503 0File: 660.22AS.E.

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

COVER SHEET

AR File Number _0_

I .I503 1

A

FINALPILOT TEST REPORT

FOR

OPERABLE UNIT 6OSNAREA 501NGA GROUNDWATER

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER RICHMOND

RICHMOND, VIRGINIA

PREPARED FOR

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCYANDTHE

U.S. ARMY ENGINEERING ANDSUPPORT CENTER HUNTSVILLE

PREPARED BY

LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.CONTRACT No DACA87-94-D0016, D O. 25

JOB No. 12001-8-1625

DECEMBER 2000

81625 08

LAWGmB 4-GROUPI

503 2

December 13, 2000

Mr. Scott Bradley/CEHNC-ED-CS-P

U S. Army Engmeering aad Support Center Huntsville

4820 University SquareHuntsville, AL 35816-1822

Subjee_: Final Pilot Test Report for Operable Unit 6

Defense Supply Center Richmond, VirginiaContract No. DACA87-94-D-0016, D.O. 19

Law Projezt No: 12001-8-1625

Dear Mr. Bradley:

Enclosed please find four copies of the Final Pilot Test Report for the Pilot Study performed at Operable

Unit 6 (the Upper and Lower Aquifers underlying the National Guard Areas) at the Defense Supply

Center Richmond (DSCR). Additional coptes have been submitted as noted on the attached Distribution

List.

Please contact Angela Myers at (770) 590-4601 if you have any questions regarding this submittal

Sincerely,

LAW ENGINEERING _,ND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.

David D. Price, P.G.

Project Coordmator

Tushar Talele, P E

Pr_ect Prmclpal

Angela McMath Myers, RHSP

ProJect Manager

Enclosure

LAW Engmeenng and Environmental Servtces, Inc81625.08D 3200 Town Point Drive NW, Suite 100 * Kennesaw, GA 30144

770-421-3400 * Fax: 770-421-3486

503 3

DISTRIBUTION LISTDRAFT RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT

OPEN STORAGE AREA - OPERABLE UNIT IDEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER RICHMOND

Commander

U.S Army Engineering and Support Center - HuntsvilleA l l N. CEHNC-ED-CS-F (Bradley)

4820 Lmverslty SquareHuntsville, AL 35816-1822

(4 copies)

Defense Supply Center RichmondA l '1N DSCR-WEP, Buil_hng 80 (F. DiPofi)

8000 Jefferson Davis High,vayRichmond, VA 23297-50t0

(3 copies, Double Sided)

U.S Environmental Protec:lon Agency, Reg. IllATTN Jack Potosnak(3FS13)1650 Arch St.

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029(4 copies)

Mr John McCloskeyU.S. Fish and Wddlife Service6669 Saon Lane

Gloucester, VA 23061

(1 cop_)

Commander

Defensz Logistics AgencyATrN.L CAAE (Sullivan)

9725 John J. Kmgman Road, Suite 2533Ft. Belvo_r, VA 22060-6221

(1 cop)')

Commander

U S. Army Corps of EngineersMissouri River DivisionATTN: CEMRD-ED-EA

12565 West Center Road

Omaha, Nebraska 68144

(1 copy)

Commander

U S Army Corps of EngineersMissouri River Division

ATTN. CEMRD-ED-GL12565 West Center Road

Omaha, Nebraska 68144

(1 copy)

Commonwealth of Virginia

Dept of Environmental QuahtyDivision of Waste OperauonsATTN: David Games

629 E Main Street, PO. Box 10009

Richmond, VA 23240-0009

(3 copies)

Mr John FellingerTechLaw, Inc.6 Meghans Way

Pennsvine, NJ 08070

(I copy)

Total. 19 copies

503 4

Comments on Draft

LAWENGINEE_J NG AND ENVIRON _.IENTAL SERVICES, INC

COMMENT RESPONSESSUB, IECT: Response to Rewew Comments - Draft Pilot Test Report for OU 6

503 5

PROJECT: Defense Supply C_.nter - Richmond, VA

DISCIPLINE: CEHNC

DISCIPLINE: Proj. Coordi3ator

COMMENT LOCATION

No. REFERRAL

1 General

2 General

3 2.3

4 2.5.4, 2.52, 2.5.6& 2.6

5 40.0.1

PAGE:

COMMENTOR: Mike Williams

RF_PONDENT: David Price

RESPONSE

1 OF 1

DATE: 9 June 2000

DATE: 22 Nov. 2000

No respome necessary for this comment.

No response necessary for thts comment.

Subsections 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 provide discussions of the step drawdown tests.

The calculated hydraulic conducttvity and transmissivity values provide the

basis for determining low performance values for tiffs technology under the

conditions encountered at OU 6. Based on these results, the use of

groundwater/soil vapor extraction as a remedial approach for OU 6 has beeneliminated from future conslderatlon.

A eonsemus was reached at the June 28-29, 2000 Planning Meeting to

eliminate DPE testing for the lower aquifer at OU 6.

CODE: A= Agree D= Disagree W= Withdrawn E = Exception Noted NA = Not Applicable

5O3 6

P.+<

+

++

IEoii o,,_

503 ?

tN

a

=_..E_ - " = _= | =- =_

= i;i_ 0 m >, _ ® " =:

=

_._ =0 ,_ _''-= =_ ,,.= , =- ,. = .,= -,-.=

_-_(2i. :_ V)

m "_ E 0

"o m Z OZ g.co= ¢ m m'_ -_ e" -_ o = =._-" _'_ e_ =- = = = o_,=

= > -- _ c -- o = "0 --_ o On_ z

= = _=._.d _ = _ == > _ _E o "- .= --'<<

_ =._ _=_=_. _='_ _ <<,-,

[300

DOCD

_OO0

z_

503 8

_ LA-_WN° _° v"_nR°mt_r^L s_'ncm' INc

COMMENT RESPONSESSUBJECT: Response to Review Comments - Draft l_ot Test Report for Off 6

503 9

PROJECT: Defense Supply Center - Richmond, VA

DISCIPLINE: CEHNC

DISCIPLINE: Proj. CoordiJmtor

PAGE: 1

COMMENTOR: Kevin Healy DATE:

RESPONDENT: David Price DATE:

OF 1

9J_e2000

22 Nov. 2000

COMMENT

No.LOCA'ITONREFERRAL

Gener, d NA

RESPONSE

Comment noted. An evaluation of innovative technologies is underway that

will consider all available technologies that specifically apply to the upper andlower aquifers at OU 6. The pros and cons of tmplementmg the vanons

*echnologies will be discussed in the evaluation process.

CODE: A= Agree D= Disagree W= Withdrawn E = Exception Noted NA = Not Applicable

James S Gilmore, IIIGovernor

Jotm Paul Woodlcy, Jr.Sect'etazy of Na_'ll Resources

COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIADEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Street address: 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219

Mailing address: P.O Box 10009, Richmond, Virginia 23240Fax (804) 698-4500 TDD (804) 698-4021

http://www.deq.slate.v& us

503 10

Dennis H. TreatyDtr_ctor

(804) 698-40001-800-592-5482

May 19, 2000

Ms. Katy Allen

Law Engineering and Environmental Services

112 Townpark Dr.

Keunesaw, GA 30144

Dear Ms. Allen:

Subject: Draft Pilot Test Report for DGSC OU 6.

Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject document. Please consider the

foIlowing review eomrr ents:

Specific comments:

l) Section 4.0.0.1: While I understand and concur with the recommendation to discontinue

evaluating Dual..phase Exa'aetion (DPE) as a remedial technology for the upper aquifer, I

do not understard the basis for recommending continued evaluation of DPE in the lower

aquifer. Section 3.2 indicates that the results of the pilot test in the lower aquifer showed

low contaminatian removal and low air flows. These results would appear to indicate

that DPE would not work satisfactorily in the lower aquifer.

2) Section 4.1.0.3: I am in agreement with the recommendations to begin investigating

these structural t:ngineering based remedies for the upper aquifer and also believe that

similar remedial technologies should be looked at for the lower aquifer as well. It just

seems like the restrictive flow environments in the lower aquifer are going to

significantly limit attempts to effectively deliver nutrients to enhance bioremediation and

the use of surfactants is generally not preferred because of the potential to mobilize

An Agency of the Natural Resources Secretariat

contaminants arid increase the contamination plume.

This concludes DEQ's review of the subject document. Please contact me at

804-698-4203 if'you w_uld like to discuss the above comment issues.

503 II

Sincerely,

David Grimes

Environmental Eng. Sr.

CO: D. Willis - DEC FFR

A. Wiltett - DEQ PROT. Richardson - EPA III

_ LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONk'ENTAL SERVICES, INC

COMMENT RESPONSESSUBJECT: Response to Revmw Comments - Draft Pilot Test Report for OU 6

503 12

PROJECT:

DISCIPLINE:

DISCIPLINE:

Defense Supply Ceater - Richmond, VA PAGE: 1

Vtrgtma DEO

Proj. Coordinator

COMMENTOR: David Grimes DATE:

RESPONDENT: David Price DATE:

OF 1

19 May 2000

22 Nov. 2000

COMMENT

No.

2

LOCATION

RE_'ERRAL

Section 4.0.0.1

Section 4. [.0.3

A

A

RESPONSE

A comemus was reached at the June 28 -29, 2000 Plaunmg Meeting to

eliminate DPE testing for the lower aquifer at OU 6

The evaluauon of innovative technologies wdl consider all avadable

technologies that specifically apply to the upper and lower aquifers at OU 6.

The pros and cons of implementing the various technologtes will be discussed

in the evaluation process.

