A.02.11_Attach_1a_Ref_1a_W912GB-16-P-0013__CCVI018_MNA_Implementation_Plan_ENG.pdf

Remedial Operational Plan CCVI018, POL Point 83, Caserma del Din USAG Italy Vicenza Military Community

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Europe District

Project Reference: W912GB-16-P-0013 Project Number: 60519583

December 15 2016

Remedial Operational Plan CCVI018, POL Point 83, Caserma del Din USAG Italy Vicenza Military Community

Prepared for: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Europe District

AECOM

Quality information

Prepared by Checked by Approved by

Francesco Isalberti Ester Nana

Ciro Viscotti

Davide Degiorgi

Revision History

Revision Revision date Details Authorized Name Position

00 14/11/2016 Pre-Final

01 14/12/2016 Final

Prepared for:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Europe District

Prepared by:

AECOM URS Italia S.p.a.

20143 - Via Giacomo Watt 27

Mo

Italia

T: +39 02 4225561 aecom.com

© 2016 AECOM URS Italia S.p.a.. All Rights Reserved.

This document has been prepared by AECOM URS Italia S.p.a. (“AECOM”) for sole use of our client (the “Client”) in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed between AECOM and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM.

Table of Contents

Document structure

1. Introduction

1.1 Environmental historical site setting

1.1.1 Administrative proceeding

1.2 Scope of Work

2. Site setting

2.1 Site description and geographical setting

2.2 Geological and hydrogeological setting

2.3 Summary of local stratigraphy

2.4 Local hydrogeological setting

3. Analysis of contamination

3.1 Soil

3.2 Groundwater

4. Conceptual model

4.1 Results of Risk Assessment and comparison with contamination level

5. Selection of remedial technology

5.1 Remedial action goals

5.2 Selection of the remedial technology

5.2.1 Advantages of the selected remedial technology

6. Remedial strategy

6.1 Definition of the monitoring network

6.2 Monitored parameters

6.3 Procedure for groundwater sampling

6.4 Analytical program

6.5 Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC) Program

6.6 Sampling periodicity

6.7 Duration of the interventions

6.8 Cost estimate of the remedial action

6.9 Work safety criteria

6.10 Achievement of the remedial targets

Tables

Table 1: Values of CSR and CSC for the contaminants of concern Table 2: Analytical methods Table 3: Sampling and analytical periodicity Table 4: Hazard areas, evaluated hazards and adopted prevention measures

Tables (attached) Table 1: Soil analytical results

Table 2: Groundwater analytical results

Figures

Figure 1: MNA implementation Site

Figure 2: Layout of groundwater monitoring network and investigation points

Figure 3: Groundwater contour map (monitoring of January 2015)

Figure 4: Layout of MNA implementation

Document structure

This document constitutes the Remedial Operational Plan of the POL Point 83 area, Caserma del Din, Vicenza.

The document is subdivided in the below listed sections:

• Section 1 – Introduction. The document subject is exposed together with a Site environmental history description and the related administrative proceeding.

• Section 2 – Site setting. Specific Site description, with included the geological and hydrogeological setting.

• Section 3 – Contamination levels analysis. Description of soil and groundwater matrices quality at the

Site.

• Section 4 – Summary of the conceptual model. Description of the Site conceptual model;

• Section 5 – Definition of the remedial action. The technology / type of the Site remedial action is exposed.

• Section 6 – Remedial strategy. Description of the activities and analyzed substances with paragraphs where the methodology, intervention program and environmental sustainability are exposed.

6/24

1. Introduction

This document constitutes the Remedial Operational Plan according to D.Lgs. 152/06, prepared by AECOM

URS Italia S.p.A. for the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for the site CCVI018 POL Point 83 located at the Caserma Del Din of Vicenza.

The preparation of this document follows the results of the environmental investigations that have been performed at the Site since July 2009 and of the site specific Risk Assessment approved during the 25 November

2014 Conference of Services.

The main reference documents are:

• AMEC (2009) “Characterization Plan according to D.Lgs. 152/06, Att. IV to Title V – POL Point 83, Dal Molin

Airfield, Vicenza” – October 2009

• AMEC (2014) “Site Specific Risk Assessment, according to D.Lgs. 152/06 – Response to the CoS of

29/01/2014 – POL Point 83 (USTs 83 A-B), Dal Molin Airfield, Vicenza” – June 2014

• Directorate of Public Works “Technical Report of the monitoring results POL Point 83 (UST 83 A, B) –

November 2015

• CH2M HILL (2016) “POL83 Full Scale ORC Injection Remediation Report” – February 2016

1.1 Environmental historical site setting

The Site was notified on 24 July 2009 according to D.Lgs 152/06, following the detection during the USTs removal activities of lead and heavy hydrocarbons concentrations above the contaminant threshold concentrations (CSC) indicated by the D.Lgs. 152/06.

Preliminary investigations of soil and groundwater were performed in July 2009, followed by characterization activities performed in October 2009. The environmental investigations, performed in 2009 in order to evaluate soil and groundwater quality, showed exceedances of the CSCs for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), Benzene, Ethylbenzene, Toluene, Xylenes and MTBE in groundwater. The investigation points location and the groundwater monitoring network are shown in Figure 2.

Following these investigations, a risk assessment was performed (January 2010), then updated in September

2010. The most recent risk assessment was submitted in June 2014 and includes the reference CSRs for soil and groundwater.

A safety measure Pump & Treat (P&T) system, designed in order to avoid the contaminated groundwater migration outside the subject area has been operational from August 2010 to January 2015. At the 25 November

2014 Conference of Services it was decided for the interruption of the P&T system.

A pilot campaign of Oxygen Releasing Compounds (ORC) injection has been performed from October 2010 to

May 2011, followed by site-wide interventions in subsequent campaigns performed in December 2012 and June

2013. The effectiveness of the treatment has been evaluated though a series of monitoring campaigns performed from November 2012 until November 2015.

