ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0012556 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, . u Mr. Chuck Carmel July 1 L. 1991 Page 7 Remediation Schedule The groundwater extraction system has been operating at this site intermittently since mid-1984 g r1 1984 and March 1987• Due to modifications to,he system, and ran continuously between Aped was not operated full-tune after March for both compliance and operational reasons,the systemenation since June 5, 1991,pumping an 1987. The system is now on-line and has been in fall e went from the separator tank is sampled twice average of 14.8 gallons per minute( }• each month to monystem Will itor the hydrocarbontested constituents ar found to be outtof compiniance based remain in full operation unless the to les. The extraction pzocess will be continued until on the analytical results of the effluent same that thehydrocarbon corstituent concentrations found in the 1egulatory agencies determine undwater monitoring wells have been reduced suctendy. groundwater samples from the gr concentrations -1•t�e hydrocarbon in the monitoring wells will continue to monitored on a hYdr0carbon concentrations sufficiently quarterly basis. An estimated schedule for reducing ossiblhy be de ermined after two to three quarters to complete the groundwater remediation can radon. of sampling with the extraction system in op Pumping Test and Zero Line Def[t[ition ' test was performed on the groundwater recovery weu As stated above,a sthis section o p Pumping suthe results of this pumping test including a modeli=.� in August 1990. sexton p pumping rate which should be sufficient to continue to analysis that was used toi ate P-beneath the site. control the hydrocarbon plume well at the site (R-13)was pumped for 6 hours at variable rates and the flow ig The recovery The flow rates were measured by and water level changes in the well were measured. d at redetermined time increments• the total gallons pompe p tune. the pump's flow meter and recording digital stop watch was used to track Flow was adjusted using a gate valve. A digi p out the test to control the flow rate. Water levels Numerous flow reading s were taken through �� a tr�ysdncer controlled by a data logger were recorded using an electronic sounder and a pn..sin portable field computer. The data (In-Situ Hermit). The data were subsequently dow ft Laded to ap recorded during the test are pro in steps los water-level recovery. Figure 5 shows the test data During the first step, the average The test consisted of three Pump g s,p lasted for 2 hours• m for the second step, in graphical form. Each pumQing P Less than 1.5 ft of drawdown pumping rate was about 6.1 gptn• •rne flow rate was increased o l�2 gP ain to 12.3 ppm for the third stv. and subsequently increased11duriagain maximum attainable rate of well doting the entire test. Initial plans for th into m included a maximum 20- occurred in the pressure on the pump resulted gpm flow rate. However, back f about 12.5 gpm. Brown and Caldwell Ccnsuwtants