Laserfiche WebLink
- <br /> IR <br /> Rog <br /> 1 <br /> The inferred limits of soil contamination, based oo all soil testing <br /> _ carri-ed oul, to date, is sho m on Figure 4. <br /> 4.2 GROUNDWATER <br /> Results rf analyses of water samples from :iW-5 and M775 Fre presented in <br /> Tables 5 through S. No contaminznts were detected. The inferred limct of <br /> groundwater contamination, based ori all resting carried out to date+, is shown <br /> on F'gure 4. <br /> 5.0 .IQUIFER TIESTING - <br /> 5.1 ESTIMATES OF HYDR.YILIC CONDUCTIVITY <br /> Slug tests were conducted in wells KW-3, KV-4, Mk-5, and MW-5 to obtain <br /> an estimate for the range of hydraulic conductivities expected at the site. <br /> These tests were conducted by Elating a seven foot long, 2..','-inch_),, PVC slug <br /> down the tqrell. Falling heaO data was recorded what the slug was inserted into <br /> the ;;ell. After •aster levels had stabilized, the slug +:aa quickly removed from <br /> a<, the well and the rising head data was recorded. A pressure transducer ware <br /> placed in the well to measure the watzi .levels. The data was recorded by a <br /> e•' <br /> datalogger system. r <br /> u The slug test results were interpreted using the Cooper method for 4,onfined <br /> aquifers (Cooper et al, 1967). The water bearing zone is assumed to be confined <br /> because of the significant diff�.rencv between depth of first encountered water <br /> - while drilling and the piezometric sur,4ine (see Well Logs in Appendix A). The <br /> Interpretation was made using an compute: softwarepackage that uses interactive <br /> graphical interpretation techniques. The interpretation results and matcha.d <br /> curves are shown i."i Appendix C. - <br /> SAC03.001 6 November 1989 <br /> *f. r <br />