Laserfiche WebLink
r <br /> (MW-1, MW-3, MW-4, and RW-1) did increase indicating that vapor development of <br /> these wells was occurring and that progressively larger amounts of gasoline as vapor <br /> r <br /> were being extracted from the vadose zone <br /> r <br /> Based on the vapor concentrations from each of the vapor extraction wells during the <br /> first 60 hours of VES operation, the vapor extraction wells (VP-1, VP-2, VP-3, and VP- <br /> 4) were turned off line and used as vapor inlet wells on January 8, 1989 to increase <br /> rthe flow of clean air into the vadose zone and thus increase the flow of gasoline <br /> vapors to the vapor extraction wells This also allowed for isolation of MW-3 on its <br /> own blower further increasing the rate of vapor extraction from this well For the next <br /> rfive months the VES operated with four (4) high capacity regenerative blowers on four <br /> monitoring/recovery wells (MW-1, MW-3, MW-4, and RW-1) using VP-1, VP-2, VP-3, <br /> and VP-4 as vapor inlet wells <br /> r <br /> During the month of May 1990, the blower operating on MW-4 was switched to <br /> r <br /> operate as a clean air injection blower manifolded to MW-9 and PW-1 to possibly <br /> rincrease the radius of influence of the VES in the central area of the site MW-4 was <br />' manifolded to the blower operating MW-3 and the vapor extraction wells (VP-1, VP-2, <br /> VP-3, and VP-4) The vapor extraction wells were turned back on to remediate this <br /> rarea more efficiently However, after one month there was no appreciable difference <br />' in the rate of remediation using clean air injection Therefore in June 1990, the system <br /> was reconfigured to its' original set-up with MW-4 manifolded to its' own blower and <br />' the vapor extraction wells turned off and used as passive air inlet wells <br />' VAPOR EXTRACTION TECHNOLOGY, INC <br />