CODE: A= Agree D= Disagree W= Withdrawn E = Exception Noted NA = Not Applicable

503 13

RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS FROM CENWO - OU 6 PILOT TEST

DRAFT OU 6 PILOT TEST REPORT

NOTE: Responses to comments prepared by Law Engineering and Environmental

Services, Inc. are provided below each comment.

.Name:NEBELSICK

.Office:CENWO-ttX-C

.Discipline:CHM

.Location:Page 2-1

.RM/DETAIL:Sec 2.0.0.1

.CmtDate:

.PClip: 0

.COMNTNUMBER:5882568-279

Recommend a discussion on how the samples were collected and identify any

deviations from the approved work plans.

Response: Sampie collection procedures are identified in Section 2.2 of the Draft

Report Submittal - OU 6 Pilot Test. The sampling procedures outlined in Section

2.2 are consistent with the sampling procedures listed in the Final Sampling and

Analysis Plan for Remedial Investigation and Expanded Site Investigation (SAP)

and the OU 6 Pilc_t Test Work Task Proposal.

.Name:NEBELSICK

.Office:CENWO-ttX-C

.Discipline:CHM

.Location:Page 2-3

.RM/DETAIL:Sec 2.2.3.1

.CmtDate:

.PClip: 0

.COMNTNUMBER:5882568-280

Recommend the report identify the rationale for collecting the wet chemistry

parameters. Anal;_tical results were reported in Appendix G but there was no discussion

on the use of alkal nity, chloride, and hardness.

Response: Agree. The text has been revised to include a discussion for the use of

these parameters,

.Name:NEBELSICK

.Office:CENWO-ttX-C

.Discipline:CHM

.Location:Appendix F

503

.RM/DETAIL :General

.CmtDate:

.PClip: 0

.COMNTNUMBER:5882568-281

Recommend the report identify the QA/QC that was performed on samples collected for

offgas analysis. The other matrices (e.g. water and soil) described the required QA/QC,

however, this was not addressed for the off gas samples.

Response: SampJing QA/QC included the use of new sampling syringes, needles,

EPA-clean sample vials, and septa for each sample. Additionally, duplicate samples

were drawn and tested at a minimum of every 20 samples. Sample blanks were also

taken of the saml_iing equipment and local atmosphere to ensure no interference

from local conditions or the sampling apparatus.

Laboratory QA/OC procedures included an initial 5-point calibration of the gas

chromatograph system, and ongoing continuos calibration checks at the beginning

and end of each analysis day. Standard EPA methodology per Method 8000 and

81321 were followed for the laboratory analyses.

t4

503 ]5

RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS - DRAFT OU 6 PILOT TESTDRAFT OU 6 PILOT TEST REPORT

Technicai Review of the Draft Pilot Test Report for Operable Unit 6OSA/Area 50/NGA Groundwater

Defense Supply Center Richmond (DSCR)

Richmond, Virginia

NOTE: Responses t(} comments prepared by Law Engineering and EnvironmentalServices, Inc. are provided below each comment.

Gannett Fleming Inc. / Dynamac Corporation performed a technical review of the Draft Pilot TestReport for Operable U'lit 60SNArea 50/NGA Groundwater, Defense Supply Center Richmond,Richmond, Virgima dated April 2000 The pilot test was designed to evaluate the effectiveness ofdual-phase extraction (DPE) The report was prepared by Law Engineering and EnvironmentalServices, Inc. under contract to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-Huntsville Division.

General Comments:

. The report states that DPE is a potentially viable remedial approach for the lower aquifer.The basis for thls statement does not appear to be justified by the results of the study. Thedual phase pilct test in the lower aquifer expenenced difficulty in dewatermg the aquifersufficiently to oroduce a zone capable of transmitting air, produced extremely lowgroundwater extractton rates even after well redevelopment and atr fracturing, experiencedrelatively low a:r withdrawal rates, and produced low VOC removal rates.

Response: Agree. The results of the DPE Pilot Test indicate that this technology isnot a viable remedial approach for the lower aquifer. This clarification has beenmade in the text.

. The report does not clearly indicate the dtfficulty m reducing groundwater levels =nthe loweraquifer. It is recommended that a section be incorporated into the report which addressesthts issue and cetails the differences in groundwater elevations before and after operationof the OU-9 grcundwater extraction system.

Response: Disagree. The difficulties in reducing the ground water levels and lowflow rates are reported throughout the document. Specifically, Section 2.3.1 of the

report identifies the low flow rates obtained during the lower aquifer step drawdowntest and presents the problems encountered when increased flow rates wereattempted.

. The report discusses other potential remedial technologies for the upper aquifer, citingGas/Nutrient Flooding and Chemical Flooding. It is recommended that chemical oxidation

technologies, enhanced bioremediation technologies utilizing Hydrogen-Release Compoundor competing p-oducts, and insttu thermal technologies also be considered for the upperaquifer. The r.=latively shallow groundwater table may make implementatton of suchtechnologies feasible

G:_DSCR\DAVID PRICE'RESPONSE TO COMMENTS_RTC GF DRAFT OU 6 DPE REPORT.DOC

,503 16

Response: An evaluation of innovative technologies for remediation ofcontaminated ground water at the site is scoped under Delivery Order (DO) 26. Theevaluation of -emedial alternatives will consider all practical technologies that couldspecifically apply to OU 6.

. To put the results obtained for the OU-6 p,lot test ,n perspective, it would be useful tocompare resuP.s such as groundwater extraction rates, contaminant removal rates andvacuum (if applicable) to similar results for the OU-8 and OU-9 groundwater treatmentsystems

Response: D,sagree. Differences in subsurface characteristics (i.e., stratigraphy,hydraulic conductivity, recharge, etc.), variations in treatment system design,

effectiveness _f long term operation and maintenance support, and length of systemoperation car make significant differences in treatment system performance. A

comparison cf data for the OU 6 pilot test and the OU 8 and OU 9 groundwatertreatment systems would not provide correlative results.

. Relatively large Flame Ionizatton Detection (FID) readings were obtained during these tests,while low concentrations of target compounds were detected The report speculated that

the high FID r_adings were attributable to methane. Efforts to verify the presence ofmethane and cuantify the FID reading by analyzing for Tentat,vely Ident_fied Compoundsand a broader list of contaminants (at least for one sample) should be included on theadditional field work proposed for OU-6.

Response: Agree. Determining the contribution of methane to the overall FIDreadings wowd be useful information. However, a consensus was reached at theJune 28 - 29, 2000 Planning Meeting to eliminate future DPE testing for the loweraquifer at OU 8.

6 Numerous errors were noted where incorrect Appendices, Figures, and Tables werereferenced. Tt_e report should be rechecked.

Response: Agree. The report has been checked to ensure appropriate cross-referencing for Appendices, Figures, and Tables.

Specific Comments:

. List of Tables, Paqe iii. Table 1.1 and Table 1.2 indtcate in the table name that these areanalytical summary tables for groundwater; however the actual table headers state thatthey summarize, effluent data. These discrepanctes should be corrected.

Response: Agree. The appropriate headings (Effluent Water Samples) have beenincluded in the List of Tables, Page iii.

. Chapter 1. Nowhere in this chapter are Tables 1.1 and 1 2 referenced. E,ther these tables

should be referenced accordingly, or the Table numbers should be changed and referenced

G _DSCR_OAVIDPRICE\RESPONSE TO COMMENTS\RTC OF DRAFT OU 6 DPE REPORT DOC

5O3 17

.

,

,

.

.

in the appropriate chapter

Response: Agree. The text and tables have been revised to facilitate appropriatecross-referencing.

Section 2.1.0.1, Paqe 2-2. The last sentence of th]s section references a table (Table 2-1)for distances of monitoring and pneumatic wells Jn relation to the dual-phase extraction

(DPE) wells This is incorrect, and should be changed to reference an appropriate figure.

Response: Agree. The text has been revised to reflect the appropriate figure.

Sect=on 2 3 1 3, Paqe 2-8. Th=s section is supposed to be a discussion of the lower aquiferstep drawdowr test. However, this subsection discusses the upper aquifer test. Thisdiscrepancy should be corrected.

Response: Agree. The text has been revised to include the discussion of the upperaquifer step d'awdown test in Section 2.3.2.2.

Secbon 3 2.1 1, Paqe 3-2 This subsection refers to Appendix G. It appears the correct

reference is Appendix F. The citation should be verified and modified accordingly.

Response: Agree. The text has been revised to reference the appropriate Appendix.

Secbon 4.2, Paqe 4-2 This section discusses a possible additional pilot test combiningDPE with air si)arg_ng to enhance air flow and contaminant removal rates in the loweraquifer. While air spargmg may increase VOC removal rates under ideal conditions, thedifficulty of dewatenng the lower aquifer and exposing an unsaturated zone to air flow wouldremain an obst3cle

Response: Agree. A consensus was reached at the June 28 - 29, 2000 PlanningMeeting to eliminate DPE testing for the lower aquifer at OU 6.

Table 2-1. Thls table should be modified to include a column which describes what the

sample represents In many instances it is not evident from the "Sample ID" what the

sample represents or where it was taken. For instance, there are letter designations,numeric des_grations, descriptive designations (e.g., S-in, T-off, etc.) that are not self-explanatory. ,_.sample description should be provided.

Response: Please note that the table reference number has been changed fromTable 2-1 to Table 2-3. The Matrix column provides a description of the material thatwas sampled. The sample designations listed in the above comment refer to soil

vapor samples. The -in designation refers to influent samples. The -off designationrefers to effluent samples.