1.1.1 Administrative proceeding

Site contamination notification to the Authorities – 24 July 2009

Submission of the Investigation Plan according to D. Lgs. 152/06 – October 2009

Submission of the site-specific Risk Assessment – January 2010

Submission of the Risk Assessment update – September 2010

Submission of the Safety Measures Implementation Plan – June 2010

Submission of the Risk Assessment update (new layout) – March 2011

Submission of the Remedial Plan – May 2012

7/24

Submission to the Authorities of the Summary Report of Field Activities – December 2013

Conference of Services requesting the Safety Measures continuation and the Risk Assessment update – January

Submission of the site-specific Risk Assessment update – June 2014, approved at the 25 November 2014 CoS

Submission of the technical report summarizing the monitoring results – November 2015

1.2 Scope of Work

The targets of the Remedial Operational Plan are:

• To evaluate and select the most appropriate remedial strategy for the Site;

• To describe the planned remedial action;

• To describe the monitoring to be performed during and after remedial activities;

• To describe the criteria for the safety of workers and the population;

• To evaluate the environmental compatibility of the proposed intervention;

• To define the costs and timing of the proposed intervention.

8/24

2. Site setting

2.1 Site description and geographical setting

This Remedial Operational Plan concerns the POL Point 83 area, located inside the military installation of

Caserma Del Din in Vicenza.

The site is a former fuel storage area located in the western part of Caserma Del Din, west of the former landing strip (of the former Dal Molin Airport) and south of Buildings 76 and 67. The storage point and the filling station have been demolished due to an enlargement and modification plan of the military installation. The storage point was equipped with a 15 m UST for Diesel Fuel and a 10 m for unleaded gasoline. The USTs were made of steel with reinforced concrete mat foundation and cover. The USTs were located under the filling station building, equipped with two (2) fuel dispensers. After the completion of demolition activities, the Site is now confining with a road on the northern side, a green area on the southern and eastern side, beyond which there was a building

(Building 149).

The Caserma Del Din military installation, located 4 km north of the city of Vicenza, occupies the western part of the former Dal Molin airport. The area is surrounded on every side by residential and rural areas. A small area dedicated to commercial activities is located east of the military installation and includes filling stations, car and motorcycle repair shops, stores and sport centers.

The Bacchiglione River flows on the north-west boundary of the military installation, near the POL Point 83 area.

The Del Din military installation is the headquarter of the 173 rd

Infantry Brigade Combat Team (Airborne) and of three of its battalions, in addition to the 509th Signal Battalion and the USARAF.

In Figure 1 is presented the general setting of the Site interested by this Remedial Operational Plan.

2.2 Geological and hydrogeological setting

The plain of Vicenza is made up of alluvial deposits related to three fluvial systems: Leogra, Timonchio, Astico and Brenta. These fluvial systems originate from the karstic system of the Sette Comuni plateau and from the calcareous formations of the Lessini mountains.

The northern part of the high and middle Venetian plain is mainly composed of coarse sand and gravel deposited by the prealpine rivers (Brenta) at the outlet of the valleys. In the higher part of the plain, near the prealpine mountains, several alluvial fans are overlaid, created by river overflows and migrations, forming mainly gravel deposits with undifferentiated structure even hundreds meters thick. In the middle plain, the alluvial fans of different ages are not superimposed but are clearly divided by thick silty-clayey strata that sometimes tend to cover totally the fans. The subsoil stratigraphy is characterized by alternating strata of alluvial gravel and silt and clay at least 300-400 m thick.

The main fault zones are located at the foot of the Sette Comuni plateau. These faults belong to a fault system oriented from north/north-west to south/south-east (Schio-Vicenza fault), forming a series of Horst in the rock buried under the gravel and sand deposits. These faults are considered to have no influence on the Site geology and hydrogeology.

Due to the lithostratigraphic and hydrogeological characteristics of the Vicenza plain, in the subsoil there are several aquifers whose features are connected with the structure of the permeable coarse-grained alluvial sediments. In the high plain a single phreatic aquifer is present, while in the middle plain there is a multiple aquifer system with a phreatic aquifer and underlying confined aquifers. In the zone of transition between the two aquifer systems there is a line of “risorgive” (natural springs). The aquifer recharge is through the supply by the river, infiltration of rainfall on the plain and infiltration of irrigation water. Passing from the high plain to the low plain the connection between rivers and groundwater is reversed. In the low plain groundwater of the phreatic aquifer supplies the rivers.

Specifically, in the area of interest there is a multi-layered aquifer system that includes a regional interest aquifer, typical of the middle and low Venetian plain. Groundwater levels have semi-artesian features that become artesian with increasing depth.

9/24

2.3 Summary of local stratigraphy

Based on previously performed investigations at the Site, the stratigraphy can be summarized as below:

• A layer of filling material from surface to a variable depth of 0.3 to 2.4 meters b.g.l.. It is composed of sand with gravel and underlying silty sands and silts.

• A layer of brown and grey silt, sometimes clayey, and of clay with silt, till a maximum depth of about 6 meters b.g.l..

• A layer that spans from 4 meters b.g.l. till at least the maximum depth of the performed investigations (11 meters b.g.l.), composed of brown and grey medium and fine sand and, under the 8-10 meters b.g.l., of gravelly sand.

The lower sandy and gravelly level is part of a mainly phreatic aquifer.

2.4 Local hydrogeological setting

Under the Site there is a shallow phreatic aquifer, only locally semi confined by the overlying sandy silts around monitoring well PZ83-1. Groundwater depth is on average of about 5 meters. Based on the previously performed data processing, groundwater flows from east-south-east to west-south-west, with a gradient of about the 8‰.

The Site piezometric surface is shown in Figure 3.

10/24

3. Analysis of contamination

3.1 Soil

During investigations performed on the soil at the Site, including the soil samples collected for the final test of the excavation related to UST83 removals and the soil borings carried out during the July and October 2009 campaigns, several exceedances of CSC limits were detected. The CSC limits refer to Column B of Table 1, Annex 5, Title V, Part IV of D. Lgs. 152/06. Exceedances were found for the following parameters:

• Light Hydrocarbons (C≤12): Exceedances detected in SB83-1, in samples SB83-1-120 (read 120 cm) and

SB83-1-240 (read 240 cm) which values were respectively 1.280 mg/kg and 374 mg/kg. The CSC threshold value is 250 mg/kg;

• Heavy Hydrocarbons (C>12): Exceedances found in UST83-FS (sample coming from the bottom of the excavation for the removal of USTs) with 2.810 mg/kg. Other exceedances have been detected in samples

SB83-1-120, SB83-1-240 and SB83-8-360 which values were respectively 8.430 mg/kg, 1.300 mg/kg and

1.170 mg/kg. The CSC threshold value is 750 mg/kg;

• Lead: It was only detected in sample UST-83-PN (read “Parete Nord”) with 7.700 mg/kg of concentration.

