Laserfiche WebLink
Feasibility Test Report <br /> C A M B R I A JIMCO Truck Plaza <br /> • 1022 Frontage Road, Ripon, California <br /> November 16, 2005 <br /> 3 3 Test Results <br /> A summary of field and Iaboratory analytical data are presented in Tables 4 and 5, respectively <br /> Copies of daily field data forms are included in Appendix B A discussion of the estimated radius <br /> of vacuum influence, vapor analytical data, and estimated hydrocarbon mass removal rate are <br /> presented below <br /> 3 3 1 Vacuum Radius of Influence <br /> Vacuum radius of Influence (ROI) was monitored in wells MW-1, MW-2, MW-7, MW-9, and <br /> MW-10, with a maximum observed vacuum Influence of 7 8 in WC and 8 8 in WC in well MW- <br /> I during SVE and combined SVE/AS, respectively (Table 4) <br /> Cambria estimated the effective ROI according to the methodology presented In "A Summary of <br /> Nationwide Vapor Extraction System Performance Study" (T E Buscheck, T R Peargin, <br /> November 1991) This approach first Involves normalizing the vacuum data by dividing the <br /> vacuum observed at monitoring points by the vacuum observed at the extraction wellhead The <br /> log of the normalized vacuum data is then plotted against the distance to the vacuum influence <br /> monitoring wells The effective vacuum ROI is frequently considered to be the distance <br /> corresponding to I% of the normalized vacuum As shown below, the effective vacuum ROI was <br /> determined to be approximately 75 feet for both SVE and combined SVE/AS <br /> SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION TEST <br /> Normalized Vacuum vs Distance <br /> t <br /> •SVE <br /> ♦SVE AS <br /> 01 <br /> E <br /> u <br /> �y x <br /> E • <br /> 001 - <br /> 0001 <br /> 410001 <br /> 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 740 <br /> Oiatence{fa@� <br /> 8 <br />