Fiqures 1-3 ano 1-5. Figure 1-3 shows the spatial relationship of the monitoring wells andpneumatic wells to the dual phase wells Figure 1-5 shows a cross-section of the

monitoring and pneumatic wells used for the lower aquifer pilot test. The horizontal

G \DSCR%DAVID PRICE\RESPONSE TO COMMENTS\RTC GF DRAFT OU 6 DPE REPORT DOC

503 1B

,

distance depicted in Figure 1-5 from ANGA-1 to MWNGA-7 is considerably smaller than

that depicted from ANGA-1 to MWNGA-6, however Figure 1-3 which shows a much largerdistance from ANGA-1 to MWNGA-7 than from ANGA-1 to MWNGA-6. These distance

should be checked and the figures modified accordingly Additionally, Figure 1-5 indicatesa horizontal scale of one inch equals five feet which does not correlate w_th the distances

depicted on Figure 1-3. The scale for Figure 1-5 is likely incorrect and requiresmodification

Response: Agree. The cross-sectional depiction of well distribution on Figure 1-5

has been revised to agree with the spatial distribution of wells illustrated on Figure1-3.

Fiqure 1-4. Figure 1-4 depicts groundwater levels a) before pumping, and b) as of 5/4/99

Pump tests were conducted in April and the SVE test was run m June. The report shouldindicate the significance of the water levels on 5/4/99. Additionally, Figure 1-4 onlyindicates drawCown in the upgradient direction on the 514199 date. The water levels in wellsMWNGA-1, -2, and -3 should be included.

Response: Agree° The 514/99 ground-water level identified on Figure 1-4 does notprovide useful information for this report. Figure 1-4 has been revised to eliminatethe 514199 groJnd water level profile.

10. Appendix F, Attachment A, Lower Aquifer Test Run 1, Table of Vacuum Readin.qs. Thefollowing vacuL,m measurements for the lower aquifer test run require explanation:

Vacuum measurements in well ANGA-3, the closest well to the dual phaseextraction well, did not experience a vacuum response until over 2.5 hours into the

test whereas wells further away were experiencing changes in vacuum earlier. Anexplanation should be offered.

Response: Logging of all wells was not performed at the initial low vacuum levels

due to a limited number of gages with sufficient accuracy at the low levels. Loggingof ANGA-3 was commenced at 19:55 on 6111199.

Well AhGA-3 did not have an initial vacuum reading, which may indicate a leak atthe well head. An explanation should be offered.

Response: A vacuum leak was detected and repaired in Well ANGA-3 at 14:15 on6112/99. The lack of an initial vacuum reading was likely related to this leak,

No read ngs were taken from ANGA-2 for the first 2.5 hours. An explanation shouldbe prov:ded.

Response: Response: Logging of all wells was not performed at the initial low

vacuum levels due to a limited number of gages with sufficient accuracy at the lowlevels. Logging of ANGA-2 was commenced at t9:55 on 61ttl99.

GADSCR_DAVID PRICE\RESPONSE TO COMMENTS_RTC GF DRAFT OU 6 DPE REPORT DOC

5O3 19

Decreases in the vacuum pulled from the dual phase well were noted at

approximately 3 hours into the test. At approximately 5 hours into the test, vacuumwas restored to initial readings. An explanation for the decrease should be noted.

Response: System response was tested between 19:30 and 21:15 on 6/11199 by fullyopening extraction bypass flow and thus decreasing vacuum. During this period,cross checks were performed on system flow and vacuum gages using additionalhandheld instruments. At 21:15, bypass flow was shut and system vacuumincreased.

Notable increases in vacuum in wells B and C were noted on 6/12/99 at

approximately 1430 hours. A review of the log entry indicates that the seals forthese wells were tightened, which likely resulted in the increased vacuum readingsFurthez explanation as to how Jtwas determined that the seals for these wells were

faulty s'._ould be provided.

Response: Leaks were detected at the wellheads of wells B and C by visual, audible,and physical inspection. A closer inspection of the wells was triggered by a reviewof the performance data up to this point in the test. Leaks were corrected by sealing

the wellheads at the entry/exit point for the sensing line and groundwater pumppower and tubing.

G _DSCR\DAVID PRICE&RESPONSE TO COMMENTS\RTC GF DRAFT OU 6 DPE REPORT DOC

503

FINAL

PILOT TEST REPORT

FOR

OPERABLE UNIT 6

OSA/AREA 50/NGA GROUNDWATER

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER RICHMOND

RICHMOND, VIRGINIA

CONTRACT NO. DACA 87-94-D0016

Prepared for:

U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center Huntsville

4820 University Square

Huntsville, AL 35816-1822

Prepared by:

Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc.

3200 Town Point Drive, N.W., Suite 100

Kennesaw, GA 30144

DECEMBER 2000

503 21

1.0

2.0

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pa_e

INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1-1

11

1.2

BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................. 1- 1

1.1.1 Site Description and History ............................................................................... 1- 11.1.2 Site Characteristics .............................................................................................. 1-2

PILOT TEST TECHNOLOGY ........................................................................................ 1-4

1.3 PILOT TEST OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................... 1-4

(3FIELD WORK SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1

2.2

23

2.4

WELL [qSTALLATION ............................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.1 Dual Phase Extraction Well Installation ............................................................. 2-2

2.1.2 Momtofing and Pneumatic Wells Installation ................................................ 2-3

2.1.3 'Nell Completion ................................................................................................. 2-52.1.4 Construction Materials ........................................................................................ 2-5

2.1.5 'Nell Development .............................................................................................. 2-62.1.6 'Nell Location Survey .................................................................................... 2-6

2.1.7 Investigation Derived Waste ...................................................................... 2-6

SAMPL NG AND ANALYSES ................................................................................... 2-7

2.2.1 Soil Samphng .............................................................................................. 2-7

2.2.2 Vapor Sampling ........................................................................................... 2-7

2.2.3 Holding Tank Influent ........................................................................................ 2-7

STEP DRAWDOWN TESTING ................................................................................... 2-8

2.3.1 Lower Aqmfer Step Drawdown Test ................................................................. 2-8

2.3.2 Upper Aquifer Step Drawdown Test ................................................................... 2-8

ADDITI DNAL WELL DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................... 2-8

2.5

2.6

DUAL PHASE TESTS .................................................................................................... 2-9

2.5. I Equipment Specifications .................................................................................... 2-92 5.2 Dual PhaseTest Procedures .............................................................................. 2-10

2.5.3 Lower Aqmfer Dual Phase Test No. 1 .............................................................. 2-11

2.5.4 Lower Aquifer Well Development .................................................................... 2-112.5.5 Lower Aquifer Dual Phase Test No. 2 ............................................................. 2-11

2.5.6 Upper Aquifer Dual Phase Testing ................................................................... 2-12

AQUIFI_ R PUMP TESTS ........................................................................................... 2-13

2.6.1 Ihamp Test Analysis Procedures ....................................................................... 2-14

2.6.2 Aquifer Tests Results ........................................................................................ 2-15

81625 08D i

503

3.0

4.0

5.0

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(Continued)Pa_e

PILOT TEST RESULTS ........................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 HYDROGEOLOGY AND GEOCHEMISTRY ............................................................. 3-1

3.1.1 Stratigraphy ........................................................................................................ 3-13.1.2 Soil Geotechmcal Analysis ................................................................................ 3-2

3.2 SVE TESTING RESULTS ............................................................................................ 3-2

3.2.1 Lower Aquifer SVE Pilot Test No. 1 .................................................................. 3-2

3.2.2 Upper Aquifer SVE Pilot Test ............................................................................ 3-2

3.2.3 Lower Aquifer SVE Pdot Test No. 2 ................................................................. 3-3

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 4-1

4.1 UPPER AQUIFER ........................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 LOWER AQUIFER ......................................................................................................... 4-2

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 5-1

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Well Survey Coordinates

Boring Logs

Well Construction Diagrams

Well Development Photographs

Geotechnlcal Testing Results

Columbia Technologies, LLC Dual Phase Extraction Test Report, March 15, 2000

Analytical Data Summary and Data Quality Evaluauon of OU 6 Pilot Test Effluent Samples

Aquifer Tests Water Level Graphs

81625.08D n

5O3 23

LIST OF TABLES

Table

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

3.1

Data Summa-), Table, Effluent Water Samples - OSA/Area 50/NGA Upper Aqmfer

Positive Rest Its Summary Table, Effluent Water Samples - OSA/Area 50/NGA LowerAquifer

Summary of Samples and Analytical Methods

Summary of _quifer Parameters - Upper Aquifer Pumping Test

Summary of _quifer Parameters - Lower Aquifer Pumping Test

Summary of 3rain Size Analysis Results

81625 08D m

503 24

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure

1-1

1-2

1-3

1-4

1-5

1-6

1-7

2-1

2-2

Defense Supply Center Richmond and Surrounding Area

" Site Map with Locations of Upper and Lower Aquifer Dual Phase Pdot Tests

Pilot Study Geological Cross-Section Locations

Geologic Cross Secuon A-A'

Geologic Cross Section B-B'

Total VOC Concentrations - Upper Aquifer - May 1998

Total VOC Concentrations - Lower Aquifer - May 1998

Pilot Test Schedule

Pilot Test Well Locations - Upper and Lower Aquifers

81625.08D iv

503 25

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.0.0.1 Operable Unit (OU) 6 consists of the contanunated groundwater beneath and downgradlent from

the Cpen Storage Area (OSA), Area 50 Landfill and the National Guard Area (NGA) at the Defense

Supply Center Richmond (DSCR) located in Rtchmond, Virginia. These sites are located in the central

portion of DSCR (FigJre 1-1). This report presents the results of the pilot tests of the dual phase

extracUon (DPE) remedial technology performed in 1999 m the upper and lower aquifers at the National

Guard Area (NGA) at ESCR.