The CSC threshold value is 1.000 mg/kg.

No exceedances from CSC limits were found for Aromatic Polycyclic Hydrocarbons. These parameters were searched for during the sampling campaigns carried out on purpose in March 2014.

The attached Table 1 shows the analytical results from the soil samples. The soil borings and the monitoring wells network of the Site are shown in Figure 2.

3.2 Groundwater

During the characterization activities and during subsequent groundwater monitoring campaigns, several exceedances of CSC limits were found. The CSC limits refer to Table 2, Annex 5, Title V, Part IV of D. Lgs.

152/06. The following parameters were found:

• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons;

• Benzene;

• Ethylbenzene;

• Toluene;

• (m+p) Xylene;

• Xylenes;

• MTBE.

Moreover some exceedances have been detected for iron and manganese. Those elements are ubiquitous in the area and probably should be linked to high natural background concentrations in the area. For this reason they have not been considered contaminants of concern (CoCs) of the Site.

It is emphasized that the majority of the exceedances and the highest concentrations have been detected in the central part of the Site (mainly PZ83-2, PZ83-3, PZ83-6 and PZ83-7) for TPH, Benzene, Ethylbenzene, Toluene, (m+p) Xylene and MTBE. The downstream area shows exceedances only for Xylenes and MTBE.

The results of monitoring campaigns shew a decreasing trend with regard to contaminants concentrations. The most recent monitoring campaigns of 2015 showed CSC exceedances for TPH, Benzene, (m+p)Xylene and

MTBE. At the point of compliance no exceedances have been detected during 2015.

Attached Table 2 shows the results from the analyses of groundwater samples collected since November 2012.

11/24

4. Conceptual model

According to Site investigations and the information gathered and contained within reference documents, here the most relevant elements of the conceptual model are exposed.

The site is a former refueling station located in the western portion of Caserma Del Din, west of the former landing strip (of the former Dal Molin Airport) and south of Buildings 76 and 67. The refueling station was demolished according to an enlargement and modification plan of the military installation. The storage point was equipped with an UST (Underground Storage Tank) of 15 m for diesel fuel and another UST of 10 m for unleaded gasoline.

The soil stratigraphy is composed of (from surface to depth) a layer of filling material (with a maximum depth variable from 0.3 to 2.4 m b.g.l.), an underlying silty-clayey layer (till a maximum depth of 6 m b.g.l.) and a layer

(starting from 4 m b.g.l. and continuing below the maximum borings depth) of sand and gravelly sand.

The investigations have shown the presence of an shallow aquifer just locally semi-confined with a groundwater level depth of 5 m b.g.l., a flow direction from ESE to WNW and a gradient of 8 ‰.

During excavation test activities for the removal of the USTs (UST83) and during site characterization activities, exceedances of CSC levels for the soil were detected. The CSC limits refer to commercial and industrial sites

(Column B of Table 1, Annex 5, Title V, Part IV of D. Lgs. 152/06). Specifically the exceeding parameters were

Light Hydrocarbns (C≤ 12), Heavy Hydrocarbons (C>12) and Lead.

During characterization activities and following groundwater monitoring events, several exceedances of CSC limits were found. The CSC limits refer to Table 2, Annex 5, Title V, Part IV of D. Lgs. 152/06. Specifically the parameters were Total Hydrocarbons, BTEs and MTBE. Furthermore, exceedances of the regulatory limits for

Iron and Manganese were detected, these are possibly due to high natural background levels in the area.

Based on the results of investigations, safety measures activities, remediation activities and three Risk

Assessments have been performed. The following paragraph presents the results coming from the last Risk

Assessment.

4.1 Results of Risk Assessment and comparison with contamination level

The most recent Risk Assessment was presented in June 2014 by AMEC and is an update, after the remedial and safety measures actions performed, of the previous risk assessments submitted in 2010. The Risk

Assessment was approved during the Conference of Services of 25 November 2014.

Four different secondary contamination sources in the unsaturated soil (Area SB83-1, Area SB83-8, UST83-PN and UST83-FS) have been identified. The considered contaminants of concern are light hydrocarbons (C ≤ 12), heavy hydrocarbons (C>12) and lead. All the detected concentrations were found below the CSR limits. The results of the Risk Assessment confirmed that the secondary sources did not define unacceptable risks for the site users, workers of the surroundings and for groundwater.

As for groundwater, two sources have been identified. The first one called GW1 that embraces the central portion of the site and it shows the highest concentrations and GW2 comprising the downstream piezometers, closed to the west boundary of the site.

The performed Risk Assessment allowed the definition of the following CSR limits for the contaminants of concern within the two identified sources.

Source GW1 of the central portion of the site:

• Benzene: 1,4 µg/l

• Toluene: 20,3 µg/l

• Ethylbenzene: 67,8 µg/l

• (m+p)Xylene: 13,6 µg/l

• Total Hydrocarbons: 474,8 µg/l

• MTBE: 54,3 µg/l

12/24

Source GW2, where CSR have been considered equal to CSC or ISS threshold limits, because it is the Point of

Compliance:

• Xylene: 10 µg/l

• MTBE: 40 µg/l

Considering the results of the monitoring campaigns carried out at the Site since 2011, it was clear that some exceedances occurred if compared with the site-specific CSR limits. Specifically, exceedances were detected for

TPH, Benzene, Ethylbenzene, Toluene, (m+p) Xylene and MTBE in GW1, while in GW2 exceedances were found for Xylenes and MTBE.

However, considering the results of the two monitoring campaigns performed in 2015, exceedances of the CSR limits were found for TPH, Benzene, (m+p)Xylene and MTBE in the GW1 source. During 2015 no exceedances were found for GW2 source.

13/24

5. Selection of remedial technology

This chapter presents the adopted strategy aimed at reaching the remedial targets activity for the Site.

