

Requested Analytical Method #

SCT

Preservative

THIS AREA FOR LAB USE ONLYLab* Page of

EPXTieKQC Level

1 (Screening) 2 3


£ 5S2 X.

OO

Special Instructions

Instructions and Agreement Provisions on Reverse Side DISTRIBUTION: Original• LAB, Yellow- LAB, Pink• ClientRev 2/01 Lab form 340

Dewatered Tailings Data

01/16/2002 12:01 FAI 5302431654 CH2H BILL

—£ee-10-2001 09:53 FRQM:FOJNDOTION ENGINEER 5417577650

-» SAC

TO: 2

1^002/002

-0.015

-O.010c

: -0.005£g Ol lotion

& °— Cgnaol.p" 0.005uA

0.010

0.015C

12

10

«8

mm«

VI

4£CO

2

O0

._•

,.

t«.

..

-

-ij

~i•*"*.-

T

* /

"

»-

F" h.

•:t~

£

i

...

...

1A.

?»

--

- ̂/

,..

;;

---«

*

...

..

••

-

_

:i..

•«.

-

*f

X

...

•*

-.

J-1

--

<.'*.

4.Fl |M

1

.•'" ••

1 0.025 0. 050 0.0730.100Horlz. 0(spl , , In

...

-

.1.

-.

1~toy&r4

"I/

i/*

*

7*

...

. -

...*

- 'r

"I

™

..

i

i-» H

«. 4.

"

*

,.

«

-

<

.

i

,. ,

::

...

! ,

!.•

-

.f- V

O.025 0.050 0.075 0,100Horlz. Dlspl .. (n

SAMPLE TYPE: Bulk sampleDESCRIPTION: Grey sandy 3 It

ASSUMED SPECIFIC GRAVITY** 2.65REMARKS: Sample: 5TP7-Comp

Fig. Na. : 4

24. 0

0- 16.0U1V)Id

£UJg 8.0

g

0C

RESULTS -_--_...,...._-__.,.

2, pal -0,00 _ _ „ _ _ _ _ _ -._..„__.4>, dag 40.3 _--._-„,„,..- _ _ _ _ 4 ^

-

f

SAMPLE NO . ;

TAN o 0.85 ---------..---?2....!C

^zi_.»._.ii4.. z__"""";;,1 - ?--,.,..__._.. ,...,*[..-.__..... .

/ ' *2T ?Jr

._,.__ „„._. ._...,.„____._.„.,._.._, ? a „......,.,.._---.-._.,,.27

2 ̂x; : ----'"*;;-••-----:::;------•8.0 16. 0 24.0

Normal Strass, pai

1 2 3

WATER CONTENT. % 11.7 11.7 11.7J DRY DENSITY, pcf 95.9 95.8 95.9C SATURATION, % 42.6 42-6 42.6S VOID RATIO 0.725 0.72S 0.72SDIAMETER. In 2.51 2.51 2.51HEIGHT, in 0.86 O.86 O.86WATER CONTENT, % O.O 0.0 0.0

H DRY DENSITY, pef 96.0 98.4 97.1W SATURATION, % 0.0 0.0 O.OH VOID RATIO 0.723 0.717 O.7O5** DIAMETER . In 2.51 2.51 2.51HEIGHT, in 0.86 O.85 O.85

NORMAL STRESS, pa! -T.5 6.9 13.9FAILURE STRESS, ps 2.9 5.9 11.7DISPLACEMENT, in O.O2 0.04 0.07

ULTIMATE STRESS, ps tDISPLACEMENT, in

Stroin rote. J£/min O.03 O.O3 0.03

CLIENT: CH2M H i l l

PROJECT: Lava Cop Bench Study

SAMPLE LOCATION: CorvaMis, Onegon

PROJ. NO.: 2O1 6014-610 DATE: 12-O5-O1DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT

FEZ TESTING AND INSPECTION » INC,

Solidified Tailings Data

22

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST160.0

120.0Q.

