^GERAGHTY
'& MILLER, INC.
Environmental Services
Ground Water 
Engineering 
Hydrocarbon 
Remediation 
Education
December 20, 1993
Caroline Kwan
Project Manager
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region n
26 federal Plaza, Room 737
New York, New York 10278
Re: 
Phase n Remedial Investigation Work Plan, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
Dear Ms. Kwan:
On behalf of Ana Gloria Ramos, Designated Coordinator of the Tutu Environmental
Investigation Committee (TEIC), Geraghty & Miller, Inc. is submitting three copies of the two-
volume Phase II Remedial Investigation (RI) Work Plan Tutu Wells Site for your review. We
understand you will forward one of these copies to CDM Federal Programs. This work nJan
has been reviewed by the members of the newly formed Tutu Potentially Responsible Party
(PRP) Committee prior to submittal to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
Additional copies of this work plan have been shipped directly to the U.S. Virgin Islands
Department of Planning and^Natural Resources (DPNR) and USEPA personnel in Puerto Rico
as indicated in the copy list below. Members of the Tutu PRP Committee will also be receiving
copies of this work plan.
TUT 
O05 
OO33
201 W:st Rassaic Street, 3rd Floor • Rochelle Park, New Jersey 07662-(201) 909-0700 • FAX (201) 909-0567/0568
*64545*
64545
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC
2
We hope this Phase n RI Work Plan addresses the USEPA's concerns. If you have any
questions, please contact Ana Gloria Ramos at (809) 749-8943.
Sincerely,
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
Marie F. McDonnell
Project Scientist
V.
f
Thomas V. Danahy
Senior Scientist/Project Manager
Daniel A. Nachman
Vice President/Project Officer
Enclosures
c: 
Andrew Prashak, Esq. - USEPA (PR office)
Jose Font - USEPA (PR office)
Leonard Reed - DPNR (2 copies)
Clifford Crooke - DPNR
Ana Gloria Ramos - Tutu Environmental Investigation Committee
Paul Ryan - Texaco, Inc.
DANinr
PR0013. •••-WP1/122093 .hr
TUT 
OO5 
OO34
PHASE n REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
WORK PLAN
TUTU WELLS SITE
ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS
VOLUME 1 OF 2
December 1993
Prepared for
Tutu Envkonmental Investigation Committee
Prepared by
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
201 West Passaic Street
Rochelle Park, New Jersey 07662
(201) 909-0700
TUT 
GO 5 
00^5
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
""
PHASE H REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
WORK PLAN
TUTU WELLS SITE
ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS
December 20, 1993
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. is submitting this work plan to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency on behalf of the Tutu Environmental Investigation Committee for work
proposed at the Tutu Wells Site in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. The work plan was
prepared in conformance with Geraghty & Miller's strict quality assurance/quality control
procedures to ensure that the work plan meets industry standards in terms of the methods used
and the information presented. If you have any questions or comments concerning this work
plan, please contact one of the individuals listed below.
Respectfully submitted,
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
Marie F. McDonnell
Project Scientist
Thomas V. Danahy
ior-Scientist/Pt
Daniel A. Nachman
Vice President/Project Officer
TUT 
O05 
OO::',6
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. 
'
CONTENTS
Page
1.0 
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1
2.0 BACKGROUND ....................................... .2-1
3.0 
DATA REVIEW PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
3.1 
TASK 1: DATA COMPILATION AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
PREPARATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-2
3.2 
TASK 2: DATABASE DESIGN AND DATA INPUT . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3
3.3 
TASK 3: EXTENSION OF AREA BASE MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4
3.4 
TASK 4: WELL INVENTORY REVISION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4
3.5 
TASK 5: GEOLOGIC LOG COMPILATION AND CROSS SECTION
PREPARATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-5
3.6 
TASK 6: PUMPING TEST DATA EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-5
3.7 
TASK 7: DATA ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT OF SCOPE
OF WORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-5
3.8 
TASK 8: PHASE H RI WORK PLAN PREPARATION . . . . . . . . . . . 3-6
4.0 
DATA ASSESSMENT AND DATA GAPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4.1 
HISTORICAL OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4.1.1 VfflA (Former Tropical Motors) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-2
4.1.2 Curriculum Center (Former LAGA Facility) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3
4.1.3 Ramsay Motor Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4
4.1.4 Antilles Auto Parts (Former Gassett Auto Parts and
Former Consolidated Auto Parts) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4
4.1.5 Tutu Texaco Service Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5
4.1.6 Old Tutu Wastewater Treatment Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6
4.1.7 Fellowship Church (Former Storage Facilities, Inc.
and Former West Indies Enterprises, Inc.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-7
4.1.8 Four Winds Plaza . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-7
4.1.9 Tillett, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-8
4.1.10 Western Auto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-9
4.1.11 Overseas Steel Fabrication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-10
4.1.12 Tracy Dodd Used Car Lot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-10
4.1.13 Tutu Esso Service Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-10
4.1.14 Classic Printers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11
4.1.15 A Property of Unknown Ownership (Southeast of
Classic Printers) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11
4.1.16 Archies Welding & Auto Body Repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-12
4.1.17 O'Henry Cleaners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-12
TUT 
On 5 
OO^y
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
11
CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
4.1.18 Rodriguez Esso Service Station (Former Shell
Oil) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-13
4.1.19 Kentucky Fried Chicken (Former Home Petroleum, Inc.
and Former Caribbean Gas Corporation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-13
4.1.20 Former Fort Mylner Coin-Op Laundry and
Drycleaners, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-14
4.2 
CONCEPTUAL HYDROGEOLOGIC MODEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-14
4.2.1 Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-14
4.2.2 Hydrogeology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-15
4.2.3 Contaminant Movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-17
4.2.4 Aquifer Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-18
4.3 
HYDROGEOLOGIC DATA GAPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-21
4.4 
CHEMISTRY DATA ASSESSMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-22
4.4.1 Soil Sampling Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-23
4.4.1.1 
VIHA (Former Tropical Motors) Soil Sampling
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-23
4.4.1.2 
Curriculum Center (Former LAGA
Facility) Soil Sampling Results . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-23
4.4.1.3 
Ramsay Motors Soil Sampling Results . . . . . . . . 4-26
4.4.1.4 
Antilles Auto Parts (Former Gassett Auto Parts and
Former Consolidated Auto Parts) Soil
Sampling Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-28
4.4.1.5 
Texaco Service Station Soil Sampling Results . . . . 4-29
4.4.1.6 
Four Winds Plaza Soil Sampling Results . . . . . . . 4-31
4.4.1.7 
Tillett, Inc. Soil Sampling Results . . . . . . . . . . . 4-32
4.4.1.8 
Western Auto Soil Sampling Results . . . . . . . . . 4-34
4.4.1.9 
Esso Service Station Soil Sampling
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-35
4.4.1.10 
O'Henry Cleaners Soil Sampling Results . . . . . . . 4-37
4.4.1.11 
Rodriguez Esso Service Station (Former Shell Oil)
Soil Sampling Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-39
4.4.2 Results of Gas Chromatograph Field Analysis
of Soil Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-39
4.4.3 Groundwater Sampling Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-40
TUT 
005 
0038
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
Ill
CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
4.4.3.1 
Chlorinated Organic Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-41
4.4.3.2 
Petroleum Hydrocarbons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-43
4.5 
CHEMISTRY DATA GAPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-44
4.5.1 Source-Related Chemistry Data Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-44
4.5.2 Groundwater Chemistry Data Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-45
5.0 
SUMMARY OF DATA GAPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-1
6.0 
DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1
7.0 
PROPOSED PHASE H REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7-1
7.1 
SOURCE INVESTIGATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-2
7.1.1 Task 1: Site Inspections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-3
7.1.2 Site Inspection Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-4
7.1.3 Task 3: Soil-Gas Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-5
7.1.4 Soil-Gas Survey Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-6
7.2 
SITE-WIDE HYDROGEOLOGY AND GROUNDWATER QUALITY
INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7-6
7.2.1 Task 5: Monitoring Well and Supply Well
Surveying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7-7
7.2.2 Task 6: Supply Well Inspection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-7
7.2.3 Task 7: Pumpage Impact Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-8
7.2.4 Task 8: Monitoring Well Installation and
Storm Sewer Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-9
7.2.5 Task 9: Water-Level Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-13
7.2.6 Task 10: Comprehensive Groundwater Sampling
Event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-13
7.3 
QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL AND REPORTING . 7-14
7.3.1 Quality Assurance/Quality Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-14
7.3.2 Monthly Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-15
7.3.3 Draft Remedial Investigation Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-15
T'U'T 
OO5 
OO39
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
IV
CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
7.3.4 Final Remedial Investigation Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-15
7.3.5 Analysis of Remedial Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-15
7.3.6 Draft Feasibility Study Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-16
8.0 
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8-1
TABLES
3-1. 
Summary of Recent Data Received from the Members of the PRP Technical Committee,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-1. 
Summary of Work Performed to Date at the Various Potential Source Facilities in the
Tutu Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-2. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in an Oil Sample Collected on August
17, 1987 at the VfflA Building, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-3. 
Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report for Curriculum Center (Former LAG A
Facility), Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-4. 
Summary of Analytical Results for Samples Collected June 5 to 10, 1989 at the
Curriculum Center (Former LAGA Facility), Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
4-5. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in an Oil Sample Collected August 17,
1987 at Ramsay Motors, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-6. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds for Soil and Water Samples Collected on
September 8, 1988 at Ramsay Motors, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-7. 
Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report of Ramsay Motors, Tutu Wells Site, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-8. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in an Oil Sample Collected June 8, 1989
at Ramsay Motors Center, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
TUT 
COS 
004O
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
TABLES (Continued)
4-9. 
Summary of Analytical Results for a Soil Sample Collected June 5 to 10,1989 at Ramsay
Motors, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-10. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Water Samples Collected August 17,
1987 at Gassett (Former Consolidated Auto Parts), Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands.
4-11. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil and Surface-Water Samples
Collected on September 12, 1988 at Gassett (Former Consolidated Auto Parts), Tutu
Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-12. Summary of Preliminary Assessment Reports for Gassett, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-13. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Oil Samples Collected on June 8, 1989
at Gassett (Former Consolidated Auto Parts), Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
4-14. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Oil and Water Samples Collected
August 17, 1987 at the Texaco Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands.
4-15. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil, Oil, and Water Samples
Collected from September 12 to 15,1988 at the Texaco Service Station, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-16. Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report for Texaco Service Station, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-17. Summary of Tank Excavation Procedures September 7 to September 16, 1988 at Texaco
Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-18. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Split Soil Samples Collected from
September 12 to 15, 1988 During Texaco Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells Site, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-19. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Water Samples Collected by Camp,
Dresser & McKee Corporation from September 12 to 15, 1988 During Texaco Service
Station Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
] u r 
fxvi 
<vi/i i
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
x41
VI
TABLES (Continued)
4-20. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in QA/QC Samples Collected from
September 12 to IS, 1988 During Texaco Service Station Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells
Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-21. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Oil Samples Collected on June 8,1989
at the Texaco Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-22. Summary of Analytical Results for Split Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989
from Texaco Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-23. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds and Tentatively Identified Compounds
in Soil Samples Collected on September 13, 1988 at Tillett Gardens, Tutu Wells Site, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-24. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Oil Samples Collected on August 17,
1987 at Esso Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-25. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Oil Samples Collected on September
12, 1988 at Esso Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-26. Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report for Esso Service Station, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-27. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds and Tentatively Identified Compounds
in Oil Samples Collected on June 8, 1989 at Esso Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-28. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected by Soil Tech
in June 1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Pit Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-29. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil
Samples Collected by Soil Tech in June 1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Pit Area,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-30. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil Samples Collected in June 1989
from the Esso Tank Excavation Pit Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
4-31. Concentrations of Metals in Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 from the
Esso Tank Excavation Pit Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
TUT 
CO5 
OO42
GERAGHTYtf MILLER. INC. 
O
vu
TABLES (Continued)
4-32. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June 5
to 10,1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands.
4-33. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Compounds in Soil Samples
Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile, Tutu Wells
Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-34. Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil Samples Collected from June
5 to 10, 1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-35. Concentrations of Metals in Soil Samples Collected from June S to 10, 1989 from the
Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-36. Results of Ignitability Analyses in Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 from
the Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-37. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Water Samples Collected from June
5 to 10, 1989 During Esso Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
4-38. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Compounds in Water Samples
Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 During Esso Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells Site, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-39. Concentrations of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Water Samples Collected from June S to
10, 1989 During Esso Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
4-40. Results of Ignitability Analyses in Water Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989
During Esso Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-41. Summary of Analytical Results for Split Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989
from Esso Tank Excavation Pit, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-42. Summary of Analytical Results for Split Soil Samples Collected June 5 to 10, 1989 from
Esso Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
TUT 
GO5 
0043
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. 
O
Vlll
TABLES (Continued)
4-43. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected on September
8, 1988 and June 5, 1989 at O'Henry Cleaners, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands.
4-44. Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report for O'Henry Cleaners, Tutu Wells Site, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-45. Concentration of Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes in Soil Samples
Collected from the Rodriguez Esso Service Station from May 22 to 24, 1990, Tutu Wells
Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-46. Concentrations of Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes in Water Samples
Collected from the Rodriguez Esso Service Station on July 9, 1990, Tutu Wells Site, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-47. Supply Well Construction Details and Estimated Pumping Rates, Tutu Wells Site, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-48. Monitoring Well Construction Details, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-49. Geraghty & Miller and Alternate Well Designations, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands.
4-50. Summary of Aquifer Testing Conducted at the Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
4-51. Field Gas Chromatograph-Detected Results for Soil Samples Collected by Geraghty &
Miller, Inc. from June through August 1992, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
6-1. 
Appropriate Analytical Levels for Analyses of Samples Collected During Phase n
Remedial Investigation of the Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
7-1. 
Summary of Criteria for Recommending Further Source Investigation Tasks at Potential
Source Facilities, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
7-2. 
Supply Wells to be Included in the Proposed Comprehensive Groundwater Sampling
Event, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
TUT 
005 
OO44
GERAGHTY # MILLER, INC. 
O
IX
FIGURES
2-1. 
Site Location, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
2-2. 
Base Map, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
2-3. 
Bedrock Surficial Map with the Locations of Monitoring Wells, Supply Wells, and Line
of Cross Section, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-1. 
Locations of Potential Source Facilities, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
4-2. 
Curriculum Center (Former LAG A Facility) Soil and Ground water Analytical Results for
Samples Collected by Arthur D. Little, Inc. in October 1993, Tutu Wells Site, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-3. 
Ramsay Motor Company Soil and Groundwater Analytical Results for Samples Collected
by Cooper Environmental, Inc. in April and July 1993, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-4. 
Site Plan of Tutu Texaco Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
4-5. 
Western Auto Facility Soil Analytical Results for Samples Collected in November and
December 1992, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-6. 
Tutu Esso Service Station Soil Analytical Results for Samples Collected by Soil Tech
Corporation in December 1989, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-7. 
O'Henry Cleaners Facility Soil Analytical Results for Samples Collected in September
1988, June 1989, June 1990, and August 1992, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands.
4-8. 
O'Henry Cleaners Facility Groundwater Analytical Results for Samples Collected in
August, September, and October 1990 and February 1991, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-9. 
Hydrogeologic Cross Section A-A', Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-10. Fracture Lineaments and Distribution of Transmissivity Values, Tutu Wells Site, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
fUr 
°05 
0045
GERAGHTYtf MILLER, INC. 
O
S (Continued)
4-11. Petroleum-Related Compounds in Groundwater, February 1992 to March 1993, Tutu
Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
4-12. Chlorinated Organic Compounds in Groundwater, February 1992 to March 1993, Tutu
Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
7-1. 
Proposed Phase n Remedial Investigation Monitoring Well, Site Inspection, and Soil-Gas
Survey Locations, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
7-2. 
Phase n Remedial Investigation Implementation Schedule, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
APPENDIX
A. 
Soil-Gas Survey Procedures, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
TUT 
CO5 
OO46
GERAGHTY 6? MILLER, INC.
PHASE n REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
WORK PLAN
TUTU WELLS SITE
ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In September 1993, Geraghty & Miller, Inc. was retained by the Tutu Environmental
Investigation Committee (TEIC) to prepare this Phase n Remedial Investigation (RI) Work Plan
for the Tutu Wells Site in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. On behalf of the TEIC, which
includes Texaco Caribbean, Inc. and Esso Standard Oil of Puerto Rico, Geraghty & Miller
conducted an investigation of soil and groundwater conditions in the Tutu area during the
summer and fall of 1992. This investigation was called the Tutu Service Station Investigation,
and was carried out in compliance with a work plan that was approved by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in March 1992 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a).
The work plan was prepared for incorporation into an Administrative Order (AO) by Consent
(No. H-RCRA - 7003 and 9003-92-0401) issued to Texaco and Esso by the USEPA Region H,
pursuant to Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The Tutu
Service Station Investigation focused on evaluating the potential environmental impacts that may
be related to the Esso and Texaco service stations, but also involved the collection of data used
to identify the distribution and potential sources of chlorinated volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) that have been detected in several supply wells in the Tutu area. The results of the
initial phases of the RCRA-type Tutu Service Station Investigation were summarized in two
technical memoranda (Technical Memorandum I and Technical Memorandum n) that were
submitted to the USEPA in April 1992 and May 1993, respectively (Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
1992b and 1993a).
In a letter, dated August 13, 1993, to Ms. Caroline Kwan of the USEPA, the members
of a newly formed Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) Technical Committee, consisting of the
technical consultants for seven PRPs in the Tutu area, stated that they believed it was necessary
to conduct a broader, more comprehensive RI in the Tutu area. The PRP Technical Committee
indicated that, prior to selection of an appropriate remedy for the groundwater contamination in
TUT 
UO5 
OO47
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
1-2
the Tutu area, all available information regarding potential sources of chlorinated VOCs and
petroleum-related compounds should be evaluated and that there was a need to develop a more
detailed understanding of the water-bearing properties and the extent of contaminants in the Tutu
aquifer. The PRP Technical Committee stated their opinion that a work plan was needed for
a Phase n RI designed to accomplish those goals, and that the work plan should include a
compilation and analysis of relevant information that has been generated recently or was not
available for incorporation into Technical Memorandum n.
This Phase n RI Work Plan has been prepared to complete a comprehensive RI consistent
with the objectives of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA). This CERCLA-type work plan includes an assessment of a large volume of
existing hydrogeologic and environmental chemistry data for the Tutu area, including
information recently made available by several of the PRPs. Based on this data evaluation, the
scope of work for the comprehensive CERCLA-type Phase n RI was developed to address data
gaps regarding the nature, extent, and fate and transport of contaminants in the subsurface, and
to support the selection and design of an appropriate remedial action for the Tutu aquifer.
TUT 
OO5 
OO4a
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
2.0 BACKGROUND
The Tutu Wells Site is located in the Upper Turpentine Run basin in the east-central
portion of St. Thomas, as shown on Figure 2-1. The site encompasses the general area known
as Tutu. The area is comprised largely of residential and commercial establishments located in
the vicinity of the intersection of Highways 38 and 384, as shown on Figure 2-2. The main
commercial district lies along Route 38, which runs in a north-south direction through the area.
Private homes and multi-family housing, including the Virgin Islands Housing Authority (VIHA)
buildings, are generally located along the less heavily traveled roads.
The Tutu basin is situated in an area of the island that was not served by public water
supply systems until the mid-1980s. Until the early 1960s, the area was rural with little demand
on local water resources. Groundwater produced from wells and water distributed by tanker
trucks augmented rainwater cisterns used for human use and agricultural purposes. When
residential and commercial development began in the 1960s, existing private wells were utilized
commercially to supply water to residences and businesses in central St. Thomas. 
As
development in the area increased during the 1960s and 1970s, groundwater withdrawal for
residential and commercial supply increased until 1987. Pumpage in the upper Tutu aquifer
basin for commercial water hauling began in 1964, and by 1967 amounted to about 7 million
gallons per year (mgy). During this 4-year period, the estimated amount of groundwater
pumped for "industrial" purposes increased from 1.2 to 7.5 mgy (Jordan & Cossner 1973).
At least 19 new wells were drilled in 1977 and 1978 for commercial water haulers and
the VIHA housing project. The maximum water production from five commercial well fields
and the VIHA wells in the Upper Turpentine Run basin was estimated to be 619,200 gallons per
day (gpd) (equivalent to 226 mgy) in 1978 (Adams, Alton, Jr. & Associates 1978). This
estimate was calculated assuming all the wells in the six well fields were pumped continuously
at their maximum individual yields. In practice, well field operators pumped a few wells at a
time, and there were periods of time when none of the wells was pumping.
TUT 
OO5 
GO49
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
2-2
Requests for groundwater withdrawal are subject to approval by the United States Virgin
Islands (USVT) Department of Public Works (DPW). By 1983, the appropriations granted by
the DPW totaled approximately 1,000,000 gpd, and no more appropriations were being issued.
The pumpage in the upper basin at that time may have approached or exceeded the estimated
safe yield of 300,000 gpd calculated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in 1973 (Griggs
1978). Groundwater pumpage in excess of 300,000 gpd could have long-term deleterious effects
on the sustained viability of the groundwater resource either by inducing saltwater intrusion in
the lower portion of the Turpentine Run basin or by inducing upconing of relatively mineralized
water at depth (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1983a).
Prior to 1987, potable water supply for the Tutu area was provided by several supply
wells located within the Turpentine Run basin. The locations of existing water supply wells in
the Tutu area are shown on Figure 2-3. These wells were operated for domestic and commercial
purposes until 1987 (Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc. 1993).
On May 20, 1982, Geraghty & Miller conducted a pumping test at Supply Well VIHA-I,
one of the four wells pumped by the VIHA for the housing complex. This pumping test was
part of an evaluation of groundwater supplies in the U.S. Virgin Islands carried out for the USVI
Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs (DCCA). A water sample was collected from
Supply Well VIHA-1 after 5 hours of pumping at 48.4 gallons per minute (gpm). This sample
(ST-1B) was analyzed for VOCs by Mead CompuChem Laboratories of Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina. Analytical results indicated concentrations of 55 parts per billion (ppb) of
tetrachloroethene (PCE), 10 ppb of trichloroethene (TCE), and 12 ppb of trans-1,2-
dichloroethene (DCE) (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1983a).
In July 1987, water from the Tillett well was reported to have an odor. The USEPA was
notified of the situation by the US VI Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR).
Subsequent sampling and analysis of water from the Tillett well and other water supply wells
in the area by the USEPA's Technical Assistance Team (TAT) revealed the presence of VOCs
in groundwater. The compounds detected included aromatic hydrocarbons and chlorinated
TUT 
005 
ooso
GERAGHTY # MILLER, INC. 
O
2-3
VOCs. As a result of the presence of these constituents, the DPNR closed 18 wells in the area
between July and September 1987. The wells remained closed and were sampled quarterly by
the USEPA Region n TAT until August 1989. Many of these wells are currently in use for
non-potable purposes.
In June 1989, a draft AO was issued by the USEPA to Esso, Texaco, and O'Henry
Cleaners. The final AO was subsequently issued by the USEPA on March 23, 1990, and
required the replacement of potable water supplies and the monitoring of 24 supply wells.
During this period, the TEIC, consisting of Esso, Texaco, and O'Henry Cleaners, was formed.
The TEIC retained Geraghty & Miller in 1990 to assist in fulfilling the requirements of the AO.
A sampling, analysis, and monitoring plan (SAMP) was developed by Geraghty & Miller and
submitted to the USEPA in September 1991 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1991a). Under the
SAMP, Geraghty & Miller, in conjunction with Soil Tech Corporation, initiated quarterly
sampling of the supply wells identified by the USEPA. Eight rounds of supply well sampling
have been conducted to date; during each of these rounds, 13 to 24 supply wells were sampled.
On November 1, 1990, the USEPA issued a revised AO to the TEIC based on the
December 1989 comments provided by the individual parties. The revised AO required the
implementation of a Tutu Service Station Investigation. On behalf of the TEIC, Geraghty &
Miller prepared a Tutu Service Station Investigation Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
1992a). The proposed work was conducted during 1991 and 1992. The investigation focused
on evaluating the potential environmental impacts that may be related to the Esso and Texaco
service stations and also involved the collection of data to identify the distribution and potential
sources of chlorinated VOCs that were detected in several supply wells in the Tutu area. Initial
activities included data review, fracture trace analysis, base map preparation, and a
magnetometer survey of proposed drilling locations. The results of these activities were
summarized in Technical Memorandum I (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992b). Subsequent field
investigative activities included the installation of 12 soil borings, 10 shallow monitoring wells,
and 7 deep monitoring wells; soil and groundwater sampling for VOCs, base neutral and acid
TUT 
COS O051
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
2-4
extractable organic compounds (BNAs), and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH); downhole
geophysics; groundwater sampling; and aquifer testing.
The results of the Tutu Service Station Investigation were provided to the USEPA in two
separate technical memoranda (Technical Memorandum I and Technical Memorandum II) dated
April 1992 and May 1993, respectively (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992b and 1993a). Based on
the findings and conclusions of Technical Memorandum n (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a),
Geraghty & Miller developed recommendations for further activities to be conducted in the next
investigative phase. These proposed activities included the installation of four additional shallow
monitoring wells. Additional analytes and sampling locations (including supply wells) were
identified and recommended for inclusion in a proposed second groundwater sampling event.
In August 1993, several PRPs in the Tutu area agreed that there was a need for a
comprehensive RI, addressing the potential sources and distribution of chlorinated VOCs and
petroleum-related compounds in the entire impacted area. As directed by the TEIC, Geraghty
& Miller has evaluated recently available data, identified persisting data gaps, and prepared this
Phase n RI Work Plan to complete a comprehensive CERCLA-type RI.
TUT 
OO5 
OO52
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
3.0 DATA REVIEW
Geraghty & Miller has compiled, reduced, and analyzed recently available data to more
fully characterize environmental conditions at the site, identify remaining data gaps, and develop
a proposal for a Phase n CERCLA-type RI work plan.
The data reviewed can be grouped into the following three categories:
• 
Data previously available in Geraghty & Miller's records that were incorporated
in Technical Memoranda I and n.
• 
Data previously available in Geraghty & Miller's records that were not
incorporated in Technical Memoranda I and n. These data consist primarily of
historical Preliminary Site Assessment (PSA) data collected by USEPA
subcontractors (i.e., NUS Corporation, Roy F. Weston, and Camp Dresser &
McKee [CDM]), and field gas chromatograph (GC) analysis of soil samples
collected during the Tutu Service Station Investigation. The Tutu Service Station
Investigation is considered to represent Phase I of a comprehensive RI.
• 
Recently available data generated by other investigators working on behalf of the
PRPs.
Recent data were provided to Geraghty & Miller by representatives of Four Winds Plaza,
LAGA, Ramsay Motors, O'Henry Cleaners, Esso, Texaco, and Weston Auto from October 21
through November 3, 1993. A summary of recent documents and data provided by individual
PRPs is presented in Table 3-1. Numerous letter reports and PSA reports authored by USEPA
subcontractors are not listed in Table 3-1, but were incorporated in the data assessment. These
documents are referenced as the data are discussed.
005 
0053
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
3-2
The scope of work for the data compilation and analysis consisted of the following tasks:
Task 1: 
Data Compilation and Bibliography Preparation
Task 2: 
Database Design and Data Input
Task 3: 
Extension of Area Base Map
Task 4: 
Well Inventory Revisions
Task 5: 
Geologic Log Compilation and Cross Section Preparation
Task 6: 
Pumping Test Data Evaluation
Task 7: 
Data Analysis and Development of Scope of Work
Task 8: 
Phase n RI Work Plan Preparation
A description of each task and the data review procedures employed is provided below.
3.1 
TASK1: DATA COMPILATION AND BIBLIOGRAPHY PREPARATION
Hydrogeologic and environmental chemistry data for the Tutu Wells Site have been
generated by three groups of investigators: USEPA subcontractors (Roy F. Weston, NUS
Corporation, and CDM Federal Programs); Geraghty & Miller on behalf of the TEIC; and
consultants for individual PRPs (IT Corporation; H+GCL; Blasland and Bouck Engineers
[Blasland and Bouck]; Cooper Environmental, Inc.; Arthur D. Little, Inc.; Hydrologic
Associates U.S.A., Inc.; ENSR; and others).
Analytical data generated by USEPA subcontractors were previously obtained by
Geraghty & Miller during a search of USEPA Region n files as part of the Phase I RI. Recent
data generated by various PRP consultants were reviewed after receipt to assign the proper data
quality classification based on the field and analytical methods and the level of quality assurance
and quality control (QA/QC) employed. Data quality levels, ranging from 1 (lowest level)
through 5 (highest level), were assigned to each data set, as follows:
TUT 
005 
0054
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
3-3
• 
Level 1 - Results from field screening instruments, such as portable
photoionization detectors (PIDs) and flame ionization detectors (FIDs).
• 
Level 2 - Data from a field GC or mobile laboratory.
• 
Level 3 - Laboratory data with reduced QA/QC requirements.
• 
Level 4 - Laboratory data with full QA/QC documentation.
• 
Level 5 - Full contract laboratory protocol (CLP) data with data validation.
All available data were compiled and qualified for entry into the database.
Geraghty & Miller reviewed the bibliographies compiled by Cooper Environmental, Inc.,
Geraghty & Miller, and others, and prepared a combined, comprehensive bibliography of
studies, reports, documents, and other information that have been generated to date for the Tutu
area. Recent reports and information provided to Geraghty & Miller by Four Winds Plaza,
LAGA, Ramsay Motors, O'Henry Cleaners, Esso, Texaco, and Western Auto were utilized to
supplement the bibliography. This comprehensive bibliography is presented in Section 8.0 of
this Phase H RI Work Plan.
3.2 
TASK 2: DATABASE DESIGN AND DATA INPUT
Geraghty & Miller developed a database to receive the environmental data generated for
the Tutu Wells Site. The database structure was designed in dBase IV to allow effective data
entry and use. Prior to entering the data into the database, the data were reviewed and
processed so that units and descriptions were consistent. The data were then "flagged" to
indicate the extent to which they had been validated and the level of caution applicable when
using the data. Analytical data assigned a quality level of 2 or greater were compiled for data
entry. Soil-gas data were not entered into the computer database. Existing ground surface
elevations were input as estimated so that cross sections could be prepared. Geraghty & Miller
has recognized that it will be necessary to resurvey monitoring wells to a common datum at a
future date to reconcile water-level elevations.
TUT 
005
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
3-4
3.3 
TASK 3: EXTENSION OF AREA BASE MAP
The base map presented in Technical Memorandum n was extended to encompass areas
to the northwest, south, and southeast of the previously mapped area that were suspected to be
underlain by groundwater that may contain VOCs or BNAs above the minimum detection limits
(MDLs) and the USEPA maximum contaminant levels (MCLs).
The extension of the base map was performed by Lopez De Azua Associates, Inc., the
surveyors and preparers of the original base map. Field surveying activities and base map
preparation were performed during October and November 1993. Field surveying activities
involved surveying land surface features including roads, buildings, and monitoring wells.
Horizontal locations and monitoring well elevations were surveyed to the nearest 0.01 foot and
plotted. 
Ground surface elevation data were contoured at a 2-foot interval to create a
topographic base map.
3.4 
TASK 4: WELL INVENTORY REVISION
Geraghty & Miller expanded the existing inventory of production wells, monitoring wells,
and borings to include all known monitoring wells and borings that have been installed by other
investigators. As new data were received, boring logs, well construction details, and well
inventory information were identified and compiled. 
The inventory includes pertinent
information regarding depths, construction details, dates of installation, and other relevant data.
In addition, the locations were plotted on the base map that was prepared in Task 3. Accurate
locations for some supply wells are not currently known; these supply wells will be field
surveyed during the Phase n RI.
TUT 
< —— °°56
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
3-5
3.5 
TASK 5: 
GEOLOGIC LOG COMPILATION AND CROSS SECTION
PREPARATION
Utilizing the new lithologic information available for the wells and borings that were
inventoried in Task 4, Geraghty & Miller augmented the geologic information presented in the
cross section (see Figure 3-1, Technical Memorandum n; Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a)
included in Technical Memorandum n. The previous line of cross section was amended to
maximize the use of additional borings and wells located within the study area. The revised
cross section provides a more comprehensive geologic and hydrogeologic evaluation of the Tutu
Wells Site and helps in the identification of hydrogeologic data gaps. This revised cross section
is described in Section 4.0 (Data Assessment and Data Gaps).
3.6 
TASK 6: PUMPING TEST DATA EVALUATION
Geraghty & Miller reviewed the data generated during pumping tests implemented by
other investigators in the Tutu area. The new data included five pumping tests conducted by
Hydrologic Associates, U.S.A., Inc. on several of the Four Winds supply and monitoring wells
and on the Harthman supply wells; a groundwater flow model simulated for the Tutu Wells Site;
and a 1985 pumping test of the Tillett supply well. A 1982 pumping test of VfflA Supply Well
VIHA-1 carried out by Geraghty & Miller was also evaluated. These pumping test data were
reviewed to expand the current understanding of aquifer hydraulic properties in different areas
and vertical portions of the water-bearing unit in the Tutu area.
3.7 TASK 7: DATA ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT OF SCOPE OF WORK
After completion of Tasks 1 through 6, Geraghty & Miller analyzed and interpreted the
compiled data. A comprehensive assessment of available hydrogeologic and environmental
chemistry data was conducted. Areas were identified where further data may be required to
provide a complete understanding of environmental conditions within the study area. The
TUT 
O05 
CO57
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
3-6
identification of these data gaps was utilized to develop the proposed field data collection
activities for the Phase n RI.
3.8 
TASKS: PHASE n RI WORK FLAN PREPARATION
After the conceptual development of the proposed scope of work for the next
investigatory phase, Geraghty & Miller prepared this Phase n RI Work Plan. To the extent
applicable, the procedures and protocols in the USEPA-approved work plan for the Tutu Service
Station Investigation (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a) under which the Phase I RI was
implemented are still considered to be in effect. The sampling and analysis proposed in this
Phase n RI Work Plan will be conducted in accordance with the quality assurance project plan
(QAPP) (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992c) and the health and safety plan (HASP) (Geraghty &
Miller, Inc. 199 Ib). This Phase n RI Work Plan focuses on the technical rationale and elements
of the proposed additional field work.
TUT
005 
0058
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
W
4.0 DATA ASSFSSVraNT f^n pATA GAPS
This section provides a summary and assessment of available data, including data
previously reviewed and analyzed by Geraghty & Miller during the preparation of Technical
Memorandum H (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a), and new data recently received from
individual PRPs and other sources. This assessment is focused on historical operations,
hydrogeologic conditions, and environmental chemistry (i.e., soil and groundwater quality). As
an integral part of the data assessment, data gaps were identified where additional information
may be required to provide a complete understanding of site conditions. The data gaps were
utilized as a basis for development of this proposed scope of work for the Phase n RI.
4.1 
HISTORICAL OPERATIONS
As previously discussed in Section 2.0 (Background), the Tutu commercial district is
concentrated along Highways 38 and 384 (Figure 2-2). Many commercial facilities are located
throughout the area; by the nature of their current or former history and operations, these
facilities may be potential sources of petroleum hydrocarbons and/or chlorinated organic
compounds. The locations of these facilities are shown on Figure 4-1. These potential source
facilities include the following:
• 
VIHA (former Tropical Motors).
• 
Curriculum Center (former LAG A Facility).
• 
Ramsay Motor Company.
• 
Antilles Auto Parts (former Gassett Auto Parts and former Consolidated Auto
Parts).
• 
Tutu Texaco Service Station.
• 
Old Tutu Wastewater Treatment Plant.
• 
Fellowship Church (former Storage Facilities, Inc. and former West Indies
Enterprises, Inc.).
• 
Four Winds Plaza.
• 
Tillett, Inc.
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
4-2
• 
Western Auto.
• 
Overseas Steel Fabrication.
• 
Tracy Dodd Used Car Lot.
• 
Tutu Esso Service Station.
• 
Classic Printers.
• 
A Property of Unknown Ownership (Southeast of Classic Printers).
• 
Archies Welding and Auto Body Repair.
• 
O'Henry Cleaners.
• 
Rodriguez Esso Service Station (former Shell Oil).
• 
Kentucky Fried Chicken (former Home Petroleum, Inc. and former Caribbean
Gas Corporation).
• 
Former Fort Mylner Coin-Op Laundry & Drycleaners, Inc.
A brief description of historical operations at each of these facilities is provided below.
A summary of historical sampling activities at each of the facilities is provided in Table 4-1.
Analytical results from soil and groundwater sampling events are discussed in Section 4.4
(Chemistry Data Assessment).
4.1.1 VfflA (Former Tropical Motors)
The VfflA complex is located to the northeast, immediately uphill, of the Curriculum
Center (former LAG A) building. One VfflA building was occupied by Tropical Motors prior
to 1981; the VfflA has occupied the site since that time (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a). The
southwest portion of the complex is currently used by the VIHA for central office operations and
the storage, maintenance, and repair of VfflA trucks (Simmonds 1993). Truck maintenance
commenced in 1982; however, the facility has never been used primarily for truck maintenance
(Simmonds 1993). Operations that have been conducted on-site include hazardous material
storage, a vehicle maintenance garage, and a drum storage area. An unused desgreasing
machine is stored at the site (Simmonds 1993). The primary hazardous material used and stored
at the facility prior to VfflA's occupation was waste oil (Simmonds 1993). A previously
,ut °°9 °°6°
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-3
installed underground storage tank (UST) for waste oils was reportedly unused from 1982 to
1989 and was emptied in 1989 (Simmonds 1993).
Historical sampling and investigations at the VIHA (former Tropical Motors) facility
were limited to the sampling of waste oils by Weston/Spill Prevention and Emergency Response
(SPER) Division U TAT in 1987 (Weston SPER Division E TAT 1988), and to soil and
groundwater sampling conducted by Geraghty & Miller as part of the Tutu Service Station
Investigation (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a), as shown in Table 4-1. A summary of the
Weston/SPER Division Region n TAT sampling results is provided in Table 4-2.
4.1.2 Curriculum Tenter (Former LAGA Facility)
The USVI Department of Education Curriculum Center is located on Route 38 to the
west of the VIHA (former Tropical Motors) facility in the northern portion of the Tutu area.