5.1 Remedial action goals

Considering the results of the Risk Assessment of June 2014, the calculated CSR limits for environmental protection of groundwater are the following:

Table 1: Values of CSR and CSC for the contaminants of concern

Parameter CSR (µg/l)

11/2014

CSC (µg/l)

D. Lgs. 152/2006

Benzene 1,4 1

Toluene 20,3 15

Ethylbenzene 67,8 50

M,p-Xylene 13,6 10

Total Hydrocarbons (TPH) 474,8 350

MTBE 54,3 40*

* Threshold limit concentration for MTBE proposed by the ISS (Italian Superior Institute for Health).

Based on the Risk Assessment of June 2014, in response to the Conference of Services of 14 January 2014, the remedial action proposed by this Remedial Operational Plan will have the target of respecting the CSR limits for groundwater in the central area of the site (GW1 source) and the respect of CSC in GW2 area (Point of

Compliance).

5.2 Selection of the remedial technology

This paragraph presents in accordance with Conceptual Model and the results of the Risk Assessment, the strategy to be adopted in order to achieve the above described remedial targets.

In order to better select the remediation technology for the remediation activity, the following aspects have been considered:

• The Site is located within a working area: remediation activities have to be compatible with the activities inside the military installation;

• The underground structures have been removed, so no primary sources of contaminations are present in the site;

• Risk Assessment revealed no health risk for all the identified receptors at the site;

• Safety measures and remedial activities already carried out determined the reduction of the soil and groundwater contamination;

• Specifically, the activities based on the aerobic biodegradation enhancement (ORC injection) have reduced the soil and groundwater contamination;

• Groundwater contamination is characterized by residual presence of TPH, BTEXs and MTBE in a limited part of the Site;

• Since March 2012 no more exceedances of CSC at the Point of Compliance were found, except for

Manganese;

• The analysis of results coming from the groundwater samples, show a general decreasing trend in progress. This trend shows the reduction of organic contaminants as presented in figures below.

14/24

/1 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/1 /2

T P

H µ g

/l

Total Hydrocarbons

CSR PZ.83-2 PZ.83-3 PZ.83-6 PZ.83-7 trend PZ 83-3

CSR

/1 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/1 /2

B e n z e n e

(µ g /l

Benzene

CSR PZ.83-2 PZ.83-3 PZ.83-6 PZ.83-7 Trend (PZ.83-6) trend PZ 83-7

CSR

15/24

Based on the above-mentioned considerations, the most appropriate remediation strategy to reach the objectives for the site is the Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA).

Natural Attenuation refers to process that reduce the concentrations in terms of concentration, mass or mobility of harmful chemical substances during space and time through processes that are naturally present in the environment. These kind of processes are based on mechanisms of various nature (biodegradation, dilution, volatilization, adsorption): these phenomena are generally characterized by long time processes.

Biodegradation processes are particularly relevant for the natural attenuation of hydrocarbons because microorganism in the soil are able to decompose them. Acting in this way they contribute to the remediation of the

Site with lower costs compared to more conventional remedial solutions. The Monitored Natural Attenuation has succeeded as a viable alternative when specific conditions at the site (in particular the site presents natural attenuation processes and the absence of risks for human and ecological receptors) allow it.

/1 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/1 /2

M T

B E µ g /l

MTBE

CSR PZ.83-2 PZ.83-3 PZ.83-6 PZ.83-7 trend PZ83-6 trend PZ 83-7

CSR

/1 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/0 /2

/1 /2

(m -p

X y le n e µ g

/l

(m-p) Xylene

CSR PZ.83-2 PZ.83-3 PZ.83-6 PZ.83-7 trend PZ 83-3

CSR

16/24

For an adequate evaluation and quantification of these ongoing processes, a monitoring protocol will be applied for the Site. This monitoring protocol aims at the evaluation of chemical, physical and biological processes that naturally occur in the aquifer and determine the attenuation of contamination in groundwater.

5.2.1 Advantages of the selected remedial technology

The Monitored Natural Attenuation is a remedial technical procedure that implies a medium to long-term monitoring. Even if it is slow, MNA has several advantages if compared with other technologies, because it is not invasive. It also has limited costs and it does not present contraindications if correctly conducted.

Herein the advantages of this solution are presented:

• Absence of substances or reagents. As a consequence no negative secondary effects are present for the environmental matrices and human receptors;

• Zero impact above surface because there are no plants, or areas with forbidden access to unauthorized persons;

• No need of building, hydraulic or mechanic activities with the exception of sampling activities;

• Effective degradation (decomposition) of contaminants due to autochthonous microorganisms;

• Sustainability (limited management costs and energy consumption and limited waste generation).

17/24

6. Remedial strategy

The proposed strategy for the Site cleanup has been developed according to the guidelines “Technical Protocol for Evaluating the Natural Attenuation of MTBE” [API, May 2007], “Guidance on Remediation of Petroleum

Contaminated Ground Water by Natural Attenuation” [Washington State Department of Ecology, July 2005] and

“Use of Monitored Natural Attenuation at Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, and Underground Storage Tank

Sites” [USEPA, April 1999]

The groundwater monitoring program must enable the below listed verifications:

• To verify that Natural Attenuation is active and could ensure the achievement of expectations and of remedial targets;

• To verify that the contamination plume is stable or in reduction;

• To evaluate the possible variation of the Site environmental conditions (hydrogeological, chemical, microbiological) that could negatively affect the effectiveness of natural attenuation processes.

6.1 Definition of the monitoring network

The Controlled Natural Attenuation will be verified through the existing environmental monitoring network, that is considered adequately extended and widely distributed. Specifically, the natural attenuation (MNA) monitoring network will interest the following 12 piezometers, represented in Figure 4: NWP-10; NWP-06; PZ.83-2; PZ83-3;

PZ83-6; PZ83-7; PZ83-8, PZ83-10,PZ83-11; PZ83-12; PZ83-13 and GW83-1.

The network includes the background well located upstream: NWP-10. The piezometers NWP-06, PZ.83-2, PZ.83-3, PZ.83-6, PZ.83-7, PZ.83-12 and PZ.83-13 are located in the central part of the Site, where there is the residual contamination. The piezometers PZ.83-8, PZ.83-10, GW83-1 and PZ.83-11 are located at the western boundary of the area and are the Points of Compliance of the Site.

