Laserfiche WebLink
v <br /> ARCAUIS GERAGHTY&MILLER <br /> retardation factor. This rate of migration must be further modified <br /> to account for the amount of attenuation of the compound due to <br /> dispersion and biodegradation. This series of calculations must be <br /> performed for each constituent of interest which is identified and <br /> quantified in the soil analysis. <br /> At each step of the calculation process, there are inherent and <br /> significant sources of error which ultimately make this <br /> quantification process highly uncertain. For example, the above- <br /> described partitioning calculations required the use of a partitioning <br /> coefficient. The value of the partitioning coefficient can only be <br /> obtained experimentally and varies significantly with soil type. In <br /> instances where experimentally determined partitioning coefficients <br /> are not available, they can be estimated using regression equations. <br /> The partition coefficient has been recognized as a key parameter in <br /> predicting the environmental fate of organic compounds. The <br /> uncertainty (error) associated with estimation of the partitioning <br /> coefficient, when one is not able to relate the site soil to one <br /> identified under carefully controlled laboratory conditions can be <br /> orders of magnitude (i.e. greater that a factor of 10). A second <br /> example of the uncertainty in predicting the potential impact on <br /> groundwater based on a soil sample is that the hydraulic <br /> conductivity of the medium must be know in order to predict the <br /> advective rate of transport. Since the value of hydraulic <br /> conductivity varies significantly with soil type and even spatially <br /> within a soil type, the error associated with a calculation dependent <br /> upon assuming a hydraulic conductivity value or spatially <br /> extrapolating a measured hydraulic conductivity value can also be <br /> orders of magnitude. Theses errors ultimately are multiplicative <br /> and can result a highly misleading assessment of the potential for <br /> future impact to downgradient groundwater. <br /> Because the task of hand-calculating predictions of future <br /> downgradient groundwater impact is so onerous, some <br /> investigators have utilized numerical computer models to ease the <br /> calculation work load. However, it is important to emphasize that <br /> while the burden of the onerous work load has been removed, the <br /> uncertainty attendant to the process described above has not been <br /> removed. To make matters worse, the uncertainty is hidden by the <br /> convenience of the automated calculation, unless a formal <br /> evaluation of the uncertainty is also included as part of the <br /> assessment. <br /> Some regulatory agencies have in the past used more simplified <br /> calculations than those described above to set soil concentration <br /> guidance levels which are designed to be protective of <br /> groundwater. These approaches have declined in usage and <br /> application as the knowledge of contaminant fate and transport has <br /> 3 <br />