1.I BACKGROUND

1.I.I Site Description and History

1.1.1.1 The DSCR ts located in Chesterfield County, Virginia, approximately 11 nules south of

Richmond and 16 n'ales north of Petersburg, Virginia (Figure I-1). Area 50 is a former landfill suspected

to be the source of g-'oundwater contanunatton identified as OU 6. The 13-acre landfill received

const"uction debris and damaged containers of solid or liquid stock chemicals during the early 1960s until

the early 1970s. The contamination occumng in the soils of Area 50 ts being addressed under Operable

Umt 2 (OU 2). Pote,_tially hazardous materials d_sposed of at the site include toxic and reactive

chemicals used in phctograpbic development processes, organic solvents, pesticides and herbicides,

polychlormated biphen'/Is (PCBs), petroleum, oils, and lubricants, and other umdentified compounds.

Some of the chemicals may have been disposed of in the Area 50 site in drums or damaged containers

while others may have been disposed of as bulk liquids into the landfill Area 50 has been graded level to

the surrounding land surface and _s completely vegetated. Previous studies have identified contaminant

plumes, primarily chlor nated volatde orgamc compounds (VOCs), in both the upper and lower aqmfers,

which extend from the Area 50 landfill to the east. A design is m progress to install a lower permeability

soil cover over the landfill area to mitigate precipitation infiltration into the landfill, repair/refurbish the

storm water system anc install anti-seep collars on the storm water pipes to prevent groundwater and/or

leachate migration along the storm pipe bedding and discharge to No Name Creek.

1.1.1.2 A Record of Decision (ROD) for an Interim action at OU 9 was signed in September 1993. An

Explanatmn of S,gnificant Differences (ESD) was issued m 1995 to modify the ROD to discharge treated

groundwater to Falling Creek through an abandoned water supply system pipe. The interim remedial

action consists of a pump and treat system designed to capture and treat groundwater on the downgradient

81625.08D 1-I

503 26

side of the OSA/Area 50/NGA locauon, preventing further migration of contaminants The system was

constructed and started up in 1996 Components of the system include 17 upper aqmfer and 5 lower

aqmfer groundwater extraction wells designed to create a hydraulic barrier parallel to No Name Creek

along the east side of the NGA (Figure 1-2). A packed tower air stripper treats the extracted groundwater,

and a carbon adsorption system treats air ermssions from the air stripper. Treated groundwater is

discharged to Falhng Creek. Monitoring of system performance is performed periodically and reports are

issued monthly, quarterly and annually. Groundwater elevaUons are measured monthly, and groundwater

samples are collected from selected wells quarterly. Air and treated water dtscharge from the system is

monitored quarterly. It is anticipated that the interim system will remain operational until a final remedy

is in place. If feasible and appropriate, components of the interim system will be incorporated into the

final remedy.

1.1.2 Site Characteristics

1.1.2.1 The area to the northeast and east of DSCR has been developed as both single family and multi-

family housing. An apartment complex is located east of No Name Creek. Rayon Park, a housing

subdivision consistmg of 83 houses, is also located southeast of DSCR. Municipal water is supplied to

the residents of the apartment complex and Rayon Park. All of the off-base residents' homes (primarily

east of the NGA) have been served by the public water supply since June 1987, but some of the homes

also have private groundwater wells. Four potable water wells were identified by Engineering Science

north of and upgradient from OU 6. Eight irrigation wells are located south or southeast of the site; these

are not downgradient from OU 6 (ES, 1992).

1.1.2.2 In addition to storage areas, office buildings and housing units are also located atDSCR. These

facilities are upgradient and not potentially impacted by the site. The on-post population at DSCR

includes approximately 120 permanent residents and 3,700 employees (Dames & Moore, 1989). DSCR

has received its drinking water from Chesterfield County Water Supply since November 1988. There are

no groundwater supply wells on DSCR property.

1.1.2.3 The topography of the OSA, Area 50, and NGA land surfaces is essentially flat with a gentle

slope downward t'o the east-northeast. Storm sewer inlets and pipes service the study area and convey the

storm water to No-Name Creek located adjacent to and east of the NGA. No-Name Creek flows from

north to south along the eastern edge of the NGA, turns to the east, and discharges into the James River

approximately 2 miles from the site.

81625 08D 1-2

503 27

1.2 PILOT TEST TECHNOLOGY

1.2.0.1 The Draft Final Focused Feasibdity Study (FIRS) for OU 6 recommended dual phase extraction

(DPE) technology to potentially address the high concentrauon portions of the upper and lower aquifers

(LAW, 1996b). To supl:ort this recommendation, DPE pilot tests were conducted m the upper and lower

aquifers to determine whether the technology would perform adequately under site-spectfic condmons

1.2.0.2 Dual phase extrzctJon refers to combining the technologies of groundwater extraction with ex-sltu

treatment and soil vapor extraction (SVE) to enhance removal of contaminants from the groundwater and

from subsurface soils it. the drawdown zone. The purposes of the groundwater extracUon are to: (1)

remove contaminated groundwater from the upper aquifer for ex-sltu treatment by another technology, (2)

lower the groundwater '.evel, thereby increasing the volume of the soil vadose zone through which air

flow and volatlhzation cf chemicals can occur, and (3) maintain a constant hydraulic gradient toward the

DPE wells to control coltaminant plume migrauon. The SVE system continuously pulls air through the

vadose zone soils, incluc ing the newly exposed unsaturated soil matrix of the drawdown zone. As long as

the drawdown is mainta ned, mass transfer of the VOCs from the soil particles to the air flowing through

the sod pores can occur. The DPE system typically reduce contaminant levels more effectively over a

shorter penod of time thm could be accomplished by a pump-and-treat system alone.

1.3 PILOT TEST OBJECTIVES

1.3.0.1. Pilot-scale tests were performed for the upper and lower aquifers at the NGA to determine the

feaslb:lity and effectiveness of this technology and to determine parameters required for the design of a

full scale DPE system, s aould the technology be considered feasible

L3.0.2 The locations ot the upper and lower aquifer pilot tests were selected in order to place the tests in

the proximities of the centers of the respective plumes. The positions and general outlines of the

groundwater contaminant plumes were determined based on samphng data collected in May 1998 as part

of the OU 9 system monitoring, and are shown in Figures 1-6 and 1-7.

1.3.0.3 The objectives of the pilot tests were to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of applying DPE

as a remedial technolog/for the removal of VOC contamination from the upper and lower aquifers. The

effectiveness of the DPE systems was evaluated based on consideration of four factors: (1) the effective

hydrologic radius of ir, fluence; (2) the effective vacuum radius of influence; (3) contaminant mass

removal rates achieved through groundwater extraction; and (4) contaminant mass removal rates reahzed

81625.08D 1-4

503 Z8

1.1.2.4 Soils and geologic condmons at the OSA, Area 50, and NGA were characterized dunng the RI

for thls s,te (Dames & Moore, 1989). The soil composmon ranges primarily from loamy sand to clay

w,th occas,onal gravel. The underlying stratigraphy has been &vlded into the Eastover, Calvert, Aqma,

and Potomac Formations. Bedrock consisting of St. Petersburg granite underhes the Potomac Fonnauon.

1.1.2.5 The surface soils of the DSCR facility consist primarily of fill material, ranging approximately

from ground surface to 5 feet in depth. The Eastover Formation hes directly beneath the surface soil zone

and consists predominantly of silty clays and clayey silts. The thickness of the Eastover Formation ranges

from approximately 30 feet m thickness on the western side of DSCR to approximately 20 feet in

th,ckness on the eastern s,de of DSCR. A shallow unconfined aquifer, referred to as the upper aquifer, _s

present in the Eastover Formation. The groundwater within this aqmfer flows east northeasterly m

direction across Area 50 and the NGA, toward No-Name Creek. Calculated horizontal hydrauhc

conductivity values from slug tests performed by Dames & Moore (Dames & Moore, 1989) suggest a

value of 15.6 feet per day with a hydrauhc gradient of 0.0095 and porosity (n) of 0.3.

1.1.2.6 The Calvert and Aquia FormaUons together form a confining unit, which separates the upper and

lower aquifers. This confining unit consists predominantly of salty clay and ranges from 10 feet to 15 feet

in thickness.

1.1.2.7 The Potomac Formation, which underl,es the confining layer, varms from approximately 20 feet

th,ck along the western port,on of the OSA to more than 40 feet thick m the eastern portion of the NGA.

This unit is composed primarily of sands, but also contains some gravel with occasional silt or clay

seams. The confined lower aquifer occurs within the Potomac Formation. Groundwater flow in the lower

aquifer is toward the east across the NGA and then off site. Hydraulic conductlwty values for the lower

aquifer, derived from a pump test, range from 7.3 to 18.3 feet per day based on a soil poros,ty of 0.3 (U.S.

Geological Survey, [USGS] 1990).

1.1.2.8 The location of the Eastover, Calvert, Aquia, and Potomac formations are shown schematically in

geologic cross sections developed from well boring samples collected at the site. Figure 1-3 shows the

locations of the geologic cross sections and Figures 1-4 and 1-5 show geologic cross sections based on the

pilot test well bonng samples.

81625.08D 1-3

503 29

through soil vapor extraction. In addmon, soil samphng conducted during installation of the DPE

extraction wells and mt_nitonng wells allowed additional evaluation of the site lithology and provided

samples for determinaticn of geotechnical characteristics.

2.3.0.4 The SVE desigr parameters evaluated included: SVE well spacing, optimum vacuum pressures

and vacuum flow rates, '¢OC mass removal rates from the air flow, and the need to treat the air emissions

from :he vapor extracti _n system. Design parameters to be evaluated for the groundwater extraction

system included: optimt m water extraction rates, radms of influence and capture zone radms, and VOC

mass removal rates through groundwater extraction.