6.2 Monitored parameters

For a correct evaluation of Natural Attenuation the analysis of the below listed parameters will be performed:

• Groundwater level measurement through field equipment, aimed at the reconstruction of the groundwater surface and the evaluation of the hydrogeological conditions of the Site over time.

• Physico-chemical parameters through field equipment. The monitoring of these parameters is aimed at the evaluation of the persistence of ideal physico-chemical conditions for biodegradation and to detect possible changes in environmental conditions also due to seasonal fluctuations of groundwater level, that could reduce the effectiveness of attenuation processes. The physico-chemical parameters are pH, dissolved oxygen, redox potential, electrical conductivity and temperature.

• Evaluation of geochemical indicators of biodegradation through laboratory analysis (Nitrates, Sulfates, Methane, Manganese II, Iron II, DOC – Dissolved Organic Carbon).

• Chemical lab analyses aimed at the evaluation of the trend of concentrations for the below listed parameters:

• Methyl-t-butyl-ether MTBE;

• Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylene (BTEX);

• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH);

• Total Iron;

• Manganese.

6.3 Procedure for groundwater sampling

Groundwater sampling will be conducted according to the following procedures:

18/24

• Plastic sheeting will be placed on the ground before unlocking the well access box and control panel. All equipment to be used in sampling will be placed only on the plastic sheeting until the sampling event has been completed;

• A multi-parametric probe, calibrated according to manufacturer’s instructions, will be connected to a flow-through cell. Purged groundwater will be directed into the flow-through cell, allowing groundwater quality parameters to be recorded before the purged water contacts the atmosphere;

• The well will be purged at a pumping rate of 3 – 5 liters per minute (l/min). Groundwater quality parameters will be measured and recorded in the field logbook;

• Specific information related to each sample will be recorded in the field logbook, which will describe the sampling location, the time, the sample name/number and type, and the sampler’s identity. Further detailed field observations (appearance, turbidity, specific sampling method, etc.) will also be included.

• During purging, the groundwater quality parameters shall be measured every 3 to 5 minutes, and purging will be performed until the parameters have stabilized.

• Quality parameters are considered stabilized when measurements meet the following criteria over three subsequent readings:

• pH: within 0.1 pH units,

• Specific conductance: within 3%,

• Dissolved oxygen: within 10%,

• Turbidity: within 10% or as low as practicable, and

• ORP: within 10 millivolts (mV);

• Once purging is complete, groundwater will be sampled using a flow rate of 0.5-1 l/min;

• The sampling will be performed wearing phthalate-free gloves, opening only one sample container or one set of sample containers immediately before filling;

• Collected groundwater samples will be placed in designated containers and stored at 4°C ± 2°C. A chain-of-custody form will be filled out in the field.

6.4 Analytical program

Based on the site-specific historical background, the analytical program includes for all samples:

• Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, p-Xylene (BTEX);

• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH);

• Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE);

• Nitrates;

• Sulfates;

• Methane;

• DOC;

• Manganese;

• Manganese (II);

• Total Iron;

• Iron (II);

During each groundwater monitoring event, groundwater level will be measured prior to the chemical/physical parameters detection. Each monitoring well will be purged of groundwater in an amount equal to three to five times the existing water column volume or until water quality field parameters have stabilized. These parameters will be measured through a multi-parametric probe and the measurements will be recorded on standard field data forms during purging of each monitoring well.

The analytical methods adopted for the parameters are listed in the table below.

19/24

Table 2: Analytical methods

Analyte Analytical method

Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylene (BTEX) EPA 8260C 2006

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) APAT CNR IRSA 5160 B2 Man 29 2003 (n-esano)

Iron, Manganese, Manganese (II), Iron (II) EPA 6020A 2007

Methane, Anions (sulfates, nitrates) EPA 9056A 2007 + RSK-175/01 mod

Methyl-t-butyl Ether (MTBE) EPA 5030C 2003 + EPA 8260C 2006

Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) APAT CNR IRSA 5040 Man 29 2003

6.5 Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC) Program

The Quality Assurance (“QA”) - Quality Control (“QC”) program will be implemented as part of the process. The

QA/QC program includes the standard procedures for groundwater field sampling and the procedures for analytical methods to be used in the laboratory. The analytical results of the collected samples and of the quality control samples will be evaluated to control the results quality and the reliability of the sampling and of the analytical methods used.

The QA/QC program will be adopted to verify if analytical results are representative and to prevent cross-contamination events that could occur on the field, during the sample transport and in the laboratory. The main elements of the QA/QC program are described in the paragraphs below.

Sample storage and transport

Immediately after groundwater samples are collected, the sealed sample containers holding the groundwater samples will be stored under refrigerated conditions. Groundwater sample containers will be packed into impact resistant insulated cool boxes with frozen preservation packs to maintain the samples at 4 °C until delivery to the laboratory.

Sample management will be performed in compliance with Chain of Custody (COC). Each groundwater sample will be identified by a unique sample number. The COC records will include the required analysis for each groundwater sample and the date and time that the sample was collected. COC records will accompany the groundwater samples until delivery to the laboratory for analysis. COC records will include the date, project number, site location, destination (laboratory), sample label, analytical plan, date of delivery, name of sampler, and other relevant notes concerning the samples.

Field duplicates

An environmental quality control will be carried out by collecting n. 1 Field Duplicate (FD) sample per each campaign and will be delivered to the lab in order to be analyzed with the other collected samples. The FD samples will be properly labelled with a univocal code in a way that the laboratory will not be able to recognize the parent sample.

6.6 Sampling periodicity

The Natural Attenuation project includes a quarterly sampling of the existing monitoring network.

The table below summarizes the activities periodicity with the correspondence of the chemical analyses and/or of the performed activities.

20/24

Table 3: Sampling and analytical periodicity

Activity Chemical analyses Monitoring points Frequency

Groundwater level measurement

No. 12 piezometers quarterly

Physico-chemical parameters measurements pH, dissolved oxygen, redox, electrical conductibility, temperature

No. 12 piezometers quarterly

Groundwater sampling MTBE, TPH, BTEX, Nitrates, Sulfates, DOC, Fe, Fe 2+

, Mn, Mn 2+

, Methane

No. 12 piezometers quarterly

Annually, a technical report will be submitted, including the data and the data processing results of the cleanup progress monitoring.