The VIHA complex is located to the east of the Curriculum Center. The Curriculum Center has
been occupied by the USVI Department of Education since approximately 1982. From 1970 to
1982, the facility was occupied by LAGA Industries, Inc. (a company named after its two
principals, Andreas Gal and Paul Lazare) (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a). Operations at the
Curriculum Center currently consist of a number of workshops including painting, masonry,
plumbing, wood working, kitchens, and welding/metal working. Hazardous materials currently
used and stored at the Curriculum Center may include paints and thinners. During the period
when LAGA Industries occupied the building, operations consisted of the production of wool
and polyester knit blend textiles. These operations included knitting, pressing patterns, dry
cleaning, and shipping and receiving. The primary chemical used and stored at the LAGA
facility was PCE.
A PSA was conducted by a USEPA subcontractor, NUS Corporation, in February 1989
(NUS Corporation 1989a). A summary of the PSA report is provided in Table 4-3. Sampling
activities conducted at the site included those conducted by CDM (CDM 1989a), Arthur D.
Little, Inc. (1993b), and Geraghty & Miller (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a), as summarized
TUT 
005 
OO61
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-4
in Table 4-1. Analytical results of soil samples collected by CDM are summarized in Table 4-4.
Analytical results of soil and groundwater samples collected by Arthur D. Little, Inc. are shown
on Figure 4-2.
4.1.3 Ramsay Motor Company
Ramsay Motor Company (Ramsay) is located north of the Antilles (former Gassett
Motors) facility and immediately northwest of the Curriculum Center. 
Ramsay initiated
operations in the Tutu area in September 1978 (Cooper Environmental, Inc. 1993a). Ramsay's
operations include three vehicle maintenance bays, a closed waste oil UST, a scrap area, a
storage building, a vehicle body repair operation, and a drum storage area. The primary
chemicals used and stored at Ramsay are motor oils and used oils. Smaller amounts of
automotive flushes, treatments, degreasers, cleaners, and lubricants may also be used on-site or
may have been used in the past.
A number of sampling events and investigations have been conducted at Ramsay,
including initial multi-media sampling by USEPA subcontractors, Weston and CDM, from 1987
through 1989 (Weston/SPER Division Region II TAT 1988 and CDM 1989b), a PSA conducted
by NUS Corporation in 1989 (NUS Corporation 1989b), and more recent investigations
conducted by Geraghty & Miller in 1992 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a) and by Cooper
Environmental, Inc. in 1993 (Cooper Environmental, Inc. 19935), as summarized in Table 4-1.
Analytical results for these sampling events are provided in Tables 4-5 through 4-9. Results of
soil and groundwater samples collected by Cooper Environmental are shown on Figure 4-3.
4.1.4 
Antilles Auto Parts (Former Gassett Auto Parts and Former Consolidated Auto
Earisl
The Antilles Auto Parts (Antilles) facility is located to the north of the intersection of
Highways 38 and 384 in the northern portion of the Tutu area. The facility is bordered by
Ramsay to the north, the Curriculum Center (former LAGA Building) to the east, and the Tutu
0062
TUT
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
4-5
Texaco Service Station to the south. Vehicle repair operations were initiated at the site by
Consolidated Auto Parts after September 1981 (Torinus and Torinus 1993). The facility was
historically occupied and operated first by Consolidated Auto Parts, subsequently by Gassett
Motors, and currently by Antilles (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a). Gassett Motors began leasing
the property in May 1988 (NUS Corporation 1989c). Two vehicle maintenance and repair
buildings are present on-site. Current operations include several vehicle maintenance bays, a
drum storage area, and a 5,000-gallon aboveground storage tank (AST) (Torinus and Torinus
1993). The primary hazardous products or wastes used and stored at the facility are motor oils
and waste oil. Smaller amounts of automotive treatments, degreasers, cleaners, and lubricants
may also be utilized in vehicle maintenance. No information is currently available regarding the
former operations of Consolidated Auto Parts.
Sampling activities and investigations conducted at the Antilles (former Gassett Auto
Parts and former Consolidated Auto Parts) facility included sampling conducted by two USEPA
subcontractors, Weston and CDM, from 1987 through 1989 (Weston/SPER Division Region II
TAT 1988; CDM 1989b; and CDM 1990a), a PSA conducted by NUS Corporation in February
1989 (NUS Corporation 1989c), and recent investigative activities conducted by Geraghty &
Miller (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a), as summarized in Table 4-1. Analytical results from
these sampling events are summarized in Tables 4-10 through 4-13.
4.1.5 Tutu Texaco Service Station
The Tutu Texaco Service Station is located at the northeastern comer of the intersection
of Routes 38 and 384 in the Tutu area. The service station began operation in 1966. During
its history of operation, at least six USTs were installed, four vehicle maintenance bays were
used, two fueling islands were operated, and an oil/water separator connected to an infiltration
tank was utilized. A site plan of the service station is shown on Figure 4-4. Oil changes, minor
engine repair, and other auto services are conducted in the service bays. The primary product
used and stored at the service station is gasoline. 
Small quantities of commercial auto
degreasing agents are purchased from nearby retail stores (H+GCL 1993a).
TUT 
OO5 
O063
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
4-6
Several sampling events and investigations have been conducted at the Texaco Service
Station. These include multi-media sampling by two USEPA subcontractors, Weston and CDM,
from 1987 through 1989 (Weston/SPER Division Region H TAT 1988; CDM 1989b), a PSA
conducted by NUS Corporation in February 1989 (NUS Corporation 1989d), tank excavation
soil sampling in September 1988 (CDM 1989c; CDM 1990a; and CDM 199Gb), and recent work
associated with the Tutu Service Station Investigation (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). A
summary of previous work performed at the Texaco Service Station is included in Table 4-1.
Analytical results for these sampling events are summarized in Tables 4-14 through 4-22.
An investigation of the Texaco Tutu Service Station is currently being performed by
H+GCL. The investigation includes the installation of soil borings and monitoring wells, and
the collection of soil and ground water samples. The results of this investigation should be
available during the first quarter of 1994.
4.1.6 Old Tutu Wastewater Treatment Plant
The old Tutu Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) is located to the west of the Tutu
area in the Donoe valley. The old Tutu WWTP was built in approximately 1967. It services
the upper Tutu Basin and Harthman's Tutu Plaza facility (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a). The
old Tutu WWTP's design capacity is about 220,000 gpd, and it currently processes
approximately 50,000 gpd. Plant treatment equipment consists of grit separation, two aeration
and activated sludge settling basins, and two air diffuser systems leading to a chlorination
system, with eventual discharge to an infiltration pond. The chlorination of the effluent
discharge can create tnchloromethanes (THMs). The infiltration pond is reportedly between 5
to 15 feet deep, with a surface area of approximately 9,000 square feet (Arthur D. Little, Inc.
1993a). Due to the shallow soil thickness in the area, the infiltration pond may be excavated
into bedrock. Sampling at the old Tutu WWTP is limited to that conducted by Arthur D. Little,
Inc. in October 1993 (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a), as summarized in Table 4-1.
TUT 
005 
O064
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-7
4.1.7 Fellowship Church (Former Storage Facilities Inc. and Former West Iqflies
Enterorises. Inc.)
The Fellowship Church is to the north of the Tutu area in Hidden Valley. Based on a
review of historical aerial photographs, the facility was developed some time prior to 1971 . The
property has reportedly been occupied by several parties since its development, including West
Indies Enterprises, Inc. and Storage Facilities, Inc. , and is currently occupied by the Fellowship
Church (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a). Little information is available concerning historical
operations at the property. Arthur D. Little cited a reference to a West Indies chemical plant
and paint company that was reportedly located in the Tutu area in the 1970s; however, the
former presence of the chemical plant and paint company at this location has not been
confirmed. The facility has at least one chemical AST (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a).
4.1.8 Four Winds
The Four Winds Plaza is located immediately west of Highway 38 in the central portion
of the Tutu area. The property is currently owned by the Four Winds Plaza Partnership.
Construction of the shopping center began in 1977. In September 1985, the Four Winds Plaza
Partnership purchased the property (Four Winds Plaza Partnership 1993). The shopping plaza
includes a movie theater, car wash, assorted restaurants, an auto repair facility (Western Auto),
an electronics store, a florist shop, a bakery, a travel agent, a food store, and various fashion
and merchandise stores.
Equipment at the plaza includes several backup diesel generators for electricity and
several ASTs (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a). Six ASTs are currently in service and are used to
store diesel fuel; these ASTs are owned and operated by various tenants and by the Plaza
Partnership (Four Winds Plaza Partnership 1993). Two additional ASTs that were owned and
operated by former tenants are currently out of service or have been abandoned (Four Winds
Plaza Partnership 1993).
TUT 
005 
0065
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-8
Three USTs were formerly present at the plaza but have been abandoned or were taken
out of service. Two of the USTs were used by Western Auto to store waste oil and diesel fuel.
The former operators) and owner(s) of the third UST (known as the "Ramp Tank") is not
known. This UST was identified by Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc. in December 1992 as part of
an investigation to locate the two former USTs operated by Western Auto (Four Winds Plaza
Partnership 1993).
Spray can solvents are utilized at Western Auto. Hazardous materials are reported to be
stored and used at Western Auto and the Splash and Dash Car Wash (Four Winds Plaza
Partnership 1993). Hazardous chemicals used at the Splash and Dash Car Wash include
automotive cleaners (interior, exterior, and wheel), compounds, and laminox detergent.
A number of sampling events and investigations have been conducted at Four Winds
Plaza from 1991 through 1992. These include investigations by Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc.
(Four Winds Plaza Partnership 1993), Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. (Hydrologic
Associates U.S.A, Inc. 1993a and 1993b), Geraghty & Miller (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a),
and soil-gas surveys by Target Environmental, Inc. (Target Environmental, Inc. 1992a and
1992b), as summarized in Table 4-1.
4.1.9 Tillett. Inc.
Tillett, Inc. is located directly east of Four Winds Plaza and Highway 38 in the central
portion of the study area. Operations at Tillett have historically included silk screening, textile
painting, piano refinishing, stripping, and varnishing. A restaurant, El Papaguyo at Tillett
Gardens, is also located on the Tillett property. Materials management practices include a raw
material storage area, floor drains, and an evaporation pit. Soil sampling was conducted at the
Tillett property by CDM in 1988 (CDM 1988b), and by Geraghty & Miller as part of the Tutu
Service Station Investigation in 1992 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a), as summarized in Table
4-1. Analytical results of the 1988 sampling event by CDM are summarized in Table 4-23.
TUT 
005 
0066
GERAGHTY # MILLER. INC. 
O
4-9
4.1.10 Western Auto
Western Auto is an automotive supply store and automobile repair shop located within
the Four Winds Plaza shopping center. Operations and equipment at Western Auto have
included maintenance bays, a diesel AST, diesel and waste oil USTs, vehicle repair facilities,
auto parts storage, an oil/water separator, floor drains, sumps, and underground piping (Arthur
D. Little, Inc. 1993a). Western Auto commenced operations in late 1978 to early 1979 at Four
Winds Plaza (Four Winds Plaza Partnership 1993). Operations consisted of vehicle repair and
service, including oil changes, tire changing, and light automobile mechanical work. In 1981
or 1982, operations were curtailed to tire and battery replacement, and automotive product sales.
Operations since then have remained essentially the same (Four Winds Plaza Partnership 1993).
The primary chemicals used and stored historically at the facility were waste oils and
diesel. Two USTs were historically used at the facility for storage of waste oil and diesel fuel;
the USTs were apparently abandoned or taken out of service in the early 1980s when operations
changed (Four Winds Plaza Partnership 1993). During November and December 1992,
Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc. conducted investigations to locate the two abandoned USTs and
sampled soil and groundwater from borings advanced in the vicinity of the USTs (Four Winds
Plaza Partnership 1993). The contents of the USTs were also sampled. Resampling of the
liquid contents of the diesel UST was conducted in March 1993 (Four Winds Plaza Partnership
1993), and in May 1993 (ENSR 1993 and Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1993a). The two
Western Auto USTs were excavated in October 1993; soil and water samples were collected
during tank excavation by Blasland and Bouck (Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1993a),
Arthur D. Little, Inc. (19935), and ENSR. These investigations are summarized in Table 4-1.
Analytical results of samples collected by Caribbean Hydro-Tech (Four Winds Plaza Partnership
1993) in November and December 1993, including samples collected in the vicinity of the ramp
tank at Four Winds, are shown on Figure 4-5. Analytical results of recent sampling associated
with tank excavation activities are not currently available.
TUT 
005 
O067
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-10
4.1.11 Overseas Steel Fabrication
Overseas Steel Fabrication is located on the east side of Highway 38 and is surrounded
by the Tracy Dodd used car lot and the Vitelco facility. The Overseas Steel Fabrication facility
consists of one field office and one trailer. Arthur D. Little personnel conducted a site visit of
the property in October 1993. 
At the time of the site visit, the building and trailer were
observed to be vacant (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a). The current activities and the nature of
historical operations at the facility are not known.
4.1.12 Tracv Dodd Used Car Lot
The Tracy Dodd Used Car lot is located immediately east of the Vitelco facility in the
central portion of the Tutu area. From 1989 through May 1993, the used car lot was called
Tracy's Radiators. Previous land uses included a used car lot and a fruit sales business. During
a site visit conducted by Arthur D. Little personnel in October 1993, approximately eight empty
drums were identified at the facility. One of these drums was labeled as containing a flammable
polyester liquid, and another was labeled as a fruit preservative (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a).
4.1.13 TiftV Fsso Service Station
The Tutu Esso Service Station is located proximal to the southeastern comer of the Four
Winds Plaza, adjacent to the junction of Highways 38 and 382. The Esso station opened in
approximately 1969, conducting both auto repair and gasoline retail operations. In addition to
gasoline and motor oils, products commonly utilized for automobile repair were reportedly
stored at the site. Auto repair operations were terminated in the late 1980s or early 1990s. No
automobile repair operations are presently being conducted at the station. In 1989, the two
gasoline USTs installed in 1969 were removed and replaced with two new USTs (Soil Tech
Corporation 1990a). The site presently contains two USTs for the storage and retail distribution
of gasoline.
TUT
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
4-11
A number of sampling events and investigations have been undertaken at the Esso Service
Station, as summarized in Table 4-1. Initial sampling of various media at the service station was
conducted by two USEPA subcontractors, Weston and CDM, from 1987 through 1989
(Weston/SPER Division Region D TAT 1988 and CDM 1989a). A PSA was conducted in
February 1989 by NUS Corporation (NUS Corporation 1989e). Split soil samples were
collected in June 1989 by CDM and Soil Tech Corporation during UST excavation activities
(CDM 1990a and Soil Tech Corporation 1990a). In December 1989, Soil Tech advanced nine
borings and collected soil samples at the service station (Soil Tech Corporation 1990b). More
recent sampling activities at the service station were conducted by Geraghty & Miller in 1992
as part of the Tutu Service Station Investigation (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). Analytical
results associated with previous sampling and investigation activities are summarized in Tables
4-24 through 4-42. Soil analytical results for samples collected by Soil Tech Corporation in
December 1989 are depicted on Figure 4-6.
4.1.14 riassir Printers
The Classic Printers facility is situated in the southern portion of the Tutu area,
approximately 300 feet south of the Esso Service Station on the east side of Highway 38. No
data are currently available concerning the history or operations of this facility. However, the
name of the business indicates that inks and ink-cleaning agents may have been utilized in site
operations; these could have contained chlorinated organic constituents.
4.1.15 A Property of Unknown Ownership (Southeast of Classic Printers)
In 1954, the Tutu area was mostly pasture for grazing. A review of an aerial photograph
from January 29, 1954 indicates that the property southeast of Classic Printers included one of
the few buildings present at this time. This building may have been a farm or residence. Since
no public water supplies were present in the Tutu area in 1954, this property may have had an
old supply well. A review of a 1992 aerial photograph indicates that light-colored circular
objects, approximately 3 feet in diameter, were present south of the building on this property.
TUT 
005 
0069
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-12
A large area east of the building was apparently paved. The historical and current operations
at this property are unknown.
4.1.16 Archies WflftiPg and Auto Body Repair
Archies Welding and Auto Body Repair Shop is located in the southern portion of the
Tutu area, immediately north of O'Henry Cleaners. The date on which the facility commenced
operations is not known, but auto repairs have been conducted for least the past 3 years. The
facility consists of two maintenance garages where welding, auto body repair, and painting take
place. Paints, primers, thinners, and degreasers are reportedly stored and used in facility
operations (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a). 
Data regarding facility operations, including
underground storage, piping, or waste management systems, are not currently available.
4.1.17 O'Henrv Cleaners
The O'Henry Cleaners facility is located on the east side of Highway 38 in the southern
portion of the Tutu area. Operations at the facility commenced in 1982. Current and former
facility equipment and operations reportedly include a leaching pit, a sump, a holding tank, an
underground wash water tank to the north of the property, a PCE drum storage area,
aboveground and underground fuel storage, drains, effluent discharges for steam condensate
from the presses, and a clothes dryer (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a).
A number of sampling events and investigations have been conducted at O'Henry
Cleaners. In 1988, CDM collected soil samples at the site (CDM 1989b and 1990b). A PSA
was conducted in 1989 by Pedro Panzardi & Associates (Pedro Panzardi & Associates, Inc.
1989). Intrusive investigations, including borings and monitoring wells, were conducted during
the period of 1990 through 1992 by IT Corporation and Geo-Caribe (IT Corporation 1990 and
1993), and by Geraghty & Miller (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). These sampling activities
are summarized in Table 4-1 . Analytical results for historical sampling events and investigations
are provided in Tables 4-43 through 4-44, and shown on Figures 4-7 and 4-8.
TUT
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-13
4.1.18 
Rodriguer Vssn Service Station (Former Shell OiD
The Rodriguez Esso Service Station facility is located on the west side of Highway 38
in the southern portion of the Tutu area. The facility commenced operations in approximately
1981 and has been under the ownership of Esso since 1987 (Soil Tech Corporation 1990c).
Operations include two USTs, an underground oil collection pit, floor drains, and a cement
cistern used for the collection of car wash wastewater. The facility was operated by Shell Oil
from 1971 to 1981. In 1989, the two USTs installed in approximately 1971 were removed and
replaced with two new USTs at a separate location on the property (Soil Tech Corporation
1990c). Waste oil and miscellaneous solvents have reportedly been used and stored at the
facility (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a). However, little information exists regarding historical
site operations, waste handling and disposal practices, the integrity of existing systems, or
potential environmental impacts.
A hydrogeological assessment of the service station was conducted in 1990 by Soil Tech
Corporation (Soil Tech Corporation 1990c), as summarized in Table 4-1. Analytical results of
soil and groundwater samples collected during the investigation are provided in Tables 4-45 and
4-46. Groundwater elevations from five monitoring wells installed in unconsolidated deposits
at Rodriguez Esso indicate that shallow groundwater flows from west-northwest to east-southeast
beneath this facility (Soil Tech Corporation 1990c).
4.1.19 
Kentucky Fried Chicken (Former Home Petroleynif Tqy, p"d Former Caribbean
Gas Cornoratioiri
The Kentucky Fried Chicken facility, located southeast of Rodriguez Esso, began
operations in 1963 under the name of Caribbean Gas Corporation and later became Home
Petroleum, Inc. until it was closed in 1986. The facility was operated after approximately 1991
by Kentucky Fried Chicken. This facility reportedly contained two or three USTs, some of
which leaked. Reportedly, upon excavation of the tanks, free product was observed in the
excavation (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a). Little information is currently available regarding
TUT
CO 5
007 1
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-14
historical operations, UST excavation, the volume and nature of free product released, or soil
and groundwater quality conditions.
4.1.20 Former Fort Mvlner Coin-Op Lflundrv &
According to Arthur D. Little (1993c) and Andrew Smyth (Smyth 1993), the 1975 yellow
pages for St. Thomas contained advertisements for a coin-operated laundry and dry cleaning
facility at the Fort Mylner Shopping Center. It is not known if dry cleaning was performed on
the premises. The exact location of this former business is not known, and renovations and
modifications have likely occurred at the Fort Mylner Shopping Center, which could have
removed all physical evidence of the former laundry.
4 .2 
CONCEPTUAL HYDROGEOLOGIC MODEL
Numerous studies of the geology, hydrogeology, and groundwater chemistry of the Tutu
area have been carried out, beginning with Donnelly 's (1966) initial description of the geology
of St. Thomas and USGS studies in the 1960s and 1970s focusing on the availability of
groundwater supply (Donnelly 1972; Donnelly and Whetten 1968; Jordan and Cosner 1973; and
Jordan and Fisher 1977). Subsequent studies have amplified the understanding of geologic and
hydrogeologic conditions and have provided soil and groundwater quality data. The data and
interpretations in these various investigations provide a sufficient basis to develop a conceptual
model of the geologic and hydrogeologic factors that affect groundwater availability and
contaminant movement in the Tutu area.
4.2.1 Geology
The Tutu valley is underlain by bedrock consisting of andesitic, volcaniclastic tuffs,
breccias, and conglomerates of the Louisenhoj Formation (Donnelly 1966). Figure 4-9 depicts
a hydrogeologic cross section through the Tutu area. The line of cross section is depicted on
the surficial bedrock surface map, Figure 2-3. The depth to bedrock ranges from 0 to
TUT 
OO5 
OO72
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-15
approximately 20 feet below land surface (bis). A very thin (less than 6 feet thick) soil layer
has developed over the rock in most areas, except for thin bands along the principal valleys
where thicker deposits of alluvium (up to approximately 20 feet thick) have accumulated. Over
large portions of the Tutu area, bedrock exposures occur at land surface (Geraghty & Miller,
Inc. 1993a). The bedrock at and below land surface is fractured to varying degrees. Several
sets of steeply dipping to nearly horizontal joints and fractures transect the rock. The bedrock
is most fractured along lineaments that are discernable from the interpretation of aerial
photographs. These lineaments were formed by major faults and fractures in the bedrock.
Fracture lineaments that have been identified are shown on Figure 4-10.
The higher intensity of bedrock fracturing along major lineaments has had a controlling
affect on site topography. Where the bedrock is more fractured, the rock is more susceptible
to erosion, and the principal, narrow valleys in the site are developed along these lineaments.
The major, north-south trending valley that parallels the stretch of Route 38 between the Tutu
Texaco Service Station and the Rodnguez Esso Service Station runs along a major lineament,
as do the northeast-southwest trending valley along the stretch of Route 38 between the VIHA
offices and the Tutu Texaco Service Station, and the northwest-southeast trending valley along
the section of Route 32 extending southeast from Rodnguez Esso.
4.2.2 Hydrogeology
Very little incident precipitation reaches the saturated zone as groundwater recharge. On
St. Thomas, evapotranspiration may consume 95 percent or more of rainfall (Jordan and Fisher
1977). The small faction of incident precipitation that is not lost to evapotranspiration or
storm-water runoff percolates downward through the network of fractures that transect the rock.
Groundwater is stored and transmitted through fractures in the bedrock, which behaves
as an unconfined aquifer. The water table occurs at depths of 5 to 97 feet bis, with the greater
depths occurring in the northern, more elevated portions of the Tutu area (Geraghty & Miller,
Inc. 1993a). Since the groundwater is transmitted principally through fractures and the rock is
TUT 
CO5 
OO73
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-16
more fractured along major lineaments, the aquifer probably behaves in a strongly anisotropic
manner.
Several supply wells are located throughout the Tutu area. In addition, numerous
monitoring wells have been installed at various facilities since 1987. Tables 4-47 and 4-48
provide an inventory of existing supply wells and monitoring wells located throughout the Tutu
area, and include relevant construction details. Table 4-49 summarizes alternate designations
assigned to the wells by various investigators.
Regional and site-specific groundwater contour maps indicate that groundwater flows
toward and down the axis of the principal valleys. The fractures of the upper portion (down to
approximately 90 feet bis) of the aquifer are interconnected to varying degrees. Based on boring
logs for Deep Test Well #1 (Monitoring Well CHT-7D) and for supply wells at Four Winds
Plaza, the interval between 40 to 90 feet bis is less fractured than the surficial 0 to 40 feet bis
(Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. 1993a). Larger fracture zones occur in the lower portion
of the aquifer from approximately 90 to 200 feet bis. The boring log for Deep Test Well #2
(Monitoring Well CHT-6D) at Four Winds Plaza indicates more intensive fracture development
at this location.
Numerous aquifer tests have been conducted in the Tutu area (Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
1983a and 1993a; Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. 1993b; and Hamlin 1985). A summary
of the aquifer test results is presented in Table 4-50. The transmissivity of the aquifer is at least
an order of magnitude higher along the valleys than it is in areas removed from the axes of the
valleys. The distribution of transmissivity values calculated for the Tutu aquifer is shown on
Figure 4-10. The highest transmissivities occur where major lineaments intersect, such as in the
north portion of the Four Winds Plaza parking lot (near Monitoring Wells MW-6, MW-6D, and
CHT-6D).
Natural groundwater flow appears to be primarily horizontal in the central portion of the
Tutu area, but there is an appreciable, consistent, downward component to flow in the northern
TUT 
OO5 
0074
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-17
portion. Under pumping conditions, downward flow would be further induced within the zone
of influence of the pumping well(s).
The bottom of the Tutu aquifer is not well defined. The physical bottom of the aquifer
would be the depth at which the fracture intensity diminishes and the fractures are no longer
sufficiently interconnected to allow for significant ground water flow. 
No information is
available to indicate at what depth this phenomenon occurs. Chemically, the bottom of the
aquifer could be defined by the transition from groundwater of natural chemistry acceptable for
consumption, to more mineralized water that can no longer be feasibly used or treated for public
or commercial supply. There is limited evidence that groundwater below a depth of about 300
feet in the central and northern portion of the Tutu area is relatively mineralized connate water.
In the southern portion of the Tutu area, the freshwater/saltwater interface may occur at
shallower depths.
4.2.3 Contaminant Movement
The constituents of concern in the Tutu area are organic liquids that can be grouped into
two categories: (1) gasoline and other petroleum products and wastes and (2) chlorinated
solvents, primarily PCE and other chlorinated compounds such as TCE and DCE. TCE and
DCE may have been present as impurities in commercial-grade PCE or may have been used as
commercial products. They also can occur as breakdown products of PCE.
Releases of organic fluids at or below land surface would initially be absorbed onto soil.
Once the absorptive capacity of the soil is exhausted, the fluids will continue to percolate
downward until they reach the water table. If pure-phase gasoline or other petroleum derivatives
reach the water table, they will tend to float since their density is less than water. A separate
oil phase has been detected in Monitoring Well MW-9S, adjacent to the Tutu Esso Service
Station (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). Free-phase product was observed in the subsurface
during removal of the Western Auto USTs. Free-phase product may have occurred in the past
in the vicinity of other petroleum product and waste oil USTs in the Tutu area.
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-18
If pure-phase PCE or other pure-phase chlorinated solvents were to reach the water table
in sufficient volumes, they would continue to move downward as an immiscible fluid along
fractures until they were completely adsorbed by clays along bedrock fractures, or until
encountering a low permeability substratum. There is no direct or indirect evidence of the
occurrence of pure-phase chlorinated solvents in the saturated zone.
Soils in the unsaturated zone that contain adsorbed organic compounds can serve as a
continuing source of dissolved constituents as rainwater percolates through the soil and transports
dissolved constituents to the saturated zone. This appears to be the primary mechanism that has
introduced PCE and other chlorinated solvents to the aquifer. Once dissolved in the groundwater
under the location of the source, the dissolved chlorinated solvents would migrate with
groundwater in the general direction of groundwater flow. The more limited distribution of
dissolved petroleum constituents in the aquifer relative to dissolved chlorinated solvents may be
due in part to the relatively high biodegradable nature of petroleum compounds.
4.2.4 Aquifer Characteristics
Several aquifer pumping tests have been carried out by various workers to develop
estimates of the hydraulic characteristics of the Turpentine Run basin aquifer. With proper data
collection and analysis, values of transmissivity (T) and storage (S) can be derived from pumping
tests. Figure 4-10 provides a site plan with aquifer pumping test locations and distribution of
calculated transmissivity values. Prior to 1982, six pumping tests were reportedly conducted in
the basin; however only one test indicated a specific capacity greater than 1 gallon per minute
per foot (gpm/ft) of drawdown. The specific capacity of that well was between 1 and 2 gpm/ft
(Stevens et al. 1981). On May 20, 1982, Geraghty & Miller conducted a pumping test on the
VIHA I supply well, which has a total depth of 140 feet. After 10 hours of pumping at 48.4
gpm, 5.3 feet of drawdown were observed in the pumping well (VIHA I), which indicated a
specific capacity of approximately 9 gpm/ft. Supply well VIHA n (located 120 feet north of
VIHA I) was used as an observation well during the May 1982 pumping test. After 10 hours
of pumping, 1.42 feet of drawdown were observed in supply well VIHA n, which is 142 feet
TUT 
005 
OO76
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
4-19
deep. Review of the drilling log for VIHA I indicated fracture zones at 78, 87, 105, 125, and
138 feet bis (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1983a). The later part of the May 1982 pumping test
indicated that the water level was continuing to be drawn down and was not stabilizing.
A pumping test of the Tillett well was conducted by Donald L. Hamlin, Inc. (1985) to
estimate the aquifer coefficients at this well location and to estimate the potential yield of the
well. Based on the pumping rate of 46.4 gpm and a drawdown of 1.82 feet after 64.5 hours
of pumping, the specific capacity of the well was 12.2 gallons per day per foot (gpd/ft). Using
the relationship between specific capacity and transmissivity, Donald L. Hamlin, Inc. calculated
a transmissivity between 2673 to 5348 square feet per day (ft/day) (Donald L. Hamlin
Consulting Engineers, Inc. 1985).
In accordance with the Tutu Service Station Investigation Work Plan (Geraghty & Miller,
Inc. 1992a), aquifer tests were conducted in November 1992 on Monitoring Wells MW-6R and
MW-6D to estimate the hydraulic properties of the aquifer in the immediate vicinity of the Tutu
Wells Site. Based on the analysis of the water-level data from the aquifer test at Monitoring
Well MW-6R, the transmissivity of the shallow portion of the aquifer was 8.39 square feet per
minute (ftVmin) (12,081 tf/day or 90,360 gallons per day per foot [gal/day/ft]) (see Table 4-50
and Figure 4-10). No confining units were identified during the drilling program; therefore the
aquifer is unconfined.
Analysis of the water-level data for the aquifer test at Monitoring Well MW-6D, which
is open to the part of the aquifer from approximately 50 to 70 feet bis, indicates a transmissivity
ranging from 5.2 to 8.14 ftVmin (7,500 to 11,700 ftVday or 56,100 to 87,500 gal/day/ft) (see
Table 4-50 and Figure 4-10). This value is similar to the transmissivity calculated from the
aquifer test at Monitoring Well MW-6R.
Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. conducted several aquifer tests on wells at the Four
Winds Shopping Plaza and in the southern portion of the Tutu site (Hydrologic Associates
U.S.A., Inc. 1993a and 19935). The tests were conducted to calculate aquifer characteristics
TUT
GERAGHTY <Sf MILLER, INC. 
O
4-20
and evaluate whether the wells were hydraulically interconnected. The tests included three
multiple well tests and two single well tests. Four Winds Deep Test Well DTW #1 (also known
as Monitoring Well CHT-7D) was pumped and Four Winds Supply Wells I, n, and m were
used as observation wells; Four Winds Deep Test Well DTW #2 (also known as Monitoring
Well CHT-D) was pumped and Supply Wells I, n, and HI were used as observation wells; the
Harthman Crusher well was pumped and the Harthman Bakery well was used as an observation
well; and single well tests were performed on the Harthman Racetrack well and Harthman
Batiste (or Baptiste) well.
Based on the analysis of the data from the aquifer testing, Hydrologic Associates U.S.A.,
Inc. (1993a) calculated aquifer transmissivities that range from 116 ftVday (868 gpd/ft) at the
Batiste well to 3,443 fWday (25,750 gpd/ft) at Observation Well OW-FW-3 (Four Winds m
Supply Well) for the pumping test at Monitoring Well CHT-6D (see Figure 4-10). Details of
the pumping rates and durations of each of the tests are provided in Table 4-50.
After reviewing the aquifer tests conducted by Hydrologic Associates U.S.A. Inc.,
Geraghty & Miller is concerned that the analyses performed on the aquifer test data sets and
resultant hydraulic parameters are flawed. For example, the analysis of the drawdown observed
in Observation Well OW-FW-3 (Four Winds m) during the test of DTW #2 (CHT-6D) utilized
the Neuman delayed drainage method, but the type curve displayed only appears to be for late
time-drawdown data. It also does not appear that the effects of delayed drainage are obvious
from the data plots. With this method, both early and late time-drawdown data need to be
matched to a type curve with resultant transmissivity values that are approximately equivalent.
The early data provide a value for storage that approximates the storage value for a confined
aquifer, while the late data provide a value of storage that approximates an unconfined aquifer.
This analysis was apparently not conducted and, therefore, the resultant transmissivity value is
in question. In addition, there is an apparent transcription error in the summary table from the
Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. (1993a) report because the transmissivity value in the table
is reported at 3,443 ft2/day and the curve match plot for this well reports a transmissivity value
of 34,443 ft2/day. 
The Neuman delayed drainage approach and methodology was also
TUT 
005 
0078
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
4-21
incorrectly applied to the drawdown data for DTW #1 (CHT-7D) during the aquifer test of this
well and the drawdown data for DTW #2 (CHT-6D) during the aquifer test of this well.
Based on the examples described above, as well as others noted during review of the
report, Geraghty & Miller is concerned about the validity of all of the aquifer hydraulic
properties that have been published by Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. These and other
concerns have also been reported by Adenekan, Springer, and Streltsova (1993). Gartner Lee,
Inc. (1993) utilized the transmissivity values calculated by Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc.
(1993a) in their numerical groundwater flow and transport modeling of the Tutu Wells Site. The
concerns regarding the hydraulic parameters calculated by Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc.
also shed doubt on the conclusions reached by Gartner Lee, Inc.
4.3 HYDROGEOLOGIC DATA GAPS
The hydrogeology of the Tutu Wells Site has been investigated, in parts, by at least ten
different environmental consulting firms, in addition to the USGS and USEPA subcontractors.
Despite the large amount of effort, data gaps for the Tutu Wells Site still exist. This Phase n
RI Work Plan has summarized some of the data presented in recent reports by various
investigators to identify these data gaps. These hydrogeologic data gaps are summarized below.
The existing supply well and monitoring well network in the Tutu area does not provide
sufficient areal coverage to allow a complete understanding of groundwater flow conditions. The
horizontal and vertical components of groundwater flow have not been adequately defined to the
south, southeast, and east of O'Henry Cleaners. Additional water-level control points are needed
in these areas so that groundwater contour maps can be generated for the shallow and deep
aquifer zones and so that the direction of the vertical component can be understood. The study
area for the RI has been extended to the southeast where chlorinated compounds have been
detected in the LaPlace, Smith, and Matthias supply wells. Installation of monitoring wells and
measurements of groundwater elevations are necessary in this area to confirm the presumed
groundwater flow direction to the southeast.
TUT 
005 
0079
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
4-22
Based on investigative work conducted by Blasland and Bouck, the storm sewer that runs
north-south through the Tutu area intersects the water table beneath the Four Winds parking lot.
The storm sewers are likely to have been placed within a gravel envelope or backfill material.
The potential exists that the storm sewers may have a hydraulic influence on groundwater flow
conditions locally, either by infiltration/exfiltration from the storm sewer pipe, or as a result of
preferential groundwater flow within the sewer pipe bedding material.
The previous aquifer testing performed at the Tutu Wells Site has been concentrated in
the vicinity of the VIHA-I Supply Well, the Four Winds Plaza, the Tillett Supply Well, and the
Harthman property. Additional analysis of some of these data is necessary to confirm the
previous results and re-analyze data that were incorrectly analyzed.
The effect of pumpage of supply wells on groundwater flow conditions in areas of
groundwater contamination (especially near the boundaries of groundwater contamination) is not
thoroughly defined. Only limited information is available at locations of previous aquifer tests.
4.4 CHEMISTRY DATA ASSESSMENT
Samples of soil, groundwater, and other materials have been collected for chemical
analysis during several investigations. This section of the Phase n RI Work Plan provides a
summary of soil and groundwater analytical data that are currently available for the Tutu area.
Soil analytical data are presented and discussed on a facility-by-facility basis to facilitate an
assessment of potential sources of petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated organic contaminants.
Groundwater data, including sampling of monitoring wells and supply wells, are subsequently
discussed from an area-wide perspective. Potential impacts from each facility on site-specific
and area-wide groundwater quality are assessed through an evaluation of documented releases,
the occurrence of groundwater impacts, and the relation of groundwater quality to soil quality.
0080
TUT
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. 
W
4-23
4.4.1 Soil Sampling Results
Soil quality data collected by Geraghty & Miller during the Tutu Service Station
Investigation, by USEPA contractors, and by other investigators are summarized and discussed
for each potential source area, where data are available.
4.4.1.1. VfflA (Former Tropical Motors) Soil Sampling Results
As part of the Tutu Service Station Investigation, Geraghty & Miller collected one soil
sample from a depth of 4.0 to 6.0 feet bis in the boring for Monitoring Well MW-13D
(Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). This monitoring well was located approximately SO feet west
of the VIHA maintenance garage. The soil sample was analyzed for TCL VOCs, BNAs, TPH,
and TAL metals. Analytical results indicated no detectable concentrations of VOCs, BNAs, or
TPH. Metal concentrations were detected at concentrations less than one order of magnitude
above background (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a).
4.4.1.2 Curriculum Center (Former LAGA Facility) Soil Sampling Results
Available soil quality data for the Curriculum Center are shown on Figure 4-2. On June
6, 1989, CDM personnel collected two soil samples (Soil Samples eL-02-Ols and el-02-02s),
at the Curriculum Center (former LAGA facility) (CDM 1990b). The soil samples were
collected from the area of dumped drums. The exact locations of these samples are not known,
and they are not shown on Figure 4-2. The analytical results are summarized in Table 4-4.
Toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, phenol, methylphenols, naphthalene, methylnaphthalene,
endosulfan I, and other hydrocarbons were detected in Soil Sample eL-02-Ols. Xylene was
detected in Soil Sample eL-Q2-02s. TPH was reported at concentrations ranging between 544
and 3,470 ppm. Cadmium and lead were detected in both soil samples (CDM 19905).
