Laserfiche WebLink
Memorandum <br /> Revised Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 9 December 1994 <br /> Geweke <br /> Comments on Bacterial Monitoring <br /> Total bacterial numbers in MW14 and EWl were low compared to other inoculated wells, perhaps <br /> due to high concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons. The two wells have higher concentrations <br /> of dissolved contamination than the other monitoring wells. <br /> Vapor and gas monitoring results appear inconsistent with expected results in some respects. Two <br /> wells near the center of the inoculated area, VW4, VW5 have higher CO2 concentrations than <br /> other wells, indicating potential bacterial activity. However, from August through September, in <br /> VWl, VW3, VW5, VW6, MW3, MtAT4, and MW14, the general trend of CO2 production was down <br /> and the trend of O, production was up. This is converse to what we might expect if bacteria were <br /> using oxygen and producing CO2. In these same wells the concentration of hydrocarbon vapors <br /> decreased, indicating possible bacterial activity. <br /> The October 1994 vapor/gas results were the reverse of the August/September trend. In most <br /> monitoring points, there was an increase in CO2 and a decrease in Q indicating possible bacterial <br /> activity. However, there was also an increase in hydrocarbon vapors. <br /> No borings were drilled so we have no data on the impact of inoculation on soil, other than <br /> vapor/gas results. <br /> A summary of Geweke's requested changes and subsequent modifications to the RMI& is <br /> included with the RMRP Cover Letter. <br />