6.7 Duration of the interventions

The planned activities will have an expected duration of 36 months. This estimate will possibly be updated on the basis of the results obtained through the monitoring protocol of the intervention. Monitoring reports for the verification of the natural attenuation progress will be submitted annually.

6.8 Cost estimate of the remedial action

The cost related to the remedial action described in this document is estimated in about 80.000 €.

6.9 Work safety criteria

In the context of the remedial activities, the topic of the safety of workers and other people in the areas affected by the field activities shall be adequately dealt with.

The safety measures regarding the installation, management and remedial action monitoring are included in the

Site Safety and Health Plan written by AECOM URS Italia S.p.A. according to D. Lgs. 81/2008. The hazard assessment will be made for the specific activities performed at the Site, prescribing the safety measures to implement in order to minimize the risk for the personnel.

The essential elements of the plan will be:

• The definition of an organizational structure in charge of the evaluation and management of the safety issue;

• The choice of the protection systems, defined on the basis of the hazard assessment for the health and safety of workers and aimed at the minimization of these risks;

• The definition of a control protocol of the execution of the prescriptions;

The specific activities described in the remedial plan are below summarized:

• Groundwater level and physico-chemical parameters measurement;

• Groundwater collection from the monitoring wells.

These activities involve potential hazards, summarized in the table below together with the hazard mitigation measures (the list is only for information and not to be considered complete)

21/24

Table 4: Hazard areas, evaluated hazards and adopted prevention measures

Hazard areas Hazard Prevention measures

Measurement and sampling equipment

Contact with harmful substances Personal Protection Equipment

Operational procedures to minimiz the contacts

Use of electrical equipment Personal Protection Equipment

Work places and environments

Contact with harmful substances Personal Protection Equipment Health and safety plan

Vehicle movements Personal Protection Equipment (high visibility jacket)

Site security Work area fencing

Personal Protection Equipment

General activities Manual handling Dispositivi di Protezione Individuale

Manual devices and equipment Personal Protection Equipment

6.10 Achievement of the remedial targets

The achievement of remedial targets will be obtained when the concentrations of the contaminants of concern for the Site (BTEX, TPH and MTBE) will comply with the CSRs for environmental protection as defined in the Risk

Assessment approved on 25 November 2014 and reported in paragraph 5 of this remedial plan.

The final test of the cleanup will be proposed when at least two successive groundwater samplings will have shown concentrations in compliance with the above-mentioned limits. The final test will be performed in conjunction with the environmental protection Authorities.

The test will be performed through the groundwater sampling of all the monitoring wells at the Site. The samples will be analyzed in the lab for BTEX, TPH and MTBE.

If the test will be successful, a final technical report of the realized interventions, aimed at the closure of the environmental proceeding for the Site, will be submitted.

22/24

Tables

POL Point 83 - USAG Del Din, Dal Molin Airport, Vicenza

MNA Implementation Plan

Table 1. Analytical results of soil samples

UST-83-PN UST-83-PS UST-83-PE UST-83-PO UST-83-FS

0-4 m 0-4 m 0-4 m 0-4 m 0-4 m

Skeleton (2mm-2cm) g/kg - 129 <1 <1 <1 <1

Skeleton (2mm) g/kg - 129 <1 <1 <1 <1

Residual at 105°C % - 77,5 83,8 75,1 81,9 80,7

Metals

Arsenic mg/kg 50 22 20 20 20 19

Cadmium mg/kg 15 0,5 0,2 1 0,2 0,2

Total Chromium mg/kg 800 24 23 27 29 26

Mercury mg/kg 5 <0,1 <0,1 0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Nickel mg/kg 500 24 22 26 28 25

Lead mg/kg 1000 7.700 25 130 31 33

Copper mg/kg 600 28 21 30 19 19

Zinc mg/kg 1500 100 90 290 100 100

Hydrocarbons

Light Hydrocarbons C≤12 mg/kg 250 8 <1 33 <1 3

Heavy Hydrocarbons C>12 mg/kg 750 25 <10 35 <10 2810

BTEXs

Benzene mg/kg 2 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Styrene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Toluene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Xylene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 0,2

MTBE

Methyl tert-butil ether mg/kg 250 <0,1 0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

On site test at Point 83

Parameter u.d.m. CSC D. Lgs. 152/06

Table 1. Analytical results of soil samples

PZ.83-1-120 PZ.83-1-480 PZ.83-1-720 PZ.83-2-360 PZ.83-2-480 PZ.83-2-600 PZ.83-3-120 PZ.83-3-240 PZ.83-3-480 SB.83-1-120

1,2 m 4,8 m 7,2 m 3,6 m 4,8 m 6,0 m 1,2 m 2,4 m 4,8 m 1,2 m

Skeleton (2mm-2cm) g/kg - 42 <1 268 <1 <1 335 95 <1 16 <1

Skeleton (2mm) g/kg - 42 <1 268 <1 <1 335 95 <1 16 <1

Residual at 105°C % - 85,2 79,9 74,5 86 84,1 87,6 84,5 82,5 89,1 80

Metals

Lead mg/kg 1000 46 6 4 21 23 9 45 36 21 200

Hydrocarbons

Light Hydrocarbons C≤12 mg/kg 250 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 2 <1 <1 <1 1280

Heavy Hydrocarbons C>12 mg/kg 750 12 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 8430

BTEXs

Benzene mg/kg 2 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Styrene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Toluene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Xylene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 0,2

Aromatic Organic mg/kg 100 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

MTBE

Methyl tert-butil ether mg/kg 250 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

SB.83-1-240 SB.83-1-360 SB83-2-120 SB83-2-360 SB83-2-480 SB83-3-120 SB83-3-240 SB83-3-480 SB83-4-240 SB83-4-360 SB83-4-480

2,4 m 3,6 m 1,2 m 3,6 m 4,8 m 1,2 m 2,4 m 4,8 m 2,4 m 3,6 m 4,8 m

Skeleton (2mm-2cm) g/kg - <1 <1 90 <1 <1 145 50 <1 <1 <1 464

Skeleton (2mm) g/kg - <1 <1 90 <1 <1 145 50 <1 <1 <1 464

Residual at 105°C % - 75,9 74,4 81,4 72,7 73,6 82,2 75,4 75,7 85,4 83,3 91,2

Metals

Lead mg/kg 1000 68 36 43 37 42 42 83 53 33 30 8

Hydrocarbons

Light Hydrocarbons C≤12 mg/kg 250 374 13 3 3 2 2 2 2 4 <1 <1

Heavy Hydrocarbons C>12 mg/kg 750 1300 596 <10 26 <10 10 274 <10 <10 <10 <10

BTEXs

Benzene mg/kg 2 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Styrene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Toluene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Xylene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Aromatic Organic mg/kg 100 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