W0

80.0

w(P1_Q.EOO

40.0

0.00.3 O.6 O.9

Ax iol St ra i n , %1 .2

SAMPLE NO.: 1Unconfined strength, psi 124.3Undrained shear strength, psi 62.2Fa i lure strain, % O.95tra in rate, 'mi n 0.25Water content, % 19.6Wet density, pcf 117.1Dry density, pcf 97.9Saturation, % 75.4Vo i d rat i o O.69O7Specimen diameter. 2.86Specimen height, 5.71Height/diameter ratio 2.00Description: 5% Lime Treated

ASS. GS= 2.65 Type: She I by Tube

Project No.: 2016014-610Date: 11-21-O1

Remarks:

Fig. No.: 2

Cl ient: CH2M Hi I I

Project: Lava Cap Bench Study

Location: CorvalI is, Oregon

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST

TESTING AND INSPECTION, INC.

UNCONFTNED COMPRESSION TEST440

0a

ww

330

220

w0)l_aEOo 1 10

0O O.5 1 1 .5

Ax i a I St ra i n , %

SAMPLE NO.: 1Unconfirmed strength, ps i 427Undrained shear strength, psi 214Failure strain, % 1 .5Strain rate, %/min O.25Water content, % 19.2Wet density, pcf 121 .9Dry density, pcf 102.3Saturation, 82.2Voi d rat i o O.6178Specimen diameter, in 2.86Specimen height, in 5.73Height/diameter ratio 2.00Description: 10% Lime Treated

ASS. GS= 2.65 Type: She I by Tube

Project No.: 2016014-610Date: 11-22-O1

Remarks:

Fig. No.: 3

Client: CH2M H i l l


Location: Corvallis, Oregon

UNCONFTNED COMPRESSION TEST

FEZ TESTING AND INSPECTION, INC.

UNCONFTNED COMPRESSION TEST760

wa

570

(fia>

ww

aEOo

380

190

O O.4 O.8 1.2Ax i a I St ra i n , %

1 .6

SAMPLE NO,: 1Unconfined strength, psi 729Undrained shear strength, psi 365Failure strain, % 1 .3Strain rote, %/mm 0.25Water content, % 16.6Wet density, pcf 114.0Dry densi ty. pcf 97.7Saturat i on( % 63.6Void rat io O.6931Specimen diameter, in 2.87Specimen height, in 5.74Height/diameter rotio 2.00Description: 20% Lime Treated

ASS. GS= 2.65 Type: She I by TubeProject No.: 2016014-610Date: 11-21-O1

Remarks:

Fig. No.: 1

Client: CH2M H i l l


Location: Corval I is, Oregon

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST

FEI TESTING AND INSPECTION, INC.

DEC-10-2001 09:53 FROM:FOUNDftTION ENGINEER 5417577650 TO: 2

Table 1. Permeability Test Specimen Data

P.003'005

2-24

SampleIdentification

5%

Length(inches)

2.68$

Diameter(inches)

#*53

Water Content(percent)

Initial

11.4

Final

2H5

Wet UnitWeight

(pcf)

MS-2.

Dry UnitWeight

(pcf)

*!&>&

RelativeCompaction

(percent)

X

Table 2. Permeability Test Data


/* *17i? ^D,1

Cell Pressure(psf)

HO

HO

Ho

Head Pressure(psi)

SJ

3^

37

Back Pressure(psi)

30

3*

J&

k(cm /sec)

i., £ - •'

3> £ '°6

3£ "^

— DEC-10-2001 09:54 FROM:FOUNDATION ENGINEER 5417577650 TO: E P. 004'005

2-24



'*%

Length{inches}

ass*3!

Diameter(inches)

3.86$


Initial

I5.5

Final

X"

Wot UnitWeight

(pcf)

in-H

Dry UnitWeight<pcf)

\Q\.G>

RelativeCompaction

(percent)

-

Table 2, Permeability Test Data


IO°7

Cell Pressure(P3i)

i{O

Ho

Ho

Head Pressure(psi)

33

35

37

Back Pressure(psi)

3o

3o

3o

k(cm/sec)

2 £ ~"6

1.6-'

•7f7

DEC-10-2001 09:54 FROM:FOUNDfiTION ENGINEER 5417577650 TO: 2 P.005'005

2-24



3o%

Length(Inches)

2.^50

Diameter(Inches)

P- £50


Initial

/6.6

Final

X

Wet UnitWeight

(pcf)

ia^-"7

Dry UnitWeight

(pcf)

