Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Jim Barton • • <br /> 6421 W. Capitol Avenue Closure Consideration <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> March 2002 to present(last event March 2006), concentrations usually in the hundreds of <br /> parts per billion. Flow direction at MW-8A during active GWE is problematical as the <br /> well was the up-gradient monitoring point in the second zone and had no other up- <br /> gradient or cross-gradient monitoring points within approximately 270 degrees. <br /> Groundwater flow at MW-8A appeared to have been generally toward the southeast at a <br /> gradient of approximately 0.001 to 0.002,but there is also some uncertainty regarding the <br /> inferred gradient. <br /> Cross sections show several significant sand units with great lateral extent and few <br /> laterally continuous clay intervals. Silt intervals are more common, but the West Haz Mat <br /> CPT logs indicate that the silt units generally do not have elevated pore pressures,hence <br /> there does not appear to be significant barriers to vertical migration of contaminants in <br /> the area. <br /> EHD-produced cross-sections yield slightly different water zone intervals compared to <br /> the Flag City Chevron and New West conventions as follows: <br /> Flag City Chevron New West Shell E1ID <br /> Vadose 0 10 ft bsg Vadose: 0— 14 it bsg Vadose-variable <br /> 1'zone: 10 to 35 ft bsg A zone: 5 to 25 ft bsg 1' zone:5-30 ft bsg <br /> 2° zone:40 to 60 ft bsg B zone:40—50 ft bsg 2° zone:33—50 ft bsg <br /> Rocky's zone:70—75 ft bsg C zone:70—75 ft bsg <br /> Secondary aquifer: 90-110 ft <br /> Primary aquifer: 120-150 ft <br /> Intervals between sand zones are generally silt, locally clay,but give little indication of <br /> forming a laterally continuous barrier to vertical migration of impacted groundwater as <br /> shown on the West Haz Mat CPT logs. EHD did note some mention of positive and <br /> negative vertical gradients,which would imply some sort of barriers,but EHD has not <br /> reviewed this data. <br /> The nearly instantaneous cleanup of MW-2 following initiation of the GWE system and <br /> the rapid rebound in MW-2 following cessation of GWE suggest that impacted <br /> groundwater did not migrate very far past MW-2 prior to initiation of GWE; active <br /> extraction from the GWE system quickly cleaned up the area with inferred induced <br /> westward plume migration. With MW-2 on the margin of the GWE area, residual <br /> contamination didn't have far to go to `rebound'. The GWE wells have been sampled <br /> only once since the GWE operation ceased, providing minimal data to analyze any <br /> potential relationship to the rebound in MW-2. <br />