My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 1
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
D
>
DURHAM FERRY
>
4491
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0544625
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 1
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/3/2019 8:12:28 PM
Creation date
7/3/2019 4:20:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
FILE 1
RECORD_ID
PR0544625
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0003113
FACILITY_NAME
ZAPIEN MARKET
STREET_NUMBER
4491
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
DURHAM FERRY
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
TRACY
Zip
95376
APN
25504003
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
4491 W DURHAM FERRY RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\wng
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
410
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
i <br /> 2.2 Performance of Test <br /> In well tests conducted with an above ground pump prior to the EVR pilot study, the aquifer <br /> produced no more than 0.5 gpm and only for a period of a few hours. A three hour non- <br /> enhanced vacuum recovery test was conducted with the newly constructed recovery well at <br /> the outset of the EVR pilot study. In this non-enhanced vacuum recovery test, groundwater <br /> was entrained with air through the stinger using vacuum, but the well head was open to <br /> atmosphere. This test corroborates previous findings that the aquifer would not sustain a flow <br /> greater than 0.5 gpm under conventional pumping conditions. <br /> Application of vacuum in the recovery well was achieved by closing the well head to <br /> atmosphere. Combinations of drawdown levels and vacuum pressures were used to determine <br /> the optimal parameters for maximizing groundwater recovery. Drawdown levels within the <br /> recovery well ranged from about 2.5 to 8.5 feet below static groundwater level. Vacuum <br /> pressures at the well head ranged from 0 to 55 inches of water column. Groundwater <br /> recovery rates ranged from 0.5 to 1.4 gpm and were determined by timing the duration I. <br /> required to fill a'unit volume container with water effluent discharged from the <br /> recovery/treatment system. in this study, optimal recovery well drawdown and well head <br /> vacuum are 8.5 feet and 45 inches of water column, respectively. Pertinent optimal <br /> recovery/treatment system settings are provided in Table 1. Once the optimal settings for <br /> natural and engineered systems were determined during the shake-down stage, the pilot study ' <br /> ensued at these settings, which consequently provided a well discharge of i gpm. s <br /> Groundwater levels in the recovery well were determined using pre-measured markings made j <br /> on the stinger during well head fabrication and accounting for the distance between the a <br /> stinger andAhe groundwater surface. Groundwater levels in the observations wells were made <br /> at regularly timed intervals using an electronic tape indicator. Table 2 summarizes the <br /> groundwater level measurements collected during the EVR pilot study. <br /> 3.0 Test Results <br /> A well yield of 1 gpm was sustained for a period of 72 hours in the pilot study. This <br /> represents a two-fold increase in groundwater recovery compared to standard pumping and <br /> non-enhanced vacuum techniques conducted at the test site prior to the pilot study. <br /> A maximum drawdown in the recovery well of 8.5 feet induced observation well drawdowns <br /> of about 0.5 and 0.4 feet at lateral distances of about 5 and 12 feet from the recovery well. <br /> Utilization of the vacuum generated by the specified treatment system to recover groundwater <br /> represents a new application for the system and demonstrates that groundwater can be <br /> effectively recovered from low yield aquifers without the use of pumps, downhole switches <br /> and timers. <br /> 4.0 Cost Considerations <br /> The EVR pilot study required approximately 130 in-field man hours to conduct. Capital <br /> expenditures totaled slightly less than $14,000. The more significant of the expenditures,were <br /> 519 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.