JO 3. 6

RelativeCompaction

(percent)

^

Table 2. Permeability Test Data


*<*%

Cell Pressure(psi)

ft f*\

/_J^t

<,

Head Pressure(psi)

33

35

37

Back Pressure(psi)

-50

3o

30

k(cm/sec)

36"*

4 £ ' * 6

5 £ ~*4

CH2MHIU

AppBed Sciences Group

2300 NW Walnut Hvd

Cotvallls.OR

97330-3538

P.O. Box 428

Ccuvallis, OR

97339-0428

Tel Ml.752.4271

Fax 541.752.0276


November 8,2001

Lava Cap

156197.00.LC


Rebecca Maco/SAC:

On October 22, 2001, CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group received three samples with arequest for analysis of selected parameters. All analyses were performed by CH2M HILLunless otherwise indicated below.


This report does not meet NELAC requirements for the following reasons:• NELAC has not provided our lab with accreditation for the following tests: EPA

1312.

CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group appreciates your business and looks forward toserving your analytical needs again. If you should have any questions concerning the data, orif you need additional information, please call Ms. Kathy McKinley at (541) 758-0235,extension 3120.

Sincerely,

</Doug HardyLaboratory Representative

EnclosuresCc: Tim Maloney/CVO

OR100022PAGE 1 of 7

CLIENT SAMPLE CROSS-REFERENCE

CH2M HELL Applied Sciences Group Reference No. 6330

Date TimeSample ID______Client Sample ID______Collected Collected

633001 LC5 10/22/2001 PM633002 LC10 10/22/2001 PM633003 LC20 10/22/2001 PM

-I-

CASE NARRATIVEMETALS

Lab Reference No.: 6330

Client/Project: Lava Cap

I. Holding Time:All acceptance criteria were met.

n. Digestion Exceptions:None.

HI. Analysis:

A. Calibration:All acceptance criteria were met.

B. ICP Interference Check Sample:All acceptance criteria were met.

C. Spike Sample(s):All acceptance criteria were met.

D. Duplicate Sample(s):All acceptance criteria were met.

E. Laboratory Control Sample(s):All acceptance criteria were met.

F- ICP Serial Dilution:Not Required.

G- OtherNone

IV. Documentation Exceptions:Samples are identified by their blend ratios with cement (ie. LC5 = 5% cement).

V. I certify that this data package is hi compliance with the terms and conditions agreed to by theclient and CH2M HIT I., both technically and for completeness, except for the conditions detailedabove. Release of the data contained in this hardcopy data package has been authorized by theLaboratory Manager or his designee, as verified by the following signature.

Prepared by:

Reviewed by:

QJ

- 3 -


Client Information

Client Sample ID: LC5

Project Name: Lava CapProject Manager: Rebecca Maco/SAC

Sampled By: Doug HardySampling Date: 10/22/01Sampling Time: PM

Type: GrabMatrix: SPLP ExtractBasis: Extracted

Analyte

Antimony, SbArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead, PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeSilver, AgThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn

MRL

5.010.01004.05.010.0io.o20.03.00.1025.020.07.010.010.025.050.0

Sample .Result

5.016.61004.05.0

41.710.020.03.00.1025.020.07.010.010.025.050.0

Qualifier

U

UUU

UUUUUUUUUUU

Lab Information


Date Received: 10/22/2001Report Revision No.: 0

Reported By: JG/SHReviewed By: J>3 -̂

Units

//g/L//g/LA/g/L//g/L//g/Lj/g/L//g/Lfjg/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA>g/LA>g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L

AnalysisMethod


DateAnalyzed

11/06/011 1/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/01



23OONWWctnutBtvd.. ConvOs. OR 97330-3538P.O. Box 428. Corvatls. OK 97339-0028

Tel 541.752.4271 Fax 541.752.0276


Client Information

Client Sample IP: LC10



Type: GrabMatrix: SPLP ExtractBasis: Extracted

Analyte


MRL

5.010.01004.05.010.010.020.03.00.1025.020.07.010.0io.a25.050.0

SampleResult

5.015.21384.05.0

36.710.028.93.00.1025.020.07.010.010.025.050.0

Qualifier

U

UU

U

UUUUUUUUU

Lab Information

Lab Sample 10: 633002


Reported By: JG/SHReviewed By: ̂ >^

Units

A/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L//g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA<g/LA/g/L