81625.08D 1-5

503 30

2.0 FIELD WORK SUMMARY

2.0.0.1 The following sections describe the OU 6 pilot test field tasks, which were, performed between

March 11 and June 21, 1999. All field work associated with sampling, analysis and well mstallation was

conducted in accordance with procedures outhned tn the "Final Samphng and Analysts Plan for Remedial

Investigation and Expanded Site Investigation" (SAP) prepared for DSCR (LAW, 1992) as amended m

the "OU 6 Pilot Test Work Task Proposal" prepared for tins project (LAW, 1999a). The tasks mcluded:

Upper Aquifer: Installation of one DPE test well (DPNGA-I) and five observationwells (MWNGA-I through MWNGA-5) (reference Figure 1-3);

Lower Aquifer: Installation of one DPE well (DPNGA-2), five observation wells

(MWNGA-6 through MWNGA-10), and four pneumatic wells (ANGA-1 through

ANGA-4) (reference Figure 1-3);

Sampling and laboratory analyses of soil, extracted groundwater, sod vapor and

holding tank influent;

• SVE testing; and,

• DPE testing.

2.0.0.2 A schedule depicting the field tasks performed in association with the pilot testing program is

presented in Figure 2-1. Prior to installation of the pilot tests at OU 6, the following work tasks were

performed: an air permit exemption was obtained from the Virgmta DEQ; the work areas for the pilot

tests were cleared by the National Guard; utility clearance was obtained for the work areas; and the OU 9

pump-and-treat system was operated four weeks in advance of the well construction to enhance

drawdown of the groundwater at the test locations.

2.0.0.3 During performance of the DPE pilot tests, Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc.

(LAW) performed the groundwater extraction portion of the tests, and continuously monitored

groundwater levels. LAW also periodically collected samples of the extracted groundwater for laboratory

analysis. Columbia Technologies, LLC (Columbia) was contracted by LAW to perform the soil vapor

extraction portion of the pilot tests. Columbia also performed continuous momtoring of the soil vacuum

pressures, and periodically collected soil vapor samples for laboratory analysis.

2.1 WELL INSTALLATION

2.1.0.1 Sixteen wells were installed by Richard Simmons Drilling Company, Inc. of Murfeesboro,

Tennessee to accomplish the pilot testing at the OU 6 site. LAW provided oversight of the driller during

8|625.08D 2-1

5O3 31

well installauon. Resource International, Ltd. of Ashland, Vtrgmla performed th_ survey of well

locations and elevatiocs. Figure 2-2 presents the surveyed well locations. Surveyed locations and

elevauons are presented in Appendix A. One DPE test well (DPNGA-I) and five observation wells

(MWNGA-I through MWNGA-5) were installed from March 28 through April 1, 1999 m the upper

aquifer. One DPE test well (DPNGA-2), five observation wells (MWNGA-6 through MWNGA-10), and

four pneumatic wells (ANGA-1 through ANGA..4) were installed in the lower aquifer from March 11

through March 28, 1999. The distances of the monitoring and pneumauc wells m relation to the DPE

phase wells are shown i'l Figure 1-3.

2.1.1 Dual Phase Extraction Well Installation

2.1.1.1 Two DPE well., were installed at the NGA. One Type-II DPE well (DPNGA-1) was installed

into the upper aqmfer and one Type-Ill DPE well (DPNGA-2) was installed in the lower aquifer where

shown on Figure 2-2. The geology of each bonng was characterized and recorded by the LAW field

geologist. The bonng logs are provided m Appen&x B. Well construction diagrams are provided in

Appendix C.

2.1.1.2 The casing and screen for the upper aqmfer DPE well (DPNGA-I) was comprised of new 6-inch

diameter, Schedule 40 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) meeting ASTM D-1784, F-480-88A and carrying the

seal of the National Sanitation Foundation. The PVC pipe was joined using flush threaded joints wtthout

solvent glue. The screen slots were 0.010 inches and continuously wrapped. Richard Simmons Drilhng

Company installed the Type-II well to a depth of approximately 20 5 feet using a truck-mounted hollow

stem auger (HSA) drill fig. The HSA had an inside dtameter of 8 25 inches. Sod samples were collected

every 5 feet dunng drill ng using a 3-inch diameter split spoon sampler between the depth of 1 foot below

grade and the aqmtard (confining unit) forming the base of the shallow aquifer (approximately 22 feet

below grade). The DPE well was completed using 9.1 feet of screen installed with the bottom of the

screen located at base o "the shallow aquifer and the top of screen at a depth of 10.87 feet below grade.

2.1.1.3 Prior to mstalla:ion of the Type-Ill DPE well (DPNGA-2) in the lower aquifer, a pilot hole was

drilled. Continuous sampling was performed to _dentify the top and bottom of the confining unit. An

outer-casing, conslstin_ of 14-inch ID Schedule 80 PVC meeting ASTM D-1784, F-480-88A, was

mstahed m the bonng from the ground surface to 2 feet into the confining umt (21 feet below grade). The

annular space of the outer-casing, between the PVC casing and the wall of the boring, was filled from the

bottom of the bonng to the ground surface with a 5 percent bentonite/cement grout. The grout was

81625.08D 2-2

503 32

pressure-pumped &rectly through the outer-casing untd the annular space was filled to the ground

surface.

2.1.1.4 After allowing a minimum of 48 hours for the grout to set, a boring was advanced through the

center of the outer-casing using 8.25-inch ID HSA. The boring performed through the outer-casing was

advanced to provide a 14.35-foot screen into the lower aquifer. The boring was completed as a Type-If

DPE well, consisting of inner casmg and screen. The DPE well consists of new 6-inch diameter,

Schedule 40 PVC inner casing that meets ASTM D-1784, F..480-88A and carries the seal of the National

Saturation Foundation. The PVC pipe had flush threaded joints. No solvent glue was permitted for

jointing of the tuner casing or screen. The tuner-casing and well screen was Installed to an approximate

depth of 43.4 feet below ground surface. The 6-inch &ameter PVC well screen was continuously

wrapped with 0.010-inch slots. Final screen positioning was specified by the on-site LAW representative

and was based on the stratigraphy encountered during field activities.

2.1.2 Monitoring and Pneumatic Wells Installation

2.1.2.1 A total of 10 momtoring wells were installed; five Type-II wells (MWNGA-1 through MWNGA-

5) into the upper aquifer and five Type-III wells (MWNGA-6 through MWNGA-10) into the lower

aquifer at the NGA. In addition, four Type-III 1-inch diameter pneumatic wells were installed into the

lower aquifer (ANGA-1 through ANGA-4). Figure 2-2 depicts the well locations. Appendices B and C

contain the bonng logs and well construction diagrams for Type-ll and Type-HI monitoring wells,

respectively.

2.1.2.2 Casing and screen for momtoring wells in the upper aquifer consisted of new 2-inch, Schedule 40

PVC meeting ASTM D-1784, F-480-88A and carrying the seal of the National Sanitation Foundation.

The PVC ptpe had flush threaded joints. No solvent glue was permitted for jointing. The screen slot size

was 0.010 inches and the screen was factory slotted. The screen lengths for the wells were approximately

10 feet in length. Wells were advanced using hollow stem augers with a minimum inside diameter of

4.25 inches to depths ranging from 20.4 feet below grade (MWNGA-I, MWNGA-3, and MWNGA-4) to

20.9 feet below grade (MWNGA-5). Soil samples were collected using 3-inch diameter spht spoon

samplers from ground surface to approximately 20 feet below grade. Final screen positioning was

specified by LAW's on-site representative and was based on the stratigraphy encountered during field

activities.

81625 08D 2-3

503 33

2.1.2.3 Prior to installation of each Type-Ill momtoring well and pneumatic well m the lower aquifer, a

4.25-inch tuner-diameter (ID) hollow-stem auger (HSA) was utihzed to advance a sod boring at each well

location. Split spoon sampling began at 1 foot below the ground surface and continued to the confining

unit interface of the upper aquifer (approximately 13 feet below grade). LAW's on-site representatwe

identified the confining unit interface. Upon identification of the lower confinmg umt, each bormg was

over-trilled (reamed) at least 2 feet into the lower confining unit using a 14-inch outer-diameter bit. An

outer-casing, consisting of 10-inch PVC, was installed in each bonng. Outer-casings were installed to

depths ranging from 15. feet below ground surface for MWNGA-8 to 18.4 feet below ground surface for

MWNGA-6. The annular space of the outer-casing, between the PVC casing and the wall of the auger,

was filled from the bott _m of the boring to the ground surface with a 5 percent bentomte/cement grout.

The grout was pressure-_umped directly through the outer-casing until the annular space was filled to the

ground surface.

2.1.2.4 After allowing a rmnimum of 48 hours for the grout to set, each boring was advanced through the

outer-casing using a 4.75-inch ID HSA. Spht-spoon soil samples were collected using a 3-inch split

spoon at 5-foot interval; to allow identification of the top of the lower aquifer (approximately 25 feet

below grade).

2.1.2.5 Monitoring well borings (MWNGA-6 through MWNGA-10) were advanced through the outer-

casing at least 15 feet lrto the lower aquifer. Each monitoring well boring was completed as a Type-HI

monitoring well The ianer casing consisted of a 2-mch diameter PVC well screen and riser. Inner-

casings for MWNGA-6 through MWNGA-10 were installed to depths ranging from 42.9 feet below

ground surface (MWNGA-8) to 48.1 feet below ground surface (MWNGA-7). The Type-Ill monitoring

wells were completed using a 15-foot length of 0.010-inch factory slotted screen. Final screen

posmoning was specified by LAW's on-site representative and was based on the stratigraphy encountered

during field activities.