Eight surficial soil samples and five subsurface soil samples were collected by Geraghty
& Miller in 1992 near the Curriculum Center (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). The soil
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-24
samples were analyzed for TCL VOCs, BNAs, TPH, and TAL metals. Surficial Soil Samples
SS-3 and SS-4 were collected near the former drum disposal area to the northwest of the
Curriculum Center building. Methylene chloride, a common laboratory contaminant (or
artifact), was reported in Surficial Soil Samples SS-3 at 22 ppb and in SS-4 at an estimated
concentration of 8 ppb. Surficial Soil Sample SS-3 had reported concentrations of 2-butanone
(35 ppb), total xylenes (19 ppb), toluene (4 ppb estimated), and ethylbenzene (3 ppb estimated).
No other TCL VOCs, TCL BNAs, or TPH compounds were reported in Surficial Soil Samples
SS-3 and SS-4. The only metal detected in Surficial Soil Samples SS-3 and SS-4 at
concentrations greater than one order of magnitude above background was potassium at 7,140
ppm in Soil Sample SS-3 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a).
Three soil borings, Soil Borings B-14, B-15, and B-16, were drilled near the location of
a former discharge pipe that extended through the north wall of the Curriculum Center Building
(former LAGA Building) (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). PCE was detected in Soil Sample
B-14 (0 to 2 feet bis) at an estimated concentration of 72 ppb, and in field replicate Soil Sample
B-14FR (0 to 2 feet bis) at an estimated concentration of 100 ppb. PCE was also detected in
Soil Sample B-15 (0 to 2 feet bis) at 170 ppb and in Soil Sample B-16 (0 to 2 feet bis) at 23
ppb. These PCE concentrations represent four of the six highest values reported during the Tutu
Service Station Investigation (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). TCE was detected in Soil Sample
B-15 at an estimated concentration of 6 ppb. No other chlorinated VOCs were detected in
samples from these three borings (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a).
Toluene was detected in the four soil samples from the three soil borings at estimated
concentrations ranging from 2 to 12 ppb. Butyl benzyl phthalate was detected in Soil Sample
B-16 at an estimated concentration of 58 ppb. Phthalate compounds are related to plastics and
may be due to sampling or laboratory artifacts (USEPA 199la). No other BNA compounds
were detected in samples from Soil Borings B-14, B-15, and B-16 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
1993a).
TUT 
O05 
0082
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
4-25
No chlorinated VOCs were detected in samples from Soil Borings B-l (northwest of the
Curriculum Center) or B-6 (south of the boarding dock), or the soil samples collected from the
boreholes of Monitoring Wells MW-1, MW-1D, or MW-14. Acetone was detected in three of
these samples at concentrations ranging from 49 to 370 ppb. Acetone is a common laboratory
artifact (USEPA 1991a).
TPH was detected at concentrations ranging from not detected to 250 ppm. Arsenic was
detected above the background level of 1 ppm in Soil Sample B-16 (11.6 ppm) and the duplicate
of Soil Sample B-16 (11.9 ppm). No other metals or cyanide concentrations were detected at
concentrations greater than one order of magnitude above background (Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
1993a).
In October 1993, Arthur D. Little, Inc. collected 13 shallow soil samples (SS-1 through
SS-13) near the north side of the Curriculum Center (former LAGA facility) (Arthur D. Little,
Inc. 19935). The locations and associated analytical results for samples collected by Arthur D.
Little, Inc. and Geraghty & Miller are shown on Figure 4-2. Soil samples were collected from
0.5 to 2.0 feet bis from shallow borings advanced with a hand auger. The samples were
analyzed for VOCs and TPH. Three shallow soil samples were collected for analysis of total
organic carbon (TOC) only. Soil Sample SS-12 collected at the northeastern comer of the
building, was reported to contain benzene (3.2 ppb), ethylbenzene (6.4 ppb), toluene (138.3
ppb), and xylene (39.5 ppb). Soil Sample SS-9, collected from a shallow trenched area north
of the building was reported to contain TCE (6.5 ppb) and PCE (169 ppb). This sample was
collected near the locations of the three borings drilled in the Tutu Service Station Investigation
where high PCE concentrations were detected. Soil Sample SS-13, collected adjacent to the
center of the northern side of the building, was reported to contain PCE at a concentration of
2.9 ppb. No TPH was detected in any samples.
'TUT 
OO5 
O083
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-26
4.4.1.3 Ramsay Motor Soil Sampling Results
Available soil quality data for the Ramsay property are shown on Figure 4-3. CDM
personnel collected two soil samples (Soil Samples eR-07s and eR-08s) at the southern boundary
of the Ramsay property on September 8, 1988 (CDM 19895). The exact locations and depths
of the samples are not available, and they are not shown on Figure 4-3. These soil samples
were analyzed for VOCs and BNAs; analytical results are summarized in Table 4-6. The results
indicated that 2-hexanone, 4-methyl-2-pentanone, toluene, and xylene were reported in Soil
Sample eR-07s. Benzene, ethylbenzene, and xylene were reported in Soil Sample eR-08s. The
highest concentrations reported were 55 ppb of 2-hexanone in Soil Sample eR-07s, and 18 ppb
of ethylbenzene in Soil Sample eR-08s.
In a later sampling event conducted by CDM from June 5 through 10, 1989, one soil
sample (eR-02-02s) was collected from 2 to 12 inches bis in an area along the property line,
from an area that had been identified as an oil spill originating from the former Consolidated
Auto (currently Antilles) property (CDM 1990a). This location is not shown on Figure 4-3.
The sample was analyzed for VOCs, BNAs, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and
metals. The analytical results are summarized in Table 4-9. The holding time for VOC analysis
was exceeded; however, the results of the analyses indicated that methylene chloride and xylenes
were detected, and benzene was tentatively identified in the soil sample. A number of BNAs
(including 
naphthalene, 
methylnaphthalene, 
fluorene, 
fluoranthene, 
pyrene, 
and
benzofluorenthene) were also reported. No pesticides or PCBs were detected. Heavy metals
(lead and cadmium) were reported at concentrations of 15 and 6.1 ppb, respectively. TPH was
reported at a concentration of 23.4 ppm.
In 1992, Geraghty & Miller collected soil samples from 0 to 2 feet bis in Soil Boring
B-2, and from 2 to 4 feet bis in Soil Boring B-3, at the Ramsay property (Geraghty & Miller,
Inc. 1993a). Soil Boring B-2 was drilled adjacent to the drum storage area. Soil Boring B-3
was drilled adjacent to a 55-gallon drum that was lying on its side with an open bunghole,
approximately 75 feet west of Soil Boring B-2. Both Soil Samples B-2 (0 to 2 feet bis) and B-3
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
TUT 
COS 
0084
4-27
(2 to 4 feet bis) had detectable concentrations of methylene chloride estimated at 17 ppb and 26
ppb, respectively, and acetone at concentrations of 14 ppb and an estimated 6 ppb, respectively.
These two compounds are common laboratory artifacts. TCE was detected in Soil Sample B-3
at an estimated concentration of 6 ppb. This reported TCE value may be due to volatilization
of TCE upward from contaminated groundwater. No other chlorinated VOCs or BTEX VOCs
were detected in either sample. The most significant results for these two soil samples are the
reported estimated concentrations in Soil Sample B-2 of benzo(a)pyrene (270 ppb),
benzo(g,h,i)perylene (290 ppb), and pyrene (220 ppb). No other BNA compounds were detected
in either samples. TPH was detected in Soil Sample B-2 at 110 ppm, and not detected in Soil
Sample B-3. No metals or cyanide concentrations exceeded one order of magnitude above
background levels.
Cooper Environmental, on behalf of Ramsay, conducted field investigations at the
property in April and July 1993 (Cooper Environmental, Inc. 1993b). The investigations
included the advancement of ten hand auger borings (Hand Borings HB-1 through HB-10) and
13 shallow soil borings (Soil Borings SB-1 through B-13). Soil sample locations and associated
analytical results are shown on Figure 4-3. One soil sample was collected from each boring and
analyzed for VOCs, BNAs, and TPH.
Hand Borings HB-1 through HB-5 were advanced in the vicinity of the closed waste oil
tank. Analysis of soil samples, recovered from depths ranging from 2 to 5 feet bis indicated the
presence of low levels of methylene chloride, benzene, ethylbenzene. and xylenes. Estimated
concentrations of methylene chloride (11 ppb), benzene (17 ppb), ethylbenzene (290 ppb), and
xylenes (7 ppb) were reported in Soil Sample HB-2; and ethylbenzene was detected in Soil
Sample HB-5 at an estimated concentration of 190 ppb. Numerous compounds, including
acetone, 2-butanone, and 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA), were detected in the blanks and in the
samples. 
BNA compounds detected included naphthalene, methyl naphthalene, fluorene,
phenanthrene, chrysene, and bis-2-ethylhexyl phthalate. Samples of the borehole water and
product observed infiltrating into Hand Boring HB-3 were collected for analyses. Aqueous and
non-aqueous liquid samples collected from Soil Boring HB-3 revealed the presence of high
TUT 
GO5 
OO85
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-28
concentrations of BTEX and BNA constituents. Chlorinated compounds were not detected in
either the oil or the water sample from Hand Boring HB-3.
Soil samples from Hand Borings HB-6 through HB-10 contained low levels of BNAs.
VOCs were not detected, with the exception of those constituents also detected in blank samples.
Soil samples collected from Soil Borings SB-1 through SB-13, advanced along the drainage ditch
in the southern portion of the property, were reported to contain variable BNA concentrations.
The soil borings along the drainage ditch were targeted to investigate staining originating from
the Antilles property. Several soil borings were advanced in the vicinity of the Ramsay drum
storage area. With the exception of acetone and methylene chloride, no aromatic or chlorinated
VOCs were detected.
4.4.1.4 Antilles Auto Parts (Former Gassett Auto Parts and Former Consolidated Auto
Parts) Soil Sampling Results
On September 12, 1988 Soil Samples eC-09Js and eC-lOJs were collected by CDM
personnel at the Antilles (former Gassett) facility (CDM 1989b). One soil sample was collected
from behind the open bay garage area, and one sample was collected at the open bay garage
adjacent to the drum storage area. The exact locations of the samples are not known. These
samples, one field blank and one trip blank, were analyzed for VOCs. The analytical results
are summarized in Table 4-11. Soil Sample eC-09Js was reported to have concentrations of
ethylbenzene at 1.3 ppm, toluene estimated at 0.56 ppm, and xylene at 2.5 ppm. Soil Sample
eC-lOJs was reported to contain ethylbenzene (2.1 ppm), toluene (1.3 ppm) and xylene (5.6
ppm). Trace levels of benzene (4 ppb), 4-methyl-2-pentanone (33 ppb), and styrene (6 ppb)
were also reported.
As part of the Tutu Service Station Investigation, Geraghty & Miller advanced Soil
Boring B-5 at the Antilles facility (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). A split-spoon soil sample
was collected from 0 to 2 feet bis for analysis for TCL VOCs, BNAs, TPH, and TAL metals.
Soil Sample B-5 was reported to have estimated concentrations of acetone (92 ppb), 2-butanone
TUT 
005 
0086
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
4-29
(18 ppb), and methylene chloride (9 ppb). Methylene chloride, acetone, and 2-butanone are
suspected laboratory artifacts (USEPA 1991a). Estimated concentrations of toluene (2 ppb) and
MTBE (1.3 ppb) were also detected in this sample; no chlorinated VOCs or BNAs were
detected. Soil Sample B-5 had a reported TPH concentration of S3 ppm, and no metals or
cyanide were detected at concentrations exceeding background values by one order of magnitude.
4.4.1.5 Texaco Service Station Soil Sampling Results
A detailed site plan for the Texaco Service Station is shown on Figure 4-4. From
September 12 through 15, 1988, Soil Sample eT-02s was collected by CDM personnel at the
Texaco Service Station in an area north of the first bay lift between the concrete pad and fence.
Duplicate Soil Sample eT-02sd was also collected. These samples were analyzed for VOCs by
Conref Laboratories; the analytical results are summarized in Table 4-15. No VOCs were
detected (CDM 1989b).
During tank excavation activities at the Texaco Service Station from September 12
through 15, 1988, CDM personnel collected split soil samples for VOC analysis (CDM 19895).
Three split soil samples (Soil Samples TP-01, TP-02, and TP-03) were collected from test holes
drilled in the concrete pad to the south-southwest of the tank excavation. The analytical results
of the split soil samples are summarized in Tables 4-17 through 4-20. The results indicated the
presence of BTEX, acetone, chloroform, 2-butanone, 2-hexanone, and 4-methyl-2-pentanone.
The highest constituent concentrations were reported for xylene and ranged from 22 to 43 ppm.
Four split soil samples (Soil Samples EX-01, EX-02, EX-03, and EX-04) and one duplicate (Soil
Sample EX-03d) were collected from the excavation pit. The same compounds were detected
at similar concentration ranges in the soil samples from the excavation. Soil Sample EX-03 was
contained to contain a concentration of 0.01 ppm of 1,2-DCE. Split Soil Samples SP-IT, SP-
2T, SP-3T, and SP-4T collected from the excavated soil piles contained similar constituents
within similar ranges. 
The compounds detected, including methylene chloride, acetone,
chloroform, 1,2-DCE, benzene, xylene, and ethylbenzene, were also detected in trip and field
blanks.
TUT 
OO5 
OO87
GERAGHTY^ MILLER, INC 
O
4-30
Split soil samples from the soil piles were collected by CDM from June 5 through 10,
1989 and analyzed for VOCs, pesticides, PCBs, extraction procedure (E.P.) toxicity metals, and
TPH (CDM 19906). The soil samples were collected after ventilation of the soil piles. The
analytical results are summarized in Tables 4-21 and 4-22. Methylene chloride was detected in
the soil samples and laboratory blank. Sample SP2-022 from the middle section of Soil Pile SP-
3 contained chlorinated VOCs and xylenes. No pesticides or PCBs were detected. TPH was
detected in split soil samples at concentrations ranging from less than 10 to 91 ppm. Cadmium
(0.35 to 2.8 ppb) and lead (1.8 to 31 ppb) were reported in E.P. toxicity test results.
As part of the Tutu Service Station Investigation, Geraghty & Miller collected four soil
samples from soil borings and monitoring wells for laboratory analysis for TCL VOCs, BNAs,
TPH, and TAL metals at the Texaco Service Station in 1992 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a).
Soil Boring B-4 was drilled through a strip of unpaved soil at the northwestern corner of the
Texaco Service Station where cars are commonly repaired. A soil sample was collected from
8 to 10 feet bis for laboratory analysis. Acetone, a common laboratory contaminant, was
reported at an estimated value of 55 ppb in sample B-4. No other VOCs, BNAs, or TPH were
detected. No cyanide or metals were detected at concentrations exceeding one order of
magnitude above background values.
Soil samples from three monitoring well borings at the Texaco Service Station were also
collected for analysis. The three borings for Monitoring Wells MW-3, MW-4, and MW-4D
were drilled through concrete pavement. The analysis of soil samples from these borings
indicated no VOCs, except for PCE at 2 ppb in Soil Sample MW-3 and 1 ppb in Soil Sample
MW-4. 
These low concentrations may be the result of volatilization from the water table.
Several common laboratory contaminants (phthalates, acetone, 2-butanone, and methylene
chloride) were detected. Benzo(a)pvrene was detected at an estimated 140 ppb in Soil Sample
MW-4; no other BNA compounds were detected. TPH ranged from not detected to 130 ppm,
and no cyanide or metal concentrations were detected at concentrations greater than one order
of magnitude above background. H+GCL is currently implementing a comprehensive source
. 
0083
TUT 
*
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-31
investigation at the Texaco Service Station. The results from this investigation are not currently
available.
4.4.1.6 Four Winds Plaza and Western Auto Soil Sampling Results
Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc. installed Monitoring Wells CHT-1 through CHT-4 on the
Four Winds Plaza property in February 1992 (Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. 1993a).
Composite soil samples were collected from discrete depth intervals in the borings for
Monitoring Wells CHT-2 and CHT-3, from 10 feet bis in Monitoring Well CHT-2, and from
29 to 29.5 feet bis in Monitoring Well CHT-3. The samples were analyzed for VOCs and total
oil and grease (TOG). One additional soil sample from 14 feet bis in Monitoring Well CHT-2
was collected and analyzed for TOG. MTBE (190 ppb) was reported in Soil Sample CHT-2 (10
feet bis). Ethylbenzene (7.6 ppb) and xylene (9 ppb) were reported in Soil Sample CHT-3 (29.0
to 29.5 feet bis). TOG values for all three samples were reported to range from less than 5 ppm
to 630 ppm.
As part of the Tutu Service Station Investigation conducted by Geraghty & Miller, six
soil samples from the borings for Monitoring Wells MW-2, MW-6, MW-6D, MW-9, MW-10,
and MW-10D were collected at the Four Winds Plaza for laboratory analysis (Geraghty &
Miller, Inc. 1993a). Monitoring Wells MW-9, MW-9S, MW-10, and MW-10D were installed
near the Tutu Esso Service Station. A blind field replicate, Sample MW-2FR (0 to 2 feet bis),
was collected from the boring for Monitoring Well MW-2. All of these soil samples were
collected beneath asphalt paving.
The only VOCs (except for laboratory contaminants) detected were toluene, at an
estimated concentration of 1 ppb in Soil Sample MW-10D and PCE at an estimated concentration
of 6 ppb in Soil Sample MW-6. No BNAs were detected in any samples. TPH concentrations
ranged from not detected to 230 ppm. It should be noted that a sheen of product was observed
floating on the water table in Monitoring Well MW-9 on one occasion, September 17, 1992.
No cyanide or metal concentrations exceeded background values by one order of magnitude.
TUT 
OO5 
OO89
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
4-32
In December 1992, Caribbean Hydro-Tech conducted investigations to locate the two
former waste oil and diesel USTs at Western Auto (Four Winds Plaza Partnership 1993). At
that time, a third UST (known as the "Ramp Tank") was identified adjacent to the ramp behind
Western Auto, as shown on Figure 4-5. This tank appeared to have been abandoned and filled
with sand (Four Winds Plaza Partnership 1993). A sample of the sand contents of the UST was
collected and analyzed for VOCs and PAHs. The results indicated elevated concentrations of
chrysene plus benzo(a)anthracene (1,600 ppb), fluoranthene (360 ppb), and phenanthrene plus
anthracene (400 ppb). Three shallow soil borings, TW-6 through TW-8, were advanced in the
vicinity of the Ramp Tank. One soil sample was collected from Soil Boring TW-6. No VOCs
or polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were detected in the soil sample. TOG and TPH
were reported at 330 and 100 ppm, respectively.
4.4.1.7 Tillett, Inc. Soil Sampling Results
On September 13, 1988, CDM personnel collected Soil Samples eTT-14 and eTT-15 in
the paint cleaning area at the Tillett property (CDM 1989b). Soil Sample eTT-14 was collected
between a concrete drainway and a gravel pit, and Soil Sample eTT-15 was collected at the end
of a drainpipe. The soil samples were analyzed for VOCs; the analytical results are summarized
in Table 4-23. The results indicated trace concentrations of xylene and tentatively identified
compounds, which were all estimated below the quantitation limit.
In 1992, Geraghty & Miller collected three soil samples at the Tillett property (Geraghty
& Miller, Inc. 1993a). Soil Samples SS-5, MW-5 (0 to 4 feet bis), and B-8 (0 to 2 feet bis)
were submitted for laboratory analysis of TCL VOCs, BNAs, TPH, and TAL metals. A blind
field replicate sample B-8FR (0 to 2 feet bis) was collected from Soil Boring B-8.
Soil Boring B-8 was located approximately 20 feet west of a sanitary sewer junction and
25 feet west of the Tillett Supply Well. PCE was detected in Soil Sample B-8 (0 to 2 feet bis)
at an estimated concentration of 2 ppb, and in a field replicate of this sample, B-8FR, at an
estimated concentration of 5 ppb. Toluene was detected at an estimated concentration of 4 ppb
TUT 
OO5 
OO90
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. 
O
4-33
in Soil Samples B-8 and B-8FR. Ethylbenzene was detected at an estimated concentration of 2
ppb in Soil Sample B-8 and at an estimated 3 ppb in Sample B-8FR. No other VOCs were
detected in any of the soil samples from the Tillett site.
Several BNA compounds were detected in Soil Sample B-8 (0 to 2 feet), including pyrene
estimated at 300 ppb; fluoranthene estimated at 290 ppb; benzo(b)fluoranthene estimated at 250
ppb; chrysene estimated at 210 ppb; and benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene,
benzo(k)fluoranthene, indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene, and phenanthrene at estimated concentrations
ranging from 84 to 180 ppb. A field replicate (B-8FR) of this soil sample had no detectable
BNA compounds reported. 
Fluoranthene at an estimated concentration of 100 ppb and
benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, chrysene, di-n-butyl phthalate, and pyrene at
estimated concentrations between 55 and 84 ppb were also reported in Soil Sample SS-5. TPH
was not detected and no cyanide or metals in Soil Sample B-8 exceeded background values by
one order of magnitude. However, TPH was detected at a concentration of 77 ppm, and arsenic
was detected at an estimated concentration of 94 ppm in the field replicate, Soil Sample B-8FR.
No cyanide or metal concentrations exceeded background levels by one order of magnitude or
greater in any sample but the field replicate, Soil Sample B-8FR.
TPH was detected in Soil Sample MW-5 (0 to 4 feet bis) at a concentration of 590 ppm,
which was the highest TPH concentration detected in soil during the Tutu Service Station
Investigation.
4.4.1.8 Western Auto Soil Sampling Results
On November 25, 1992, Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc. advanced two hand auger borings,
Borings TW-1 and TW-2, in the vicinity of the abandoned waste oil tank at Western Auto (Four
Winds Plaza Partnership 1993). The locations of the hand auger borings and the associated
analytical results for soil samples are shown on Figure 4-5. One sample of the sand contents
of the waste oil tank was collected and analyzed for VOCs, PAHs, TPH, and TOG; no VOCs
TUT 
005 
0091
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-34
or PAHs were detected. TPH and TOG were reported at concentrations of 14 ppm and IS ppm,
respectively.
A soil sample was collected from Boring TW-1, which was advanced to approximately
4 feet. No VOCs or PAHs were detected in this sample. Concentrations of 32 ppm and 40 ppm
were reported for TPH and TOG, respectively. A sample of water from Boring TW-2 was
collected and analyzed for purgeable VOCs, TPH, and TOG. BTEX constituents were detected
in this sample. The highest individual concentration was for xylene at 17 ppb. TPH and TOG
were reported at concentrations of 430 ppm and 450 ppm, respectively. The sample had a
hydrocarbon odor, an oily sheen, and some discoloration (Four Winds Plaza Partnership 1993).
On December 2, 1992, Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc. advanced three additional borings,
TW-3, TW-4, and TW-5 in the vicinity of the former diesel UST at Western Auto (Four Winds
Plaza Partnership 1993). This UST was found to contain a petroleum hydrocarbon product and
had not been abandoned in place. A sample of the liquid in the UST was collected on December
8, 1993. The sample was analyzed for purgeable VOCs, PAH, TOG, and TPH. Benzene,
ethylbenzene, and 1,1,1-TCA were reported at concentrations of 26 ppb, 13 ppb, and 700 ppb,
respectively. PAHs, naphthalene, pyrene, and 1-methylnaphthalene were also reported at
concentrations of 190 ppb, 350 ppb, and 200 ppb, respectively. Elevated detection limits were
reported for PAH compounds due to sample matrix interference. TOG and TPH were each
reported at a concentration of 690 ppm. The UST contents were resampled in March 1993 by
Caribbean Hydro-Tech (Four Winds Plaza Partnership 1993), and in May 1993 by ENSR and
Blasland and Bouck (ENSR 1993 and Blastend and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1993a). Although
petroleum hydrocarbon compounds were detected, 1,1,1-TCA was not detected in any of these
sampling events.
On December 8, 1992, a soil sample was collected from Boring TW-4 adjacent to the
former diesel UST. Although no VOCs or PAHs were reported (with the exception of 1-
methylnaphtnalene at 570 ppb), detection limits were elevated due to sample matrix interference.
TOG and TPH were reported at 240 ppm and 56 ppm, respectively. A water sample collected
0092
TUT 
'" ' ' 
'
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-35
from Boring TW-5 exhibited detectable levels of ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene, and several
PAH compounds. Detection limits for PAH analyses were elevated due to sample matrix
interference. TOG and TPH were reported at 110 ppm and 90 ppm, respectively.
4.4.1.9 Esso Service Station Soil Sampling Results
During the period of June 5 through 10, 1989, two petroleum product USTs were
removed from the Esso Service Station. Soil Samples TP-1 through TP-13 and two duplicates
(TP-10 RE and TP-4 DUP) were collected from the excavation pit by Soil Tech Corporation
(Soil Tech Corporation 1990a). These samples were analyzed for VOCs, BNAs, TPH, and
metals. Analytical results of the soil samples are summarized in Tables 4-28 through 4-40.
Xylene (ranging from not detected to 540 ppm), ethylbenzene (not detected to 55 ppm), toluene
(not detected to 180 ppm), benzene (not detected to 23 ppm), and acetone (not detected to 0.11
ppm), were reported in the excavation pit samples. 2-Butanone was detected in both the samples
and the blanks. A variety of BNAs, ranging in concentrations from not detected to 49 ppm, was
reported in the samples. No chlorinated compounds were detected. TPH values were reported
at concentrations ranging from not detected to 40 ppm. With the exception of chromium at
concentrations of 0.1 and 0.2 ppb, no heavy metals were reported in the excavation pit soil
samples.
Grab samples were collected from the top, middle, and bottom of Soil Piles SP-1 through
SP-7 during tank removal activities. These 21 samples and one duplicate were analyzed for
VOCs only. The results indicate that the same compounds were reported at ranges similar to
the excavation pit soil samples. No chlorinated compounds were detected in the soil samples.
Composite samples were collected at each soil pile for analysis for BNAs, TPH, metals, and
ignitability. One duplicate sample was collected from the composite samples. TPH was
reported at concentrations ranging from 18 to 19 ppm; heavy metals were not detected.
Seven split soil samples (TE-X-01 through TE-X-07) were collected by CDM from the
excavation pit at Esso (CDM 19895 and 1990b). These samples were analyzed for VOCs,
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
4-36
BNAs, pesticides, PCBs, TPH, and metals. The analytical results are summarized in Table 4-
41. Three split soil samples were collected from three of the seven soil piles, SP-1 through SP-
7. Grab samples were collected from the top, middle, and bottom sections of the soil piles for
VOC analyses. Composite samples for BNAs, TPH, metals, and ignitability were collected from
the top, middle, and bottom sections of the soil piles. Composite samples were analyzed for
BNAs, TPH, and metals (CDM 19905). Analytical results are summarized in Table 4-42.
In December 1989, Soil Tech Corporation advanced eight soil borings (Soil Borings
B-101 through B-103 and B-105 through B-109) at the Esso Service Station (Soil Tech
Corporation 19905). Soil samples were collected at various depth intervals in the borings and
analyzed for BTEX and PCE. The boring locations and associated soil analytical results are
shown on Figure 4-6. Neither PCE nor BTEX compounds were detected in samples from Soil
Borings B-105, B-106, B-107, or B-108. BTEX constituents were detected in Soil Borings
B-101, B-102, and B-103, generally in samples recovered from depths ranging from 4 to 8 feet
bis. The highest BTEX concentrations were reported in Soil Sample B-101 (10 to 12 feet bis),
with benzene (303.5 ppb), toluene (548.3 ppb), m-xylene (1,008.5 ppb), and o,p-xylene (1,286.4
ppb) reported. The soil sample from 8 to 10 feet bis and 10 to 12 feet bis in Boring B-102 also
showed high concentrations of benzene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes. PCE was reported in Soil
Sample B-109 (8.0 to 9.5 feet bis) at a concentration of 10.48 ppb, and in Soil Samples B-103
(0 to 1.0 foot) and B-103 (2 to 2.5 feet bis) at concentrations of 394.3 ppb and 85.1 ppb,
respectively.
As part of the Tutu Service Station Investigation, Geraghty & Miller collected two soil
samples at the Esso Service Station (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). Both of these samples
were collected beneath asphalt pavement near the northern portion of the Esso Service Station.
Sample B-9 (2 to 6 feet bis) was collected in the northeastern corner of the Esso property. No
VOC or BNAs were detected in this soil sample. TPH was detected at 160 ppm. No metals
and cyanide were detected at concentrations that exceeded background values by one order of
magnitude.
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-37
Soil Sample MW-8 (2 to 4 feet bis) had an estimated PCE concentration of 2 ppb; this
concentration could be due to volatilization from contaminated groundwater. 
No other
chlorinated VOC compounds were detected. This sample also had an estimated concentration
of toluene (1 ppb). No other BTEX VOCs or TPH was detected. No cyanide or metals in this
sample exceeded background values.
4.4.1.10 O'Henry Cleaners Soil Sampling Results
Several investigations have collected soil samples at the O'Henry site for chemical
analysis. Sample locations and available soil-quality data are shown on Figure 4-7. On
September 8, 1988, CDM personnel collected Soil Sample e-01 from ground surface in an area
near a fuel tank at the O'Henry Cleaners facility. The sample was analyzed for VOCs. The
analytical results are summarized in Table 4-43. With the exception of PCE (440 ppm), VOCs
were undetected.
Three additional soil samples (Soil Samples e02-01, e02-02, and eQ2-03) were collected
by CDM on June 5, 1989 from the former PCE filter and residue disposal area. The analytical
results indicated concentrations of 1,2-DCE (20 ppb), TCE (75 ppb), and PCE (180,000 ppb)
in one sample, Soil Sample e02-02. No other VOCs were detected.
On August 23, 1989, Pedro Panzardi & Associates, Inc. collected two soil samples from
two drums of topsoil removed from the disposal area (Pedro Panzardi & Associates, Inc. 1989).
These samples were analyzed for PCE. PCE was not detected above the detection limit of 0.03
ppm (see Table 4-44).
On June 27,1990, Geo-Caribe collected soil samples from various depth intervals in Soil
Boring OHSS-1 advanced to the south of O'Henry Cleaners facility (IT Corporation 1990).
Analytical results of soil samples from this boring, indicated the presence of methylene chloride,
acetone, 2-butanone, xylenes, and PCE. Methylene chloride, 2-butanone, and xlyenes were also
detected in the blank samples. PCE was reported in the soil samples at concentrations ranging
TUT 
OO5 
OO9S
GERAGHTY# MILLER, INC.
4-38
from 400 to 59,000 ppb. These are the highest PCE concentrations reported for soil in the Tutu
area.
During the Tutu Service Station Investigation conducted by Geraghty & Miller, six soil
samples were collected at the O'Henry Cleaners facility (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). These
included five soil boring samples (from Soil Borings B-10, B-ll, B-12, B-13, and B-13 A) and
surface Soil Sample SS-6. In addition, a blind field replicate of Surface Soil Sample SS-6 was
collected and labeled Soil Sample SS-7. After the laboratory results had been returned, Sample
SS-7 was renamed SS-6FR.
PCE was detected in four soil samples as follows: Soil Samples B-13 (200 ppb), B-ll
(29 ppb), B-13A (15 ppb), and SS-6 (estimated concentration of 1 ppb). Toluene was detected
at an estimated concentration of 2 ppb in Soil Sample B-ll. No other VOC or BNAs were
detected. TPH concentrations ranged from not detected to 41 ppm. The PCE concentration of
200 ppb in Soil Sample B-13 was the highest detected in soil samples collected in 1992, but is
much lower than the concentrations detected in samples collected by CDM in 1989 or Geo-
Caribe in 1990. Groundwater quality data for O'Henry monitoring wells are shown on Figure
4-8; these data will be discussed in Section 4.4.3 (Groundwater Sampling Results).
Barium (498 ppm), was detected in Soil Sample B-10 slightly in excess of one order of
magnitude above the background value (41.9 ppm). Arsenic concentrations in five of the soil
samples collected near the O'Henry facility exceeded the background value of 1 ppm by greater
than one order of magnitude, as follows: Soil Sample B-12 (6 to 8 feet bis) at 18.3 ppm, Soil
Sample B-13 (4 to 6 feet bis) at an estimated concentration of 185 ppm, Soil Sample B-13 A (0
to 2 feet bis) at 13.7 ppm, Soil Sample SS-6 at an estimated concentration of 17.3 ppm, and Soil
Sample SS-6FR at an estimated concentration of 19.1 ppm. No other metals or cyanide
concentrations in these samples exceeded one order of magnitude above background values.
0096
TL,T
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-39
4.4.1.11 Rodriguez Esso Service Station (Former Shell Oil) Soil Sampling Results
The only available soil quality data for the Rodriguez Esso Service Station are those
generated by Soil Tech Corporation. In 1990, Soil Tech Corporation performed a hydrogeologic
assessment of the Rodriguez Esso Service Station (Soil Tech Corporation 1990c). During this
investigation, six borings were advanced. Soil samples were collected from various depth
intervals in Boreholes No. 1 through 6 and were analyzed for BTEX compounds. The analytical
results are summarized in Table 4-45. No BTEX constituents were detected in soil samples
from Boreholes 1, 3, or 6. BTEX constituents were detected in Boreholes 2, 4, and 5 at depths
ranging from 6 to 14 feet bis. The highest total BTEX constituent concentrations (97 and 94
ppm) were reported in soil samples from Borehole 2 (10 to 12 feet bis) and Borehole 4 (10 to
12 feet bis), immediately above the water table.
4.4.2 Results of Gas Chromatograph Ffclfl Analysis of Soil Samples
During the Tutu Service Station Investigation, Geraghty & Miller collected soil samples
from soil borings, surface soil, and borings for monitoring wells for VOC analysis using a
portable GC. The results of the field GC analysis are summarized in Table 4-51.
The soil samples were analyzed for VOCs in the field using a Photovac 1 OS-Plus portable
GC manufactured by Bingham Environmental Technologies Inc., with a headspace technique.
The field measurement concentration units are reported in micrograms per liter (ug/L).
Although these units preclude direct comparison of the field results with regulatory soil
standards, these results can be used for qualitative analysis of relative VOC concentrations in
soil and soil vapor.
Field screening is a useful technique for soil analysis, but the results may be misleading
because of the VOCs present in the soil gas in addition to those absorbed to the soil. VOCs in
the soil gas will be detected by a headspace technique during analysis and reported as soil
contamination, while laboratory methodologies primarily measure the concentrations of VOCs
TUT 
005 
0097
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
4-40
absorbed on the soil. Therefore, laboratory confirmation is required to verify whether the soil
is the source of the VOCs detected in the field GC analysis or whether soil vapors are present
due to migration from another location.
4.4.3 firmindwater Sampling
Groundwater samples have been collected from monitoring and supply wells in the Tutu
area during numerous investigations. A discussion of groundwater quality conditions, focusing
on petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated organic compounds, which have been determined
to be the contaminants of concern in the Tutu area (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a), is presented
below. Groundwater quality data for late summer/early fall 1992 are shown on Figures 4-11
and 4-12. Figure 4-11 shows the concentrations of petroleum-related compounds (BTEX, BNA,
and TPH parameters) in monitoring wells and supply wells. Chlorinated VOC concentrations
in monitoring wells and supply wells are shown on Figure 4-12. These data have been compiled
from many sources. Groundwater samples were collected from most of the supply wells from
September 14 through 17, 1992, as part of the Seventh Sampling Event conducted in accordance
with the SAMP AO (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992d). Monitoring wells installed during the
Tutu Service Station Investigation were sampled from September 29 through October 7, 1992
(Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a).
Groundwater sampling data generated by other investigations from monitoring wells
installed at O'Henry Cleaners and Four Winds Plaza and from supply wells on the Harthman
Estate have also been incorporated into Figures 4-11 and 4-12. It should be noted that the
groundwater sampling data presented encompasses a range of sampling dates during February
1992, September 1992, October 1992, December 1992, and March 1993. Since a
comprehensive round of sampling data for one event is not currently available, Figures 4-11 and
4-12 will be used as a basis for discussion, but the effects of time on contaminant migration,
transport, and chemical reactions (i.e., biodegradation, adsorption, and volatilization) will also
be considered.
TUT 
OO5 
0098
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
4-41
4.4.3.1 Chlorinated Organk Compounds
The total concentrations of chlorinated VOCs (PCE, TCE, and DCE) have been
contoured on Figure 4-12. Examination of this figure indicates the presence of two distinct
chlorinated VOC plumes in the Tutu area, a northern plume extending north-south and a
southern plume extending northwest-southeast. In general, total chlorinated VOC concentrations
are distributed consistently through the vertical saturated trickness of the aquifer, and adjacent
clustered monitoring and supply wells usually show total chlorinated VOC concentrations that
do not vary by more than one order of magnitude.
The northern chlorinated VOC plume extends from the vicinity of the Curriculum Center
down the axis of the valley to the intersection of Routes 38 and 382, near the Tutu Esso Service
Station. The highest concentrations of PCE, TCE, and DCE in this northern plume were
detected in Monitoring Wells MW-1 and MW-1D; the total chlorinated VOC concentrations in
these wells was in excess of 1,780 ppb and 760 ppb, respectively. The fringes of the plume
have historically extended northeast to the VIHA property, as PCE, TCE, and DCE have been
detected in VfflA Supply Wells VIHA-1 and VfflA-2 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1983a; Weston
1987). In the northern plume, total chlorinated VOC concentrations exceed 200 ppb in supply
wells and monitoring wells in a narrow area extending along the axis of Route 38.
The eastern limit of the northern chlorinated VOC plume along the valley is not well
defined. 
Based on the concentrations observed in wells on the Four Winds Plaza, total
chlorinated VOCs appear to decrease sharply along the western boundary of the plume. This
may be the result of predominant contaminant migration along the fracture zone, which runs in
a north-south direction through the Four Winds Plaza parking lot. Total chlorinated VOC
concentrations in Monitoring Wells MW-10 and MW-IOD, installed downgradient on the Esso
Service Station property, were detected at 184 ppb and 238 ppb, respectively (Geraghty &
Miller, Inc. 1993a). The northern chlorinated VOC plume appears to end abruptly, as
Monitoring Well MW-1 ID showed no chlorinated VOCs, and Monitoring Well MW-12D only
showed DCE at an estimated concentration of 2 ppb.
TLI"r 
005 
0099
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-42
The southern chlorinated VOC plume extends from the O'Henry facility to the southeast.
The most recent groundwater quality data show a narrow, elongated area of total chlorinated
VOC concentrations in excess of 200 ppb that includes Monitoring Wells OHMW-2 and
OHMW-4 and the O'Henry, Steele, LaPlace, and Smith Supply Wells (see Figure 4-12).