AnalysisMethod


DateAnalyzed

11/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/01

— U=Not detected at specified reporting limits


- 5 -

2300NW Walnut BM. CofvalSs. OR 9733O3538P.O. Sox42& Coivaflii Off 97339-O428

Tel 541.752.427! Fax S4J.752.O276


Client Information

Client Sample ID: LC20



Type: GrabMatrix: SPLp ExtractBasis: Extracted

Analyte


MRL

5.010.01004.05.010.010.020.03.00.1025.020.07.010.010.025.050.0

Sample.Result

5.013.32664.05.022.710.022.63.00.1025.020.07.010.010.025.050.0

Qualifier

U

UU

U

UUUUUUUUU

Lab Information



Reported By: JG/SHReviewed By: ^*frk-

Units

A/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA>g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L

AnalysisMethod


DateAnalyzed

11/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/01



2300 NW Walnut Blvd. ConaWs. OR 97330-3538P.O. Box 428. Corvallls. OR 97339-0428

Tel 541.752.4271 Fax 541.752.0276


Client Information

Client Sample ID: METHOD BLANK


Sampled By: NASampling Date: NASampling Time: NA

Type: QCMatrix: SPLP ExtractBasis: Extracted

Analyte


MRL

5.010.01004.05.010.010.020.03.00.1

25.020.07.010.010.025.050.0

Sample .Result

5.010.01004.05.010.010.020.03.00.125.020.07.010.010.025.050.0

Qualifier

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

Lab Information

Lab Sample ID: 6330

Date Received: NAReport Revision No.: 0

Reported By: JG/SHReviewed By: z>4&-

Units

A/g/LA>g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA*g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA<g/LA/g/L

AnalysisMethod


DateAnalyzed

11/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/01

•— U=Not detected at specified reporting limits


7-

2300 NW Walnut Blvd. CorvaOls. OK 9733Q3S38P.O. Box 428. Conatts. OR 97339442B

Tot 541.752.4271 Fax541.752.CB76

CH2MHILL Applied Sciences LabCHAfa OF CUSTODY RECORDAND AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SERVICES

CVO 2300 NW Walnut BoulevardCorvallta, OR 97330-3538(541) 752-4271 FAX (541) 752-0278

Requicoc#

Project* Purchase Order #

Project Name

Company Name

Report to: Phone No:

Requested Completion Date:

Sampling

Date Time

Matrix

Sample Disposal:DltpoM RttumQ Q


LABQC

ested Analytical Method #

Preservative

THIS AREA FOR LAB USE ONLYLab#

1/23 bPage of

EPA Tier QC Level

1 (Screening \2 ) 3


c/zr

i ± -7.

-:*>

Instructions and Agreement Provisions on Reverse Side DISTRIBUTION: Original • LAB, Yellow • LAB, Pink • ClientRev 2/01 Lab form 340


Batch Number

Client/Project

Date/Time Received: |

Temperature: I ATTVERIFICATION OF SAMPLE CONDITIONS (verify all Hems) * HD = Client Hand delivered Samples

ObservationWere custody seals Intact and on the outside of the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody Inside the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody properly filled out?Were the sample containers .In good condition?Was there Ice In the cooler?

YES

If the answer to any of the questions above Is NO, a Sample Receipt Exceptions Report Must be written.VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE PRESERVATION (verify all preserved samples except HAAs, HANs and CH)

SampleNo123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930

NutrientspH<2

x->

Metals pH<2

*

«

VolatilespH<2

CyanidespH>12

TOCpH<2

Other(specify)

Other(specify)

N/A(soils/unpres)

\/

AND H VERIFICATIONS PERFORMED BY

CH2M HILLApplied Sciences Group -9 -

Dat&Tifne

2300 NW Walnut Blvd. ConalHl OR 97330JS38P.O. Box42& CO/vc*, OR 97339-0428

Tel 541.752.4271 fax 541.752.0276

technical memorandum- treatability study report lava · pdf filetechnical...

Documents