MTBE

Methyl tert-butil ether mg/kg 250 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Parameter u.d.m. CSC D. Lgs. 152/06

Sampling on 13 July 2009

Sampling on 13 July 2009

Parameter u.d.m. CSC D. Lgs. 152/06

Table 1. Analytical results of soil samples

SB83-5-240 SB83-5-360 SB83-5-480 SB83-6-240 SB83-6-360 SB83-6-480 SB83-7-240 SB83-7-360 SB83-7-480 SB83-8-240 SB83-8-360

2,4 m 3,6 m 4,8 m 2,4 m 3,6 m 4,8 m 2,4 m 3,6 m 4,8 m 2,4 m 3,6 m

Skeleton (2mm-2cm) g/kg - <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 1 <1 <1 25 <1 <1

Skeleton (2mm) g/kg - <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 1 <1 <1 25 <1 <1

Residual at 105°C % - 76,7 73,9 72,7 74,1 77,8 78,4 77,9 74 80,5 77,1 71

Metals

Lead mg/kg 1000 52 40 42 17 8 8 8 17 11 43 45

Hydrocarbons

Light Hydrocarbons C≤12 mg/kg 250 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Heavy Hydrocarbons C>12 mg/kg 750 14 15 26 14 11 13 12 19 13 19 1170

BTEXs

Benzene mg/kg 2 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Styrene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Toluene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Xylene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Aromatic Organic mg/kg 100 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

MTBE

Methyl tert-butil ether mg/kg 250 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

SB83-8-480 SB83-9-240 SB83-9-360 SB83-9-480 SB83-4-240 SB83-4-360 SB83-4-480

4,8 m 2,4 m 3,6 m 4,8 m 2,4 m 3,6 m 4,8 m

Skeleton (2mm-2cm) g/kg - <1 25 <1 119 <1 <1 <1

Skeleton (2mm) g/kg - <1 25 <1 119 <1 <1 <1

Residual at 105°C % - 73,7 77,9 75,7 75,6 75,5 77,6 77,8

Metals

Lead mg/kg 1000 39 32 40 35 24 8 9

Hydrocarbons

Light Hydrocarbons C≤12 mg/kg 250 173 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Heavy Hydrocarbons C>12 mg/kg 750 139 14 14 17 14 14 24

BTEXs

Benzene mg/kg 2 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Styrene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Toluene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Xylene mg/kg 50 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1

Aromatic Organic mg/kg 100 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

MTBE

Methyl tert-butil ether mg/kg 250 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 <0,1 u.d.m.Parameter CSC D. Lgs. 152/06

Parameter u.d.m. CSC D. Lgs. 152/06

Sampling on 21 and 26 October 2009

Sampling on 21 and 26 October 2009

Table 1. Analytical results of soil samples

S1 S1 S1

1-2 m 2-3 m 3-4 m

Residual at 105°C - 76,5 76,7 74,9

Skeleton - 0 0 0

Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds

Benzo(a)Anthracene mg/kg 10 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Benzo(a)Pyrene mg/kg 10 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene mg/kg 10 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene mg/kg 10 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene mg/kg 10 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Chrysene mg/kg 50 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Dibenzo(a,e)Pyrene mg/kg 10 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Dibenzo(a,l)Pyrene mg/kg 10 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Dibenzo(a,i)Pyrene mg/kg 10 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Dibenzo(a,h)Pyrene mg/kg 10 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Dibenzo anthracene mg/kg 10 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Indenopirene mg/kg 5 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Pyrene mg/kg 50 <0,01 <0,01 <0,01

Parameter

Sampling on 7 March 2014 u.d.m. CSC D. Lgs. 152/06

Table 2. Analytical results of groundwater samples

Parameter

Hydrocarbon s C6÷C10 n-hexane

Hydrocarbon s C10÷C40 n-hexane

Total hydrocarbon s n-hexane

Benzene Ethylbenzen e Toluene (m÷p) Xylene Xylene Styrene MtBE Iron Iron II Lead Manganese u.d.m. μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l μg/l

CSC D. Lgs. 152/06 - - 350 1 50 15 10 10 25 40 200 - 10 50

13/11/2012 <10 <25 17.5 0.107 0.124 1.12 0.35 N.A. <0,11 <1 N.A. <10 <0,5 <0,5

22/01/2015 10 25 17.5 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. <0,11 1 20 10 0.5 0.5

13/11/2012 76 <25 88.5 0.53 0.76 1.08 0.45 N.A. <0,11 1 N.A. 1640 <0,5 432

21/12/2012 10.2 <25 22.7 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. <0,11 1.53 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

31/01/2013 90 <25 103 1.19 2.05 0.169 1.59 N.A. <0,11 2.25 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

28/02/2013 76 <25 88.5 0.65 0.06 0.107 0.69 N.A. <0,11 1.94 N.A. 810 <0,5 638

03/04/2013 N.A. N.A. 523 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. <0,11 4.5 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

10/05/2013 104 <25 117 0.149 0.06 0.06 1.46 N.A. <0,11 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

30/05/2013 38 <25 50.5 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. <0,11 1 N.A. 430 <0,5 493

19/07/2013 312 <25 325 0.29 20.1 0.6 22.3 N.A. <0,11 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

06/09/2013 22.1 <25 34.6 0.36 3.6 0.26 4.1 N.A. <0,11 2.56 N.A. 400 <0,5 506

30/10/2013 34 25 46.5 0.82 1.19 0.06 0.8 N.A. 0.11 4.4 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

27/11/2013 10.7 25 23.2 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. 0.11 4.4 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

10/01/2014 11.8 25 24.3 2.5 0.06 0.8 0.42 N.A. 0.11 7.7 N.A. 340 0.5 740

28/02/2014 10 25 17.5 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. 0.11 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