Historically, total chlorinated VOC concentrations in excess of 1,000 ppb have been detected in
Monitoring Well OHMW-4 (see Figure 4-8), and some of the supply wells listed above
(Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992d). The total chlorinated VOC concentrations drop off sharply
to the north, west, and southwest from the high concentrations found in the southeast portion
of the O'Henry facility, as Monitoring Wells OHMW-1 and OHMW-3 and Supply Wells Eglin
I and Eglin n all recently showed total chlorinated VOC concentrations below 100 ppb (see
Figure 4-12). The southeast extent of the southern chlorinated VOC plume, downstream from
the Smith and Matthias supply wells, is not known.
In contrast to the individual chlorinated VOCs observed in the northern plume, total
chlorinated VOC concentrations in wells downgradient of O'Henry Cleaners contain a
significantly higher percentage of PCE, which may be indicative of a more recent source. The
monitoring and supply wells in the northern plume show higher percentages of DCE and TCE,
which are potential breakdown products of PCE.
4.4.3.2 Petroleum Hydrocarbons
The total concentration of BTEX constituents in groundwater is contoured on Figure
4-11. This figure indicates at least two petroleum hydrocarbon contaminant plumes in the Tutu
area, one located near the intersection of Highways 38 and 384 in the vicinity of the Tutu
Texaco Service Station and one in the southern portion of the Four Winds Plaza parking lot in
the vicinity of the Tutu Esso Service Station. These BTEX plumes are apparently relatively
confirmed in areal extent compared to the chlorinated VOC plumes. The northern BTEX plume
is centered around Monitoring Well MW-5. Although no BTEX constituents were detected in
groundwater samples collected from wells at the Texaco Service Station, downgradient
Monitoring Well MW-S, situated on the Tillett property, showed a high benzene concentration,
L|T' 
CO 5 
01 Go
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-43
and the presence of other petroleum-related hydrocarbons. Benzene was reported in Monitoring
Well MW-S and field duplicate sample MW-SFR at concentrations of 1,000 ppb and 950 ppb,
respectively. An estimated TPH value of 2.2 ppm was reported for the groundwater sample
from Monitoring Well MW-5. 
MTBE was reported at a concentration of 6,200 ppb. BNAs
detected included naphthalene, substituted naphthalenes, and substituted phenolic compounds.
The southern BTEX plume is centered at the Tutu Esso Service Station. The highest site-
wide concentration of BTEX constituents (104.4 ppm) was reported in Monitoring Well CHT-3
located downgradient of the Esso Service Station. This well contained BTEX and MTBE in the
ppm range. Individual BTEX constituents ranged from 24 to 38 ppm. MTBE was reported at
62 ppm. MTBE was detected at concentrations of 2,200 ppb and 2,700 ppb in Monitoring Wells
MW-9S and MW-9, respectively and at concentrations of 660 ppb and 780 ppb in Monitoring
Wells MW-10 and MW-10D, respectively. 
Lower concentrations of benzene (4 ppb),
ethylbenzene (3.8 ppb), xylene (2.7 ppb), and n-propylbenzene (0.81 ppb) were reported in Deep
Test Well #1 (CHT-7D) (Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. 1993a). Petroleum hydrocarbon
constituents were not detected in supply wells and monitoring wells south of CHT-7D, with the
exception of 11 ppb of MTBE in Monitoring Well MW-12D.
4.5 CHEMISTRY DATA GAPS
The evaluation of soil and groundwater chemistry data has identified specific data gaps.
The data gaps identified can be divided into two categories: source-related chemistry data gaps
and regional groundwater chemistry data gaps.
4.5.1 
Source-Related Chemistry Data Gaps
The existing chemistry database does not provide a complete delineation of sources of
petroleum-related compounds and chlorinated VOCs. Several of these potential sources are
currently being investigated by individual PRPs. The potential source areas that may require
further investigation include the following:
TUT 
005 
'•>!<-'
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
4-44
• The VIHA Maintenance Area.
• The Curriculum Center (former LAGA building).
• The Ramsay Motors Property.
• The Antilles Auto Parts (former Gassett Auto Parts) Facility.
• Tutu Texaco Service Station.
• The Western Auto UST Area/Four Winds Plaza.
• Tutu Esso Service Station.
• Tracy Dodd Used Car Lot (and Overseas Steel Fabrication).
• Classic Printers Facility.
• A Property of Unknown Ownership Southeast of Classic Printers.
• Archies Auto Body Repair.
• O'Henry Cleaners.
The last four facilities listed above have not previously been investigated. Work plans
for additional soil and groundwater sampling at the Texaco and Esso service stations have been
prepared by H+GCL and Blasland and Bouck, respectively. These work plans are being
implemented and will complete the potential source investigations at the Texaco and Esso service
stations. The Western Auto UST area has been investigated by ENSR, Inc. According to
DPNR personnel, Western Auto is expected to submit a Site Investigation Work Plan to provide
further evaluation of non-aqueous phase liquid (NAPL) and groundwater quality.
The Curriculum Center and VIHA complex warrant further identification to evaluate
potential sources of chlorinated VOCs to groundwater. Potential sources of petroleum-related
compounds have been identified at Ramsay Motors and Antilles Auto Parts. 
Further
investigation of soil and groundwater quality is necessary to identify the potential impacts to
groundwater from these identified sources.
TUT 
005 0102
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. 
O
4-45
4.5.2 Grgflipdwater niwnfotry pata Gaps
One of the principal data gaps is the extent of chlorinated VOC contamination south and
southeast of the O'Henry Cleaners. As illustrated on Figure 4-8, this area extends from Route
38 near the O'Henry facility southeastward beyond the LaPlace, Smith, and Matthias residences.
The four monitoring wells at the O'Henry facility, along with the Eglin, Harvey, and Steele
supply wells, are sufficient to define the northwest extent of elevated chlorinated VOCs for this
area. The northeast, southwest, and southeast extent of the elevated chlorinated VOCs need to
be delineated with additional groundwater sampling points.
To define the extent of petroleum-related compounds in groundwater, additional
monitoring wells are necessary at the Ramsay facility and at the Western Auto UST area.
Recent monitoring wells installed by Blasland and Bouck at the Tutu Esso Service Station and
by H+GCL at the Tutu Texaco Service Station should be sufficient to delineate the extent of
petroleum-related compound at these two facilities.
TUT
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. 
W
5.0 SUMMARY OF DATA GAPS
Data gaps associated with historical facility operations, hydrogeologic conditions, and
distribution of chemical constituents are summarized as follows:
• The horizontal and vertical components of groundwater flow are not thoroughly
understood, particularly in the south, southeast, and eastern portions of the Tutu area.
Additional water-level elevation control points are needed to facilitate the development
of groundwater contour maps for shallow and deeper aquifer zones, and to understand
the vertical component of groundwater flow.
• Monitoring wells and supply wells should be inspected to evaluate their usefulness to
provide groundwater quality and/or water-level data. All wells in the Tutu area which
area that are deemed suitable for water-level measurements should be surveyed to
common horizontal and vertical data.
• Aquifer characteristics are not thoroughly understood. A brief review of the pumping
test analyses presented by Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. (1993a) indicated that
some tests have been improperly analyzed. Aquifer pumping test data should be
further evaluated to derive accurate transmissivity estimates. No pumping test data
are available for the southeastern portion of the study area.
• The influence of active supply wells on groundwater flow conditions and plume
migration is not currently understood. Water levels in deeper monitoring wells
(Monitoring Wells MW-1D and MW-13D) in the northern portion of the study area
apparently respond to nearby pumping stresses. The zone of influence of pumping
wells should be evaluated.
• The potential for the storm sewer and the surrounding guard envelope to serve as a
conduit for contaminant flow is not well understood. Groundwater has been observed
TUT 
005 
01O4
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
5-2
entering the storm sewer in certain locations, but the relationship between shallow
groundwater and the storm sewer requires additional investigation.
• Several facilities in the Tutu area, specifically VIHA, Tracy Dodd Used Car Lot,
Archies Welding & Auto Repair, Overseas Steel Fabrication, Classic Printers, and a
property of unknown ownership southeast of Classic Printers, require further
investigation to evaluate whether they represent potential contaminant sources. At a
minimum, inspection of these facilities is necessary.
• Exact details and locations of historical disposal of PCE wastes at the Curriculum
Center (former LAGA) facility are not currently known. The facility should be
inspected to identify the most probable discharge locations, including the possible
location of the alleged 9-foot wide disposal pit.
• Additional groundwater quality data are needed to fully delineate the extent of
petroleum-related compounds in groundwater at the Ramsay, Western Auto, Texaco,
and Esso facilities.
• Additional groundwater quality data are needed south and east of the O'Henry facility
to delineate the extent of chlorinated VOCs in groundwater.
• No comprehensive, synoptic round of groundwater sampling has been conducted in
the Tutu area. A sampling event should involve the collection of groundwater samples
from as many accessible monitoring wells and supply wells as are needed to provide
an understanding of current groundwater quality conditions.
TUT 
OO5 
O1O5
GERAGHTY 6? MILLER. INC.
6.0 DATA OUATTTY OBJECTIVES
The data quality objectives (DQOs) for the Phase n RI are identified in this section. The
DQOs were developed by reviewing historic information and analytical data presented in
Technical Memorandum n (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a) and other data summarized in this
report.
The DQOs for the Phase n RI are to fully delineate the sources, nature, extent, and
migration pathways of petroleum-related constituents and chlorinated VOCs at the Tutu Wells
site. The Phase n RI as proposed is intended to provide sufficient data to allow for the
identification of viable remedial alternatives and the preparation of a comprehensive feasibility
study (FS).
To meet the DQOs, the analytical methods proposed for the Phase n RI were reviewed
and qualified with the appropriate analytical levels (Levels I, n, ffl, or IV) (see Table 6-1).
Each of these analytical levels is sufficient to meet the DQOs.
TUT 
005 0106
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
7.0 PROPOSED PHASE JT HFMFDIAL INVESTIGATION
The work proposed in this work plan for the Phase n RI is significantly expanded from
the scope of work recommended in Technical Memorandum n, which was only intended to
address data gaps regarding the area around the Esso and Texaco Service Stations. Two general
categories of sampling activities are proposed for the Phase n RI. The first category includes
data collection efforts associated with source identification and characterization. The TEIC
recognizes that several source investigations (e.g., Esso, Ramsay, Texaco, and Western Auto)
are being implemented in the fall and winter of 1993 and that these sources will be
comprehensively characterized as a result of these efforts. Therefore, this Phase n RI Work
Plan only proposes characterization work at those sites that will not have been comprehensively
characterized by January 31, 1994.
The second category of investigative activities is focused on collecting data regarding site-
wide hydrogeologic, groundwater quality, and contaminant fate and transport conditions. This
category also includes a storm sewer investigation to further evaluate the hydraulic impact, if
any, of the storm sewer in the Tutu area. These activities are intended to provide a better
understanding of groundwater flow dynamics, the influence of fractures on groundwater flow,
and the extent and mobility of groundwater contamination from each source.
The elements of proposed additional Phase n RI field work are illustrated on Figure 7-1.
The proposed scope of work for the Phase n RI includes ten field tasks, monthly reports, two
interim deliverables (for site inspections and soil-gas surveys), a draft RI report, a final RI
report, an analysis of remedial alternatives, and a draft FS report. 
A schedule for
implementation of these activities is shown on Figure 7-2. The initial four field tasks are
designed to investigate potential contaminant sources. The remaining six field tasks address site-
wide hydrogeologic and groundwater quality data gaps.
The scope of work for the Phase II RI will involve the preparation and submittal of
interim deliverables (i.e., a site inspection report and a soil-gas survey report) to the USEPA
at various milestones throughout the course of the Phase n RI. The TEIC has developed an
TUT
oio"
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC
7-2
extensive Phase n RI program for completion under a compressed schedule. The TEIC
anticipates that review of future recommended activities, which will be outlined in the interim
deliverables and monthly progress reports, will be conducted expeditiously in order to promote
progress and allow timely continuance of the Phase n RI field activities. In addition, it is also
assumed that the procurement of property access will not cause delays in the execution of the
field investigation. 
If delays are encountered that jeopardize the schedule of tasks and
deliverables, they will be documented in the monthly progress reports. In such an event, the
TEIC may request assistance from the DPNR and the USEPA.
7.1 SOURCE INVESTIGATIONS
A large volume of data regarding possible releases and soil-quality conditions at potential
sources has been collected during numerous investigations, including the Tutu Service Station
Investigation (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a) and investigations implemented by various site
owners. The source investigations proposed for the Phase n RI are based on the following
assumptions:
• That Texaco, Ramsay, Western Auto, and Esso facilities are conducting thorough
source characterizations. The relevant data generated during the source investigations
will be analyzed and incorporated into the final RI report.
• That insufficient source characterization has been implemented at the VIHA
maintenance facility, at the Curriculum Center (former LAGA facility), and at the
Antilles Auto Parts (former Gassett Auto Parts and former Consolidated Auto Parts).
• That there are at least nine locations (listed in Section 7.1.1 [Task 1: Site Inspections]
below), six of which have not been considered as PRPs to date, that may represent
potential sources of contamination and, as a minimum, warrant site inspection.
TUT 
O05 
O1OS
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
7-3
The Phase n RI source investigations will include the following tasks:
• Task 1: Site Inspections.
• Task 2: Site Inspection Report.
• Task 3: Soil-Gas Surveys.
• Task 4: Soil-Gas Survey Report.
7.1.1 Task It Site Inspections
At least nine locations that warrant further consideration as potential sources of
contaminants have been identified through aerial photographs, available records, and data
research by several investigators. Site inspections are proposed at these facilities. These
locations are as follows:
• VIHA (former Tropical Motors).
• Curriculum Center (former LAG A facility).
• Antilles Auto Parts (former Gassett Auto Parts and former Consolidated Auto Parts).
• Fellowship Church (former Storage Facilities, Inc. and former West Indies
Enterprises, Inc.).
• Tracy Dodd Used Car Lot.
• Overseas Steel Fabrication.
• Classic Printers.
• A Property of Unknown Ownership (Southeast of Classic Printers).
• Archies Welding & Auto Body Repair.
These locations are identified on Figure 7-1. Prior to conducting the site inspections, the
TEIC will obtain access to these facilities from the current owners. 
If difficulties are
encountered in gaining site access, the TEIC may request assistance from the USEPA and the
DPNR. Site inspections will consist of a tour of the facility and interviews with knowledgeable
facility personnel, if available. Site photographs will be taken as appropriate. The site
TUT 
005 0!09
GERAGHTY 6? MILLER, INC.
7-4
inspection at the Antilles facility will also include the collection of a waste oil sample from the
5,000-gallon AST that is reported to exist on-site (Torinus and Torinus 1993). The waste oil
sample will be transmitted under chain-of-custody documentation to the laboratory for analyses
of TCL VOCs in accordance with contract laboratory protocol (CLP).
The purpose of the site inspections is to observe the property for evidence of potential
source(s) of petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated VOCs. Potential sources such as ASTs,
USTs, manholes, vents, septic systems, dry wells, oil/water separators, drum storage areas, and
oil pits/sumps will be identified. Evidence of on-site waste disposal or release(s), such as
stained soils and stressed vegetation will also be identified.
7.1.2 Task 2; Site Inspection Report
After completion of the site inspections, Geraghty & Miller will prepare a site inspection
report including the results from each facility. Each site inspection report will consist of a
description of each inspection, including names of individuals interviewed, a site sketch map,
site photographs (if taken), summary of findings, and recommendations for further work.
Recommendations for further work will be made based on the results of the site
inspections, evaluation of historical site operations, and data collected by other investigators, if
available. 
A summary of the criteria that will be used in recommending further work at
potential source facilities is presented in Table 7-1. Recommendations may include a site-
specific soil-gas survey, if sources are suspected or identified at a given facility but have not
been located. Recommendations may also include the collection of surface soil samples,
advancement of soil borings, subsurface soil sampling, or other source identification activities.
Consistent with the current PRP working agreement, source delineation is considered the
responsibility of individual facility owners. Thus, although recommendations may include
additional activities to identify a potential source(s), delineation/confirmation soil sampling and
analyses should be performed by the facility owners or individual PRPs. If groundwater
contamination is evident in a well(s) downgradient of a facility and the site inspection indicates
TUT 
005
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
7-5
a suspected source, recommendations may include the installation of an additional well(s) to
further evaluate groundwater contamination.
The site inspection report will be submitted for USEPA review and comment. No
additional field work will be implemented at those facilities until USEPA approval has been
received.
7.1.3 Task 3: Soil-Gas Surveys
Soil-gas surveys will be implemented at the Curriculum Center (former (LAGA facility)
and the VIHA. A soil-gas survey may also be implemented at other facilities, depending on the
results of the site inspections. 
The soil-gas survey will be conducted over an area of
approximately 55,000 ft2 near the Curriculum Center (former LAGA facility), and approximately
60,000 ft2 near the VIHA (see Figure 7-1). The soil-gas survey will be conducted utilizing the
information about potential or suspected source(s) observed during the site inspection or revealed
by other investigators. The soil-gas survey will be initially conducted on an unbiased rectangular
grid with a 40-foot spacing. Based on physical access and soil-gas results, the grid will be
modified to a 20-foot or smaller spacing, as needed. Sampling points, consisting of hollow
aluminum tubing driven to 3 feet bis, will be used to collect samples of subsurface soil gas.
Soil-gas samples will be analyzed within 3 hours of collection using a field GC. The soil-gas
surveys are intended to provide indications of possible sources of VOCs. Therefore, the field
GC will be calibrated for the site-related compounds: benzene, toluene, xylene, PCE, TCE, cis-
1,2-DCE, and trans-l,2-DCE. The protocols that will be followed are provided in Appendix
A. Data collected during the soil-gas survey will be utilized to select optimal locations for the
installation of monitoring wells. 
One monitoring well, MW-13, will be installed at the
Curriculum Center, and one monitoring well, MW-16, will be installed at the VIHA.
TUT 
OO5 Olll
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
7-6
7.1.4 
Task 4; Soil-Gas Survey Report
After completion of the soil-gas surveys, Geraghty & Miller will prepare a soil-gas
survey report. The soil-gas survey report will consist of a description of the field activities, the
tabulated soil-gas analytical results, a site plan, an iso-concentration map, a summary of
findings, and recommendations. Recommendations for further work will be made based on the
results of the site inspection, data from the soil-gas survey, data regarding historical site
operations, and data collected by other investigators, if available, in accordance with Table 7-1.
Recommendations may include additional activities to identify a potential source(s). However,
soil sampling for delineation and confirmation, test pits, or other investigatory activities will be
the responsibility of the facility owner, in accordance with the current PRP working agreement.
Two monitoring wells (MW-13 and MW-16) will be proposed for installation at the
Curriculum Center (former LAGA facility) and the VIHA. Additional monitoring wells may
be proposed based on the results of the soil-gas surveys at the Curriculum Center, the VIHA,
or other facilities evaluated during Task 1. 
Monitoring wells will be located based on
anomalously high soil-gas results, findings of the site inspections, and historical site operations
data. The protocols that will be followed for monitoring well installation, soil sample collection,
and laboratory analysis will be in accordance with the USEPA-approved work plan for the Tutu
Service Station Investigation (Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1992a). Soil samples will be analyzed
for VOCs and BNAs in accordance with the CLP.
7.2 
SITE-WIDE 
HYDROGEOLOGY 
AND 
GROUNDWATER 
QUALITY
INVESTIGATION
Several tasks are proposed to supplement data gaps regarding horizontal and vertical
groundwater flow conditions, the influence of fractures on groundwater flow, the influence of
pumpage on groundwater flow, the hydraulic impact of the storm sewer, and the distribution of
petroleum-related compounds and chlorinated VOCs in groundwater. The tasks that are
proposed for the Phase II RI include the following:
TUT 
DOS 0112
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
7-7
• Task 5: Monitoring Well and Supply Well Surveying.
• Task 6: Supply Well Inspection.
• Task 7: Pumpage Impact Monitoring.
• Task 8: Monitoring Well Installation and Storm Sewer Investigation.
• Task 9: Water-Level Measurements.
• Task 10: Comprehensive Groundwater Sampling Event.
7.2.1 Task 5: Monitoring Well and Supply Well Surveying
At present, there are numerous supply wells and monitoring wells at the Tutu Wells Site.
Monitoring wells installed by other investigators have not been surveyed to the same datum as
the monitoring wells installed by Geraghty & Miller during the Tutu Service Station
Investigation (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). In addition, some of the supply wells have not
been accurately located on the base map prepared for this Phase H RI Work Plan.
The surveyor, Lopdz De Azua" & Associates, which has performed the work for the Tutu
Service Station Investigation, will accurately locate all supply wells not previously surveyed and
determine the elevation of a measuring point at the top of the casing for water-level
measurements and groundwater elevation calculations. In addition, the surveyor will determine
the elevations of measuring points on monitoring wells installed at O'Henry, Four Winds Plaza,
Gassett, Texaco, Tutu Esso, Rodriquez Esso, and any other monitoring wells that can be located
and utilized for future water-level measurement events.
7.2.2 Task 6; Supply Well Inspection
Supply wells that do not have pumping equipment installed will be sounded to verify the
reported depth. Groundwater levels and well depths will be determined in wells that do have
pumping equipment installed, where possible.
TUT
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
7-8
7.2.3 
Task 7; Pupipage Impact Monitoring
As discussed in Technical Memorandum n (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a), the water
levels measured in deeper Monitoring Wells MW-1D and MW-13D suggest that the deeper
aquifer zone is impacted by pumpage in the northeastern portion of the study area. Pressure
transducers will be installed in Monitoring Wells MW-1, MW-1D, and MW-13D for several
weeks to obtain data regarding water-level fluctuations in these monitoring wells. Interviews
will be conducted with operators at VIHA, Ramsay, the Gomez School, and other potential well
owners to determine if groundwater pumpage is occurring in the northern portion of the study
area and to identify other possible causes for the anomalous water levels observed during the
Tutu Service Station Investigation.
Currently, the hydraulic properties of the aquifer are not fully understood. As described
in Section 4.2.4 (Aquifer Characteristics), several aquifer tests have been conducted by
investigators of the Tutu Wells Site. Geraghty & Miller proposes that, prior to initiating any
new aquifer tests, the existing water-level data from all of the aquifer tests be reanalyzed for
estimates of T and S, where possible.
Conducting a controlled long-term aquifer test would entail generating large volumes of
water, which, in turn, would require disposal, treatment, and permitting. Therefore, Geraghty
& Miller proposes to utilize an existing supply well to obtain additional information about the
effects of pumpage and the responses of water levels, and, if possible, to obtain additional data
on the aquifer characteristics of the Tutu Wells Site. The objective of the monitoring of
pumpage impact is to assess the impact of existing pumpage in critical areas, such as the
boundaries of identified contaminant plumes.
Groundwater pumpage is currently occurring in at least four locations in the study area.
The following supply wells are reportedly in use:
• The Ramsay supply well.
TLI"r 
005 0114
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
7-9
• The Four Winds Plaza I and n supply wells.
• The Eglin I, n, and m supply wells, for the Top Cat Laundromat water supply.
• The Harthman supply wells, including the Estate and Crusher wells, and possibly the
Racetrack well.
Interviews will be conducted with the operators of the Ramsay, Four Winds Plaza, Eglin,
and Harthman supply wells, and other wells that may be pumping water for supply purposes.
Flow meters on these wells will be inspected and, if necessary, repaired, or new ones will be
provided. Water-level recording devices (i.e., pressure transducers with data loggers or Stevens
recorders) will be installed in nearby monitoring wells to provide data regarding water-level
response at various vertical intervals and distances from the pumping well. If possible,
arrangements will be made with the owners of currently operating wells to utilize their wells for
a controlled pumping test, taking advantage of the storage capacity offered by individual cisterns
or water tanks. Where feasible, a well will be shut down for a sufficient time for water levels
to recover to static conditions, and the well will then be turned on at a constant rate while water
levels are measured in nearby supply and monitoring wells. The data collected during this task
will be analyzed to evaluate the extent of the zones of water-level influence of the individual
supply wells and, where possible, to expand the aquifer hydraulic parameter database.
7.2.4 Task 8; Monitoring-Well Installation and Storm Sewer Investigation
Eleven new monitoring wells at ten locations are proposed to address data gaps regarding
groundwater quality in the vicinity of potential sources and the site-wide distribution of
petroleum-related compounds and chlorinated VOCs in groundwater. 
In addition, these
monitoring wells are intended to provide sufficient data points for a better understanding of site-
wide groundwater flow conditions, the hydraulic impact of the storm sewer, and the influence
of fractures on aquifer properties.
Three of the four shallow monitoring wells proposed in Technical Memorandum n
(Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1993a) are still necessary. Monitoring Well MW-18, formerly
TUT 
CO5 0115
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. 
O
7-10
proposed in Technical Memorandum n (Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1993a), is no longer needed
because Blasland and Bouck has recently installed a shallow monitoring well downgradient of
the Esso Service Station near Monitoring Well CHT-7D. Two monitoring wells, designated in
Technical Memorandum n as Monitoring Wells MW-16 and MW-17 (Geraghty & Miller, Inc.,
1993a), are still necessary to evaluate the impact of the Western Auto USTs. However, Western
Auto intends to install two monitoring wells in similar locations (Gayla 1993). Consistent with
additional investigations conducted voluntarily by other PRPs, further investigation of the
Western Auto USTs should be performed by Western Auto. Because Western Auto is proposing
to install these two monitoring wells, these wells are not currently included in the proposed
Phase n RI scope of work. However, if these two monitoring wells are not installed by the
middle of the Phase n drilling program, the TEIC will attempt to gain property access and
install these two monitoring wells to assess potential impacts to groundwater quality from the
Western Auto USTs.
Monitoring Well MW-15 was originally proposed at Ramsay in Technical Memorandum
n (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a). The purpose of this monitoring well, as originally
proposed, was to evaluate the impact to groundwater, if any, from the drum storage area and
the former waste oil UST at Ramsay. 
Cooper Environmental, Ramsay's consultant, was
concerned that documented historic surface spills of oils leading from the adjacent property,
Antilles, could possibly have impacted local groundwater quality. To clarify whether historical
operations at either the Ramsay or Antilles facilities have impacted groundwater quality,
Monitoring Well MW-15 is now proposed to be installed on the southern portion of the Ramsay
property near the property line with Antilles.
Two wells (Monitoring Wells MW-13 and MW-15) are proposed to further evaluate
potential impacts to groundwater quality at the VIHA complex (MW-13) and the Curriculum
Center (MW-16). The exact locations for these wells will be identified in Task 4: Soil-Gas
Survey Report.
TUT 
005 0116
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
7-11
Three shallow monitoring wells (Monitoring Wells MW-17, MW-18, and MW-19) are
proposed to evaluate the storm sewer as a possible contaminant pathway. According to Blasland
and Bouck (Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1993c), the main Tutu storm sewer, which runs
north-south through the Tutu area, intersects the water table, at least beneath the Four Winds
parking lot. Blasland and Bouck has reviewed the historical storm sewer construction plans and
reports that the storm sewer pipe, which runs in a north-south direction to the west of Route 38,
may have been placed within a gravel envelope or backfill material. Observations of the interior
of the sewer pipe by Blasland and Bouck have revealed that water infiltrates into the sewer pipe
along various sections beneath the Four Winds Plaza parking lot. Based on these findings and
observations, the potential exists that the storm sewer pipe may have a hydraulic impact on the
aquifer, as a result of either infiltration/exfiltration from the storm sewer, or as a result of
preferential movement along the exterior bedding material.
As part of the Phase H RI, Monitoring Wells MW-17 though MW-19, are proposed to
be installed within the gravel envelope immediately adjacent to the storm sewer pipe (Figure 7-
1). The section of the storm sewer located to the north of Route 384 is reported to be a smooth,
concrete box, culvert, approximately 6-feet wide by 2-feet deep. To the south of Route 384 and
underlying the Four Winds parking lot, the storm sewer pipe is reported to be a 6-foot diameter,
reinforced concrete pipe. Immediately south of the God of Holiness Church, the storm sewer
is converted back to a concrete box culvert, approximately 5-feet wide by 7-feet deep in
dimensions. The sewer construction remains essentially the same as the storm sewer passes
beneath Route 38 to the Weymouth Rhymer Sanitary Sewer Pump Station.
Monitoring Well MW-17 is proposed to be installed immediately east of the storm sewer
at the southwestern corner of the Ramsay property. This monitoring well will serve two
purposes: to evaluate groundwater conditions downgradient of the Ramsay UST and service
area, and to evaluate the hydraulic impact, if any, of the storm sewer in the area. Geraghty &
Miller anticipates that the water table in the vicinity of the Ramsay property lies below the storm
sewer invert and that bedrock is approximately 5 to 10 feet bis. Monitoring Well MW-17 will
be advanced to a depth of no greater than 5 feet below the top of bedrock. A 3- to 5-foot
„ 
00,
T U <
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
7-12
section of 4-inch inside diameter (I.D.), 0.020-slotted, stainless-steel well screen will be placed
in the borehole. A sand pack will be placed in the annular space around the well screen. A
1-foot bentonite seal will be placed above the sand pack. The remaining annular space will be
grouted to the surface.
Monitoring Well MW-18 will be installed within the gravel envelope or backfill material
at a location in the southern portion of the Four Winds parking lot, to the southwest of the Esso
Service Station. Monitoring Well MW-19 will be installed immediately adjacent to the storm
sewer pipe at the Weymouth Rhymer Pump Station. At these locations, the water table should
be encountered within the gravel envelope or backfill material. An approximately 3- or 5- foot
section of 4-inch I.D., 0.020 slot, stainless-steel well screen will be placed to screen the gravel
envelope at these locations. A sand pack will be placed in the annular space around the well
screen. A 1-foot bentonite seal will be placed above the sand pack and the remaining annular
space will be grouted to land surface. Since Monitoring Wells MW-17 through MW-19 will not
be installed in source areas and will be advanced in fill material, soil samples will not be
collected for laboratory analysis. Soil samples will be collected using split-spoon samplers for
the purpose of soil classifications and to provide guidance in well installation.
Three deep monitoring wells (Monitoring Wells MW-21D, MW-22D, and MW-23D) are
proposed in the southern portion of the study area to delineate the extent of chlorinated VOCs
and to better characterize groundwater flow directions. These monitoring wells will be installed
according to the protocols in the Tutu Service Station Investigation Work Plan (Geraghty &
Miller, Inc. 1992a). Monitoring Well MW-21D is intended to provide water-level information
along the eastern boundary of the study area and to provide groundwater quality information
downgradient of Classic Printers and the property of unknown ownership to the southeast of
Classic Printers. This monitoring well will provide information regarding the eastern extent of
chlorinated VOCs that have been detected in the Eglin, Harvey, and Steele supply wells.
Monitoring Well MW-22D is intended to provide information regarding the southwestern extent
of chlorinated VOCs that have been detected in the vicinity of O'Henry Cleaners, and in the
LaPlace, Smith, and Matthias supply wells. Monitoring Well MW-23D is intended to provide
TUT 
OO5 
Oil8
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. 
O
7-13
information regarding the extent of chlorinated VOCs in groundwater downgradient of the Smith
and Matthias supply wells. Locations for the new monitoring wells, particularly in the southern
portion of the study area, were selected considering physical site access, the orientation of major
fracture traces, and the known extent of chlorinated VOCs in existing monitoring wells and
supply wells. In addition, monitoring well locations were selected to provide a sufficiently broad
network of wells from which to collect representative groundwater-level data for mapping
groundwater flow dynamics.
7.2.5 
TflsV 9' Water-Level
Four water-level measurement events will be implemented ever a period of approximately
4 months. The water-level measurement events will include all monitoring wells and accessible
supply wells existing at the time of the measurement event. 
Since the first water-level
measurement event will begin before all of the newly proposed monitoring wells are installed,
new monitoring wells will be phased into the water-level measurement program after installation.
7.2.6 
Task 10; Cornpryhf i^iv^ Groundwater SflmpliinC Event
A comprehensive groundwater sampling event will be implemented; this event will
include sampling of all monitoring wells installed during the Tutu Service Station Investigation
and the Phase II RI. Additional monitoring wells may be selected for sampling during the
comprehensive sampling event depending on the following factors:
• Locations that are not redundant and that fill data gaps.
• Locations that have not been sampled recently.
• Locations that have approved legal access.
In addition, selected supply wells will be sampled during the comprehensive event. A
list of potential supply wells to be included in the comprehensive groundwater sampling event
is provided in Table 7-2. All of the collected groundwater samples will be analyzed for TCL
TUT 
CO 5 O119
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
7-14
VOCs, TCL BNAs, MTBE, sulfate, sulfide, total dissolved solids (TDS), total suspended solids
(TSS), nitrite, nitrate, sulfide, phosphorous, alkalinity, TAL metals, cyanide, organo-metallic
lead (using the California Leaking Underground Fuel Tank [LUFT], Department of Health
Services Method), chloride, ferrous iron, ferric iron, manganese, chemical oxygen demand
(COD), and hardness. Field analyses will include pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen, oxidation-
reduction (Eh) potential, and specific conductance. Geraghty & Miller anticipates that the
sampling event will take approximately 3 to 4 weeks and that the new monitoring wells will not
be sampled until at least 2 weeks after they have been developed. The groundwater sampling
protocols for monitoring wells and supply wells will be in accordance with the work plan for
the Tutu Service Station Investigation (Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a).
The monitoring wells and supply wells that are selected for sampling and analysis will
be proposed to the USEPA in a monthly report following completion of the supply well
inspections and prior to the comprehensive groundwater sampling event. The wells selected for
sampling will be based on the factors listed above to provide representative sampling data for
the delineation of groundwater contamination.
7.3 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL AND REPORTING
The information collected during the Phase n RI will be analyzed and presented in a
Draft RI Report. Strict QA/QC protocols will be followed throughout the Phase H RI, and the
progress of the work will be documented in monthly reports to the USEPA.
7.3.1 Quality Assurance/Quality Control
The QA/QC procedures incorporated into the Tutu Service Station Investigation Work
Plan will be followed throughout the Phase II RI. The requisite number of duplicate samples,
field blanks, and trip blanks will be collected during the soil and groundwater sampling tasks.
All of the collected soil and groundwater quality data will be validated in accordance with
USEPA Region n data validation protocols. The QA/QC procedures will be in accordance with
TUT 
005 
012O
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
7-15
the USEPA-approved QAPP for the Tutu Service Station Investigation (Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
1992b).
7.3.2 
Monthly Reports
Brief letter reports will be submitted to the USEPA on a monthly basis summarizing the
work completed to date, deviations from the schedule shown on Figure 7-2, and problems
encountered in the field. The work anticipated for the following month will also be indicated.
7.3.3 
Draft Remedial Investigation Report
The data collected during the Phase n RI and the data compiled by other investigators
will be analyzed and presented in a comprehensive RI Report. Groundwater flow conditions,
the horizontal and vertical extent of contaminants, and contaminant fate and transport will be
described. This report will be prepared in draft form for the USEPA's review. Geraghty &
Miller anticipates that the USEPA will submit comments on the draft RI report within 6 weeks.
7.3.4 Final Remedial Investigation Report
The USEPA's comments on the Draft RI Report will be reviewed, and, if warranted, a
meeting will be requested to discuss these comments. A Final RI Report will be prepared to
address the USEPA's comments.
7.3.5 
Analysis of Remedial Alternatives
After the Draft RI Report is submitted to the USEPA, a report summarizing an analysis
of remedial alternatives will be submitted as a companion document. This report will identify
potential alternatives for remediating contamination at the Tutu Wells Site and will provide an
initial screening of feasible remedial alternatives.
TUT
005 0.121
GERAGHTY # MILLER, INC.
7-16
7.3.6 Draft Feasibility Study Report
The data presented in the Draft RI Report and in the report analyzing the potential
feasible remedial alternatives will be utilized to prepare a comprehensive FS for the Tutu Wells
Site. A Draft FS Report will be submitted as a companion document with the Final RI Report.
PR0013. •••-WPl/120993.
TUT 
005 
012
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams, Alton, Jr. and Associates. 1978. Well Field Development Program, East End, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, Phase I Feasibility Report, Government of the Virgin
Islands, Department of Public Works, St. Thomas U.S. Virgin Islands.
Adenekan, A.E, N.K. Springer, and T.D. Streltsova. 1993. Exxon Production Research
Company. Summary Interpretation of Available Hydrogeologic and Water Quality Data
for the Tutu Wells Area, Upper Turpentine Basin, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
October 1993.
Ajayi, O., and F. G6mez-G6mez. 1983. Water Resources Appraisal, College of the Virgin
Islands, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Ajayi, O., and H.H. Smith. 1983. Compendium of Water Resources Data for the U.S. Virgin
Islands, College of the U.S. Virgin Islands, Technical Report No. 12, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands.
Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993a. Groundwater Contamination Occurrence and Sources in the Tutu
Area, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Reference 44199-15. November 1, 1993.
Arthur D. Little, Inc. 19935. Environmental Investigation Report, Tutu Area, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands. Reference 44199-00. November 1, 1993.
Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1993c. Letter to Alberto Gutierrez of H+GCL Dated December 8,
1993. Re: Comments on Draft Phase n Remedial Investigation Work Plan. Signed by
Andrew Smyth.
Back, W. 1988. Region 26: West Indies, in Back W., Rosenshein, J.S., and Seaher, P.R.,
eds. Hydrogeology. Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America,
Volume 0-2, Boulder, Colorado.
Black, Crow, and Eidsness, Inc. 1979. A Sediment Reduction Program, Department of
Conservation Cultural and Affairs, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1993a. Analytical Data Packages with Results from Soil
and Water Samples Collected from UST Excavation and Sludge and Oil Samples
Collected at Western Auto, Tutu Wells Site. St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. October
19-20, 1993.
Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1993b. Hydrogeologic Assessment/Source Identification,
Upper Tutu Aquifer Basin, Tutu, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. October 1993.
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
8-2
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1993c. Letter to R. Lehman, Esq., Archer and Greiner.
Re: Esso Virgin Islands, Tutu Wellfields Storm Sewer Preliminary Report.
November 1, 1993.
Bowden, MJ. et al. 1968. Water Balance of a Dry Island, Hanover, New Hampshire,
Dartmouth College Publication, Geography, No. 6, 89 pp.