2.1.2.6 Pneumatic well bonngs advanced through the outer-casing were advanced providing a 5-foot

screen into the lower aqfifer. Each pneumatic well boring was completed as a Type-Ill well, consisting

of l-mch diameter PVC well screen and riser Final screen positioning was specified by LAW's on-site

representative and was based on the stratigraphy encountered during field actwities

81625.08D 2-4

50:} 31

2.1.3 Well Completion

2.1.3.1 A filter pack was placed in each well using a maximum l -inch O.D. tremle pipe to a minimum of

2 feet above the top of the screen. This was performed ms,de of the augers. The augers were gradually

withdrawn as the filter pack was added, maintaining at least 1-foot of sand in the augers at all times

during extraction of augers until the sand was filled to the desired depth. Using a surge block, the well

casing was surged for ten minutes. The depth to filter pack was measured and addmonal filter pack was

added to bring the level up to 2 feet above the well screen. The well was surged and sand was added untd

the filter pack stabihzed at a minimum of 2 feet above the well screen.

2.1.3.2 A bentonite seal was placed above the filter pack and hydrated with water. The bentonite seal

was installed and hydrated in l-foot increments through the augers to 2 feet above the sand pack,

hydrating each foot of pellets for 30 minutes before instalhng the next.

2.1.3.3 The remainder of the boring annulus was grouted from the top of the bentonite seal to the ground

surface. The grout was pumped into the well annulus, from the top of the bentonite seal to the top of the

outer-casing, using a tremie pipe.

2.1.3.4 The surface completion for each monitoring well and pneumatic well consisted of a flush

mounted steel locking well cover with a hinged lid. The wellheads were surrounded by a level 3-foot by

3-foot by 4-inch thick concrete pad. Three protective posts were installed for each well. Each post was

installed to a minimum depth of 2.5 feet below grade and is set into a concrete collar. Each post was

painted bright yellow in color.

2.1.4 Construction Materials

2.1.4.1 Filter pack materials were rounded, silica sands of 10-20 gradation. The filter pack material was

a product of a commercial sand manufacturer, properly sized and graded, and composed of round, hard.

waterborne siliceous sand, free of flat or elongated pieces, organic matter, and other foreign matter. All

filter pack material was protected from contamination prior to placement by either storing it in plastic-

lined bags or in a location protected from the weather and contaminatton on plastic sheeting. All filter

pack materials were transported to the well site in a manner preventing contamination by other soils, oils

and grease, and other chemicals.

81625.08D 2-5

5O3

2.1.4.2 A hydrated bentonite sea] consisting of low sodmm bentomte pellets was placed at a minimum

thickness of 2 feet.

35

" A Portland Type-II F)entonite grout (5 percent bentonite by weight of cement with 7 to 9 gallons of

water per 94-1b. bag of cement) was used to fill the annular space above the bentomte seal.

2.1.5 Well Development

2.1.5.1 At least 48 hours following well completion, each well was developed using a pneumatic pump.

Well development activities were performed from March 29, 1999 through April 14, 1999. Prior to

development, the static water level m each well was gauged and recorded. The pH, conducuvity, and

temperature of the devtqopment water were measured at 30-minute intervals during development.

Development continued n each well until these parameters stabilized, and at least three well volumes

were removed.

2.1.5.2 Sand and silt wa; encountered at the bottom of the wells. Therefore, a combmauon of surging,

bailing, pumping, and mr lifting was attempted to remove sand and silt from the bottom of the wells and

to clean the filter pack. Well development photographs are presented in Appen&x D. The orange-

colore¢ water of MWNGA-3 through MWNGA-5 was attributed to oxidauon of Iron in the groundwater.

(Groundwater from wells MWNGA-3 through MWNGA-5 was imtially clear).

2.1.6 Well Location Survey

2.1.6.1 Upon completior of the field investigation, the horizontal and vertical location, and elevaUon of

each of the wells were su-veyed by Resource International, Ltd. The survey coordinates for each well are

presented in Appen&x A

2.1.7 Investigation Derived Waste

2.1.7.1 Soil cuttings gererated during the field investigation were containerized in labeled, 55-gallon

drums and transported to a central staging area at DSCR for subsequent disposal. Development water and

the groandwater withdrawn during the pilot test were placed in a holding tank at the site. Water from the

holding tank was filtered prior to discharge into the sump leading to the OU 9 treatment system.

81625 08D 2-6

503 3G

2.2 SAMPLING AND ANALYSES

2.2.0.1 Samples of soil, soil vapor, and extracted groundwater (effluent from the wells) were collected

during the pilot test. Analytical results of the effluent water samples are presented in Tables 2.1 and 2.2.

A summary of the samples collected for laboratory analyses is presented m Table 2 3.

2.2.1 Soil Sampling

2.2.1.1 Eight soil samples, four from each DPE well boring, were submitted for geotechnical laboratory

analysis for Grain Size Sieve Analysis (ASTM D422), Moisture Content (ASTM D2216) and Atterberg

Limits (ASTM D4318). Four of the samples were collected from the vadose zone: DPNGA-I (6-GT and

7-GT) and DPNGA-2 (1-GT and 2-GT). Four were collected from the saturated zone: DPNGA-I (8-GT

and 9-GT) and DPNGA-2 (3-GT and 4-GT). The geotechnical information allows for interpretation of

the hthologic descnptions developed by site personnel during drllhng operations. Geotechnical analyses

were performed by LAW's Atlanta, Georgia Physical Testing Laboratory. The results of the geotechnical

analyses are provided m Appendix E.

2.2.2 Vapor Sampling

2.2.2.1 Vapor (gas) samples were collected from the extraction well vapor sampling port during each

test. The vapor samples were analyzed by Columbia using EPA Methods 3810/8010/8020 on a gas

chromatograph equipped with a flame iomzation detector (FID) for petroleum hydrocarbons and an

electron capture detector (ECD) for chlorinated hydrocarbons. In addinon, frequent measurement of

volatile compound levels at the inlet and outlet of the vacuum pump were made using a Photovac Field

FID detector. Laboratory results for the vapor samples and PID field measurements are presented m

Columbia's report (Appendtx F).

2.2.3 Holding Tank Influent

2.2.3.1 Four samples were collected from the groundwater extracted during the pilot test and discharged

to the holding tanks (designed as "effluent" samples). The samples collected during the dual phase

testmg of the lower aquifer were analyzed for volatile orgamcs. In addition, the first sample was analyzed

for alkahnity, chlorides and hardness to provide informauon for disposal and/or future treatment system

design purposes. Appendix G presents the analytical results for the effluent samples, which were

designated as LAEFF-1 through LAEFF-4.

81625.08D 2-7

5O3 37

2.3 STEP DRAWDOWN TESTING

A step drawdown test on the lower aquifer was performed from April 13 through April 15, 1999. A step

drawdown test on the upper aqmfer was performed from April 20 through April 21, 1999

2.3.1 Lower Aquifer Step Drawdown Test

2.3.1.1 A step drawdowa pump test was started at the lower aquifer well DPNGA-2 on April 13, 1999

and continued for 48 hot rs. Due to the low flow rate of the well (approximately 0.5 gallons per mmute

[gpm]), the step-draw down test could not be performed effectively on DPNGA-2. Attempts at stepping

to a higher flow rate (above 0.5 gpm) resulted in pumping the well dry. The globe valve used to control

the &scharge was ineffective at maintaining lower flow rates. As the valve was throttled down, silt would

be deposited in the valve further lowering the &scharge. Silt also caused problems with the flow meter.

2.3.1.2 The pumping ratzs for the step drawdown test ranged from 0.7 gpm to 1.0 gpm. With such low

flow rates, sigmficant dr; wdown was not achieved when pumping from the dual phase well.

2.3.2 Upper Aquifer Step Drawdown Test

2.3.2.1 A 24-hour step d'awdown pump test was conducted on the upper aquifer well DPNGA-I on April

20, 1999. Identical problems were encountered in performing the step drawdown test on the upper

aquifer as experienced at the lower aquifer; that _s, the flow rate could not be stabihzed. The flow rate

varied from 0.3 gpm to 1).6 gpm. Addmonally, when the water level m the pumping well (DPNGA-I)

dropped to a low level, the current sensor controlling the pump would sense a lower energy consumption

(phase shift) and automatically shut the pump down for preset intervals to allow the water level to rise.

2.3.2.2 An addmonal step drawdown test was reperformed on the upper aquifer well (DPNGA-1) on June

28, 1999 for a period o" approximately 4 hours. As a result of this supplementary test, the specific

capacity at well DPNGA- 1 was estimated to be 0.30 gpm/ft.

2.4 ADDITIONAL WELL DEVELOPMENT

2.4.0.1 Following the step drawdown tests, additional development of both DPE wells (DPNGA-I and

DPNGA-2) was performed in an attempt to increase the flow rates.

81625.08D 2-8

2.4.0.2Additionalwell developmentactivitieswereperformedfrom May 12, 1999throughMay 16,

1999.Duringthisphaseof thewelldevelopment,m additionto air lifting,jettingwasaddedto thewell

developmentprocess.Duringtheredevelopmentof wellsDPNGA-1andDPNGA-2,theglobevalves

werereplacedwithneedlevalves,whichhavethecapabilityof controllinglowerflow ratesandcanadjust

flow rateswith greatersensitivity. The groundwaterpumpswerereinstalledon May 16, 1999and

pumpingof boththeupperandloweraquiferwascontinuedonMay 17,1999.Dischargeratesmcreased

only shghtlyoverpreviouslevels. Additionalwell developmentwassubsequentlyperformedon the

loweraqmferDPEwellafterdualphasetesting,asdiscussedin Section2.5.4.

