Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br /> Mr. David L. Crow Project 2520-100.01 <br /> March 15, 1995 <br /> Page 2 <br /> through two granular activated carbon (GAC) vessels before being reinjected into the <br /> aquifer. <br /> EMCON conducted remediation system startup on January 21, 1995. Subsequently the <br /> engine was found to be malfunctioning and hence replaced. Analytical results of soil vapor <br /> samples collected during the source test indicated that the system was not in compliance <br /> with the conditions attached to the ATC No. N-26$2-1-0. EMCON immediately contacted <br /> the APCD to report the results. EMCON conducted a second source test to demonstrate <br /> compliance with the new engine. The second source test was conducted on February 21, <br /> 1995. <br /> Soil vapor samples collected during the source test were subsequently analyzed for total <br /> purgeable hydrocarbons; and benzene. toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes (BTEX). <br /> Inlet and exhaust vapor samples were collected in new Tedlar:0 bags using a vacuum pump <br /> connected to an iron lung sampling device. The vacuum pump slowly evacuates the apace <br /> between the iron lung and the Tedlar bag. This creates a pressure difference between the iron <br /> lung and the sampling line which causes a vapor sample to be drawn into the bag. After filling, <br /> • the bags were sealed and forwarded to a laboratory, accompanied by the appropriate chain-of- <br /> custody documentation, for analysis. Attached are the laboratory results for the vapor samples, <br /> along with the chain-of-custody documentation for both the test dates(see Attachment A). <br /> Total inlet soil vapor flow rates were measured using a Pitot tube. The total flow through the <br /> system was calculated based on the volume of air displaced by the engine per revolution. <br /> Individual flows from the wells were measured using pitot tubes and Dwyer magnahelic gages. <br /> The measured total flow into and out of the ICE was corrected for temperature to obtain the <br /> actual flow rate (see Attachment B for calculation sheets). Field data sheets, which document <br /> the total and individual flow rates on the sampling dates, are attached (see Attachment Q. <br /> Table 1 summarizes the analytical results, flow rates of both soil and exhaust vapors, mass <br /> destruction efficiencies, and mass discharge rates of purgeable hydrocarbons and BTEX. <br /> Example calculations of mass destruction efficiencies and mass discharge rates are attached (see <br /> Attachment E). <br /> Influent and effluent groundwater samples collected during the source test were subsequently <br /> analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHG) and BTEX. The total flow <br /> through the system was measured using a Signet" flow totalizer before the spray aeration tank <br /> and after the carbon vessels. The difference in the volume of groundwater between influent and <br /> effluent flows was due to the vaporization of groundwater in the spray aeration tank. <br /> Observations are recorded on the field data sheets (see Attachment Q. Table 2 summarizes the <br /> �r <br /> .W.W.T1Z\252n5201000.1 MS-94Nmam:4 <br />