Bowden, M.J., N. Fischman, P. Cook, J. Wood, and E. Omasta. 1970. Climate, Water
Balance and Climatic Change in the Northwest Virgin Islands, Caribbean Research
Institute, College of the Virgin Islands, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, 127 pp.
Braids, O. C., Ph.D. 1993. Expert Report on Anthropogenic Sources of Contaminants, Tutu
Wellfield Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Eder Associates Consulting Engineers,
P.C. November 1, 1993.
Briggs & Akers. 1965. Hydrogeologic Map of Puerto Rico and Adjacent Islands:
Hydrological Investigations Atlas U.S.Geological Survey HA-197.
Bullock, D.C., R.W. Peebles, and H.H. Smith. 1980. Water Usage Patterns in the U.S.
Virgin Islands, College of the Virgin Islands, Technical Report No. 6.
Buros, O.K. 1974. Water Reclamation and Reuse, Presented at the Conference on Water
Resources Problems and Research Needs, Virgin Islands, Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S.
Virgin Islands, October 30, 1974.
Euros, O.K. 1975. Water Resources Planning and Wastewater Reclamation in the Virgin
Islands, Presented at the Workshop on Augmenting the Virgin Islands Water Supply,
Water Resources Center, Caribbean Research Institute, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Buros, O.K. 1981. Water Management Plan for the Public Water System, U.S. Virgin Islands,
CH2M-HU1 Southeast, Inc.
Calvesbert, RJ. 1961. Climates of the States. Climate of Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin
Islands, Climatography of the United States, No. 60-52. Rev. 1970. Environmental
Science Services Administration, Department Commission, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Calvesbert, R.J. 1970. Climate of Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands, Revised, U.S.
Environmental Science Services Administration, Climatography of the United States, No.
60-52, 29 pp.
TUT 
005 
0124
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
8-3
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Camp, Dresser & McKee (COM) Federal Programs Corporation 1988a. Field Notes, Tutu
Wellfield, September 6-15, 1988 and June 5-10, 1989 Sampling Events.
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation 1988b. Letter to C. Kwan,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Re: Overview of the Tutu Texaco Service
Station Tank Excavation, October 31, 1988.
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation 1989a. Letter to C. Kwan,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation 1989b. Letter to C. Kwan,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Re: CLP Sample Analysis Data Summary of
the 104(e). Letter Response Sampling, Tutu Wellfield Area, Work Assignment 648,
March 31, 1989.
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation 1989c. Letter to C. Kwan,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Re: CLP Sample Analysis Data Summary of
the Tutu Texaco Service Station Tank Excavation, Tutu Wellfield Area, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands, March 31, 1989.
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation 1989d. Letter to C. Kwan,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Re: Summary of the 104(e). Letter Responses
and Facility Inspections Relating to Underground Storage Tanks in the Tutu Wellfield
Area, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, Work Assignment 648, April 24, 1989.
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation 1990a. Letter to C. Kwan,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Re: Work Assignment C02048. CLP Sample
Analysis Data Summary of Oils from the Tutu Texaco Stations, Tutu Esso Station,
Ramsay Motor Center, and Consolidated Auto Parts, Tutu Wellfield Area, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands, February 2, 1990.
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation 1990b. Letter to C. Kwan,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Re: Preliminary (unvalidated) CLP Sample
Analysis Data Summary of Soils and Waters from the Tutu Texaco Soil Pile, Tutu Esso
Tank Excavation Pit and Soil Pile, and Second Round 104(e). 
Letter Response
Sampling, Tutu Wellfield and Supercat Areas, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, April
27, 1990.
TUf 
Oo5
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
8-4
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation 1990c. Letter to C. Kwan,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Re: Sampling Locations 104(e) Letter Response
Sites, Second Round of Sampling, 1989, Tutu Wellfield and Supercat Areas, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands, May 2, 1990.
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation 1992. Letter to C. Kwan,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Re: Technical Memorandum I, April 24, 1992.
Canoy, MJ. 1983. Remote Sensing of Subsurface Water Resources in the U.S. Virgin Islands,
College of the Virgin Islands, Technical Report No. 14.
Canoy, M.J., and A. Knudsen. 1986. Waterborne Pathogens of the U.S. Virgin Islands,
College of the Virgin Islands, Technical Report No. 25, 47 p.
Canoy, M.J., A. Knudsen, and Rene Garcia. 1985. Reconnaissance of Groundwater Quality
in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Water Resources Research Institute, College of the Virgin
Islands, Technical Report No. 24, 30 pp.
Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc. 1992. Letter to C. Crooke, Division of Environmental Protection.
Re: Western Auto Site Investigation. December 4, 1992.
Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc. 1993. Letter to Attorney Jack Dema. Re: Four Winds Water
Quality Results. May 12, 1993.
Case, J.N., and T.L. Holcombe. 1980. Geologic-Tectonic Map of the Caribbean Region, U.S.
Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Map I-1100, Scale 1:2,500,000.
CH2M Hill Southeast, Inc. 1982. Water Management Plan, Public Water System, Prepared
for Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Chongasing, E.A., and D.C. Francois. 1972. Creating a Water Distribution and Wastewater
Disposal Authority in the U.S. Virgin Islands. 
Prepared with the Division of
Environmental Health U. S. Virgin Islands, May 22, 1972.
Church, G. 1917. Report on the Water Supply and Sewerage in the Virgin Islands, Report to
the Governor of the Virgin Islands, U.S. Naval Station, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Cooper, H.H., Jr. and C.E. Jacob. 1946. A Generalized Graphical Method for Evaluating
Formation Constants and Summarizing Well Field History. Transactions, American
Geophysical Union, Vol. 27, No. 4.
TUT
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
8-5
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Cooper Environmental, Inc. 1993a. Letter to Alberto Gutierrez, H+GCL from Ivan Cooper,
P.E., December 9, 1993.
Cooper Environmental, Inc. 19935. Investigation of Ramsay Motors Site, Tutu, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands, CEI File No. 92115. November 8, 1993.
Cosner, O.J. 1972. Water in St. John, U.S. Virgin Islands. U.S. Geological Survey, Water
Resources Division, 46 pp.
Curtis, R.E., Jr. 1984. Hoods of April 18, 1983 on St. Thomas and St. John, U.S. Virgin
Islands, U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 84-4184, 1 pi.
Curtis, R.E., Jr. 1985. Floods of April 18, 1983 on St. Thomas and St. John, U.S. Virgin
Islands, Symposium on Tropical Hydrology and Second Caribbean Islands Water
Resources Congress 1985, Proceedings, American Water Resources Association
Technical Publication Series TPS-85-1, p. 90-95.
Curtis, R.E., Jr., S. Guzman-Rios, and P. Diaz. 1983. Water-Resources Investigations in
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, 1982-1983: U.S. Geological Survey Data
Report.
D'Anna, N. 1993. Letter to C. Kwan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Re: Tutu
Wells Site, O'Henry's Monitoring Well Results. June 9, 1993.
Defenback, J. 1975. Audit of Potable Water Supply Distribution, Department of Public Works,
Government of the Virgin Islands, July 1971 through October 31, 1973, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
Dema, J.K. Esq. 1993. Letter to A. Gutierrez, CPG, President, H+GCL. Re: Tutu Water
Wells Contamination Litigation, Four Winds Plaza Partnership vs. Texaco, Inc. et al.
October 14, 1993.
Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs. 1983. Comprehensive Water Resources
Management Plan for the U.S. Virgin Islands, June 1983.
Donald L. Hamlin Consulting Engineers, Inc. 1985. Investigation and Report on Water
Demand and Capability of Tillett Well, July 1985.
Donnelly, T.W. 1959. Geology of St. Thomas and St. John, Virgin Islands. Unpublished
Ph.D dissertation, Princeton University, 179 pp.
T'U'I" 
COS 
O127
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
8-6
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Donnelly, T.W. 1960. The Geology of St. Thomas and St. John, Virgin Islands, 2nd
Caribbean Geology Conference, Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, p. 153-155.
Donnelly, T.W. 1966. Geology of St. Thomas and St. John, Virgin Islands. Caribbean
Geologic Investigations. H.H. Hess, ed. Geological Society of America Memoir 98,
pp 15-121.
Donnelly, T.W. 1972. Deep-Water, Shallow-Water, and Subaerial Island-Arc Volcanism,
Example from the Virgin Islands, R. Shagam, R.B. Hargraves, W.J. Morgan, V.B. Van
Houten, C.A. Burk, H.D. Holland, and L.C. Hollister, Editors. Studies in Earth and
Space Sciences, Geological Society of America Memoir 132, p. 410-414.
Donnelly, T.W. 1989. Geologic History of the Caribbean and Central America, A.W. Bally
and A.R. Palmer, Editors. The Geology of North America: An Overview, Geological
Society of America, The Geology of North America, Vol. A, p. 299-321.
Donnelly, T.W., and J. Whetten. 1968. Field Guide to the Geology of the Virgin Islands, Fifth
Caribbean Geological Conference.
ENSR. 1993. Analytical Data Packages with Results of Water and Sludge Samples Collected
at Western Auto, Tutu Wells Site. St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. May 27,1993.
Enseco, Inc. 1993a. Summary Result Package for Cooper Environmental, Enseco-East,
Project No. 28187. April 1993.
Enseco, Inc. 1993b. Summary Result Package for Cooper Environmental, Enseco-East, Project
No. 029182. July 1993.
Fahrenthold, P. No Date. Evaluation of Chemical Data from Soil Gas and Groundwater
Monitoring, Tutu Basin, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Four Winds Plaza Partnership, 1993. Supplemental Response to Request for Information,
Certified by Anthony T. Colasanti, Attorney at Law. March 29, 1993.
Foumier, L.B., Ph.D. No Date. Star Environmental, Inc. Expert Report.
Francois, D. C. et al. 1981. A Summary of Water Production and Modification Projects in the
United States Virgin Islands. Prepared with the Government of the Virgin Islands
Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs Division of Natural Resource
Management, July 1981.
TUT 
O05 
O128
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
8-7
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Garcia, R., and M. Canoy. 1985. Reconnaissance of Groundwater Quality in the U.S. Virgin
Islands, July 1984. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Data Report 84-807, 1 pi.
Gartner Lee International, Inc. 1993. Simulation of Groundwater Flow in the Upper
Turpentine Run Basin, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Garrett, C.R., P.E. 1993. Report on Conditions Encountered at the Texaco Tutu and the Esso
Tutu Automobile Service Stations in Tutu, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
October 13, 1993.
Garrett, P., M. Moreau, and J.R. Lowry. 1986. Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether as a Groundwater
Contaminant. Proceedings of the 1986 Conference on Petroleum and Organic Chemicals
in Ground Water, National Water Well Association and American Petroleum Institute,
Houston, Texas, pp. 227-238.
Gayla, D. 1993. Personal Communication during a December 10,1993 Telephone Conference.
Geo Science Consultants, Ltd. 1987. Final Report on Results of Soil Gas Survey, Tutu, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Prepared for Texaco Caribbean, Inc., December 18,
1987.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1983a. Report on Current Groundwater Conditions in the U.S. Virgin
Islands. Prepared for the U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Conservation and Cultural
Affairs, April 1983.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 
1983b. 
Groundwater Management Plan, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Prepared for the Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1990. The Fundamentals of Groundwater Contamination, Geraghty
& Miller, Inc., Tampa, Florida.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 199 la. Revised Sampling Analysis and Monitoring Plan (SAMP) for
Wells, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, September 27, 1991.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 
1991b. Health and Safety Plan (HASP), Tutu Service Station
Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, September 24, 1991.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992a. Tutu Service Station Investigation Work Plan, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands, March 1992.
PUT 
DO5 
O129
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
8-8
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992b. Technical Memorandum I, Tutu Service Station Investigation,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, April 1992.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992c. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Tutu Service Station
Investigation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, March 1992.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1992d. Seventh Sampling Report, September 1992, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, December 1992.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a. Technical Memorandum n, Tutu Service Station Investigation,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, May 28, 1993.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993b. Eight Sampling Report, March/April 1993, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. July 13, 1993.
Gomez-Gomez, F. 1984. Water Resources in the Area of the College of the Virgin Islands,
St. Thomas, Pilot Investigation. Presented at the First Caribbean Islands Water
Resources Congress, July 26-27, 1984, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Gomez-Gomez, F. 1986. Caribbean Islands Regional Aquifer-System Study Phase 1, Regional
Aquifer-System Analysis Program of the U.S. Geological Survey, Ren Jen Sun, ed.,
Summary of Projects, 1978-89, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1002, p. 234-241.
Gomez-Gomez, F. 1987. Planning Report of the Caribbean Islands Regional Aquifer-System
Analysis Project, U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation Report 86-4074,
50 p.
Gomez-Gomez F., and J. Heisel 1980. Summary Appraisals of the Nation's Ground Water
Resources; Caribbean Region, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 813-9, 32 pp.
Gomez-Gomez, F., F. Quinones-Marquez, and A. Zack. 1985. U.S. Virgin Islands,
Groundwater Resources, U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2275, p. 409-413.
Government of the Virgin Islands of the United States Department of Public Works. 1978.
Well Field Development Program, East End, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands-Phase I-
Feasibility Report.
Government of the Virgin Islands of the United States Department of Public Works. 1982. A
Water Supply Plan for the U.S. Virgin Islands with an Outline of Projects Suggested for
Federal Funding During FY 1983-1986, April 1982.
TUT 
OO5 0130
GERAGHTY # MILLER. INC. 
O
8-9
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Graves, R.P., and R. Gonzalez. 1988. Potentiometric Surface of the Turpentine Run Aquifer
in the Tutu Area, Eastern St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, September 11, 1987. U.S.
Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigation Report 88-4131, 1 pi.
Green, B.R. 1993. Letter to J.K. Dema, Esq. Re: Opinion Report - Tutu Contamination
Study. Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc., October 12, 1993.
Griggs, D.I. 1978. Interoffice Memorandum, re: Land Areas Associated with Public Supply
Wells in Upper Tutu. Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas: Government of the Virgin Islands
of the United States, Public Works Department, Division of Solid Waste.
Grossman, I.G. 1959a. Groundwater Data from St. Thomas, Virgin Islands. U.S. Department
of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. June 1959, 16 pp.
Grossman, I.G. 19595. Groundwater Data from St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report. 36 p.
Grossman, I.G. 1962. Chemical Quality of Groundwater in St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, Short
Papers in Geology, Hydrology, and Topography, Articles 1-59, U.S. Geological Survey
Professional Paper 450-B, Article 55, p. 131-133.
H+GCL. 1993a. Technical Opinions Regarding the Texaco Tutu Service Station, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands. November 1, 1993.
H+GCL. 1993b. Letter to A.J. Meyers, Esq. Re: Texaco Tutu Site. October 19, 1993.
H+GCL. 1993c. Phase I Site Assessment and Interim Remedial Measures Workplan, Tutu
Texaco Station, Tutu, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. November 5, 1993.
Haris, R.H., C.F. McLane, m, and W.A. Stone, Jr. 1993. Expert Report on Groundwater
Contamination and Remediation of the Tutu Aquifer, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
November 1993.
Hess, H.H., C.O. Bowin, T.W. Donnelly, J.T. Whetten, and E.R. Oxburgh, eds. Caribbean
Geological Investigations, Geological Society of America Memoir 98, 309 pp.
Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. 1993a. Geohydrologic Analysis and Water Quality Data
for the Upper Tutu Aquifer, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, Appendices I through X,
October 1993.
Hydrologic Associates U.S.A., Inc. 1993b. Sources and Migratory Routes of Organic
Constituents in the Tutu Aquifer, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, October 1993.
TUT 
CO5 O131
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
8-10
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
IT Corporation. 1990. Summary of Laboratory Data for Job Number: QUL 46313 and P.O.
Number: 00512, Quantum Laboratories, Inc., August 30, 1990.
IT Corporation. 1993. Summary of Laboratory Data for Job Number: ITEK 53554 and P.O.
Number: 409440, O'Henry, April 2, 1993.
Johnson, A.F. 1936. 
Water Supply for St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation, 37 pp. Plus Exhibits.
Johnson, A.F. 1937. Report on the Water Supply for St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, November
1936, United States Bureau of Reclamation, 27 pp.
Jordan, D.G., and OJ. Cosner. 1973. A Survey of the Water Resources of St. Thomas,
Virgin Islands, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 55 pp.
Jordan, D.G., and D.W. Fisher. 1977. Relation of Bulk Precipitation and Evaporation to
Water Quality and Water Resources, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands. U.S. Geological
Survey Water-Supply Paper 1663-1.
Karen & Associates, Inc. 1993. Letter to Robert Lehman, Esq., Archer and Greiner, and Kell
Damsgaard, Morgan, Lewis and Bockius. Re: Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data
from the Tutu Aquifer, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, November 1, 1993.
Kemp, J.F. 1926. Geology of the Virgin Islands, Culebra, and Vieques, Introduction and
Review of the Literatures. New York Academy of Sciences, Scientific Survey of Puerto
Rico and Virgin Islands, Volume IV - Part 1, pp. 1-69.
Kruseman, G.P., and N.A. De Ridder. 1979. Analysis and Evaluation of Pumping Test Data,
Bulletin U, International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvements, Wageningen,
Netherlands, 200 pp.
Lewis, J.F., and G. Draper. 1988. Geologic and Tectonic Evolution of Northern Caribbean
Margin, in Dengo, G. and J.E. Case, Geological Society of America, DNAG Vol. H.
Lopez De Azua & Associates. 1992. Topographic and Planimetric Survey of Approximately
100 Acres Located at the New Tutu Section, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands,
November 2, 1992.
Lopez De Azua & Associates. 1993. Topographic and Planimetric Survey of Approximately
140 Acres Located at New Tutu, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, November 1993.
TUT 
005 
01.32
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. 
Ct
8-11
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Maury, R.C., G.K. Westbrook, P.E. Baker, Ph. Bouysse, and D. Westercamp. 1990. Geology
of the Lesser Antilles. The Geology of North America Vol. H, The Caribbean Region,
pp. 141-166.
McHugh, I.B., and R.E. Tucker. 1989. Analytical Results for 38 Water Samples from a
Hydrogeological Survey of the U.S. Virgin Islands, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File
Report 88-514, Denver, Colorado, 9 pp.
Meyer, £. Ph.D. No Date. Expert Report. Meyer Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Meyerhoff, H.A. 1926a. Geology of the Virgin Islands, Culebra, and Vieques. 
The
Physiography of the Virgin Islands, Culebra, and Vieques, New York Academy of
Sciences, Scientific Survey of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, Vol. IV - Part 2, pp.
142-219.
Mickelson, B.J. No Date. Tutu Wellfield Litigation Executive Summary.
Moreau, M. 1993. Letter to J.K. Dema, Esq. Re: Findings and Opinions Relative to the Tutu
Wells Site. Marul Moreau Associates, October 13, 1993.
Neuman, S.P. 1975. Analysis of Pumping Test Data from Anisotropic Unconfined Aquifers
Considering Delayed Yield, Water Resources Research, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 329-342.
NUS Corporation, Region 2 FIT. 1989a. Preliminary Assessment Report for LAG A Building,
Virgin Islands Department of Education, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, TDD No. 02-
8902-44, March 24, 1989.
NUS Corporation, Region 2 FIT. 1989b. Preliminary Assessment Report for Ramsay Motors,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, TDD No. 02-8902-42, March 24, 1989.
NUS Corporation, Region 2 FIT. 1989c. Preliminary Assessment Report for Gassett Motors,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, TDD No. 02-8902-41, March 24, 1989.
NUS Corporation, Regional FIT. 1989d. Preliminary Assessment Report for Tutu Texaco, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, TDD No. 02-8902-40, March 31,1989 Revised March 26,
1989.
NUS Corporation, Region 2 FIT. 1989e. Preliminary Assessment Report for Tutu Esso, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, TDD No. 02-8902-43, March 24, 1989.
TUI" 
005 0133
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC. 
O
8-12
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Officials of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce. 1974. Climates of the States, Vol. I - Eastern States plus Puerto Rico and
the U.S. Virgin Islands - A Practical Reference Containing Basic Climatological Data of
the United States. Water Information Center, Inc., Port Washington, New York.
Pedro Panzardi & Associates, Inc. 
1989. 
Preliminary Site Assessment Report for O'Henry,
Inc., St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, October 31, 1989.
Pedro Panzardi & Associates, Inc. 
1990. 
Remedial Investigation Work Plan for O'Henry
Laundry, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Geo-Caribe, Inc. and Pedro Panzardi &
Assocciates, March 1990.
Pindell, J.L., and S.F. Barren. 1990. 
Geological Evolution of the Caribbean Region, A Plate
Tectonic Perspective. Geology of North America, Caribbean Region, in press.
Rankin, D.W. 
1984a. Geology of the U.S. Virgin Islands, A Progress Report. 
U.S.
Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia, 15 pp.
Rankin, D.W. 1984b. Geology of the U.S. Virgin Islands, A Progress Report, P.L. Gori, and
W.W. Hays, Editors. Earthquake Hazards in the Virgin Islands Region, U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 84-762, pp. 83-96.
Ranlet, K.B. 
Letter to J.K. Dema, Esq. 
Re: Soil Gas Survey at Four Winds Plaza and
Harthman Property Tutu Area, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Law Engineering and
Environmental Services, October 11, 1993.
Reed, J.P., and T.M. Robison. 1972. 
Groundwater Contamination in Turpentine Run Basin
as of April 1972. 
U.S. Geological Survey, 16 pp.
Robinson, A.H. 
1974. 
Virgin Islands National Park; The Story Behind the Scenery. Las
Vegas, Nevada, KC Publications, 27 pp.
Robinson, T.M. 
1971. Earthquake Accelerated Decline of Water Level in an Observation Well
in St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 750-B:
B252-253.
Robinson, T.M. et al. 1973a. Water Records of the U.S. Virgin Islands, 1962-69. Prepared
with the Government of the Virgin Islands of the United States and the National Park
Service.
TUT
GERAGHTY6? MILLER. [NC
8-13
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Robinson, T.M. et al. 1973b. Water Records of the U.S. Virgin Islands, 1962-69, U.S.
Geological Survey Open-File Data Report. 163 pp.
Savannah Laboratories and Environmental Services. 1991. Appendix IX. Summary Tables
Detected Contaminants, Laboratory Analysis Sheets and Chain of Custody Records.
Savannah Laboratories and Environmental Services. 1992a. Appendix n. 
Air Stripping
Effluent Laboratory Analysis Sheets. December 11, 1992.
Savannah Laboratories and Environmental Services. 1992b. Appendix ffl, Aquifer Test Data:
Four Winds Deep Test Well No. 2 and Curve Matching Graphs, 1992.
Simmonds, R. 1993. Memorandum to Tim Knutson, Texaco, Re: Revised Draft of Sections
4.1 and 4.2, Phase H RI Work Plan as Prepared by Geraghty & Miller, Inc. December
15, 1993.
Slaine, D.D. 1993. Letter to J.K. Dema. Re: Simulation of Groundwater Flow in the Upper
Turpentine Run Basin. Reference GLI92-817. Gartner Lee International Inc., October
13, 1993.
Smyth, A. 1993. Personal Communication during December 10, 1993 Telephone Conference.
Soil Tech Corporation. 1990a. Laboratory Analysis of Soil at Tutu Esso Car Care Center,
Tutu, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. January 11, 1990 (Report incorrectly dated
January 11, 1989).
Soil Tech Corporation. 1990b. Memorandum to Lie. Jose* L. Cepeda, Goldman & Antonetti
from Jose1 C. Agrelot, January 23, 1990.
Soil Tech Corporation. 1990c. Hydrogeological Assessment of Rodriguez Esso Service Station,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, November 14, 1990.
Stevens, K.E., F. Gomez-Gomez, and J. Alicia-Ortiz. 1981. Water Wells in the U.S. Virgin
Islands, Part One, St. Thomas, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 82-82, 112 pp.
Target Environmental Services, Inc. 1992a. Soil Gas Survey, Four Winds Shopping Center
and Environs, Tutu Area, Anna's Retreat, U.S. Virgin Islands, February 1992.
Target Environmental Services, Inc. 1992b. Soil Gas Survey, UST Areas, Four Winds
Shopping Center and Environs Tutu Area, Anna's Retreat, U.S. Virgin Islands,
September 1992.
TUT 
OO5 O135
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
8-14
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Theis, C.V. 1935. The Relation Between the Lowering of the Piezometric Surface and the
Rate and Duration of Discharge of a Well Using Groundwater Storage, Transactions,
American Geophysical Union, vol. 16, pp. 519-524.
Thomey, N., D. Bratberg, and C. Kalisz. 1989. A Comparison of Methods for Measuring
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil. Proceedings of the Conference on Petroleum
Hydrocarbons and Organic Chemicals in Groundwater; Prevention, Detection, and
Restoration, Houston, Texas. National Water Well Association.
Torinus, S., and W. Torinus. 1993. Letter to Tom Danahy, Geraghty & Miller, Inc. Re:
Draft of Phase H Remedial Investigation Work Plan, Dated December 13, 1993. Signed
by W. Torinus.
Torres-Sierra, H., and R. Dacosta. 1984. Estimated Water Use in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands, July 1983 - June 1984. Department of the Interior, United States Geological
Survey, Water Resources Division. Open File Report Data Report 84-721.
Troester, J.W. 1988. U.S. Geological Survey Groundwater Studies in the U.S. Virgin Islands,
U.S. Geological Survey Water Fact Sheet, Open-File Report 88-163, 2 pp.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1970. Soil Survey, Virgin Islands
of the United States, August 1970.
U.S. Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs. 1983. Comprehensive Water Resources
Management Plan for the U.S. Virgin Islands, June 1983, 94 pp.
U.S. Department of the Interior. 1973. Water Records of the U.S. Virgin Islands 1962-1969.
U.S. Geologic Survey, 163 pp.
U.S. Department of the Interior. 1982. Water Wells in the U.S. Virgin Islands Part One, St.
Thomas. U.S. Geological Survey, 17 pp.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. 1985. Groundwater Manual, 480 pp.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Region n Environmental Service Division
Laboratory. 1987. Re: Turpentine Run, Laboratory Analysis from Roy F. Weston,
TAT, Region n, Sampling Event Conducted on October 6-7, 1987, Project No. 262,
Organic Analysis, Project No. 263, Inorganic Analysis, December 22, 1987.
TUT 
005
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
8-15
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1989a. Risk Assessment Guidance for
Superfund, Vol. 1, Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part A). Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1989b. Method 524.2, Measurement of
Purgeable Organic Compounds in Water by Capillary Column Gas Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry, Revision 3.0, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Cincinnati, Ohio, 1989.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1990a. USEPA Contract Laboratory
Program, Statement of Work for Organic Analysis, Multi-Media, Multi-Concentration,
Document Number OLM 01.0, Revised December 1990 and February 1991. USEPA
Contract Laboratory Program, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1990b. Statement of Work for Inorganics
Analysis (Multi-media, Multi-concentration), Document Number ILMO1.1, March 1990.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 199la. National Functional Guidelines for
Organic Data Review, Draft Version, December 1990, Revised June 1991.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1991b. Risk Assessment Guidance for
Superfund Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual Supplemental Guidance "Standard
Default Exposure Factors" Interim Final. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response,
OSWER Directive 9285.6-03, March 25, 1991.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1991c. Hazardous Ranking System (HRS)
Documentation Record, Tutu Wellfield, April 1991.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1992a. Personal Communication from C.
Kwan, USEPA Project Manager, with the Tutu Environmental Investigation Committee
and Geraghty & Miller, Inc., May 5, 1992
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1992b. Hazardous Ranking System, 40 CFR,
Part 300, Appendix A.
U.S. Virgin Islands Government. 1982. A Water Supply Plan for the U.S. Virgin Islands,
August 1982, 19 pp.
Van Eepoel, R. 1983. Groundwater Monitoring at Municipal Landfills on St. Thomas and St.
Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, July 1982 through March 1983, Unpublished Report.
'TUT 
005 
Ol.:57
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
8-16
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)
Vaughan, T.W. 1920. The Groundwater Resources of the West Indian Islands, St. John, St.
Thomas, Culebra, and Vieques, and of the Eastern End of Puerto Rico, U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report.
Vaughan, T.W. 1923. Stratigraphy of the Virgin Islands of the United States and of Culebra
and Vieques Islands, Notes on Eastern Puerto Rico, Reprint from the Journal of
Washington Academy of Sciences, Vol. 13, No. 14, August 1923, pp. 303-317.
Virgin Islands Port Authority. 1975. Environmental Impact Assessment Report, Harry S.
Truman Airport Master Plan, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, Appendix Vol. JJ, Continued
Soil Testing Services, Caribbean Inc.
Warren Roger Associates, Inc. 1993. Final Report, Tutu v. Exxon, November 1, 1993.
Weston/Spill Prevention and Emergency Response (SPER) Division Region n TAT. 1987.
Analytical Report for Groundwater Samples Collected from Supply Wells during the
October 6 to October 7, 1987 Sampling Event, Tutu, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Weston/Spill Prevention and Emergency Response (SPER) Division Region U TAT. 1988.
Summary of Laboratory Results for Oil and Water Samples Collected from Tanks, Storm
Drains, and Sumps at Gasoline Stations and Auto Body Shops in Tutu, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands on August 17, 1987. February 23, 1988.
Zack, A., T. Rodriguez-Alonso, and A. Roman-Mas. 1987. U.S. Virgin Islands Groundwater
Quality in National Water Summary, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2325,
pp. 489-492.
TUT 
005
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
Page 1 of 4
Table 3-1. 
Summary of Recent Data Received from Members of the PRP Technical Committee, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Facility Document
Prepared for:
Document Description
New Data
Identified
Four Winds Plaza
* Fahrenthold, Paul. Expert Report. Evaluation of Chemical Data from
Soil Gas and Ground water Monitoring, Tutu Basin, U.S. Virgin
Islands. No Date.
•-G
* Fournier, Louis B., STAR Environmental, Inc. Expert Report. No Date.
* Garrett, Carlos R. Expert Report. Report on Conditions Encountered at
the Texaco Tutu and Esso Tutu Automobile Service Stations in
Tutu, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, October 13, 1993.
* Green, Bruce, Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc. Opinion Report. Hydrogeology
and Water Resources of St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
41 Kassenaar, Dirk C., and Eliezer J. Wexler, Gartner Lee International, Inc.,
Simulation of Groundwater Flow in the Upper Turpentine Run Basin,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, October 1993.
* Meyer, Eugene, Meyer Environmental Consultants, Inc. Expert Report.
No Date.
* Moreau, Marcel. Expert Report, October 13, 1993.
* Ranlet, Kenneth B., Law Engineering, Inc. Expert Report. Soil Gas Surveys
at Four Winds Plaza and Harthman Property, October 11, 1993.
* Target Environmental Services, Inc. Soil Gas Survey, Four Winds Shopping
Center and Environs, Tutu Area, Anna's Retreat, U.S. Virgin Islands.
February 1992.
Results of site visits and mechanical/fluid
pipe tracing results.
Groundwater data for Four Winds wells,
and liquid/sludge data from Western
Auto.
Groundwater model, geophysical
survey results.
Evaluation of soil-gas surveys at Esso,
Texaco, and Four Winds.
Soil-gas survey, results and data.
PRP 
Potentially responsible party.
UST 
Underground storage tank.
fM013.—«.XI/SUMADTIJCLS
GERAGHTY & Mil I.I R. INC
Page 2 of 4
Table 3-1. 
Summary of Recent Data Received from Members of the PRP Technical Committee, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Facility Document
Prepared for:
Document Description
New Data
Identified
Four Winds Plaza
(continued)
LAGA
Ramsay Motors
O'Henry Cleaners
* Target Environmental Services, Inc. Soil Gas Survey, UST Areas, Four Winds
Shopping Center, Tutu Area, Anna's Retreat, U.S. Virgin Islands.
September 1992.
* Hydrologic Associates U.S.A. Inc. Geohydrologic Analysis and Water Quality
Data for the Upper Tutu Aquifer, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands,
October 1993.
* Hydrologic Associates U.S.A. Inc. Sources and Migratory Routes of Organic
Constituents in the Tutu Aquifer, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
October 1993.
* Arthur D. Little, Inc., Groundwater Contamination Occurrence and Sources
in the Tutu Aquifer, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. November 1, 1993.
* Arthur D. Little, Inc., Environmental Investigation Report, Tutu Area,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
* Cooper Environmental, Inc. Document Inventory, Received by Geraghty &
Miller from Cooper Environmental, Inc., November 3, 1993.
* Cooper Environmental Inc. Draft Report. Investigation of Ramsay Motors
Site, November 8, 1993.
* International Technology Corporation. Analytical Data Packages, Boring
Logs and Monitoring Well Construction Diagrams, Received by
Geraghty & Miller from Nancy D'Anna, November 2, 1993.
Soil-gas survey, results and data.
Aquifer test data; boring logs; well
construction details; and soil, groundwater,
and waste sludge/liquid analytical data.
Pump test data.
History/operations/waste streams at
LAGA, and various other facilities.
Soil, groundwater, and soil percolation
test results. Storm and sanitary sewer
sampling results. Boring logs.
Bibliography.
Soil, groundwater, and drummed liquid
analytical data.
Groundwater and soil analytical data,
boring logs, and well construction details.
PRP 
Potentially responsible party.
UST 
Underground storage tank.
«OOI3.—-XI/SUMA0T1.XLS
TUT 
005 
0140
GERAGHTY <?? MlU.I R . I N C
r
Page 3 of 4
Table 3-1. 
Summary of Recent Data Received from Members of the PRP Technical Committee, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Facility Document
Prepared for:
Document Description
New Data
Identified
Esso
Texaco
* Soil Tech. Corporation, Report, January 23, 1990.
* Braids, Olin C., Eder Associates Consulting Engineers, P.C. Expert Report on
Anthropogenic Sources of Contaminants, Tutu Wellfield Site, Tutu, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, November 1, 1993.
* Harris, Robert H., Charles H. McLane HI and William A. Stone, ENVIRON Corporation,
Expert Report on Ground water Contamination and Remediation of the
Tutu Aquifer, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, November 1993.
* Adenekan, A. E., N.K. Springer, and T.D. Streltsova, Exxon Production
Research Company, Summary Interpretation of Available Hydrogeologic
and Water Quality Data for Tutu Wells Area, Upper Turpentine Basin,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, October 1993.
* Golden, Robert, Ph.D., Karch & Associates, Inc. Letter Opinion Report,
November 1, 1993.
* Kukenberger, Robert J., Blasland & Bouck Engineers, P.C., Esso Virgin Islands,
Tutu Well Fields Storm Sewer Preliminary Report, November 1, 1993.
* Warren Rogers Associates, Inc. Final Report, Tutu v. Exxon, November 1, 1993.
* Mickelson, Barbara J., Tutu Wellfield Litigation, Executive Summary, No Date.
* Blasland & Bouck Engineers, P.C., Hydrogeologic Assessment/Source
Identification, Upper Tutu Aquifer Basin, Tutu, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands, October 1993.
* H+GCL, Phase I Site Assessment and Interim Remedial Measures Workplan,
Tutu Texaco Station, Tutu, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, November 5, 1993.
Site operations data, soil analytical data.
Pump test data.
Groundwater analytical data.
PRP 
Potentially responsible party.
UST 
Underground storage tanV 
(T
005 0141
nw»u.-«.xi/suMADri xut
GRRAGMIY^MII.I.I -R.INC
r 
r
Page 4 of 4
Table 3-1. 
Summary of Recent Data Received from Members of the PRP Technical Committee, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Facility Document 
New Data
Prepared for: 
Document Description 
Identified
Texaco 
* H+GCL, Technical Opinions Regarding the Texaco Tutu Service Station, St.
(continued) 
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, November 1, 1993.
Western Auto 
* Blasland & Bouck Engineers. Analytical Data Packages with Results from Soil and 
Analytical data.
Water Samples Collected from UST Excavation and Sludge and Oil Samples
Collected at Western Auto, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands,
October 19-22, 1993.
ENSR. 1993. Analytical Data Packages with Results of Water And Sludge Samples 
Analytical data.
Collected at Western Auto, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands,
May 27, 1993.
PRP 
Potentially responsible party.
UST 
Underground storage tank.
K!
GERAGHTY^MIU.I K.IN(
Table 4-1. Sumnury of Work Performed to Date at the Various Potential Source Facilities in the Tutu Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomai, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 1 of 8
Facility
Date
Investigators
Scope
Samples Collected
Analytical Results
VIHA (former
Tropical Motors)
20-M«y-82 
Geraghty & Miller
Performance of pump test.
Sample of discharge from
supply well, VIHA I.
PCE (55 ppb), TCE (10 ppb)
and 1,2-tnni-DCE (12 ppb)
reported
17-Aug-88
Weston/SPER Division
Region II TAT
Inspection and sampling.
One sample (3239B-2I)
from waste oil UST for VOC
analysis.
See Table 4-2.
May-November 1992 
Geraghty & Miller
Sep-90
Geraghty tt Miller
Installation of Monitoring Well
MW-13D, soil and groundwater
sampling.
Supply well sampling.
Groundwater sample (MW-13D)
soil sample MW-13D (4.0-
6.0 feet bis).
Groundwater samples from VIHA I
and VIHA n.
See Technical Memorandum II
(Genghty A Miller, Inc. 1993«).
See Eighth Sampling Report.
(Genghty & Miller, Inc. I993b).
Curriculum Center
(former LAGA facility)
15-Feb-89 
NUS Corporation
6-Jun-89
COM
Preliminary Site Assessment
(inspection).
Sampling in area of dumped
drums.
No sampling conducted. 
See Table 4-3.
Two soil samples (eL-02-01 s 
See Table 4-4.
and eL-02-02s) from ground
surface, and one aqueous sample
(eL-02-04L) from an open drum.
May-November 1992 
Geraghty & Miller
Oct-93
Arthur D. Little
Drilling of soil borings (B-l,
B-6, B-14, B-15, and B-16),
installation of monitoring wells
(MW-I and MW-1D), and
collection of Surface Soil
Samples SS-1 through SS-8.
Site visit and sampling.
Surface Soil Samples SS-1, SS-2,
SS-3, SS-4, SS-8, B-14 (0-2 feet
bis), B-15 (0-2 feet bis), and B-16
(0-2 feet bis). Subsurface Soil
Sample B-l (4-8 feet bis).
Surface Soil Samples SS-1 through
SS-13, and two groundwater samples
from rock boring (RC-SB1) for VOC
and TPH analysis.
See Technical Memorandum II
(Geraghty & Miller, Inc. I993a)
and Figure 4-2.
