WORK PLANS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

August 11,2000 - 6- 003-7170 and EC levels, suggests the separation of the samples into three related yet distinct groups. These subgroups include: 1) process pond water; 2) downgradient wells MW-3 and MW-4, and; 3) water supply well and upgradient well MW-2. In general TDS are lowest in the water supply well and upgradient well MW-2. Relatively higher concentrations of TDS are observed in samples collected from wells MW-3 and MW-4. Relatively higher concentrations of calcium, magnesium and sodium are observed in the sample collected from well MW-4 compared to wells MW-2 and MW-3. Relatively higher concentrations of chloride and sulfate are observed in samples collected from well MW-3 compared to wells MW-2 and MW-4. 2.4 Organic Chemistry Ground water samples collected from wells MW-2, MW-3 and MW-4 have been analyzed for VOCs using EPA Methods 8010 and 8020 on three occasions (6/30/95, 8/22/96, and 6/14/00). Samples have been collected on one occasion (6/14/00) from process ponds 3 and 5 and analyzed for TPH-d using EPA Method 8015m and VOCs using EPA Method 8010. Ground water and process pond sample results are presented in Tables 4 through 7. 1,1 DCE was reported on one occasion (6/95) in ground water samples collected from well MW-4 and on two occasions from well MW-3 (6/95 and 6/00). Toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes were reported on one occasion (6/00) in wells MW-2 and MW-3. Xylenes were also reported in the sample collected from well MW-3 during the June 2000 sampling event. In addition, benzene and MTBE was reported in the sample collected from well MW-4 during the June 2000 sampling event. Concentrations of BTEX, MTBE and 1,1 DCE were all reported near their respective method detection limits. No 1,1 DCE was reported in the samples collected from ponds 3 and 5. The source of these chemicals is currently unknown. Future VOC analysis will be conducted using EPA Method 8260 to confirm the presence or absence of these chemicals. 3.0 ASSESSMENT OF GROUND WATER MONITORING WELL NETWORK The WDRs require an evaluation of the adequacy of the existing ground water monitoring well network with respect to potential contaminant source areas, ground water quality, elevation data collected to date,and historical ground water flow directions. With the exception of the process ponds, no other known source areas have been identified at the Owens-Brockway facility. As described in section 1.1, the existing ground water monitoring well network includes two upgradient monitoring wells (MW-1 and MW-2) and two downgradient monitoring wells (MW-3 and MW-4). Monitoring well MW-3 is located adjacent to process pond No. 3 and monitoring well MW-4 is located downgradient of stormwater pond No. 5 (Figure 2). The location of these wells appears to be adequate to monitor changes in ground water elevation and quality associated with releases from the process ponds. Process water is currently discharged to ponds 4 and 5 when the capacity of ponds 1, 2, and 3 are exceeded. The WDRs require that discharge of process water to ponds 4 and 5 be terminated by November 1, 2000. In addition, the WDRs require that process water discharged to the process ponds not exceed a specific conductivity value of 1,800 umhos/cm. Compliance with this discharge specification is required to be implemented within two years of the date of the WDRs (March 2002). Owens-Brockway is currently conducting a feasibility study to identify alternatives to reduce the salinity of the process water. Upgradient monitoring well MW-2 currently provides data regarding background water quality. Well MW-1 has been dry since it was installed in April 1995. The current well network configuration (excluding well MWA) is not adequate to estimate ground water flow directions and gradient. A new well is proposed to be installed to replace well MW-1. The location of the proposed well is shown on Roo-37.doc Golder Associates