2.5 DUAL PHASE TESTS

2.5.0.1 The following sections describe the equipment used and the operating conditions for the DPE

test. The DPE testing was initiated on June 8, 1999 and completed on June 26, 1999.

2.5.1 Equipment Specifications

2.5.1.1 The dual phase pdot test incorporated both a vacuum extraction system and a groundwater

pumping system. Columbia provided a complete dual phase system. A wellhead fitting was securely

attached to the top of the extraction well pipe to allow connection to a vacuum pump system. Periodic

collection of air ('_apor) stream samples occurred through a qmck disconnect port. Columbia also

provided caps with quick-connect fittings to connect to the top of each monitonng probe for connection to

the vacuum momtoring equipment.

2.5.1.2 The pilot tests were performed with an AI30 Fluid-Vac® liquid ring pump assembly. The pilot

test system consisted of a skid-mounted umt comprised of a liqmd nng vacuum pump, stainless steel

air/water separator tank, high- and low-level switches, demister for removal of 99 percent of entrained

liquid from the vapor stream, make-up water valve, and inlet strainer. The vacuum pump had a rated

maximum air flow rate of 130 cubic feet per minute (cfm) at 28 inches mercury (inHg).

2.5.1.3 An instrument test section was installed m the extraction line prior to the vacuum pump. The test

section consisted of a pitot tube test port, an in-hne Rotron flowmeter, a vacuum gage, and a test port for

sample collection.

81625.08D 2-9

503 39

2.5.1.4 The outlet of tt_e vacuum pump was configured wtth a valve assembly, "pressure gage and test

port. The valve assembly was provided to simulate the appropriate backpressure anticipated for exhaust

gas treatment in a full-scale remediation system. Exhaust gas from the vacuum pump assembly was then

directed to an elevation af 10 feet above ground.

2.5.1.5 Support eqmprrent included a l I0/120V portable diesel generator, power &stnbution system,

groundwater pumps, ho_'.es, collecuon tanks, and water level logging system.

2.5.1.6 Pressure declim' measurements were obtained at the vacuum pump and each monitoring probe

dunng each pilot test us ng highly sensitive Dwyer magnahehc pressure in&cator-transducers mounted m

a central monitoring console. The pressure responses from the transducers were digitally recorded on a

Fluke Hydra Series computerized data logging system at operator-selectable sampling rates. Additional

transducers on the moni:oring console were used to measure vacuum levels and air flow rates m the SVE

pilot system.

2.5.1.7 The groundwat_.r extraction system consisted of a single submersible pump powered by a 47-

Kilowatt generator. Th_ pump was installed in the dual phase well below the static water level in the

well. A flow meter was installed in the discharge line near the well head. The pumped groundwater was

dehvered to one 21,000-gallon, steel holding tank equipped with a cover.

2.5.1.8 The groundwater fluctuations in the upper and lower aquifer monitoring wells were monitored

with downhole pressure transducers connected to a Hermit SE2000 Datalogger.

2.5.2 Dual Phase T(;st Procedures

2.5.2..". The objectives f3r conducting each dual phase test conststed of:

.

2.

3.

4.

Lowering a ld maintaining groundwater levels below the screened interval of thevapor extraction well.

Operating tae SVE system at maximum vacuum to determine the total systemresponse.

Monitoring the change in flow rate, vacuum and contaminant level while operating amaximum vacuum for an extended period of time.

Monitoring the change in flow rate, vacuum and contaminant level whale reducingthe system vacuum incrementally.

81625.08D 2-I0

5O3 4O

2.5__ Lower Aquifer Dual Phase Test No. 1

2.5.3.1 The first dual phase test run started on June 11, 1999 at the lower aquifer well (DPNGA-2)

Airflow measurements indicate 83 actual cubic feet per minute (acfm) was the highest recorded airflow.

Seventy (70) minutes after this highest airflow was recorded, the flow ranged from 25 to 30 acfm for the

remainder of the test. The test log, pressure decline data, and airflow data are provided in Columbia

Technologies' report (Appendix F). As noted m the test log, the vacuum pump was shut down three

times during the test, the data logging system failed once, and the power supphed by the generator was

unstable. The plot of well vacuum versus elapsed time (Appendix F) shows each of the monitoring points

reaching and maintaining a steady state vacuum relatively quickly. Once the mmal vapor volume was

extracted from the subsurface test area, flow dropped to a relatively low level for the remainder of the

test. Additionally, a low contaminant removal rate was noted throughout the test. On June 15, 1999, the

system was shut down and the equipment was set-up on well DPNGA-I (upper aquifer).

2.5.4 Lower Aquifer Well Development

2.5.4.1 Following the first attempt of the dual phase pilot test on the lower aquifer, dual phase well

DPNGA-2 was further developed. With approval from the Corps of Engineers and the Virginia

Department of Environmental Quality, a non-phosphate well development aid was applied in DPNGA-2

on June 17, 1999, per the manufacturer's recommendations. The chemical, BMR (Bentonite Mud

Remover) manufactured by CETCO, removes bentomte and other natural clays. BMR was allowed to set

in the well for approximately 24 hours.

2.5.4.2 In addition to the BMR, pressure-fracturing to increase the permeabihty of the formation

immediately around the well bore was performed on June 18, 1999 and June 19, 1999. A second BMR

treatment was applied at DPNGA-2 on June 19, 1999. The dual phase test was restarted on the lower

aquifer on June 22, 1999 and an increase in airflow was observed. However, groundwater flow rates from

DPNGA-2 increased only slightly (from 0.5 gpm to 0.8 to 0.9 gpm).

2.5.5 Lower Aquifer Dual Phase Test No. 2

2.5.5.1 A second dual phase test on the lower aquifer was performed following the redevelopment

activities on DPNGA-2. The test was started on June 22, 1999. An air flow of 75 acfm was the initial

and highest recorded air flow. The airflow dropped steadily over the first 9 hours of the test from 75 acfm

to 25 acfm or less, where it remained constant throughout the remainder of the test period. The test log,

81625 0gD 2-11

5O3

pressure dechne data, ai- flow data, and contaminant concentration data are prowded m Appen&x F. As

noted m the test log, the vacuum pump was shut down once during the test to install new groundwater

transducers in DPNGA-2 and MWNGA-6. Minimal contaminant removal was noted throughout the test.

The second dual phase test conducted at the lower aquifer was terminated on June 25, 1999 due to

insufficient airflow.

41

2.5.6 Upper Aquifer Dual Phase Testing

2.5.6.i The upper aquifer step drawdown test had indicated that the groundwater pump rate from

DPNCA-I was insufficient to lower the groundwater table Prior to commencing the dual phase test m

the upper aquifer, elect'ic pumps were installed m each 2-inch observation well to further lower the

groundwater table in the upper aquifer and improve airflow through the vadosezone.

2.5.6.2 The upper aquifer dual phase test began on June 16, 1999. Airflow measurements indicated a

maximum of 90 acfm. S_xty- (60) acfm was typical for the first 48 hours of testing. The test log,

pressure decline data, z.ir flow data, and contaminant concentration data are provided in Columbia

Technologies' report (Appendix F). As noted m the test log, the vacuum pump was shut down once

during the test and the p3wer supplied by the generator was again unstable, resulting in seven equipment

shutdowns. The electric _umps failed several times dunng pumping and were replaced as they faded. This

created inconsistent water levels and consequently affected vacuum measurements in each observation

well as the water levels changed.

2.5.6.3 The plot of well vacuum versus elapsed time (Appendix F) shows that stable vacuum conditions

were not reached at an3 of the momtonng points. This was likely the result of varying water levels

caused by the power failures. Since each monitoring well was sealed, the change In water levels within

the wells resulted in variations in the momtored vacuum level.

2.5.6.4 The vacuum applied to DPNGA-I was stepped down from 25 in. Hg to 15 in. Hg on June 20,

1999. The measured airflow dropped from 60 acfm to 25 acfm and remained constant. When the applied

vacuum was stepped down to 10 in. Hg the airflow remained at 25 acfm.

2.5.6.5 Petroleum-like odors were noted m the air discharge air from DPNGA-1. Portable FID readings

indicated that chemicals were being removed throughout the upper aquifer test. Subsequent laboratory

analysis indicated that tae majority of the FID readings were attributed to methane. Tnchloroethene

8 !625.08D 2-12

(TCE)wasalsoremoveddunngtesting.A plotof TCEconcentrattonsversustimeandflow isprovided

inAppendixF. ThedualphasetestconductedattheupperaquiferwascompletedonJune22,1999.

2.6 AQUIFER PUMP TESTS

2.6.0.1 In April of 1999, two pump tests were performed in the OU 6 area to deterrmne aquifer

parameters for the upper and lower aquifers. Groundwater quality data was also collected during the DPE

pdot tests. The pumping test in the upper aquifer was performed in extracuon well DNPGA-1 with

continuous monitoring of water level changes in DNPGA-1 and monitoring wells MWNGA-I through

MWNGA-5. The lower aquifer was tested with extraction well DNPGA-2 and monitoring wells

MWNGA-6 through MWNGA-10. Aquifer parameters of transmisswlty, hydraulic conductivity and

storativity were determined from both aquifer tests These wdl be used to support the additional pilot

tests planned for 2000 as well as future evaluation of groundwater remediation alternatives during the

feasibility study.

2.6.0.2 The lower aquifer pump test began on April 13, 1999, and consisted of a drawdown (pumping)

phase lasting approximately 14,000 minutes (233.3 hours) during which groundwater levels were

recorded automatically (using pressure transducers and data loggers) m the test well and monitoring well

network. Approximately 3,570 minutes after the beginning of the test, the extraction wells at OU 9 were

turned on, resulting in an increased drawdown at the OU 6 dual-phase extraction well and monitoring

wells. Therefore only first 3,570 minutes of the drawdown versus time data were used in the aquifer test

analysis presented in Section 2.7.