See Figure 4-2.
M»OOI3.-*-XI/T4IPOT$»JCU
GERAGHTY^ Mil.I I R.IN(
Table 4-1. Summary of Work Performed to Date •( the Various Potential Source Facilities in the Tutu Area, Tutu Well* Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 2 of 8
Facility
Date
Investigators
Scope
Samples Collected
Analytical Result!
Ramsay Motor Company
(former Cobuild)
17-Aug-87
Weston/SPER Division
Region II TAT
Inspection and sampling.
One waste oil sample (3239-20)
from UST.
See Table 4-5.
g-Sep-88
CDM
15-Feb-89 
NUS Corporation
Inspection and sampling.
Preliminary Site Assessment
(inspection).
Two soil samples (eR-07s and 
See Table 4-4.
eR-08s) at the southern boundary
of property, and water sample
(e-02) from holding tank.
No sampling conducted. 
See Table 4-7.
8-Jun-89 
CDM
Sampling.
One waste oil (ample (eR-02-Ola) from
watte oil UST, and one soil
sample (eR-02-02s) in area
adjacent to Antilles (Oatsett)
property.
See Tables 4-8 and 4-9.
May-November 1992 
Geraghty & Miller
April and July 1993 
Cooper Environmental
Drilling of Soil Borings B-2
and B-3, and soil sampling.
Advancement of hand auger
and soil borings, soil and ground-
water sample collection.
Soil Sample B-2 (0-2 feet bis)
and B-3 (2-4 feet bis).
Soil Samples HB-1 through HB-10,
and Soil Samples SB-1 through SB-3.
Ground-water and product sample from
HB-3. Samples analyzed for
VOCs, BNA, and TPH.
See Technical Memorandum II
(Geraghty A Miller, Inc. 1993s).
See Figure 4-3.
Sept. 1990-March 1993 Geraghty & Miller
Supply well sampling.
Groundwaler sample from Ramsay well.
See Eighth Sampling Report
(Geraghty A Miller, Inc. I993b).
Antilles (former Gassett
Auto Parts and former
Consolidated Auto Parts)
17-Aug-87
Weston/SPER Division
Region D TAT
Inspection and sampling.
Two water samples from a gutter
(3239B-18) and a storm drain
(3239B-I9) for VOCs.
See Table 4-10.
MWOI3.
GERAGHTY 5? MIMJ-R. INC.
Table 4-1. 
Summary of Work Performed to Dale at the Various Potential Source Facilities in the Tutu Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 3 of 8
Facility
Date
Investigator!
Scope
Samples Collected
Analytical Results
Antilles (former Gassett
Auto Parts and former
Consolidated Auto Parti)
(continued)
12-Sep-88
COM
Sampling.
Two soil samples (eC-09Ji) and
eC-lOJs) near garage, and one
water sample (eC-1 la) near drum
storage area for VOCs.
See Table 4-11.
15-Feb-89
NUS Corporation
Preliminary Site Assessment
(inspection).
No sampling conducted.
See Table 4-12.
8-Jun-89 
CDM
Sampling.
One oily water sample (eC-02-Oli)
from a drain.
See Table 4-13.
May-November 1992 
Geraghty &. Miller
Texaco Service Station
17-Aug-87
Weston/SPER Division
Region II TAT
Drilling of Soil Boring B-5, and
soil sampling.
Inspection and sampling.
Soil Sample B-5 (0-2 feet bis).
Two waste oil samples (3239B-15
and 3239B-16) from oil/water
separator and UST. Three water
samples (3239B-12 through
3239B-14) from bay sumps, and
one water sample (3239B-17)
from storm drain.
See Technical Memorandum II
(Geraghty A Miller, Inc. 1993a).
See Table 4-14.
r.n
September 12 to
IS, 1988
CDM
Inspection and sampling.
One toil sample (eT-02s), one
cistern water (eT-OlW) sample and
one waste oil sample (eT-62)
from oil/water separator for VOC
analysis.
See Table 4-15.
15-Feb-89
NUS Corporation
Preliminary Site Assessment
(inspection).
No sampling conducted.
See Table 4-16.
MWOI J.«—-XI /T41 KITS* JCLS
GERAGHTY 5? Ml I.I.I - R . I N C .
Table 4-1. Summary of Work Performed lo Date at the Various Potential Source Facilities in the Tutu Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 4 of 8
Facility
Date
Investigators
Scope
Samples Collected
Analytical Results
Texaco Service Station
(continued)
September 12 to
15, 1988
COM
Collection of split soil samples
during UST excavation.
Split soil samples from test holes
(TP-01 through TP-03), excavation
pit (EX-01 through EX-04) and
soil piles (SP-IT thorugh SP-4T).
one water sample (PW-02).
See Tables 4-17 through 4-20.
8-)un-89 
CDM
Sampling of soil piles after
ventilation and sampling of
waste oils.
Split soil samples from soil piles
after ventilation, and aeven waste
oil samples (eT-02-Ola through
eT-02-07a) from oil/water separator,
bay sumps and drums for VOCs.
See Tables 4-21 and 4-22.
Summer-Fall 1992 
Geraghty A. Miller
Drilling of Soil Boring B-4 and
Monitoring Wells MW-3,
MW-4, and MW-4D, soil and
groundwater sampling.
Soil samples MW-3 (0.4-2 feet
bis), MW-4 (2-7 to 4.7 feet bis),
MW-4D (8.7 to 10.7 feet bis),
and B-4 (8 to 10 feet bis).
See Technical Memorandum II
(Geraghty A Miller, Inc. I993a).
November-December 1993 H + GCL
Old Tutu Wastewater
Treatment Plant
Oct-93
Arthur D. Little
Four Winds Plaza
March 1991 
—
TUT 
OO5 0146 
Nov-91
Hydrologic Associates
Monitoring well installation and
soil samples.
Site visit and sampling.
Installation of well, MW-WO
during foundation excavation
for car wash.
Sampling of supply wells.
Study ongoing.
Three water samples collected
after grit chamber, after chlorination
and from lagoon. Sediment sample
also collected from lagoon.
Samples analyzed for VOCa.
Sample from MW-WO.
Four Winds I, II, and 111, and waste
oil well (MW-WO).
Results pending.
Chloroform and toluene reported
in influent and effluent samples.
Chlorobenzene and toluene
reported in sediment sample-
Benzene (730 ppb), MTBE
(27,000 ppb), oil and grease
(62 ppm), and heavy oil (100,00
ppm) reported in sample.
rHOOl}.—.XI/T4IPOTSRJCLS
GERAGHTY^ Ml 1.1 . I K . IN(
Table 4-1. 
Summary of Work Perfonned (o Date at the Various Potential Source Facilities in the Tutu Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 5 of 8
Facility
Date
Investigators
Scope
Samples Collected
Analytical Results
Four Winds Plaza
(continued)
Feb-92
Caribbean Hydro-Tech
Installation of monitoring wells,
CHT-I through CHT-5.
Composite soil simples from
boring CHT-2 and CHT-3. Groundwater
samples from CHT-1 through CHT-5
and MW-WO.
Tillett, Inc.
February and 
Target Environmental
Sep-92
May-November 1992 
Geraghty A Miller
8-Dec-92 
Caribbean Hydro-Tech
Dec-92 
Hydrologic Associates
13-Sep-88 
CDM
Soil gas surveys.
Drilling and installation of
Monitoring Wells MW-2, MW-o,
MW-9, MW-IO, MW-6D, and
MW-10D, soil and groundwater
sampling.
Investigation of "ramp" tank,
advancement of borings TW-6
ih rough TW-8.
Pump testing.
Soil sampling.
No sampling.
Soil samples MW-2 (0-2 feet bis),
MW-6 (0-2 feet bis), MW-6D
(0-2 feet bis), MW-9 (0-4 feet
bis), MW-IO (2-4 feet bis), and
MW-10D (0-2 feet bla).
Sample of sand contents and soil sample
from TW-6.
Supply well sampling.
Two soil samples (eTT-14 and
eTT-15) from dninway and end
of drainpipe in the paint cleaning
See Technical Memorandum II
(Oeraghty & Miller, Inc. 1993a).
See Figure 4-5.
See Table 4-23.
May-November 1992 
Oeraghty A Miller
Sep 1990-April 1993 
Geraghty & Miller
Drilling of Soil Boring B-8,
installation of Monitoring Well
MW-5, soil and groundwater
sampling.
Supply well sampling.
Soil Samples SS-5, MW-5 (0-4
feel bis) and B-8 (0-2 feet bla).
Groundwater sample from Tillett well.
See Technical Memorandum II
(Oeraghty A Miller, Inc. I993a).
See Eighth Sampling Report
(Geraghty 4 Miller, Inc. I993b).
rtOOIJ.—-XI/T4IPOTSHJCLS
Table 4-1. 
Summary of Work Performed to Date at the Vinous Potential Source Facililiet in the Tutu Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 6 of 8
Facility
Date
Investigators
Scope
Samples Collected
Analytical Resulti
Western Auto
Western Auto
(continued)
25-Nov-92 
Caribbean Hydro-Tech
2-Dcc-92 
Caribbean Hydro-Tech
Mar-93
May-93
Caribbean Hydro-Tech
Investigation of abandoned
waste oil UST, advancement
of auger borings TW-1 and TW-2,
and toil and groundwater
sampling.
Investigation of abandoned
diesel UST, advancement of
auger borings TW-3 through
TW-5, and soil and groundwater
sampling.
Sample of sand contents, Soil
Sample TW-1, Water Sample TW-2.
Sample of liquid from UST. One
soil and one water sample from
borings TW-4 and TW-5.
Resampling of diesel UST contents. 
Liquid sample from dieael UST.
ENSR and Blasland & Bouck. 
Resampling of diesel UST contents. 
Split samples of liquid from UST.
October 6-22, 1993 
Arthur D. Little and Blasland
& Bouck
Sampling during UST excavation. 
Soil samples from sidewalls and
base of excavation.
See Figure 4-5.
See Figure 4-5. Liquid sample indicated
presence of petroleum hydrocarbon
compound* and 1,1,1-TCA.
Petroleum hydrocarbon constituents
detected; 1,1,1-TCA not detected.
Petroleum hydrocarbon compounds
detected; 1,1,1-TCA not detected.
Results pending.
Esso Service Station
Nov-93 
ENSR
17-Aug-87 
Weston/SPER Division
Region II TAT
12-Sep-S8 
CDM
Soil vapor measurements.
Inspection and sampling.
Sampling.
1989
NUS Corporation
Preliminary Site Assessment.
Soil vapor. 
Results pending.
One waste oil sample (3239B-22) 
See Table 4-24.
from one of the oil/water separator!.
One waste oil sample (eE-64) 
See Table 4-25.
from one of the oil/water separators
and one waste oil sample (eE-63)
from a holding tank.
No sampling. 
See Table 4-26.
CD
rWOIJ.—-XI/T4IPOTSH.XU
GERAGHTYtfMIU .I-R.INC.
Table 4-1. 
Summary of Work Performed to Date at the Various Potential Source Facilities in the Tutu Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 7 of 8
Facility
Date
Investigators
Scope
Samples Collected
Analytical Results
8-Jun-89 
COM
Sampling.
One waste oil sample (eE-02-Ola)
from holding tank, and one watte
oil sample (eE-02-02a) from one
of the oil/water separators.
See Table 4-27.
June 5-10, 1989 
Soil Tech Corporation
Soil sampling during UST
excavation.
Soil samples from test holes (TP-1
through TP-13) and grab and
composite samples from soil
piles (SP-I through SP-7). Samples
of tank residue (T-E-I) and
decontamination water (DW-1).
See Tablea 4-28 through 4-40.
June 5-10, 1989 
COM
Easo Service Station
(continued)
O'Henry Cleaners
Dec-89
Soil Tech Corporation
May-November 1992 
Oeraghty & Miller
Nov-Dec 1993 
Blasland & Bouck
Jan-94
Blasland & Bouck
8-Sep-88 
CDM
Soil sampling.
Advancement of borings B-101
through B-109, and toil
sampling.
Seven split toil samples (TE-X-Ol
through TE-X-07) from excavation
pit and soil piles.
Soil samples from borings B-101
through B-109.
Drilling of Soil Boring B-9, installation Soil Sample B-9 (2-6 feet bit), and
of Monitoring Wells MW-8, toil 
MW-8 (2-4 feet bit),
and groundwater sampling.
Monitoring well installation.
Soil and groundwater sampling.
Inspection and sampling.
Soil and groundwater.
To be collected.
Soil sample (e-01) from area near
fuel tank and toil samples (e-01 -02
through e-01-03) from area of
disposed PCE filters.
See Tablea 4-41 and 4-42.
See Figure 4-6.
See Technical Memorandum II
(Oeraghty A Miller. Inc. 1993a).
Results pending.
See Table 4-43 and Figure 4-7.
TU
PKOOI ).*«*-X I/T4IKTSR JCU
)05 0149
GERAGMTY^MII.I.I K. IN<
Table 4-1. 
Summary of Work Performed to Date at the Various Potential Source Facilitiei in the Tutu Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 8 of 8
Facility
Date
Investigators
Scope
Samples Collected
Analytic*! Results
1989
Pedro Panzardi A Associates
Preliminary Site Assessment
(inspection and sampling).
Two soil samples collected from
two drums of top soil.
See Table 4-44.
1990-1993 
FT Corporation Geo-Cim
GeoCaribe
Installation of monitoring wells,
OHMW-1 through OHMW-4,
soil and groundwater sampling.
Soil samplei from OHSS-1.
Groundwater samples OHMW-1
through OHMW-4.
See Figure* 4-7 and 4-8.
May-November 1992 
Geraghty & Miller
Advancement of five soil borings
B-10, B-11.B-I2, B-13, and
B-13A, collection of surface
soil sample SS-6, soil and
groundwater sampling.
Soil samplei B-10 (6-8 feet bis),
B-12 (6-8 feet bla), B-l 1(0-2
feet bis), B-13 (4-6 feet bis), B-13A
(0-2 feet bis), SS-6.
See Technical Memorandum II
(Oeraghty A Miller. Inc. 1993a).
26-Oct-93 
Arthur D. Little
Site inspection.
Two surface soil samples, one sewer
sample, and one drum sample.
Result* pending.
Sep 1990-March 1993 Geraghty &. Miller
Supply well sampling.
Groundwater sample.
See Eighth Sampling Report.
(Geraghly A Miller, Inc. I993b).
Rodriguez Eiso Service
Station
1990
Soil Tech Corporation
Soil and groundwater
investigation.
Soil samples collected from B-l through
B-6. Groundwater samples collected
from MW-2 through MW4.
See Tables 4-45 and 4-46.
C
.—^X I /T41 rOTSR JCU
GERAGHTY^MII.I.I-K.INC
Table 4-2. 
Concentration! of Volatile Organic Compounds in an Oil Sample Collected on August 17, 1987
at the VfflA Building, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Sample ID:
Sample Location:
3239B-21
Waste Oil UST
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene (total)
97
98
500
2,900
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
Samples collected by Region II Technical Assistance Team (TAT), Weston/SPER Division, New Jersey, and
U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR) personnel.
Samples received at S-Cubed Laboratories of San Diego, California on September IS, 1987; holding times were exceeded.
VIHA
UST
Source:
Virgin Islands Housing Authority.
Underground storage tank.
Weston/SPER Division Region n TAT (1988).
H6013.— • -XI/ffTOIJCLS
GERAGHTYtf MILLER. INC.
TUT °°5
Table 4-3. Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report for Curriculum Center (former LAGA Building), Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Site Data
cH
Site:
Report:
Site Reconnaissance Date:
Site Information:
UST Location Record
of Tank Leaks:
Disposal Procedures:
Areas of Concern:
Potential Sources to Soil
and/or Oronndwater
Identified:
Sampling of Areas
of Concern:
Sample Results:
LAGA Building.
Preliminary Assessment Report, LAGA Building/Virgin Islands Department of Education, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands,
NUS Corporation, March 24,1989.
February 15,1989
No RCRA permit. Active status. Dates of operation unknown. Owner: Virgin Islands Department of Education.
No UST at this location.
No indication in this report.
Drums behind LAGA Building:
• Drums were located less than 100 feet northwest of the corner of the Laga Building.
• NUS Corporation observed 22 55-gallon drums over a grassy area: 21 steel drums and one plastic drum. Some during
were corroded, some were perforated, some were empty, only one was found fuO.
• No containment in this waste unit. Drums were found dispersed and on their sides over the ground surface.
• No stains observed at the drums area.
Potential of release to soil, surface water, and groundwaten
• Drums laying on their sides, no labels, corroded, deposited over the ground.
• No containment structures.
• No records or information on drum contents.
• DPNR indicates that the LAGA Building was a former textile processing facility that used solvents in its processes.
No readings above background were detected on the OVA or the PID during the NUS Corporation site reconnaissance.
There is no reference of sampling activity conducted at this site in this report No stains on the ground were observed during
site reconnaissance by NUS Corporation.
None.
RCRA 
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
UST 
Underground storage tank.
DPNR 
Department of Planning and Natural Resources.
OVA 
Organic vapor analyzer.
PID 
Photokmization detector.
Source: 
NUS Corporation, Region II FIT (1989e).
GERAGHTYfl'MIU.I R.IN(
Table 4-4. 
Summary of Analytical Results for Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 at the
Curriculum Center (Former LAGA Facility), Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
Sample Location: 
Curriculum Center (former LAGA Building).
Sample Type: 
Four soil samples and one water sample were collected from an area behind the
LAGA building according to Graber letter to C. Kwan of the USEPA dated April
27, 1990. Field notes from CDM dated June 6,1989 described two soil samples,
eL-02-Ols and eL-02-02s, and one aqueous sample, eL-02-04L. Soil samples
were collected from the ground surface area of dumped drums. The aqueous
sample was collected from an open drum found during the sampling activity.
Two field blanks, eL-02-FBl and eL-02-FB2, were collected during this sampling
event at LAGA (CDM 1989a).
Samplers:
Analytical
Results:
(CDM letter dated
April 27, 1990)
Camp, Dresser & McKee Federal Programs Corporation personnel.
Toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes were detected in sample eL-02-Ols.
Xylene was detected in sample eL-02-02s.
Phenol, methylphenols, naphthalene, methylnaphthalenes, and other hydrocarbons
were detected in sample eL-02-Ols.
Endosulfan I was detected in sample eL-02-Ols.
Concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) ranged between 544 to
3,470 micrograms per gram (ug/g).
Cadmium and lead were detected in all samples.
Heptanes were tentatively identified in water sample eL-02-04L.
Source:
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1989a).
PR0013.»"-WPl/L*il .WP
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
TUT 
CO5 O153
Table 4-5. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in an Oil Sample Collected on August 17, 1987
at Ramsay Motors, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Acetone
2-Butanone
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Total Xylenes
Sample: 
3239-20
Waste Oil
Storage Tank
ND
15,000
210,000
1,400,000
290,000
1,700,000
Analyte concentrations in micrograms per kilogram (ug/kg).
ND 
Not detected.
Source: 
Weston/Spill Prevention Emergency Response Division Region II, Technical Assistance Team (1988).
WOOl 3.—«.X I /TAB2ICOC XLS
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
TUT 005 0154
Table 4-6. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds for Soil and Water Samples Collected on
September 8, 1988 
at Ramsay Motors, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
Tetrachloroe thane
Toluene
Xylene
Sample: 
e-02
Ramsay Motors
Groundwater
ND
ND
ND
ND
11
ND
ND
eR-07s
Ramsay Motors
Soil
ND
ND
55
8
ND
2
1
eR-08s
Ramsay Motors
Soil
6
18
ND
ND
ND
ND
7
Analyte concentrations for groundwater in micrognuns per liter (ug/L) and for soil in micrograms per
kilograms (ug/kg).
ND 
Not detected.
Source: 
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1989b).
HMJOI3.—«-Xl /TAB22COV JCLS
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
TUT
0155
Page 1 of 2
Table 4-7. Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report of Ramsay Motors, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Site Data
H
rjl
Ul
Site:
Report:
Site Reconnaissance Date:
Site Information:
UST Location
Record of Tank Leaks:
Disposal Procedures:
Areas of Concern:
Ramsay Motors.
Preliminary Assessment Report, Ramsay Motors, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, NUS Corporation, March 24,1989.
February 15,1989.
No Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit Active status. Operation: unknown to present. Owner: Rita Ramsay.
Waste oil UST located underground below the workshop area.
No record or indication of tank leakage.
Waste oil stored on-site. Report indicates no other disposal procedures.
Waste oil drums:
• Unknown age.
• Drums located inside an overhanging garage in the northeast corner of Ramsay Motors property.
• Twenty-five 55-gallon drums of waste oil observed during NUS Corporation site reconnaissance.
• Drums contain automotive waste oil. Substances such as gasoline, kerosene, and degreasing solvents may also be present in the
drums.
• Drums located over a concrete floor. No berms or curbs observed during NUS Corporation site reconnaissance.
• Many drums were open during site reconnaissance.
Waste oil UST:
• No RCRA permit
• Unknown age.
• Unknown volume.
• No evidence of tank leaking.
• UST contains waste oil from automotive repair and servicing activities.
See Page 2 for footnotes.
GERAGHTYi^MII.I.I K . I N (
Page 2 of2
Table 4-7. 
Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report of Ramsay Motors, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Site Data
Potential Sources to Soil
and/or groundwater
Identified:
Drainage ditch at Gassett property line:
• Waste ofl discharging onto Ramsay Motors property from Gassett Motors.
Waste oil drums:
• Potential of release to groundwater. Some minor oil spills observed on the concrete floor of the garage area and at the drum
storage area during site reconnaissance.
Waste oil UST:
• There is no indication of tank leakage.
Waste oil was observed discharging from an oil pool at Gassett property into a drainage ditch on Ramsay property. This ditch
discharges into the storm sewer.
PID and OVA readings of open drums ranged between 10 to 90 ppm (PID) and 60 to 300 ppm (OVA).
Soil and groundwater samples were collected, but NUS did not report when this sampling occurred. Soil samples were analyzed by
Cenref Labs of Brighton, Colorado.
No laboratory information for groundwater sample analysis was provided by NUS.
Detected in soil: toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene, and 2-hexane.
Detected in groundwater tetrachloroethane, ethylbenzene, and xylene.
Sampling of Areas
of Concern:
Sample Results:
RCRA 
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
UST 
Underground storage tank.
OVA 
Organic vapor analyzer.
PID 
Photoionization detector.
ppm 
Parts per million.
Source: 
NUS Corporation (1989b).
PROO01-TW2»JBWK3/i)f
GERAGHTY^MII.I.I R . I N (
O
Table 4-8. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in an Oil Sample Collected June 8, 1989,
at Ramsay Motors, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
Total Xylene
Toluene
Sample: 
eR-02-Ola
Ramsay Motors
Oil
64,000 J
1 30,000 J
1 80,000 J
1, 200,000 J
450,000 J
Analyte concentrations in micrograms per kilograms (ug/kg).
Four tentatively identified compounds reported.
J 
Estimated value.
Source: 
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1990a).
PR0013.—-XIOABZ4VOCJOS 
Tl IT 
OO5 
O158
GERAGHTY^ MILLER, INC.
Table 4-9. 
Summary of Analytical Results for a Soil Sample Collected June 5 to 10, 1989
at Ramsay Motors, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample Location: 
Ramsay Motors.
Sample Type:
Samplers:
Analytical
Results:
One soil sample (eR-02-02s) collected from 2 to 12 inches below ground
surface in an area adjacent to Gassett fence on Ramsay property.
Camp, Dresser & McKee Federal Programs personnel.
Methylene chloride and xylenes were detected in sample eR-02-02s.
Tentatively identified benzenes were also detected in sample eR-02-02s.
Naphthalene, methylnaphthalene, fluorene, fluoranthene, pyrene, and
benzofluoranthene were detected in sample eR-02-02s.
No pesticides or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were detected.
Concentration of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) was 23,400
micrograms per gram (ug/g).
Cadmium was detected at a concentration of 6.1 micrograms per liter
(ug/kg).
Lead was detected at a concentration of IS ug/kg.
Source:
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1990a).
PR0013."--WPl/R«niiyl.WP
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
TUT 
005 0159
Table 4-10. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Water Samples Collected on August 17, 1987
at Gassett (Former Consolidated Auto Parts), Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample:
Sample Location:
Analyte 
Sample Type:
Acetone
2-Butanone
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Total Xylenes
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L).
J 
Estimated value.
ND 
Not detected.
3239B-18
Gutter
Water
2.1
4.2
0.39
0.78
2.6
3239B-19
Storm Drain
Water
ND
2.6
ND
0.10J
ND
Samples collected by Region II Technical Assistance Team (TAT), Weston/SPER Division, New Jersey, and
St. Thomas Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR) personnel of St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Samples collected on August 17, 1987 and received in S-Cubed Laboratories of San Diego, California on
September IS, 1987.
Holding time for volatile organic compounds were exceeded.
Source:
Weston/SPER Division Region n, TAT (1988).
MWOI3—-XI/S16W3.XLS
GERAGHTY 6? MILLER, INC.
TUT
Table 4-11. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil and Surface-Water Samples Collected
on September 12, 1988 at Gassett (Former Consolidated Auto Parts), Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID:
Sample Location:
Analyte 
Sample Type:
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
Styrene
Toluene
Xylene
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram
for water sample.
ND 
Not detected.
J 
Estimated value.
eC-09Js
Garage
Border
Soil
ND
1.3
ND
ND
0.56 J
2.5
(mg/kg) for soil
eC-lOJs
Open Bay
Garage
Soil
0.004 J
2.1
0.033 J
0.006
1.3
5.6
samples and in milligrams
eC-lla
Standing
Water
Water
ND
0.003
ND
ND
0.010
0.013
per liter (mg/L)
Samples collected by Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) personnel.
eC-09s Collected behind open four bay garage in back of facility. Grab sample from entire rear border of garage.
eC-lOs Collected on upgradient gable-End of open bay garage adjacent to drum storage area.
eC-1 la Collected from standing water in an area adjacent to drum storage area.
Source: 
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1989b).
PROOI3.——-XI/TABSOTC.XLS
TUT
005 
0161
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
Table 4-12. 
Summary of Preliminary Assessment Reports for Gassett, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Site Data
H
r;
H
Site:
Report:
Site Reconnaissance Date:
Site Information:
UST Location Record
of Tank Leaks:
Disposal Procedures:
Areas of Concern:
Potential Sources to Soil
and/or Groondwater
Identified:
Sampling of Areas
of Concern:
Sample Results:
Gassett.
Preliminary Assessment Report for Gassett Motors, St. Thomas, US. Virgin Islands, NUS Corporation, March 24,1989.
February 15,1989.
No RCRA permit. Active status. Dates of operation unknown to present. Owner unknown.
Former Consolidated Auto Parts. Site is bordered by Ramsay Motors on the northeast and Texaco on the southeast.
No UST reported at this site.
Waste oil stored on-site. No indication of other disposal procedure in the report
Waste oil drums:
• Waste oil drums were at the facility when Mr. Gassett leased the property in May 1988.
• Waste unit is located behind the main building adjacent to a garage overhang. Drums stored above ground surface.
• Drum quantity: four 55-gallon drums and three 20-gallon drums.
• Drums contain waste oil from automotive repair and servicing activities. Drums may also contain small quantities of
gasoline, kerosene, and/or degreasing solvents.
Waste oil from drainage ditch on Gassett property discharges into Ramsay Motors property.
Potential of soil and groundwater contamination:
• Waste was not properly contained. Drums stored over ground surface. Numerous spills and a large pool of oil in the northwest
corner of the property (drum area) were observed during site reconnaissance by NUS Corporation.
• Oil-stained area was observed during site reconnaissance on the Ramsay Moton property where drainage ditch kft the Gassett
property. The drainage ditch discharges into a storm sewer.
OVA and PID readings below background at the area of concern during site reconnaissance. No reference of samples collected at
this site in this report.
No sample results in this report.
RCRA 
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
PI D 
Photoionization detector.
UST 
Underground storage tank.
OVA 
Organic vapor analyzer.
Source: 
NUS Corporation, Region II FIT (1989b).
GERAGHTY<??MIU.I R . I N (
Table 4-13. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Oil Samples Collected on June 8, 1989 at Gassett
(Former Consolidated Auto Parts), Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Sample I.D.:
Sample Location:
Sample Type:
eC-02-Ola*
Drain
Oil
Acetone 
0.013 J
Analyte concentration in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)
J 
Estimated value.
* 
Sample mistakenly analyzed as water. All other values were rejected (R).
eC-02-Ola 
Sample of oily water collected from drain leading to Ramsay property.
Sample collected by Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) personnel.
Sample analyzed by Versar, Inc.
Source: 
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1990a).
PROOI3.—«-X I/TABMTTCJCLS
TUT 
OO5 0163
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
Table 4-14. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Oil and Water Samples Collected on August 17, 1987 at the Texaco Service Station,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
c
H
Sample ID:
Sample Location:
Sample Type:
Analyte
Acetone
2-Butanone
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene (total)
Chloroform
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
3239B-12
Bay 01 Sump
Water/Oil
1.4
3
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
3239B-13
Bay #2 Sump
Water
1.5
3.1
0.27
2.3
1.3
9.1
ND
ND
ND
3239B-14
Bay #3 Sump
Water
2.2
4.1
ND
0.9
1.0
7.0
0.26
ND
ND
3239B-15
Oil/Water
Separator
Oil
ND
5.3
2.8
43.0
14.0
110.0
ND
2.4
ND
3239B-16
Waste Oil
Tank
Oil
1.9
6.3
ND
ND
1.0
9.3
ND
ND
ND
3239B-17
Storm Drain
Water
2.2
4.0
ND
1.1
0.66
4.4
ND
ND
ND
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L) for water and water/oil samples, and in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) for oil samples.
ND 
Not detected.
No field or trip blanks collected.
Samples collected by Region II Technical Assistance Team (TAT), Weston/SPER Division, New Jersey and St. Thomas Department of Planning
and Natural Resources personnel.
Samples received at S-Cubed Laboratories, of San Diego, California on September 15, 1987. Samples analyzed using U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency-Contract Laboratory Program (USEPA CLP) Methodology. Holding time was exceeded.
Source: 
Weston/Spill Prevention Emergency Response Division Region II, Technical Assistance Team (1988).
o
H-
Cr-
PR01301-Xl/6U93A.XLS/df
GERAGHTY^MIM.IiR.INC
Table 4-15. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil, Oil, and Water Samples Collected from
September 12 to 15, 1988 at the Texaco Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
Sample ID:
Sample Location:
Sample Type:
Analyte
Carbon disulfide
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene (total)
Analyte concentrations for water in
kilogram (ug/Kg).
J 
Estimated value.
ND 
Not detected.
* 
Samnle enlisted nnrt
eT-01W
Cistern
Water
2 J
ND
ND
ND
micrograms per liter (ug/L) and
h of the first ntv»n hav with lift
eT-02s 
eT-02sd
* 
Duplicate
ofeT-02s
Soil 
Soil
ND 
ND
ND 
ND
ND 
ND
ND 
ND
for soil and oil in micrograms per
h*>fu/f¥»n rnnrrato rmH anrl fi»iu*j»
eT-62
Oil/Water
Separator Oil
nag /kg
ND
140
400
160
Samples collected by Camp, Dresser & McKee (COM) personnel.
Sample eT-62 analyzed by Cenref Laboratories of Brighton, Colorado.
No results available for eT-23s and eT-23sd.
Samples analyzed using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Contract Laboratory Programs (USEPA CLP) methodology.
Source: 
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1989b).
PR01301-Xl/61493b.XLS/df
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
TUT
00 3 0165
Page 1 of 2
Table 4-16. Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report for Texaco Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Site Data
Site:
Report:
Site Reconnaissance Date:
Site Information:
UST Location Record
of Tank Leaks:
Disposal Procedures:
Areas of Concern:
—f
Texaco Service Station.
Preliminary Assessment Report for Tutu, Texaco, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, NUS Corporation, March 31,1989.
February 15,1989.
No RCRA permit. Active status. Operation unknown to present.
Waste oil UST of unknown age. Unknown location. A previous investigation by DPNR on August 5,1987, indicated two
USTs: one with a concrete top and a concrete partition, and the other covered with a square steel plate. No reports of leaks or spills.
Waste oil drums:
• No RCRA permits.
• Unknown age.
• Drums located in the northern corner of the Tutu Texaco property.
• Twenty-seven SS-gallon drums in the waste unit. Twenty—five drums contain waste oil from automotive repair and servicing
operations. Two drums contain din.
• Three 20-gauon drums with waste oil
• Few 5 -gallon pails with waste oil
• Drums stored over a concrete surface. No berms or curbs observed in this area.
• Evidence of oil spill in storage area.
• One drum was found open during site reconnaissance.
• Waste oil may contain small quantities of gasoline, kerosene, or degreasing solvents.
See Page 2 for footnotes.
GERAGHTY (* Mil 1,1 K INC
Page 2 of 2
Table 4-16. Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report for Texaco Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Site Data
Waste oil USTs:
• Construction and integrity is unknown.
• USTs contain waste oil from automotive servicing.
• USTs operated in violation of USVI laws.
• Waste oil may contain small quantities of gasoline, kerosene, or degreasing solvents.
Potential Sources to Soil 
Waste oil drums:
and/or Oroundwater 
• Potential of release to surface water, soil, and groundwater.
Identified: 
• No containment structure in storage area.
• Spilled oil and soil staining observed during site reconnaissance.
Sampling of Areas 
OVA readings of 20 ppm from the open drum. No readings above background in the ambient air in the storage area. Waste oil
of Concern: 
sample collected.
Sample Results: 
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane was detected in waste oil sample. Sample results invalidated because the sample holding time was exceeded.
RCRA 
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
DPNR 
Department of Planning and Natural Resources.
UST 
Underground storage tank.
USVI 
U.S. Virgin Islands.
OVA 
Organic vapor analyzer.
c 
ppm 
Parts per million.
Source: 
NUS Corporation, Regional FIT (1989a).
PIUIMI-TU571 WB.WK3/dr*»
GERAGHTV^ Ml I.I.I IMN(
Page 1 of 3
Table 4-17. Summary of Tank Excavation Procedures, September 7 to September 16, 1988 at Texaco
Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Site:
Field Activities Date:
Excavation and Installation
of Underground Storage Tanks
(USTs):
Field Activities Oversight:
Sampling Activities:
Soil Venting System:
USTs Removed:
USTs Installed:
Removal Operation:
Sampling of Excavation Pit:
Texaco Service Station.
September 7 to September 16, 1988.
Local contractor.
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation.
U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural
Resources, (removal and transportation activities).
Lebrbn Associates, Inc.
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
Three 4,000-gallon steel USTs, one containing motor fuels were
removed from the south end of the Texaco Service Station.
Three doubled-walled steel tanks (two 10,000-gallon and one
6,000-gallon capacity tanks) with leak detection systems were
installed at the west end of the Texaco service station.
USTs were excavated and removed from September 7 to
September 9, 1988. USTs were degassed with carbon dioxide
prior to removal. Large holes were noted in one of the USTs
during an initial investigation. No holes were observed in the
other two USTs. 
During UST removal excavated soils were
placed over polyethylene sheeting at the eastern boundary of the
site. Excavation depth was approximately 6.5 feet. USTs were
transported to the Texaco terminal outside of Charlotte Amalie, St.
Thomas.
An attempt to collect soil samples from the excavation was made
after removal of the USTs. Soil sampling procedure was delayed
due to a tropical storm event on September 8 and 9, 1988.
Excavation pit was filled with the runoff produced by heavy rain.
The soil piles were covered with plastic sheeting. CDM requested
that Texaco analyze the water accumulated in the excavation pit
and pump out the water prior to infiltration through the excavation
walls.
See page 3 for footnotes.
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
TUT
005 0169
Page 2 of 3
Table 4-17. 
Summary of Tank Excavation Procedures, September 7 to September 16, 1988 at Texaco
Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St, Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sampling of Excavation Pit
(continued):
Water Sampling:
Soil Pile Sampling:
A tanker truck was not available until September 10, 1988. By
this date the water inside the pit had dropped approximately 3 feet.
Two 55-gallon drums provided by Texaco were filled with water
from the excavation pit for later sampling. A 4,000-gallon tanker
truck from the Texaco terminal arrived on September 10, 1988 to
remove the water from the excavation pit.
Another hurricane advisory was in effect by the evening of
September 10, 1988. Operations were shut down and the
excavation pit was protected and bermed to keep surface runoff
from going inside the excavation. A third 55-gallon drum was
filled with the water that had accumulated in the excavation pit.
Two tanker trucks were filled to empty the excavation pit.
CDM requested soil samples from at least 10 feet downgradient of
the excavation area due to flooding of the excavation pit. Three
holes were drilled in the concrete pad at the south-southwest
portion of the excavation. Borehole depth was not indicated in the
letter.
Soil samples from the excavation pit were collected on September
13 and 14, 1988: four soil samples were collected from the corners
of the excavation pit floor and four soil samples were collected
from the center of each wall. Three soil samples were collected
in the vicinity of the excavation pit.
Three water samples were collected from the 55-gallon drums that
were used to store water removed from the excavation pit. One
sample per drum was collected.
Two soil piles were sampled on September 15, 1988. Three
composite samples were collected from the first soil pile. Two
composite samples were collected from the second pile. A third
pile was generated during excavation for the new tanks installed at
the west end of the Texaco service station on September 15, 1988.
This soil pile was sampled the following week. One sample was
collected from this soil pile.
See page 3 for footnotes.
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
TUT 
005 
O169
Page 3 of 3
Table 4-17. Summary of Tank Excavation Procedures, September 7 to September 16,1988 at Texaco
Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Installation of New USTs:
Soil Venting System:
Air Monitoring:
Three new double-walled steel tanks and leak detection systems
were installed at the west end of the Texaco service station on
September 15, 1988. Excavation procedures began on September
14, 1988. The first 4-feet of soil removed during the excavation
was used as backfill for the old tank excavation pit. Remaining
soil was piled at the eastern and northern boundaries of the service
station. Due to HNU readings obtained from soil samples during
field activities of 10 to 15 parts per million (ppm) of total volatile
organics, the soil could not be used as landfill. Fill material was
utilized to backfill the excavations. The source of this fill material
was not indicated in the letter.
Soil removed from both excavations was placed over a slotted
polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe for venting. Air was removed from
the pipe with a high vacuum pump system. This system was
monitored weekly with an HNU photoionization detector at
selected points. Soil samples were scheduled to be collected after
completion of the soil venting procedure for final disposition of the
soils.