28/03/2014 10 25 17.5 0.08 0.97 0.157 1.43 N.A. 0.11 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

09/05/2014 10 25 17.5 0.54 1.35 0.06 1.28 N.A. 0.11 4.7 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

22/01/2015 10 25 17.5 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. 0.11 1 1130 870 0.5 428

30/04/2015 11.5 25 24 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. N.A. 1.22 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

28/05/2015 31 48 79 0.08 0.42 0.194 1.25 N.A. 0.11 0.733 N.A. 4010 0.5 32.9

30/07/2015 69.5 59 129 0.08 2.66 0.06 5.3 N.A. N.A. 1.59 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

01/10/2015 10 25 17.5 0.08 0.06 0.178 0.09 N.A. 0.11 2.36 N.A. 460 0.5 602

20/10/2015 36 51 87 0.05 0.134 0.05 0.194 N.A. 0.05 2.46 N.A. 900 0.5 646

13/01/2011 N.A. N.A. 1850 1.5 1660 21 3510 N.A. <0,1 9.3 5400 N.A. N.A. N.A.

14/02/2011 N.A. N.A. 952 3.2 1330 6.4 2050 N.A. 0.2 16 8800 N.A. N.A. N.A.

15/03/2011 N.A. N.A. 1290 2.3 1120 16 2410 N.A. <0,1 7.9 6100 N.A. N.A. N.A.

13/04/2011 N.A. N.A. 2250 2.8 2270 11 5910 N.A. <0,1 18 9000 N.A. N.A. N.A.

16/05/2011 N.A. N.A. 1880 2.6 4620 46 16000 N.A. 0.5 20 11000 N.A. N.A. N.A.

15/06/2011 N.A. N.A. 1200 3.5 287 44 4000 N.A. N.A. 54 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

14/11/2011 N.A. N.A. 1760 2.2 1720 28 5260 N.A. <0,1 13 21000 N.A. N.A. N.A.

13/11/2012 4100 <25 4110 1.47 0.63 3.7 600 N.A. <0,11 8.6 N.A. 3600 <0,5 800

21/12/2012 700 <25 713 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.62 N.A. <0,11 2.77 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

31/01/2013 7100 <25 7110 0.73 390 0.44 960 N.A. 0.189 2.3 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

28/02/2013 7600 <25 7610 0.9 120 0.29 470 N.A. <0,11 3.2 N.A. 1260 <0,5 325

03/04/2013 N.A. N.A. 4610 1.29 1.07 0.81 279 N.A. <0,11 1.31 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

10/05/2013 2900 <25 2910 0.37 65 0.41 266 N.A. <0,11 2.5 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

30/05/2013 240 <25 253 0.08 0.06 0.06 6.8 N.A. <0,11 1 N.A. <10 <0,5 399

19/07/2013 2380 <25 2390 0.22 0.06 0.06 210 N.A. <0,11 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

06/09/2013 780 <25 793 0.24 4.5 0.35 86 N.A. <0,11 1 N.A. 4200 <0,5 310

30/10/2013 910 112 1020 0.23 84 0.64 30 N.A. 4.4 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

27/11/2013 380 50 430 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. 2.17 1.4 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

10/01/2014 4300 38.6 4340 0.34 157 0.93 114 N.A. 0.11 1 N.A. 2950 0.5 557

28/02/2014 1110 94 1200 0.18 122 0.56 148 N.A. 0.11 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

28/03/2014 590 25 603 0.098 54 0.14 73 N.A. 0.11 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

09/05/2014 2020 25 2030 0.08 1.32 0.06 42 N.A. 0.11 3.6 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

22/01/2015 2330 25 2340 0.092 2.46 0.06 68 N.A. 0.11 1 5740 4600 0.5 287

30/04/2015 380 25 393 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. N.A. 2.16 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

28/05/2015 400 36 436 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. 0.0746 1.02 N.A. 24700 0.5 239

30/07/2015 455 258 713 0.142 34 0.06 44.5 N.A. N.A. 1.06 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

01/10/2015 570 660 1230 0.08 58.5 0.217 109 N.A. 0.11 1 N.A. 5000 0.5 283

20/10/2015 555 213 768 0.1 42.4 0.1 52.2 N.A. 0.1 0.5 N.A. 4900 0.5 257

27/11/2015 529 460 989 0.243 9.88 0.401 21.8 N.A. 0.1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

14/11/2012 <10 <25 17.5 <0,08 <0,06 0.4 0.118 N.A. <0,11 1 N.A. 2310 <0,5 327

10/01/2014 10 25 17.5 0.08 0.06 0.44 0.212 N.A. 0.11 1 N.A. 2090 0.878 408

28/02/2014 10 25 17.5 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. 0.11 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

28/03/2014 10 25 17.5 0.08 0.177 0.06 0.188 N.A. 0.11 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

22/01/2015 10 25 17.5 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. 0.11 1 3500 3180 0.5 221

13/01/2011 N.A. N.A. 462 4.7 1.4 0.4 150 N.A. <0,1 47 5800 N.A. N.A. N.A.

14/02/2011 N.A. N.A. 554 11 110 7.7 241 N.A. 0.1 68 4200 N.A. N.A. N.A.

15/03/2011 N.A. N.A. 469 4.1 0.4 0.5 235 N.A. <0,1 38 2000 N.A. N.A. N.A.

13/04/2011 N.A. N.A. 405 3.6 0.9 0.1 31 N.A. <0,1 32 3500 N.A. N.A. N.A.

16/05/2011 N.A. N.A. 615 4.3 1 7.5 1200 N.A. <0,1 28 4100 N.A. N.A. N.A.

15/06/2011 N.A. N.A. N.A. 2.9 145 N.A. 504 N.A. N.A. <40 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

13/11/2012 121 <25 134 4.8 0.33 0.85 1.7 N.A. <0,11 31.8 N.A. 982 <0,5 567

21/12/2012 <10 <25 17.5 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. <0,11 57 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

31/01/2013 104 <25 117 0.08 0.203 0.06 2.96 N.A. <0,11 39 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

28/02/2013 60 <25 72.5 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. <0,11 55 N.A. 780 <0,5 650

03/04/2013 N.A. N.A. 125 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 N.A. <0,11 20.8 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.