My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
V
>
VICTOR
>
1220
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0009056
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/3/2019 9:07:45 AM
Creation date
10/3/2019 8:43:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0009056
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0004059
FACILITY_NAME
LODI DOOR & METAL CO
STREET_NUMBER
1220
STREET_NAME
VICTOR
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
LODI
Zip
95240
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
1220 VICTOR RD
P_LOCATION
02
P_DISTRICT
004
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.
/
242
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
Page 2 • <br /> Concern #2 <br /> The test was run for five and a half hours. This may not have been long <br /> enough to see any changes in other wells. <br /> Answer #2 <br /> It is my understanding that the primary purpose of the pump test was to <br /> determine whether or not the water bearing zones within the screened <br /> intervals of monitoring wells MW-6 (deep) and MW-4 (shallow) are <br /> hydraulically connected. Monitoring well MW-4 is less than 10 feet away <br /> from monitoring well MW-6. The pump test resulted in a very rapid <br /> draw-down of 1421 feet in monitoring well MW-6 with no affect on the <br /> depth of groundwater in monitoring well MW-4. Five and one half hours <br /> under these draw-down conditions appeared to be more than adequate to <br /> conclude that there was no immediate (close) hydraulic connection <br /> between the water bearing zones within the screened intervals of <br /> monitoring well MW-4 and MW-6. <br /> Concern #3 <br /> Continuous recorders were not used to monitor the wells. Only five <br /> water level measurements were collected from well MW-1, MW-2, MW-3, and <br /> MW-5, including the static water level measurement prior to pumping. <br /> The next measurements in these wells were collected three hours after <br /> the pumping test began and then at intervals of up to one hour. There <br /> is not enough data to draw any conclusions from these wells. <br /> Answer #3 <br /> Again, it is my understanding that the primary purpose of the pump test <br /> was to determine whether or not the water bearing zones within the <br /> intervals of monitoring well MW-6 and MW-4 are hydraulically connected. <br /> I agree with your statement that "there is not enough data to draw any <br /> conclusions from these wells " (referring to wells #MW-1, MW-2, MW-3, <br /> and MW-5). <br /> Concern #4 <br /> Water levels in monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2, and MW-3 fluctuated from <br /> 0.1 to 0.16 feet during the test. However, water levels MW-4 and MW-5 <br /> did not fluctuate during the test. The following day water levels were <br /> measured at two times during the day (four hours apart) to see if ground <br /> water fluctuated in the three wells, without pumping MW-6. The water <br /> levels in the wells fluctuated 0.04 to 0.05 feet. Are there any outside <br /> influences on the wells that could cause these fluctuations? Static <br /> water level measurements should have been taken the day before the test, <br /> at regular intervals to check for any fluctuations in the wells. <br /> Answer #4 <br /> Pumping from local irrigation wells and tidal effects could contribute <br /> to fluctuations in the groundwater levels in monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2 <br /> and MW-3. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.