An HNU photoionization detector and Draeger tube during field
activities. HNU readings during tank excavation ranged between
20-30 ppm with peaks of 80 ppm of total VOCs during soil
removal activity. HNu background readings ranged from 0.2 to
1.0 ppm total VOCs. HNu readings above the soil pile surface
ranged between 80 to 150 ppm. Breathing zone readings ranged
from 5 to 10 ppm.
Draeger tubes for benzene levels during UST removal ranged from
1 to 2 ppm during peak activity.
HNU readings at the new tanks excavation soil pile were from: 10
to 15 ppm.
USTs 
Underground storage tanks.
Source: 
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1989c).
PROO13.«»-WPl/Teuco6.W
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
TUT 
CO5 
O17O
Page 1 of 2
Table 4-18. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Split Soil Samples Collected from September 12 to 15, 1988
during Texaco Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample:
Location:
Analyte
Acetone
Chloroform
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
2-Hexanone
Toluene
Xylene
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
2-Butanone
TP-01
Test
Hole
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
43
ND
5
ND
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per
J 
Estimated value.
B 
No explanation in
ND 
Not detected.
TP-02
Test
Hole
18BJ
ND
ND
2.7
14J
4.8
22
1.4
13
2.3J
kilogram (mg/kg).
TP-03
Test
Hole
ND
0.013J
ND
ND
ND
0.013J
ND
0.087J
0.1 7J
0.006J
EX-01
Excavtion
Pit
ND
ND
ND
6.2J
ND
14J
31J
1.2J
16J
ND
EX-02
Excavation
Pit
ND
ND
ND
49J
ND
6.9
58
4.6
59
ND
EX-03
Excavation
Pit
ND
ND
0.01
ND
24J
3.6
8.1
0.28J
4
ND
EX-03d
Excavation
Pit
ND
ND
ND
30J
ND
11
25
11
ND
2.6J
EX-04
Excavation
Pit
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.28J
2B
ND
1.4
ND
reported results.
* 
Sample may be a duplicate or matrix spike.
Split samples were collected by Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) personnel during Texaco tank excavation soil sampling activities.
Source: 
Graber (1989).
wwou.^mvocssjcL 
GERAGHTY & Mll.l.l R. |N(
(
Table 4-18. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Split Soil Samples Collected from September 12 to IS, 1988
during Texaco Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Split samples were collected by Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) personnel during Texaco tank excavation soil sampling activities.
Source: 
Graber (1989).
Page 2 of 2
Sample:
Location:
Analyte
Acetone
Chloroform
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
2-Hexanone
Toluene
Xylene
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
2-Butanone
SP-1T
Soil
Pile
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.72J
ND
0.99
ND
SP-2T
Soil
Pile
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.72J
ND
0.92
ND
SP-3T
Soil
Pile
ND
ND
ND
ND
17J
0.67J
5.6
ND
3.2
ND
SP-3DT
Duplicate
ofSP-3T
ND
ND
ND
ND
7.8
ND
1.9
ND
1.4
ND
SP-2M
4.5J
ND
ND
ND
7.9J
0.52J
1.7
ND
1.4
ND
SP-3DM
Duplicate
ofSP-2M*
ND
ND
ND
ND
12J
0.28J
1.3
ND
1.7
ND
SP-4T
Soil Pile
Trip Blank
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.24J
1.9
ND
1.3
ND
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
J 
Estimated value.
B 
No explanation in
ND 
Not detected.
* 
Sample may be a c
reported results.
luplicate or matri;i spike.
GERAGHIY & MII.1.1 R .INC
Table 4*19. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Water Samples Collected by Camp, Dresser &.
McKee Corporation from September 12 to IS, 1988 During Texaco Service Station Tank Excavation,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte 
Sample I.D.: 
PW-02
Location: 
Excavation Pit
Pumped Water
Xylene 
0.0021
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L).
No tentatively identified compounds (TICs) reported in Sample PW-02.
Sample analyzed using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Contract Laboratory Program (USEPA CLP)
methodology.
J 
Estimated value.
Source: 
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1989c).
PROI301 -XI /TEXACO3 JO.
GERAGHTY^ MILLER, INC. 
TUT 
°°5 
O173
-\
r
Table 4-20. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in QA/QC Samples Collected from September 12 to 15, 1988 During the Texaco Service Station
Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample I.D.:
Analyte
Methylene chloride
Acetone
Chloroform
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
Bromodichloromethane
Dibromochloromethane
Bromoform
Xylene
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L).
TFB-01
Field
Blank
ND
0.005J
ND
0.006
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TFB-02
Field
Blank
ND
0.005J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.01
0.024J
0.034B
TFB-03
Field
Blank
0.004J
0.013
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SP-FB-59
Field
Blank
ND
0.012
ND
0.002J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SP-T-60
Trip
Blank
ND
0.01
ND
0.002J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SP-T-61
Trip
Blank
ND
0.026J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
648-WB
Water
Blank
ND
0.005J
0.008
ND
0.006
0.008
0.01
ND
ND
ND
Water blank concentration in milligrams per liter (mg/L).
No tentatively identified compounds (TICs) reported in
J 
Estimated value.
B 
No explanation in reported results.
ND 
Not detected.
QA/QC 
Quality assurance/quality control.
the blank samples.
Source: 
Graber (1989).
i-1-
•-4
4s
PMI30I-XI/TEXAC04JCL
GERAGHTY^MIU.I-K.INC
Table 4-21. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Oil Samples Collected on June 8, 1989 at the Texaco Service Station,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
fjl
Sample ID:
Sample Location:
Analyte 
Sample Type:
Methylene chloride
Acetone
2-Hexanone
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
eT-02-Ola
Oil/Water
Separator
Oil
ND
ND
ND
ND
340 J
190 J
1600 J
ND
ND
eT-02-02a
Middle Bay
Collection Pit
Oil
ND
ND
ND
7J
76 J
35 J
190 J
ND
ND
eT-02-03a*
Waste Oil
Drum
Oil
R
2.4 JR
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
eT-02-04a
Waste Oil
Drum
Oil
ND
ND
59 J
46J
490 J
140 J
900 J
ND
ND
eT-02-OSa
Waste Oil
Drum
Oil
ND
ND
ND
11 J
130 J
49 J
330 J
ND
ND
eT-02-06a
Waste Oil
Drum
Oil
ND
ND
ND
4J
110J
61 J
88 J
3.9 J
ND
eT-02-07a
Waste Oil
Drum
Oil
3.8 J
ND
ND
ND
24 J
13 J
120 J
ND
ND
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
Samples analyzed using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Contract Laboratory Program (USEPA-CLP) methodology.
Samples collected by Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) personnel.
Samples analyzed by Versar, Inc.
J 
Estimated values.
* 
Sample mistakenly analyzed as water by the laboratory.
ND 
Not detected.
R 
Sample analysis rejected.
Holding times exceeded for all samples.
Source: 
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1990a).
ntoi J.oi -x i /VOCOSTEX JCLS
GKRAGHTY^MIU.I R.I NT
Table 4-22. Summary of Analytical Results for Split Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to
10, 1989 from Texaco Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
Sample Location: 
Texaco service station soil pile generated during tank excavation.
Samples collected after on-site soil ventilation procedure.
Sample Type:
Split soil samples from ventilated soils. Grab samples were collected from
the top, middle, and bottom section of each sampling location for VOAs
analysis. Composite samples for other analysis were prepared from the
top, middle, and bottom section of the soil pile at each location.
Samplers:
Camp, Dresser & McKee Federal Programs Corporation personnel. Other
personnel involved were not mentioned.
Analytical
Results:
Source:
VOAs
PCBs
EP
PR0013.~»-WFl/TeMeo5.WP
Methylene chloride was found in soil samples and in the laboratory blank.
The letter does not specify which samples.
Sample SP2-022 from the middle section of location SP-3 contained
chlorinated 
hydrocarbons and xylenes. 
Tentatively 
identified
hydrocarbons were detected in semivolatile analyses at this location.
No pesticides or PCBs were found in these samples.
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were detected in all split samples.
TPH concentrations ranged from < 10 to 91 micrograms per gram (ug/g).
Metals detected by EP Toxicity were cadmium from 0.35 to 2.8
micrograms per liter ug/L, and lead from 1.8 to 31 ug/L.
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1990a).
Volatile organic analyte.
Polychlorinated biphenyls.
Extraction procedure.
TUT 
OO5 
O176
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
Table 4-23. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds and Tentatively Identified Compounds in Soil Samples Collected
on September 13, 1988 at Tillett Gardens, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Sample ID:
Sample Location:
Sample Type:
eTT-14
Paint Cleaning
Drain
Soil
eTT-15
Paint Cleaning
Drain
Soil
Xylene (total) 
0.01 U 
ND
Tentatively Identified VOCs
2-Ethyl-l,3-dimethylbenzene 
0.30 JN 
2JN
l-Ethyl-2,3-dimethylbenzene 
UN 
3 JN
Acetic acid (methylester) 
ND 
0.03 JN
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
J 
Estimated value.
N 
Presumptive evidence of the presence of the analyte.
ND 
Not detected.
VOCs 
Volatile organic compounds.
Samples collected by Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) personnel.
eTT-14 surface sample collected at the foot of the concrete drainway at beginning of gravel pit.
eTT-15 drainline location inside fence line collected from the 2-foot drainpipe where it exits the building.
Samples were analyzed for VOCs by using the method specified in the Contract Laboratory Program (CLP)
Statement of Work (SOW).
Source: 
Camp, Dresser and McKee, Federal Programs Corporations (1989b).
PROI3.——-XI/6TO.XLS
TUT 
005
GERAGHTYtf MILLER, INC.
Table 4-24. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Oil Samples Collected on August 17, 1987,
at Esso Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID: 
3239B-22
Analyte 
Sample Location: 
Oil/Water Separator
Benzene 
59
Toluene 
970
Ethylbenzene 
200
Total Xylenes 
1,200
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 
58
Tetrachloroethene 
110
Analyte concentrations for oil in milligrams per kilogram (rag/kg).
Only detected compounds are reported.
Samples collected by Weston/SPER Division Region II Technical Assistance Team (TAT) of New Jersey,
and St. Thomas Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR) personnel.
Samples collected on August 17, 1987 and received in S-Cubed Laboratories of San Diego, California
on September 15, 1987.
Holding time for sample was exceeded.
Source: 
Weston/SPER Division Region II, TAT (1988).
PROI30|.XI/52*93JCLS/d/
TUT 
OO5 
0178
GERAGHTYtf MILLER. INC.
Table 4-25. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Oil Samples Collected on September 12, 1988
at Esso Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID:
Sample Location:
Analyte 
Sample Type:
Methylene chloride
2-Butanone
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene (total)
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
eE-63
Holding Tank
Oil
ND
ND
ND
1,800
230
1,600
ND
ND
eE-64
Oil/Water Separator
Oil
57
62
29
2,900 *
4,500 *
1,900 *
100
65
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
* 
Value from analysis of a diluted aliquot of this sample.
ND 
Not detected.
Samples collected by Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) personnel.
Samples analyzed by Cenref Laboratories in Brighton, Colorado.
Source:
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1989a).
PRO) 301 -XI /5M93A JCLSMf
TUT 
OO5 
O179
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
Table 4-26. Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report for Esso Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Site Data
Site:
Report:
Site Reconnaissance Date:
Site Information:
UST Location Record
of Tank Leaks:
Disposal Procedures:
Areas of Concern:
Potential Sources to Soil
and/or Groundwater
Identified:
Sampling of Areas
of Concern:
Sample Results:
Esso Service Station.
Preliminary Assessment Report for Tutu Esso, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, NUS Corporation, March 24,1989.
No indication on the report.
No RCRA permit. Active status. Operation: 1969 to present.
Waste oil UST installed in 1969. This UST is located below a tire rack inside the maintenance garage. Volume of tank unknown.
Waste oil UST contains waste oil generated from automotive repairs and servicing operations. Solvents and cleaners are not stored
in the tanks according to information provided by an Esso manager during site reconnaissance. No records of incidental spills or
dumping on-site. No indication of tank leaking.
Tanks are periodically emptied by Esso Corporation and the waste is shipped off St. Thomas for disposal, according to information
provided by Esso station manager during site reconnaissance.
Waste oil UST:
• No RCRA permit.
• Unknown volume.
• Installed in 1969.
• UST contains waste oil from automotive services.
• No records of incidental spills or tank leakage.
UST for gasoline suspected of leaking.
Potential of groundwater contamination.
• Waste oil is containerized in a UST.
• No evidence of spills or releases to the environment were observed by NUS Corporation during site reconnaissance.
Waste oil samples from UST collected by Belgedere Associates, Inc. and analyzed by Cenref Laboratories, Brighton, Colorado,
according to report.
Toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes were detected in waste oil sam pies.
CD
RCRA 
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
UST 
Underground storage tank.
Source: 
NUS Corporation, Region II FIT (1989d).
GERAGHTY^MII U;IMN(
Table 4-27. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds and Tentatively Identified Compounds in Oil Samples Collected on June 8, 1989
at Esso Service Station, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID:
eE-02-Ola
Sample Location: 
Holding Tank
Analyte 
Sample Type:
Volatile Organic Compounds
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene (total)
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethane
Tentatively Identified Compounds
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
3-Methylpentane
2-Methoxy-2-Methylpropane
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
J 
Estimated value.
N 
Presumptive evidence of the presence of the
ND 
Not detected.
Oil
12 J
91 J
32 J
28 J
25 J
30 J
140 JN
16 JN
7.9 JN
25 JN
analyte.
eE-02-02-a
Oil/Water
Separator
Oil
ND
57 J
19 J
150 J
42 J
63 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
eE-02-03a
(eE-02-02*
Duplicate)
Oil
ND
92 J
ND
230 J
ND
91 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
X 
Samples collected by Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) personnel.
rjl 
Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) sample analysis by Versar, Inc.
CO
Source:
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1990a).
GERAGHTY^MIU.I-.K.INr
Table 4-28. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collecled by Soil Tech in June 1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Pit Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Sample ID: 
TP-I 
TP-2 TP-3 TP-4 TP 5 
TP-5A 
TP-6 TP-7 TP-8 TP-9 
TP-10 
TP-10A 
TP-10RE 
TP-M 
TP-I2 
TP-13
Replicate
Acetone
2-Butanone
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene (total)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.6E
ND
0.4 BJ
0.23 J
5.2
2.1
31 E
0.014
ND
0.002 J
ND
0.005 J
ND
ND
3.6 B
1.1
ND
7
ND
ND
4.4 B
0.87
ND
14
ND
ND
19 BJ
23 J
180
55
540
0.029
ND
ND
ND
0.0051
0.30 E
ND
ND
0.093
ND
0.52
0.22
0.005 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.005 J
0.003 J
ND
0.009
ND
0.053
0.004 J
0.013
ND
0.016
ND
0.032
ND
0.009
ND
0.014
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.11
0.0041
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
B
E
I
ND
Analyte found in the method blank. The reported results have been adjusted for the quantity found in the blank.
The reported concentration is an estimate only. The response factor was assumed to be 1.000 relative to an internal standard.
Estimated concentration below the method detection limit.
Not detected.
Source:
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
»v-j| J.OI-Xl/VOLATENI JCLS
TUT 
O05 0182
GERAGHTYtfMIl I.I R.IN<
(
Table 4-29. Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected by Soil Tech in June 1989 from the
Esso Tank Excavation Pit Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 1 of 2
Sample ID: 
TP-1 TP-2
Analyte
Naphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Acenaphthene
Diethylphthalate
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Di-n-butylphthalate
Butylbenzylphthalate
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate
ND
0.11 J 
0
ND
ND
ND 
0
ND 
0
ND
ND
ND
0.069 BJ
ND
0.28 BJ
ND
.68 J
ND
ND
.18J
.12J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TP-3
3.2 J
45 E
0.4 J
ND
1.4
1.1
0.13 J
0.12J
0.21 J
ND
ND
0.4 BJ
TP-3DL
49
45
ND
ND
1.6 J
1.2 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TP-4
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TP-4DUP
(Duplicate)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TP-5
9
9.6
ND
ND
ND
0.37 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.11 BJ
TP-5A
7.9
11
ND
0.13 J
0.69 J
0.47 J
ND
ND
0.09 J
0.2 J
1
0.26 BJ
TP^S
45 E
47 E
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
E 
The reported concentration is an estimate only. The
J 
Estimated concentration below the method detection
B 
Analyte found
ND 
Not detected.
DL 
Diluted.
NA 
Not available.
in method blank. The reported
response factor was
limit.
results have been adjusted
assumed to be 1
for the quantity
.000 relative to an internal
found in the blank.
standard.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990s).
PROI3.0I-XI/BASNEUAEJCU
TUT
005 0183
GERACJHTY^MII.I.I ;.«. INC
Page 2 of 2
Table 4-29. 
Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected by Soil Tech in June 1989 from the
Esso Tank Excavation Pit Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID: 
TP-6DL
Analyte
Naphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Acenaphthene
Diethylphthalate
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Di-n-butylphthalate
Butylbenzylphthalate
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate
55
47
ND
ND
2J
1.5J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TP-7
0.3 J
1.1
ND
ND
0.29 J
0.16J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TP-8
1.1
2
ND
ND
0.29 J
0.18J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TP-9
ND
0.14J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.063 BJ
ND
ND
TP-10
0.19J
0.18J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.094 BJ
0.31 J
0.36 J
TP-10A
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.13BJ
TP-11
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
E 
The reported concentration is an estimate only
J 
Estimated concentration below
B 
Analyte found in method blank
ND 
Not detected.
DL 
Diluted.
NA 
Not available.
. The response factor wasassumed to be 1 .000 relative to an internal standard.
the method detection limit.
. The reported results have been adjusted for the quantity found in the blank.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
PRO) 3.01-X I/B ASNEU AE.XLS
TUT 
oo* 
,-^,,,.
GERAGHTY^MIU l-R.INf 
O
Table 4-30. 
Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil Samples Collected in June 1989 from the Esso
Tank Excavation Pit Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample I.D. 
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
TP-1 
ND
TP-2 
15
TP-3 
40
TP-4 
ND
TP-5 
10
TP-5A 
11
TP-6 
40
TP-7 
6
TP-8 
23
TP-9 
7
TP-10 
ND
TP-10A 
ND
TP-11 
ND
TP-12 
9
TP-13 
ND
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
Samples analyzed by Soil Tech Corporation.
ND 
Not detected.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
pftouoi-xi/neni i AJCLSAU
TUT 
005 0185
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
Table 4-31. 
Concentrations of Metals in Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Pit Area, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID: TP-1 TP-2 TP-3 TP-4 TP-5 TP-5A 
TP-45 
TP-7 TP-8 TP-9 TP-10 TP-10A TP-11 TP-12 TP-13
Analyte
Lead 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
Arsenic 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
Chromium 
ND 
ND 
0.0002 
ND 
ND 
ND 
0.0001 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
Selenium 
" 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
Mb 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND— 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (rag/kg).
ND 
Not detected.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
H
H
•'Ji
!-^
CD
PROI3.0I-XI/1NORANL2.XU
GERAGHTV^MIU I - K . I N C
T«ble 4-32. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to June 10, 1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 1 of 2
Analyte
Sample ID: SP-l-Top 
SP-l-Mid 
SP-l-Bot 
SP-2-Top 
SP-2-Mid 
SP-2-Bot 
SP-3-Top 
SP-3-Mid 
SP 3-Bot 
SP-4-Top 
SP-4-DU-T
Location: 
Top of 
Middle of 
Bottom of 
Top of 
Middle of 
Bottom of 
Top of 
Middle of 
Bottom of 
Top of 
Top of
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile
(Duplicate)
Methylene chloride 
0.003) 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
0.004 1 
NO 
ND 
ND
Acetone
2-BuUnone
Vinyl acetate
Benzene
Toluene
Elhylbenzene
Xylene (total)
0.0061 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
0.007) 
ND 
ND 
ND
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
3.2 B 
ND 
3.8 B 
ND 
0.003) 
ND 
ND
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
0.21 ) 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
0.033 ) 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
1.6 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
ND 
ND 
0.027 
0.028 
0.83 ND 
1.4 
ND 
0.003) 
ND 
ND
0.046 
ND 
0.14 0.92 E 
16 
0.58 20 
0.073 
0.14 ND 
ND
SP-4-Mid
Middle of
Soil Pile
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analyte concentration* in milligrams per kilograms (mg/kg).
ND
)
B
E
Not detected.
Estimated concentration below method detection limit.
Analyte found in method blank. Reported results have been adjusted for the quantity found in the blank.
The reported concentration is an estimate only. The response factor was assumed to be 1 .000 relative to an internal standard.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990s),
rmi ).oi-x i/SPVOLORC JCLS
TUT 
005 
O187
GERAGHTYtfMIU I U . I N (
Page 2 of 2
Table 4-32. 
Concentrations of Volitile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to June 10, 1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Sample ID: 
SP-4-DU-M
Location: 
Middle of
Soil Pile
(Duplicate)
Methylene chloride 
ND
Acetone
2-Butanone
Vinyl acetate
Benzene
Toluene
Elhylbenzene
Xylene (total)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SP-4
Bottom of
Soil Pile
ND
0.005 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SP-4-DU-B
Bottom of
Soil Pile
(Duplicate)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SP-5-Top
Top of
Soil Pile
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SP-5-Mid
Middle of
Soil Pile
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.046
SP-5-Bot
Bottom of
Soil Pile
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SP-6-Top 
SP-6Mid
Top of 
Middle of
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile
ND 
ND
ND 
ND
ND 
ND
ND 
ND
ND 
ND
ND 
ND
ND 
ND
ND 
ND
SP-6-Bot 
SP-7-Top 
SP-7-Mid 
SP-7 Bot
Bottom of 
Top of 
Middle of 
Bottom of
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile 
Soil Pile
ND 
ND 
0.003 J 
0.001 J
ND 
ND 
O.OS6 
0.009 J
ND 
2.9 B 
0.006 J 
ND
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND
0.009 
7 
ND 
0.072
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilograms (mg/kg).
ND
J
B
E
Not detected.
Estimated concentration below
Analyte found in method blank
method detection limit.
. Reportedresults have been adjusted for the quantity found in the blank.
The reported concentration ii an estimate only. The responsefactor was assumed to be 1 ..000 relative to an internal standard.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990s).
PMI3.0I-XI/SPVOLORC JCLS
"HIT 
0 0 5 
O 18 8
(JERA(JHTY^MIU.1-K.IN(
o
H-
CD
•-C
Table 4-33. 
Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Compounds in Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 from the
Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample I.D.:
Analyte 
Location:
Naphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Di-n-butylphthalate
bis-(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate
SP-1
Soil Pile
ND
0.18J
0.16J
0.1 5J
0.048BJ
0.16BJ
SP-2
Soil Pile
2.6
5.2
0.33J
0.23J
ND
0.13BJ
SP-3
Soil Pile
0.32J
1.7
0.26J
0.22J
ND
0.11BJ
SP-4
Soil Pile
ND
0.08SJ
ND
ND
0.098BJ
0.13BJ
SP-4
Dup
ND
0.082J
ND
ND
0.1 BJ
ND
SP-5
Soil Pile
0.16J
0.81
0.16J
0.12J
0.045BJ
ND
SP-6
Soil Pile
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analyte concentration in milligrams per kilogram (rag/kg).
Analyses were performed by Datachem of Salt
J 
Estimated concentration below
Lake City, Utah.
the method detection limit.
B 
Analyte found in the method blank. Reported results have been adjusted for the quantity found in
Dup 
Duplicate.
ND 
Not detected.
the blank.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
rMou.«*«-xi/Ei»mjcL
GERAGHTY S Mil,I.I R. IN(
Table 4-34. 
Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil Samples Collected from June S to 10, 1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte 
Sample I.D.: 
SP-1 SP-2 SP-3 
SP-4 SP-4-Dup 
SP-5 SP-6 SP-7
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 
18 
24 
21 
20 
14 
19 
12 
12
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
Analyses were performed by Datachem of Salt Lake City, Utah.
Dup 
Duplicate.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
XI/EM04JCL 
GER AGHT Y & M11.1.1 R. INC
Table 4-35. Concentrations of Metals in Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 from the Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte 
Sample I.D.
SP-1
SP-2
SP-3
SP-4
SP-4-Dup
SP-5
SP-6
SP-7
Lead
Arsenic
Chromium
Selenium
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analyte concentrations in micrograms per kilogram (mg/kg).
Analyses were performed by Datachem of Salt Lake City, Utah.
ND
Dup
Not detected.
Duplicate.
Source:
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
t-
1-
•-0
H-
MMOI3.—-XI/EMO5.XL
GER AGHT Y & Ml I.I.I R.I N(
Table 4-36. 
Results of Igniubility Analysis of Soil Samples Collected from the June S to 10, 1989 from Esso Tank Excavation Soil Pile,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte 
Sample I.D.:
Igniubility
(oC)
Igniubility
(Torch)
SP-1 
SP-2 
SP-3 
SP-4 
SP-4-Dup 
SP-5 SP-6
>60 
>60 
>60 
>60 
>60 
>60 
>60
N-I 
N-I 
N-I 
N-I 
N-I 
N-I 
N-I
SP-7
>60
N-I
Analyses were performed by Datachem of Salt Lake City, Utah.
Flashpoint >60 degrees Celsius (oC) defines sample as nonigniUble.
N-I 
NonigniUble when tested with torch.
Dup 
Duplicate.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
C-i
•-0
HWI).—-XI/EXSMJtL
GERAGHTYc^MII.U R.IN'(
c
Table 4-37. 
Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Water Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 During Esso Tank Excavation, Tutu
Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Sample I.D.:
Methylene chloride
Acetone
Carbon disulfide
2-Butanone
Vinyl acetate
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Total Xylenes
DW-1
ND
190B
ND
ND
ND
3.5J
ND
ND
ND
FB-1
0.009J
0.26E
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
FB-2
ND
0.015
0.018
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
FB-3
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TB6-8-89
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TB6-9-89
ND
0.017
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TB6- 10-89
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
T-E-1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
3.8
3.5
1.8
5.0
WB-1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L).
Analyses were
J
B
E
DW
FB
TB
T-E-1
WB
ND
performed by Datachem of Salt Lake
Estimated concentration below the
Analyte found in the method blank
City, Utah.
method detection limit.
. Reported results have been adjusted for the
Reported concentration is an estimate only. The
standard.
response factor was assumed to
quantity found in the blank.
be 1 .000 relative to an internal
Water sample from decontamination waters.
Field blank.
Trip blank.
Sample collected from a SS-gallon drum that was used to store liquid residues pumped out from tanks at the site
Water blank from deionized water.
Not detected.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
GERAGHTYc^MIU.I R.IN(
Table 4-38. 
Concentrations of Base Neutral and Acid Extractable Compounds in Water Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 During Esso Tank Excavation,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Phenol
Benzyl alcohol
2- Methylphenol
4-Methylphenol
Naphthalene
Sample I.D.:
2-Methylnaphtalene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
bis-2-Ethylhexylphthalate
DW-1
0.02
0.041
ND
ND
0.067
0.031
0.004J
0.005J
ND
0.084
FB-1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
FB-2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
FB-3
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
WB-1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
WB-2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
T-E-1
0.15
ND
0.028
0.036
0.67E
0.44E
0.015
0.009J
ND
0.046
TE-l-DL
0.13
ND
ND
ND
0.72
0.39
0.02J
0.012J
0.005J
0.049
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L).
Analyses were performed by Datachem of Salt Lake City, Utah.
E
J
DW
FB
WB
T-E-1
DL
ND
Reported concentration is an estimate only. The reponse factor was assumed to be 1 .000 relative to aninternal standard.
Estimated concentration below the method detection limit.
Water sample from decontamination waters.
Field blank.
Water blank from deionized water.
Sample collected from
Diluted sample.
Not detected.
a 55-gallon drum that was used to store liquid residues pumped out from tanks at the site.
X 
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
iji
••C
-fc,
GERACiHTY^MIU.I-K.INC
Table 4-39. 
Concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Water Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 During Esso Tank Excavation, Tutu
Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte 
Sample I.D.: 
DW-1 
FB-1 FB-2 FB-3 
WB-1 
WB-2
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 
39 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
ND 
7.5
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L).
Analyses were performed by Datachem of Salt Lake City, Utah.
ND 
Not detected.
DW 
Water sample from decontamination waters.
FB 
Field blank.
WB 
Water blank from deionized water.
T-E-1 
Sample collected from a 55-gallon drum that was used to store liquid residues pumped out from tanks at the site.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
woo,s.~xi/Essoii JCL 
GER AGI IT Y «P M11,1.1 R. I N( 
O
••ca-
f
Table 4-40. 
Results of Ignitability Analysis of Water Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989 During Esso Tank Excavation, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte 
Sample I.D. 
DW-1
Ignitability 
>60
c-Degree
FB-1 
FB-2 FB-3 WB-1 
WB-2 T-E-
>60 
>60 
>60 
>60 
>60 
>60
Flashpoint >60 degrees Celsius defines sample as nonignitable.
Analyses were performed by Datachem of Salt Lake City, Utah.
DW 
Water sample from decontamination waters.
FB 
Field blank.
WB 
Water blank from deionized water.
T-E-1 
Sample collected from a 55-gallon drum that was used to store liquid residues pumped out from tanks at the site.
Source: 
Soil Tech Corporation (1990a).
GERAGHTY^MIU.I-K.INC. 
O
Table 4-41. Summary of Analytical Results for Split Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989
from Esso Tank Excavation Pit, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample Location: 
Esso service station tank excavation pit.
Sampk Type: 
Split samples from seven of the 13 sampling locations.
Samplers:
Analytical
Results:
Soil Tech Corporation and Camp, Dresser & McKee Federal Programs
Corporation personnel.
Xylene and ethylbenzene were detected in all samples except one.
Benzene was detected in four samples.
Toluene was detected in two samples.
The highest combined concentrations of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and
xylene were detected in sample TE-X-03 at 31 1 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
Several tentatively identified benzenes were detected in various samples.
Chlorobenzene was detected in sample TE-X-05 at a concentration of 0.008
mg/kg.
Semivolatiles detected included naphthalene, methylnaphthalenes, fluorene,
phenanthrene, bis-2-ethylhexylphthalate, and benzene isomers.
No pesticides or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were detected.
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs) were detected in all samples. 
The
concentration of TPH in sample TE-X-03 was 2,550 micrograms per gram (ug/g).
TPH concentrations in other samples ranged from < 10 to 69 ug/g.
Barium, cadmium, and lead were detected in most of the samples.
Source: 
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1990b).
PR0013.«»»-WP1/BSS013.WP
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
TUT 
GO5 0197
Table 4-42. Summary of Analytical Results for Split Soil Samples Collected from June 5 to 10, 1989
from Esso Soil Pile, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sampk Location: 
Esso service station soil pile generated from tank excavation procedures. Samples
collected prior to soil ventilation procedures.
Sampk Type:
Samplers:
Analytical
Results:
Split samples from three of the seven sampling locations. Grab samples were
collected from the top, middle, and bottom sections of the soil pile at each
location for volatile organic analyses. Composite samples for other analyses were
collected from the top, middle, and bottom sections of the soil pile at each
location.
Soil Tech Corporation and Camp, Dresser & McKee Federal Programs
Corporation personnel.
High concentrations of xylenes and ethylbenzene were detected in all samples
except one.
Toluene was detected in two samples.
Tentatively identified compounds for hydrocarbons and benzenes were detected
in all samples.
Semivolatile compounds detected in all 
samples were naphthalene,
methylnaphthalene, fluorene, phenanthrene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and
benzene isomers.
No pesticides or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were detected in the samples.
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) ranged from 48 to 139 micrograms per
gram (ug/g).
Barium, cadmium, and lead were detected in all samples.
Arsenic was detected in one sample.
Source: 
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) Federal Programs Corporation (1990b).
PR0013 •••-WPl/E«ol4.WP
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
TIJT 
GO 5 
0198
Table 4-43. Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Collected on September 8, 1988 and June 5, 1989 at O'Henry Cleaners,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Analyte
Tetrachloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethene
Trichloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
Sample ID:
Sample Location:
Sample Depth (bis):
Sample Date:
e-01
Area Near
Fuel Tank
NA
9-8-88
440
-
-
-
e02-01*
Area Southeast
of Fuel Tank
6-15 in.
6-5-89
.
-
-
~
e02-02*
Area Southeast
of Fuel Tank
15-24 in.
6-5-89
.
0.02
0.075
180.00
802-03 +
Area Southeast
of Fuel Tank
NA
6-5-89
.
-
-
-
c-/
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (rag/Kg).
bis 
Below land surface.
Not analyzed or not detected. No clear indication from available data.
NA 
Not available,
in 
Inches.
* 
Base neutral and acid extractable compounds (BNAs), pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs), and metals were also sampled, but no results were available.
Samples collected by Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) personnel.
A total of three soil samples was collected from an area of discarded filters from the dry cleaning process on June 5, 1989. Samples were identified
as e02-01, e02-02, and e02-03 according to CDM personnel field notes. Samples were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
BNAs, pesticides, PCBs, and metals (Camp, Dresser & McKee 1990).
PR013.*"-X1/61493.XLS
en
O
I--
••0
•o
GERAGHTY^MILI.I-.R.INC.
Table 4-44. 
Summary of Preliminary Assessment Report for O'Henry Cleaners, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Site Data
Site:
Report:
Site Reconnaissance Date:
Site Information:
UST Location Record
of Tank Leaks:
Disposal Procedures:
Areas of Concern:
Potential Sources to Soil
z! 
and/or Oroundwater
H 
Identified:
X 
Sampling of Areas
ui 
of Concern:
c 
Sample Results:
O'Henry Dry Cleaners.
Preliminary Site Assessment Report, O'Henry, Inc., St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, Pedro Panzardi A Associates, October 1969.
Not available.
Dry cleaning operation:
• One dry cleaning unit.
• One industrial size washing machine and dryer.
Operation started January 2,1982.
Historical purchases of PCE: 17 to 20 drums per year (1.5 to 1.75 gallons per month).
No UST at this site.
Dry cleaning unit filters, PCE sludge and lint have been disposed at a local dumping site. Total amount of PCE disposed does not
exceed 22 gallons per year. At the time of the site reconnaissance and sampling activity, arrangements were made for disposal of
PCE at a Safety Kleen facility in Puerto Rico.
Reported disposition of PCE residue on-site by an operator. Approximately 36 ft2 area with a lot of tint residues. In June 1989, soil
samples were collected from this area by an inspector. After the inspection, O*Henri removed topsoil and stored it in two containers.
No indication of inspector name, sample location, analysis, or laboratory in the report
Pedro Panzardi personnel collected two composite samples on August 23,1989 (one from each container).
Potential of soil and groundwater contamination. Pedro Panzardi proposed soil borings at different locations on the O'Henry
to property to collect soil samples for PCE analysis.
Composite samples were collected from two containers that were Filled with excavated topsoiL Sampling date: August 23,1989.
Sample ID: Station #1 and Station #2. Samples analyzed for PCE by EQ Lab of Puerto Rico.
Station #1: PCE<0.03ppm. Station #2: PCE <0.03 ppm.
PCE
UST
ppm
ft*
Tetrachloroethene.
Underground storage tank.
Parts per million.
Square feet
Source: 
Pedro Panzardi A Associates, Inc. (198%).
GHRAGHTV^MII.I I IMN'C
Page 1 of 6
Table 4-45. 
Concentrations of Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes in Soil Samples Collected from the Rodriguez Esso Service Station
from May 22 to 24, 1990, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID:
Depth:
B-l
(0-2)
B-l
(2-4)
B-l
(4-6)
B-2
(0-2)
B-2
(2-4)
B-2
(4-6)
B-2
(6-8)
B-2
(8-10)
B-2
(10-12)
(ft bis)
Sample Location: 22-May-90
22-May-90 
22-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-M«y-90
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes (total)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.78
0.37
ND
ND
ND
0.29
ND
ND
0.26
56.71
5.95
34.81
See footnotes on last page.
PR0013."X-l/enosoil.xl»
GERAGHTYc*MII.I.HMNr
Page 2 of 6
Table 4-45. 
Concentrations of Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes in Soil Samples Collected from the Rodriguez Esso Service Station
from May 22 to 24, 1990, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID:
Depth:
B-2
(12-14)
B-2
(14-16)
B-2
(16-18)
B-2
(18-20)
B-2
(25-27)
B-3
(0-2)
B-3
B-3
(4-6)
B-3
(6-8)
(ft bis)
Sample Location: 24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes (total)
ND
4.2
0.80
5.48
ND
8.8
1.27
7.74
ND
0.18
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
See footnotes on last page.
c
O!
PR0013."X-l/essosoil.xli
GERAGH TY & Mil .1 . I K . IN<
01
Page 3 of 6
Table 4-45. 
Concentrations of Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes in Soil Samples Collected from the Rodriguez Esso Service Station
from May 22 to 24, 1990, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID:
Depth:
B-3
(8-10)
B-3
(10-12)
B-3
(12-14)
B-3
(14-16)
B-3
(16-18)
B-3
(18-20)
B-3
(20-22)
B-3
(22-24)
B-4
(0-2)
(ft bis)
Sample Location: 24-May-90
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes (total)
NR
NR
NR
NR
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
NR
NR
NR
NR
ND
ND
ND
ND
See footnotes on last page.
PROOI3."X-l/eno«oilxlf
GERAGHTY^MII.I.I R.INT
Page 4 of 6
Table 4-45. 
Concentrations of Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes in Soil Samples Collected from the Rodriguez Esso Service Station
from May 22 to 24, 1990, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID:
Depth:
B-4
(2-4)
B-4
(4-6)
B-4
(6-8)
B-4
(8-10)
B-4
(10-12)
B-4
(12-14)
B-4
(14-16)
B^
(16-18)
B-4
(20-22)
(ft bis)
Sample Location: 24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90 
24-May-90
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes (total)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.23
1.42
ND
0.81
ND
0.94
ND
0.76
2.13
44.75
7.15
40.71
ND
0.71
ND
1.33
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
See footnotes on last page.
PR0013.**X-l/essosoil.xli
(JERAGHTY^MII.I.I K . I N (
Page 5 of 6
Table 4-45. 
