Laserfiche WebLink
FROM URSGa W-G SRNTR BRRBARR eOS 964 02S9 1999.11-23 16 23 #380 P 13/14 <br /> 4 DOW Iftd.,Mio.usaWd.1. O nanlS ladurldo•4mab ,Irta. <br /> ®ec®ntamination Why ®o We Purge Wells T? <br /> • Water In the Borehole ABOVE the Screened <br /> Interval Is Stagnant <br /> r . Most Sampling Devices Can ONLY Access <br /> 1,� f the Standing Casing Water <br /> • TEGD &SW-846 Recommend (require) <br /> Purging Based on Old Studies <br /> • Purge Methodology Based on Older Sailer <br /> or Pump-sagling Tec es <br /> 0ECJN is Simple EffccVvc.Efficient �I�/achy• y <br /> .11 <br /> O 516111(1 n.Wsrdop agmtoY.Irm. 0 SINK iftWOMv.Uiellvd.I/o <br /> tftl� $ I� ,t a�w�w4 ®m�0 lOol�ec, o� Where the KABIS Samp6er <br /> Takes Its SampOe <br /> 0 Water not In communication _ <br /> with the groundwater �. � -�r� � <br /> iw..>sa- -��, x: I)raaate Point Interval Devlca <br /> formation Is stagnant [Senor <: = <br /> cv-preciston Depth Sampiing Possible <br /> �TEGD rec rote da well ra^Sampies in the Wella Zow Zone <br /> purgtng when using a bailer <br /> ((S EPA 1994) m'Satnples through LNAPL <br /> 'O"No or Improper purging V a n•» n0" O'Scavange-samples DNAPLs <br /> n ~ heater Cam forerro <br /> (Barcelona I9t*0� <br /> 0 <br /> O SINK I"Wh'ar UW604.in*. O nadir 1FrlwrAM Uodr.d.Irm. <br /> 17 <br /> The Amount of Produced Purge-water Hazardous Si ngie-We[O Cos$ Analysis <br /> Waste Per Stre has Steadily Increased <br /> -+-88lsiSlra Annual monitoring Costa <br /> 1000 When Compared to a Sailer Mmicro Pur" <br /> outer Technologies O BATT RKASIS <br /> 100 Costs can be reduced i <br /> t by more than W14 E4o,v00 <br /> over 1-year's tune $3tl,aoo <br /> 10 This can equate to $20,000 <br /> 510,0001 s in savings 310,040 <br /> 1 for each well 1r1 io <br /> f979 f979 i9A9 f9t36 00 ..• Q <br />