Concentrations of Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes in Soil Samples Collected from the Rodriguez Esso Service Station
from May 22 to 24, 1990, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID:
Depth:
B-4
(25-26.5)
B-5
(0-2)
B-5
B-5
(4-6)
B-5
(6-8)
B-5
(8-10)
B-5
(10-12)
B-5
(12-14)
B-5
(14-16)
(ft bis)
Sample Location: 24-May-90 
23-May-90 
23-May-90 
23-May-90 
23-May-90 
23-May-90 
23-May-90 
23-May-90 
23-May-90
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes (total)
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.0
ND
ND
0.23
ND
ND
ND
0.29
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
0.23*
See footnotes on last page.
rJi
rRrai3.~x.itaMoii.iii 
GERAGHTY^MII.I.I R.IN(
Page 6 of 6
Table 4-45. 
Concentrations of Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes in Soil Samples Collected from the Rodriguez Esso Service Station
from May 22 to 24, 1990, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID:
Depth:
B-5
(20-22)
B-5
(22-27)
B-6
(0-2)
B-6
(2-4)
B-6
(4-6)
B-6
(6-8)
B-6
(10-12)
B-6
(15-17)
B-6
(20-25)
(ft bis)
Sample Location: 23-May-90
23-May-90 
22-May-90 
22-May-90 
22-May-90 
22-May-90 
22-May-90 
22-M«y-90 
22-May-90
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes (total)
ND*
ND*
ND*
0.29*
ND*
ND*
ND*
0.24*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
ft bis 
Feet below land surface.
ND 
Not detected. Below lower limit of detection.
NR 
No recovery.
* 
Sample collected below water table and results are a combination of soil and groundwater concentrations.
Lower limit of detection is 0.010 mg/kg.
PR0013.**X-l/e»oioit.xb
GERACjHTY^MII.I.I.R.INC
o
Table 4-46. Concentrations of Benzene, Toluene, Etbylbenzene, and Xylenes in Water Samples Collected
from the Rodriguez Esso Service Station on July 9, 1990, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample ID:
Date:
MW-2
9-July-90
MW-3
9-July-90
MW-4
9-July-90
MW-5
9-July-90
MW-6
9-July-90
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes (total)
8.66
5.60
1.65
8.83
ND
ND
ND
ND
9.23
36.51
1.30
8.57
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analyte concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L).
ND 
Not detected.
PR013. •••-Xl/oulMex.XLS
GERAGHTYtf MILLER, INC. 
TUT 
°05 
02°7
Table 4-47. Supply Well Construction Details and Estimated Pumping Rates, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 1 of 4
Well
C. Adkins #1
C. Adkins Wl
C. Adkins #3
Baptist Mission
Bertha C. Boschulte School
Bryan I
Bryanll
Bryan HI
Creger Motors No. 1
Creger Motors No. 2
Creger Motors No. 3
Creger Motors No. 4
Controlled Concrete Products
Demitri
Dench
Dept. of Agriculture
Animal Shelter
Dept. of Education
(Goroez School)
Dept. of Education
(James Madison School)
See last page for notes.
TUT 
005 
0209
r»oi3.— «-xi/cnmvru.xu
Total
Depth of
Year 
Well
Drilled 
(ft bis)
1972-1973 
100
1972-1973 
80
1972-1973 
120
1977 
55
...
1978 
140
1978 
140
1978 
140
—
...
...
140
—
1980-1981
...
Approximate
Elevation of
Depth of 
Measuring
Casing 
Point
(ft bis) 
(ft msl)
20...
—
30
—
215
48 
220
30 
218
135
135
137
148
80
231
...
9
—
— 
—
Diameter (in.)
and Type
of
Casing
6PVC
—
—
6PVC
—
6PVC
6PVC
6PVC
.„
6PVC
6PVC
6PVC
—
—
—
Possible 
Hours
Water-Bearing 
Estimated 
Operating
Zone 
Pumping 
Per
(ft bis) 
Rates* 
Day
_.
—
— 
—
— 
—
— 
—
60, 70, 89 
—
— 
80,000 
6
50-60 
Max. (10 gpm) 
Intermittent
— 
—
—
— 
_.
15,000
—
52,800
... 
... 
——
GERACJHTY ^ Mil 1 IK. IN< 
O
Table 4-47. Supply Well Construction Details and Estimated Pumping Rates, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 2 of 4
Well
Devcon (Poly Carib) I
Devcon (Poly Carib) II
Devcon (Poly Carib) III
Year
Drilled
1981 (deepened 1984)
1980
1982
Total
Depth of
Well
(ft bis)
260
250
250
Depth of
Casing
(ft bis)
...
—
—
Approximate
Elevation of
Measuring
Point
(ftmsl)
_—
—
—
Diameter (in.)
and Type
of
Casing
6PVC
6 Steel
8PVC
Possible
Water-Bearing
Zone
(ft bis)
150-170, 190-220
—
—
Estimated
Pumping
Rates*
_
—
—
Hours
Operating
Per
Day
...
—
—
Devcon (Poly Carib) IV
Didi Well/Public Well
E's + A Corp. Well No. 1
E's + A Corp. Well No. 2
E's + A Corp. Well No. 3
E's + A Corp. Well No. 4
G. Eglin Well I
G. Eglin Well II
G. Eglin Well III
Farrington Well
Four Winds Plaza I
Four Winds Plaza II
Four Winds Plaza III
Francois LaPlace
"New" Gassett
"Old" Gassett
Harthman I Bakery Well
Harthman Baptiste
Harthman Cow Pen
Harthman Crusher
Harthman Estate Well
Harthman Mango Tree
Harthman No. 69
Harthman Racetrack
1965
1981
1967
1978
1978
1967
1978
Deepened 1978
225
225
325
305
285
325
97
97
210
130
325
125
180
30
40
36
65
20
40
35
27
123
126
126
144
149
152
43
166
165
111
130
140
6 Steel
6 Steel
6 Steel
6 Steel
9PVC
6 Steel
6PVC
6 Steel
6PVC
6PVC
6PVC
6 Steel
160-164
90-120
170-190
25,000
25,000
25,000
500
500
24
24
24
16
16
10,000
24
69, 125
See last page for notes.
MWI3.—-XI/CNSTftmJJtLS
TUT 
OO5 
O2O9
GERAGHTY & M i l l IK. INC
Table 4-47. 
Supply Well Construction Details and Estimated Pumping Rates, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 3 of 4
Well
Harthman Wilfred
Harthman Zero Filter
Osbom Harvey
RFC Corp.
Lantern Laundry
Leonard
Lockhart Well I(Donoe)
Lockhart Well II (Donoe)
Lockhart Well III (Donoe)
Lockhart Well IV (Donoe)
Lockhart Well V (Donoe)
Matthais
Ottley
Ramsay
Rodriquez
Sanson
Santa Cruz Shores (Laundry)
L. Smith
Steele Well
See last page for notes.
nwM j.«~-x i /CN mvru XLS
Year
Drilled
.__
—
1978
—
...
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1978
1966
1978
1978
1978
1978
1978
1960s
1965
TUT 
O05 021.0
Total
Depth of
Well
(ft bis)
60
120
160
—
—
70
185
145
145
145
285
55
200
105
80
160
350
—
105
Depth of
Casing
(ft bis)
»_
—
...
—
—
44
50
38
60
45
45
—
—
...
...
80
50
...
...
Approximate
Elevation of
Measuring
Point
(ftmsl)
...
—
138
...
...
—
192
192
188
189
90
—
—
125
—
—
90
175
Diameter (in.)
and Type
of
Casing
6 Steel
6PVC
6 Steel
_
._
6PVC
6 Prime Steel
6 Prime Steel
6 Prime Steel
6 Prime Steel
6 Prime Steel
8 Steel
_.
6PVC
6 Steel
8 Steel
6PVC
6 Steel
6 Steel
Possible
Water-Bearing 
Estimated
Zone 
Pumping
(ft bis) 
Rates*
...
—
500
— 
—
— 
—
— 
—
~ 
Max. (40 gpm)
— 
Max. (40 gpm)
— 
Max. (40 gpm)
— 
—
—
500
500
150,000
Max. (50 gpm)
—
...
GERAGHTYfl'MII.U-'K.INC
Hours
Operating
Per
Day
...
—
Variable
—
' —
—
Intermittent
Intermittent
Intermittent
—
—
8
6
...
Intermittent
—
...
o
Table 4-47. Supply Well Construction Details and Estimated Pumping Rates, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 4 of 4
Well
Stevens
Tillett Well
Year
Drilled
1980
1963
Total
Depth of
Well
(ft bis)
100
100
Depth of
Casing
(ft bis)
80
15
Approximate
Elevation of
Measuring
Point
(ftmsl)
—
186
Diameter (in.)
and Type
of
Casing
6PVC
6 Steel
Possible
Water-Bearing
Zone
(ft bis)
68-80
_
Estimated
Pumping
Rates*
—
40,000
Hours
Operating
Per
Day
—
24
VIHA Well I
VIHA Well II
VIHA Well HI
VIHA Well IV
Villanueva
1977
1977
1978
1978
175
150
142
140
41
37
73
69
231
235
239
278
6 Steel
6 Steel
6 Steel
6 Steel
70-72, 78,
87, 105, 125, 138
500
500
44
500
24
PVC 
Polyvinyl chloride.
* 
Estimated pumping rates are in gallons per day, unless otherwise noted.
VIHA 
Virgin Islands Housing Authority,
ft bis 
Feet below land surface,
ft msl 
Feet mean sea level,
gpm 
Gallons per minute.
— 
Not available.
in. 
Inches.
Sources: 
Graves and Gonzalez (1988).
DPNR report: Well Inventory Tutu/Turpentine Run Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands September, 1987-Unpublished.
i 
Unpublished report by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) office in the U.S. Virgin Islands and is tentative. Hydrologic Associates. 1993.
• 
Geohydrologic Analysis and Water Quality Data for the Upper Tutu Aquifer, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
h.J
«-XI/CNJTTVnjJtLS
GERAUHTY^MM I I-R.INC
Table 4-48. 
Monitoring Well Construction Details, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page I o f 2
rjl
Well
Identification
Four Winds Plaza
CHT-1 
(MW-1)
CHT-2 (MW-2)
CHT-3 (MW-3)
CHT-4 (MW-4)
Gassett (MW-5)
WO Sump
CHT-6D (DTW-2)
CHT-7D (DTW-1)
Geraghtv & Miller.
Shallow
MW-1
MW-2
MW-3
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6R
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9
MW-9S
MW-10
MW-14
Date
Installed
2/92
2/92
2/92
2/92
2/92
1992
5/92
5/92
Inc.
6/30/92
8/25/92
6/11/92
6/17/92
8/25/92
9/2/92
7/29/92
7/23/92
7/30/92
9/14/92
8/20/92
7/2/92
Top of
Casing
Elevation
(ft above msl)
—
—
...
...
...
...
—
• — •
195.08
178.15
181.84
175.66
187.09
171.17
180.13
167.54
162.26
162.37
161.50
196.12
Total
Borehole
Depth
(ft bis)
28.5
36
34
29
48
6
144
124
46.0
28.0
34.0
28.0
40.8
23.7
39.6
26.0
34.3
21.0
36.7
48.0
Borehole
Diameter
(in.)
8
8
8
8
8
4
9
8
8
10
6
6
10
10
10
10
10
6
10
8
Well
Casing
Depth
(ft bis)
18.5
31
23
19
27
5
20
20
43.6
27.0
30.4
27.0
39.0
22.7
35.4
25.5
34.1
18.7
35.6
45.2
Diameter (in.)
and
Casing
Material
2PVC
2PVC
2PVC
2PVC
2PVC
4PVC
6PVC
6PVC
4SS
4SS
4SS
4SS
4SS
4SS
4SS
4SS
4SS
4SS
4SS
4SS
Screened
Interval/
Open
Borehole
(ft bis)
18.5-28.5
31-36
23-33
19-29
27-37
5-6
20-144
20-124
23.6-43.6
7.0-27.0
10.4-30.4
7.0-27.0
19.0-39.0
2.7-22.7
15.4-35.4
5.5-25.5
14.1-34.1
8.7-18.7
15.6-35.6
25.2-45.2
Screen
Slot
Size
(in.)
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
—
open
open
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
Top of
Sand
(ft bis)
16.5
25
22
17
32
—
—
«.
21.1
5.0
8.4
5.0
17.0
1.6
12.8
3.0
11.8
6.7
13.0
22.4
Top of
Bentonite
(ft bis)
14.5
22
21
14
30
—
—
_»
19.1
3.0
6.4
3.0
15.0
0.8
11.0
1.5
10.0
5.7
11.0
19.8
Depth to
Top of
Bedrock
(ft bis)
17
29
34
—
21
—
10
20
1.8
3.1
2.4
8.7
4.8
4.92
15.0
8.3
5.0
5.0
2.9
3.0
See last page for notes.
PMOI3.***-X2/|10m2JCLW)A
GERAGHTY «f»MII.U-:K. INC
Table 4-48. Monitoring Well Construction Details, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Page 2 of 2
c
Well
Identification
Geraghtv & Miller.
Deep
MW-1D
MW-4D
MW-6D
MW-10D
MW-11D
MW-12D
MW-13D
O' Henrv Cleaners
OHMW-1
OHMW-2
OHMW-3
OHMW-4
NA
ft above msl
ft bis
MW-6R
MW-9S
...
PVC
ss
in.
Date
Installed
Inc. (continued)
7/8/92
6/17/92
8/10/92
8/19/92
7/20/92
7/23/92
7/15/92
7/18/90
7/18/90
7/18/90
7/18/90
Not applicable.
Top of
Casing
Elevation
(ft above msl)
195.14
176.02
171.01
161.38
153.22
161.81
236.60
—
...
—
Total
Borehole
Depth
(ft bis)
90.0
71.0
65.0
75.1
74.3
88.0
120.0
42
42
35.5
52
Well 
Diameter (in.)
Borehole
Diameter
(in.)
6
6
6
6
6
10
6
6
6
6
6
Casing
Depth
(ft bis)
70.0
47.7
45.0
55.1
53.0
80.5
100.0
22.5
22.0
15.5
27.0
and
Casing
Material
6SS
6SS
6SS
6SS
6SS
4SS
6SS
2SS
2SS
2SS
2SS
Screened
Interval/
Open
Borehole
(ft bis)
70.0-90.0
47.7-71.0
45.0-65.0
55.1-75.1
53.0-74.3
60.5-80.5
100.0-120.0
22.5-37.5
22-37
15.5-35.5
27.52
Screen
Slot
Size
(in.)
open
open
open
open
open
0.020
open
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
Top of
Sand
(ft bis)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
56.4
NA
18.5
14.0
8.25
25.0
Top of
Bentonite
(ft bis)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
54.0
NA
15.5
11.0
9.25
22.0
Depth to
Top of
Bedrock
(ft bis)
2.8
10.7
4.92
1.7
10.2
5.9
5.0
—
—
—
...
Feet above mean sea level.
Feet below land surface.
Replacement well for MW-6.
Additional shallow well at MW-9
Not available.
location.
Polyvinyl chloride.
Stainless steel.
Inches.
moou.
GERACiHTY^MII.I.I R.INf
Page 1 of 4
Table 4-49. Geraghty & Miller and Alternate Well Designations, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Geraghty & Miller Well Designation 
Alternate Well Designations
MONITORING WELLS
Four Winds
CHT-1 
MW-1 
—
CHT-2 
MW-2 
—
CHT-3 
MW-3 
—
CHT-4 
MW-4 
—
CHT-5 
MW-5 (Gassett) 
Gassett Motors MW-1
WO-Sump 
WO Well; Sump 
Waste Oil Well
CHT-6D 
FWDT-2; 4WDTW02 
Deep Test Hole 2
CHT-7D 
FWDT-1; 4WDTW#1 
Deep Test Hole 1
Geraghtv & Miller. Inc. fShallow Wells)
MW-1 
— 
—
MW-2 
— 
—
MW-3 
— 
—
MW-4 
— 
—
MW-5 
— 
—
MW-6 (Abandoned) 
— 
—
MW-6R
MW-7 
— 
—
MW-8 
— 
—
MW-9 
— 
—
MW-9S 
— 
—
MW-10 
— 
—
MW-14 
— 
—
Geraehtv & Miller. Inc. (Deep Wells)
MW-1D 
— 
—
MW-4D 
— 
—
MW-6D 
— 
—
MW-10D 
— 
—
MW-1 ID 
— 
—
MW-12D 
— 
—
MW-13D
O'Henry Cleaners
OHMW-1 
MW-1 
—
OHMW-2 
MW-2 
—
OHMW-3 
MW-3 
—
OHMW-4 
MW-4 
—
— 
No alternate designation.
PROI3.—-XI/TWSAUASJCLS
JUT 
CO5 0214
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC. 
O
Page 2 of 4
Table 4-49. 
Cereghty & Miller and Alternate Well Designations, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Geraghty & Miller Well Designation
Alternate Well Designations
SUPPLY WELLS
C. Adkins No. 1
C. Adkins No. 2
C. Adkins No. 3
Baptiste
Baptist Mission
Berthac Boschulte School
Bryanl
Bryanll
Bryan III
Creger Motors No. 1
Creger Motors No. 2
Creger Motors No. 3
Creger Motors No. 4
Controlled Concrete Products
Dede
Demitri
Dench
Dept. of Agriculture
(Animal Shelter)
Dept. of Education
(Gomez School)
Dept. of Education
(James Madison School)
Devcon I
Devcon II
Devcon in
Devcon IV
Harthman Baptiste
V.I. Baptist Mission
Mario Bryan #1
Mario Bryan #2
Mario Bryan #3
Creger Motors #1
Creger Motors Wi
Creger Motors #3
Creger Motors #4
Well #1
Didi Well/Public Well
Demetry Well
Poly Carib/Devcon 1
Poly Carib/Devcon 2
Poly Carib/Devcon 3
Poly Carib/Devcon 4
Batiste
Mario Bryan - S
Mario Bryan - N
Mario Bryan - E
USVI - WAPA
Well #1
No alternate designation.
WOI3.—-XIATWSAUAS JOS
GERAGHTY & MILLER. INC.
TUT
O05 
021
Page 3 of 4
Table 4-49. Geraghty & Miller and Alternate Well Designations, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Geraghty &. Miller Well Designation
Alternate Well Designations
SUPPLY WELLS (continued)
E & A Corp. No. 1
E & A Corp. No. 2
E & A Corp. No. 3
E & A Corp. No. 4
Eglml
Eglin II
EglinUI
Famngton Well
E's + A Corp. Well #1
E's + A Corp. Well #2
E's + A Corp. Well #3
E's + A Corp. Well #4
Gene Eglin Well #1
Gene Eglin Well #2
Gene Eglin Well #3
Four Winds I
Four Winds II
Four Winds III
Gassett (New)
Gassett (Old)
Harthman Bakery
Harthman Baptiste
Harthman Cow Pen
Harthman Crusher
Harthman Estate
Harthman H.TW-3
Harthman Mango Tree
Harthman No. 69
Harthman Racetrack
Harthman Wilfred
Harthman Zero Filter
Harvey
KFC Corp.
LaPlace
Lantern Laundry
Leonard
Four Winds Plaza Well #1 ; FWP#1 
Plaza Associates Well #1
Four Winds Plaza Well #2; FWP#2 
Plaza Associates Well #2
Four Winds Plaza Well #3 ; FWP#3 
Plaza Associates Well #3
— 
—
— 
—
H-TW-2 
—
— 
—
— 
—
— 
H-TW-1
Harthman III 
Estate Well
— 
—
H-TW-3 
—
69 
—
Racetrack 
—
Wilfred 
—
Zero; Filter 
O. Filter
Osborn Harvey 
—
Home Petroleum Well 
—
Francois La Place; Francois 
C. Hodge
— 
—
— 
—
No alternate designation.
PROl 3 .—-X1/TWS ALIAS JCLS
TUT
005 0216
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
Page 4 of 4
Table 4-49. 
Geraghty & Miller and Alternate Well Designations, Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Geraghty & Miller Well Designation
Alternate Well Designations
SUPPLY WELLS (continued)
Lockhart I
Lockhart n
Lockhart III
Lockhart IV
Lockhart V
Matthias
Ottley
Ramsay
Rodriguez
Sanson
Santa Cruz Shores (Laundry)
Steele
Stevens
Tillett
VIHA-I
VIHA- II
VIHA- III
VIHA- IV
Lockhart Well HI
Lockhart Well #2
Lockhart Well #3
Lockhart Well #4
Lockhart Well #5
Earl B. Ottley Well
Ramsay Motors
L. Smith
E. Steele Well
Marjorie Stevens Well
Tilletts Well
VIHA Well #1
VIHA Well #2
VIHA Well #3
VIHA Well #4
Donoe TW-1
DonoeTW-2
Donoe TW-3
Donoe TW-4
Donoe TW-5
Robert Ramsay Well
V.I. Housing Authority Well No. 1
V.I. Housing Authority Well No. 2
V.I. Housing Authority Well No. 3
V.I. Housing Authority Well No. 4
PROI3.—.XI/TWSAUASJOS
TUT
005 0217
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
(
Page 1 of 2
Table 4-50. Summary of Aquifer Testing Conducted at the Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
— jc
— J
en
Ki
i-*
00
Pump
Test
CHT-7D
CHT-4SD
Racetrack
Crusher
Batiste
(Baptiste)
Tillett
MW-6R
gpm
Observation
Wells
CHT-7D
OW-FW-1
OW-FW-2
OW-FW-3
CHT-6D
OW-FW-1
OW-FW-2
OW-FW-3
Racetrack
Crusher
OW-Bakery
Batiste
(Baptiste)
Tillett
MW-6R
MW-2
MW-3
MW-5
MW-6D
Conducted
By
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Hydrologic Associates, Inc.
Donald L. Hamlin, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Pumping 
Maximum
Rate 
Duration 
Drawdown
Date 
(gpm) 
(minutes) 
(feet)
12/18/92 
28.7 235 
9.88
0.2
0.1
0
12/16/92 
135.5 1090 4.566
0.35
0.7
0.75
3/26/92 
31.4 510 
39.5
12/18/92 
46 
710 
3.415
0.474
12/18/92 
44.75 
170 
19.465
6/11/85 
46.4 3870 
3.8
11/3/92 
9.25 1320 2.43
Specific 
Method
Capacity 
of
(gpm/ft) 
Analysis
2.9 
Neuman delayed
None
None
None
29.68 
Neuman delayed
Neuman delayed
0.79 
Theis leaky
13.47 
Neuman
None
2.3 
Cooper/Jacob
Theis leaky
12.2
3.81 
Cooper/Jacob
None
None
None
None
None
Transmissivity
(square feet 
Storage
per day) 
Coefficient
210
2,736
3,443 
0.00463
159 
0.3
847
116
164 
0.24
12,100
Gallons per minute.
GERAGHTY <!* Mil .1 .1 K .INC 
O
Page 2 of 2
Table 4-50. 
Summary of Aquifer Testing Conducted at the Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
—I
Q
rn
Pump 
Observation
Test 
Wells
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9
MW-10
MW-10D
MW-11D
MW-12D
CHT-6D
MW-6D 
MW-6R
MW-2
MW-3
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6D
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9
MW-10
MW-10D
MW-11D
MW-12D
CHT-6D
VIHA-I 
VIHA
VIHA-II
Conducted
By
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Pumping 
Maximum 
Specific 
Method 
Transmissivity
Rate 
Duration 
Drawdown 
Capacity 
of 
(square feet 
Storage
Date 
(gpm) (minutes) 
(feet) 
(gpm/ft) 
Analysis 
per day) 
Coefficient
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
11/6/92 
14 
1440 0.22 
63.64 
Cooper/Jacob 
7,500
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
Cooper/Jacob 
11,700 
0.0007
5/20/82 
48.4 600 
5.3 
9.13 
None
1.42 
None
gpm 
Gallons per minute.
PROUOl-Xl/TuAqTm.nk
GERAGHTY {* MIM.I R. IN(
Page 1 of 5
Table 4-51. 
Field Gas Chromatograph-Detected Results for Soil Samples Collected by Geraghty & Miller, Inc. from June through August 1992,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
rJ
Sample Location and Depth
in Feet Below Land Surface
MW-4D 0.7-2.7
MW-4D 2.7-4.7
MW-4D 4.7-6.7
MW-4D 6.7-8.7
MW-4D 8.7-10.7
MW-4D 10.7-11.7
MW-4D 11.7-13.7
MW-4D 13.7-14.7
MW-4D 14.7-15.7
MW-4D 15.7-16.1
MW-1D 1.0-25
MW-1D 1.0-25 (dup)
B-4 05-2.0
B-4 2-4
B-4 4-6
B-4 4-6 (dup)
B-4 6-8
B-4 8-10
MW-3 0.4-2.0
MW-4 0.7-2.7
MW-4 2.7-4.7
MW-4 4.7-6.7
MW-4 6.7-8.7
MW-13D 0-2
MW-13D 2-4
MW-13D 2-4 (dup)
MW-13D 4-6
MW-11D 0-2
MW-11D 2-4
See last pace for footnotes.
trans
1,2-DCE
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
CIS
1,2-DCE
ND
ND
34
38
24
2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
12
ND
ND
184
34
20
56
77
182
35
BMDL
42
39
BMDL
ND
BMDL
Benzene
ND
ND
6
6
4
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8
6
ND
6
9
20
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TCE
ND
ND
12
10
10
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
10
14
ND
10
18
38
10
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Toluene
ND
ND
14
10
10
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
2
ND
ND
26
28
BMDL
11
25
43
16
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
PCE
ND
ND
2
2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
2
ND
BMDL
7
BMDL
4
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
Ethylbenzene
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
10
ND
BMDL
23
33
6
17
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
GKRAGH'1
m,p-Xylene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
13
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
~Y& Ml I.I.I
o-Xylene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
19
24
BMDL
16
ND
ND
4
ND
ND
•:R.INC 
O
Page 2 of 5
Table 4-51. 
Field Gas Chromatograph-Detected Results for Soil Samples Collected by Geraghty & Miller, Inc. from June through August 1992,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
w
Sample Location and Depth
in Feet Below Land Surface
MW-11D 4-6
MW-11D 6-8
MW-11D 6-8 (dup)
MW-11D 8-10
MW-11D 10-11
MW-1 0-2
MW-1 0-2 (dup)
MW-14 0-2
MW-14 0-2 (dup)
MW-14 2-4
MW-14 2-4 (dup)
MW-12D 0-2
MW-12D 2-4
MW-12D 4-6
MW-7 0-2
MW-7 
2-4
MW-7 
4-6
MW-7 4-6 (dup)
MW-7 6-8
MW-7 8-10
MW-7 10-12
MW-7 12-14
MW-7 14-16
MW-8 
0-2
MW-8 0-2 (dup)
MW-8 
2-4
MW-8 2-4 (dup)
MW-8 
4-6
MW-8 4-6 (dup)
trans
1,2-DCE
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
cis
U-DCE
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
Benzene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TCE
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Toluene
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
PCE
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
BMDL
BMDL
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
12
28
48
24
22
24
Ethyfcenzene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
m,p-Xylene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
o-Xylene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
See last page for footnotes.
GERAGHTY (?? Mil.I.l :K.INr
Page 3 of 5
Table 4-51. 
Field Gas Chromatograph-Detected Results for Soil Samples Collected by Geraghty & Miller, Inc. from June through August 1992,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Kl
i-.j
Sample Location and Depth
in Feet Below Land Surface
MW-8 6-8
MW-8 6-8 (dup)
MW-6(D) 0-2
MW-6(D) 0-2 (dup)
MW-9 0-2
MW-9 0-2 (dup)
MW-9 2-4
MW-9 2-4 (dup)
B-9 0-2
B-9 2-4
B-9 2-4 (dup)
B-9 4-6
B-6 0-2
B-6 2-4
B-6 2-4 (dup)
B-6 4-6
B-6 6-8
B-l 0-2
B-l 2-4
B-l 4-6
B-l 4-6 (dup)
B-l 6-8
B-l 8-10
B-7 0-2
B-7 0-2 (dup)
B-7 2-4
B-7 2-4 (dup)
B-3 0-2
B-3 2-4
trans
1,2-DCE
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
10
12
8
BMDL
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
CIS
1,2-DCE
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
4
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
26
42
18
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
Benzene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TCE
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
BMDL
BMDL
2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Toluene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
PCE
BMDL
BMDL
2
4
BMDL
BMDL
ND
BMDL
2
2
4
2
2
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
6
4
6
2
8
6
6
BMDL
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
2
Ethyfoenzene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
m,p-Xylene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
o-Xylene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
See last page for footnotes.
GERAGHTY^MIU.I R.INC
Page 4 of 5
—ic
_4
to
K.1
Table 4-51. Field Gas Chromatograph-Detected Results for Soil Samples Collected by Geraghty & Miller, Inc. from June through August 1992,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample Location and Depth
in Feet Below Land Surface
B-2 0-2
B-2 2-4
B-2 2-4 (dup)
MW-10D 0-2
MW-10 
0-2
MW-10 
2-4
MW-6D 0-2
MW-6D 2-4
MW-6D 4-6
MW-6D 4-6 (dup)
B-13 
0-2
B-13 
2-4
B-13 
4-6
B-13 6-8
B-13 
6-8 (dup)
B-10 0-2
B-10 2-4
B-10 
4-6
B-10 
6-8
B-ll 0-2
B-ll 2-4
B-12 
0-2
B-12 
2-4
B-12 
4-6
B-12 
6-8
B-12 8-10
MW-5 
0-2
MW-5 
2-4
MW-5 
2-4 (dup)
trans
1,2-DCE
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
BMDL
BMDL
ND
cis
1,2-DCE
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
182
48
661
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
2
36
4
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
Benzene
BMDL
ND
BMDL
8
2
30
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
TCE
ND
ND
ND
14
3
78
BMDL
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
3
3
10
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
Toluene
BMDL
ND
ND
16
2
64
BMDL
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
PCE
2
4
4
6
BMDL
12
2
BMDL
4
5
36
26
344
54
50
4
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
51
50
374
154
3
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
Ethylbenzene
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
10
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
m,p-Xylene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
o-Xylene
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
12
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
See last page for footnotes.
GERAGHTY «!*MII.I.I R.IN'r
Page 5 of 5
Table 4-51. 
FieW Gas Chromatograph- Detected Results for Soil Samples Collected by Geraghty & Miller, Inc. from June through August 1992,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sample Location and Depth
in Feet Below Land Surface
MW-5 
4-6
B-13A 0-2
B-8 0-2
B-8 2-4
MW-2 
0-2
MW-2 
2-4
B-5 0-2
B-5 0-2 (dup)
B-5 2-4
B-14 
0-2
B-14 
2-4
B-15 
0-2
B-15 
2-4
B-16 0-2
B-16 
2-4
B-16 
2-4 (dup)
SS-3
SS-4
SS-5
SS-6
trans
U-DCE
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
3
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
Concentrations reported in micrograms per
DCE 
Dichloroethene.
cis
U-DCE
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
6
4
18
4
4
4
ND
ND
ND
ND
liter (ug/L),
Benzene
BMDL
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
8
ND
BMDL
BMDL
TCE
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
10
10
68
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
based on headspace analysis
Toluene
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
4
ND
BMDL
2
PCE
BMDL
18
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
70
446
286
1086
6
16
20
BMDL
ND
BMDL
2
Ethybenzene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
m,p-Xjiene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
10
ND
ND
ND
o-Xylene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BMDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
6
ND
ND
ND
of aqueous standards.
TCE 
Trfchloroethene.
PCE 
Tetrachloroethene.
ND 
Not detected.
BMDL 
Detected presence; below method detection limit.
dup 
Duplicate.
PR01301 -
GKRAGHTYc^MII I.I K.IN<
Table 6-1. 
Appropriate Analytical Levels for Analyses of Samples Collected During the Phase n Remedial Investigation
of the Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Field Activity 
Media
Soil-Gas Survey 
Soil-gas
Soil Borings
Soil
Groundwater Sampling 
Water
Analyte
VOCs
VOCs
TCL VOCs
VOCs
BNAs
Metals
Organic Lead
Cyanide
TDS
TSS
Nitrite
Nitrate
Sulfide
Sulfate
Iron (ID
Iron (HI)
Manganese (II)
Manganese (III)
Phosphorous
Alkalinity
Chloride
COD
Total hardness
PH
Temperature
Dissolved oxygen
Oxidation-reduction potential
*
VOCs
TCL
BNAs
TDS
TSS
COD
PID
CLP
SOW
CLPM
USEPA
LUFT
DHS
Actual laboratory methods may
Volatile organic compounds.
Target compound list.
Specific conductance
Method*
Field gas
chromatograph
PID
CLP SOW
CLP SOW
CLP SOW
CLPM
California LUFT DHS Method
CLPM
USEPA 160.1
USEPA 160.2
USEPA 354.1
USEPA 352.1
USEPA 376.1
USEPA 375.3
To be determined.
To be determined.
To be determined.
To be determined.
USEPA 365.2
USEPA 310.1
USEPA 325.2
USEPA 410.2
USEPA 130.2
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
(Eh) 
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Analytical
Level
II
I
IV
rv
IV
IV
m
IV
m
in
m
m
m
m
in
m
in
m
m
m
in
in
m
vary slightly depending on analytical laboratory certifications.
Base neutral and acid extractable organic compounds.
Total dissolved solids
Total suspended solids.
Chemical oxygen demand.
Portable photoionization detector.
Contract laboratory program.
Scope of work.
Contract laboratory program for inorganic analyses.
U.S. Environmental Protection
Leaking underground fuel tank.
Department of Health Services.
Agency.
PRO 1301 -X1 / ApproLvl.xls
TUT
OO5 
O225
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
Page 1 of 2
Table 7-1. 
Summary of Criteria for Recommending Further Source Investigation Tasks at Potential Source Facilities, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
c
r_R
Source Investigation Task
• 
Review of historical site
operations, and data generated by
other investigators
Site inspection
Soil-gas survey
Criteria for Recommending Further Investigation Task(s)
• 
Potential on-site source may exist.
• 
Insufficient data to evaluate if potential source
exists.
• 
Potential on-site source may exist, but
investigations are being conducted by other
investigators/PRPs.
• 
On-site source indicated, but location not well
known.
• 
On-site source identified, and downgradient
well(s) indicate contamination.
• 
On-site source identified, but no downgradient
well(s) exist.
• 
Anomalously high VOC results indicated, and no
downgradient monitoring well(s) exist.
• 
Anomalously high VOC results indicated, and
downgradient well(s) indicate contamination.
• 
No anomalous VOC results, but site inspection
and/or historical data indicate suspected source.
Location not well known.
Type of Further Investigation Recommended
• 
Site inspection.
• 
Site inspection.
• 
None. Data from other investigators to be
incorporated into RI.
• 
Soil-gas survey.
Soil sampling (to be performed by the TEIC
or PRP).
Monitoring well installation.
Soil sampling (to be performed by the TEIC
or PRP) and/or monitoring well installation.
Soil sampling (to be performed by the TEIC
or PRP) and/or installation of additional
monitoring well(s) at potential source if
confirmation is necessary.
Soil sampling (to be performed by the TEIC
or PRP). 
Locations selected based on site
inspection and/or historical operations data.
See last page for footnotes.
G E R A G H I Y ^ M I I . I I R . I N (
Page 2 of 2
Table 7-1. 
Summary of Criteria for Recommending Further Source Investigation Tasks at Potential Source Facilities, Tutu Wells Site,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Source Investigation Task
• 
Soil sampling
Monitoring well installation and
groundwater sampling
Criteria for Recommending Further Investigation Task(s) 
Type of Further Investigation Recommended
Contaminant source is confirmed by soil
sampling results, and downgradient well(s)
indicate contamination by similar contaminants
as source.
Contaminant source is confirmed but
downgradient well(s) indicate contamination by
different contaminants than source.
Contaminant source is confirmed but no
downgradient well(s) exist.
Insufficient data.
Groundwater contamination near or
downgradient of confirmed source is similar to
source contaminants.
Groundwater contamination exists near or
downgradient of confirmed source.
Contaminants not similar.
Install monitoring wells(s) in area of source
to further delineate groundwater
contamination.
None. Evaluate alternate source.
Install monitoring well(s) proximal to
source.
Additional soil sampling.
Additional monitoring wells for plume
delineation if necessary.
None. Evaluate alternate source.
w
r-J
NJ
PRPs 
Potential responsible parties.
RI 
Remedial investigation.
TEIC 
Tutu Environmental Investigation Committee.
VOC 
Volatile organic compound.
PR0013.***wp*l/fumincrit.tbl
GERAGHTY^MII.I.I R.IN(
Page 1 of 2
Table 7-2. 
Supply Wells to be Included in the Proposed Comprehensive Croundwater Sampling Event,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Creger Motors No. 1
Creger Motors No. 3 (location unknown - Alternate for Creger Motors No. 1)
Creger Motors No. 2
Creger Motors No. 4 (location unknown - Alternate for Creger Motors No. 2)
Dench
Dept. of Education
(Gomez School)
Devcon (Poly Carib) I
Devcon (Poly Carib) n (Alternate for Devcon I)
Devcon (Poly Carib) m
Devcon (Poly Carib) IV
Dede
E's + A Corp. Well #1
E's + A Corp. Well Wl
E's + A Corp. Well #3
E's + A Corp. Well #4 (Alternate for E&A Corp. No. 3)
G. Eglin Well H\
G. Eglin Well #2
G. Eglin Well #3
Four Winds Plaza I
Four Winds Plaza n
Four Winds Plaza m
(Francois) LaPlace
•New' Gassett
Field inspection of supply wells will be performed prior to sampling. Accessible supply wells will be sampled.
•Alternate* wells will be sampled only if primary well is not accessible.
PMI3.-.XI/SUFWTITUJOS 
TUT 
OO'=, 
<->~"-VQ
" '— 
- j.'- j£ O
GERAGHTY& MILLER, INC. 
O
Page 2 of 2
Table 7-2. 
Supply Wells to be Included in the Proposed Comprehensive Groundwater Sampling Event,
Tutu Wells Site, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Harthman Bakery
Harthman Crusher
Harthman Estate
Harthman No. 69
Harthman Racetrack
Harthman Wilfred
Osborn Harvey
RFC Corp.
L. Smith
Leonard
Matthias
Ramsay
Rodhquez
Steele
Tillett
VIHAI
VfflA n (Alternate for VIHA I)
VfflAin
VIHA IV (Alternate for VIHA III)
Field inspection of supply wells will be performed prior to sampling. Accessible supply wells will be sampled.
"Alternate* wells will be sampled only if primary well is not accessible.
TUT 
OO5 
O229
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.