2.6.0.3 The upper aquifer pump test began on April 20, 1999, and consisted of a drawdown (pumping)

phase lasting 4,000 minutes (66.7 hours) during which groundwater levels were recorded automatically

(using pressure transducers and data loggers) in the test well and monitoring well network. The pumping

rate, which was kept approximately constant at 0 9 gallons per minute during first 800 minutes,

subsequently varied more than 10 percent from the average resulting in variable drawdown

measurements. Therefore, only first 800 minutes of the drawdown versus time data were used in the

aquifer test analysis presented m Section 2.7.

81625.08D 2-13

503 43

2.6.1 Pump Test Analysis Procedures

2.6.1.3. The upper and lower aquifer pump test data were analyzed using data corrected for unconfined

condmons (upper aqui'er) and the following analytical methods, taking into account partial well

penetration (for both aqtMers):

• Thels methcd (type-curve matching)

• Cooper-Jac(_b (straight-line) method

• Neuman Method for aqmfers with delayed gravity response (type-curve matchmg)

All three methods (when applicable) were apphed w_th the aid of aquifer test analysis computer program

AQTESOLV for Windows (HydroSOLVE, Inc., 1996-1997). This program includes both visual and

automatic curve matching methods for confined, unconfined, and delayed gravity response aquifers.

Vlsua: curve matching s analogous to traditional manual methods of aquifer test analysis using graph

paper and type curves. The program applies Hantush's equations for the effect of partml well penetration

in a confined aquifer (Hantush, 1961) and Jacob's correction of recorded drawdown data for unconfined

aquifers (Jacob, C.E., 1c63).

2.6.1.2 The pumping rate at extraction well DNPGA-1 (upper aquifer test well) was kept approximately

constant at an average of 0.9 gallons per minute (gpm), providing for direct application of all three

analytical methods. Thc pumpmg rate at extraction well DNPGA-2 (lower aqmfer test well) varied

between 2.88 and 3.72 __pm during first 3,570 minutes of the test (used in the analysis). This variation in

the pumping rate was accounted for within AQTESOLV computer program that uses principle of

superpositlon to analyze pumping test data having variable pumping rates.

2.6.1.3 Prior to aquifer pump test analysis, data from the data loggers were downloaded, checked for

consistency, and prepared for input into AQTESOLV m the form of test data files (ASCI format). Graphs

of water level versus tm-e for the monitoring wells at OU 6 instrumented with pressure transducers dunng

the entire aquifer test art' presented in Appendix H.

2.6.1.4 Semi-log and Icg-log graphs of time versus drawdown data for all momtoring wells used in the

analysis are presented I1 Appendix H. These graphs show the matching type curves and straight lines

generated by AQTESOLV for aquifer parameters determination.

81625.08D 2-14

503 44

2.6.2 Aquifer Tests Results

2.6.2.1 The results of the aqmfer tests conducted as part of the pilot tests of the upper and lower aquifers

at OU 6 are presented below.

2.6.2.2 Upper Aquifer - The calculated aquifer transmissivlty range varies from 6.96 x 10.3 square feet

per nunute (ft2/min) (at MWNGA-1) to 1.15 x 10" ft2/min (at MWNGA-3, Cooper-Jacob method for the

first 350 minutes of data). These data indicate a heterogeneous porous medium. Assuming an average

saturated aquifer thickness prior to the pumping test of approximately 12 feet (the bottom of the upper

aquifer is at average elevation of 93 feet above datum), the hydraulic conductivity ranges between 5.58 x

10"4 ft/min (2.8 x l0 "4 centimeters per second [cm/sec] (MWNGA-l) and 9.6 x ]0 -3 fffmin (4.9 x l0 "3

cm/sec) based on the Cooper-Jacob method.

2.6.2.2.1 Momtoring well MWNGA-1, which is closest to extraction well DPNGA-1, was the only well

showing effects of a delayed gravity response to groundwater withdrawal. This is primarily due to the

fact that MWNGA-I exhibited the greatest drawdown of all the monitoring wells, resulting in a sufficient

time for delayed gravity response to become apparent. The drawdown versus time data for MWNGA-l

was analyzed using appropriate Neuman's method.

2.6.2.2.2 Momtoring well MWNGA-3 showed effects of a less permeable boundary approximately

350 minutes into the test (as evident on the Cooper-Jacob straight-line graph, Appendix H). This

boundary may comprise a less permeable portton of the upper aquifer sediments or some other physical or

artificial boundary that limits the groundwater flow towards the extraction well from an area beyond

MWNGA-3.

2.6.2.2.3 Applicable specific y,eld values were calculated from five wells and are summarized in

Table 2.4. Specific yields ranged from 0.0025 to 0.0131.

2.6.2.3 Lower Aquifer - Transmissivity of the upper portion of the lower aquifer is generally higher than

for the upper aquifer and ranges between 4.74 x l0 "2 ft2/min (MWNGA-6) and 7.96 x l0 "2 ft2/min

(MWNGA-8). This portion of the aquifer also appears to be fairly uniform in terms of permeability. The

DPE extraction well and associated monitoring wells in the lower aquifer are all screened in the upper,

less permeable portion of the aquifer (i.e., they are all partially penetrating). The hydraulic conductivity

of the aquifer is therefore less accurately determined since the aquifer is stratified, consisting of three

horizontal zones of hydraulic conductivity (the middle zone being the most permeable) (USGS, 1990).

81625 08D 2-15

503 45

Assuming an aqmfer thickness of 40 feet 0.e., the ennre thickness between the Aqma Formanon

(overlying confining unit) and the Petersburg Granite (underlying confining unit) the Potomac would

therefore yield erroneoasly low values for hydraulic conductivity. Therefore, hydraulic conducnvlty

valves for the lower aquifer were not calculated.

2.6.2.3.1 Table 2.5 summanzes the aquifer parameters for the lower aquifer at OU 6, based on the

calculated pump test data. The specific yield of the confined lower aquifer ranges between 0 0009 and

0.071

81625.08D 2-16

503 4G

3.0 PILOT TEST RESULTS

3.1 HYDROGEOLOGYANDGEOCHEMISTRY

3.1.1 Stratigraphy

3.1.1.1 Two geologic cross sections were generated for the OU 6 Pilot Study area usmg the reformation

obtained from the pilot study well borings. The locatrens of these cross sections are presented in Figure

1-3. Figure 1-4 illustrates a cross section oriented approximately west-east from momtoring well

MWNGA-5 to MWNGA-3 and including momtoring wells MWNGA-4, 1 and 2, and DPE well

DPNGA-1. F_gure 1-5 illustrates a cross section oriented approximately south-north from monitoring

well MWNGA-10 to MWNGA-8, and includes monitoring wells MWNGA-6, 7 and 9, monitoring wells

ANGA-I through 4, and dual phase well DPNGA-2.

3.1.1.2 The stratigraphy underlying the site is comprised of the Eastover, Calvert, Aquia, and Potomac

Formations. As revealed in the cross-sections, the Eastover Formation is predominately comprised of

clayey silts and salty clays with sand lenses. The Eastover Formation ranges from approximately 30 feet

m thickness on the western side of DSCR to approximately 20 feet in thickness on the eastern side of

DSCR. A shallow unconfined aquifer, referred to as the upper aquifer, is present in the Eastover

Formation.

3.1.1.3 Immediately underlying the Eastover Formation is the Calvert and Aquia Formations,

respecuvely. These two formations form the confining unit that separates the upper unconfined aquifer

from the lower confined aquifer. The confining unit consists predominately of silty clays and ranges from

10 to 15 feet m thickness.

3.1.1.4 The Potomac Formation underlies the confining unit and is composed primarily of sands with

gravel, silt, and clay seams. The Potomac Formation vanes in thickness from approximately 20 feet

along the western boundary of the OSA to more than 40 feet m the eastern portion of the NGA. A deeper

confined aquifer, referred to as the lower aquifer, is present in the Potomac Formation.

81625 OgD 3-1

3.1.2 Soil Geotechnlcal Analysis

5O3

3.1.2.I A summary of tie gram size analyses and soil classifications for the samples collected from the

pilot study well borings .ere presented in Table 3.1. The laboratory results and the grain size distributions

are contained in Appenc ix E. The grain size distribution test report classifies the soils surrounding the

dual phase well DPNG_-I as (CH) - inorganic clays of high plasuclty, or (CL) - morgamc clays of low

to medium plasticity. Tt'e gram size distribution test report classifies the soils surrounding the dual phase

well DPNGA-2 as (CH) - inorganic clays of high plasticity or (SM) - poorly graded sand/silt mixtures

4;'

3.2 SVE TESTING RESULTS

3.2.0.1 Three SVE pilot tests were conducted on the upper and lower aquifers at OU 6. Two of the SVE

pilot tests were conducted on the lower aquifer and one of the SVE pilot tests was performed on the upper

aquifer. The following :,ections describe the vacuum responses and extraction rates observed dunng the

performance of the SVE pilot tests.

3.2.1 Lower Aquife- SVE Pilot Test No. 1

3.2.1.1 The first SVE p lot test conducted on the lower aqutfer began on June 11, 1999. This test was

performed on extraction well DPNGA-2 and indicated an initial air flow velocity of 83 acfm. As the test

proceeded, the air flow ,,elocity was observed to continually decrease, and within seventy minutes from

the start of the test, remzmed static at approximately 25 to 30 acfm for the duration of the test. The plot

of well vacuum vs. elapsed time (Appendix F) illustrates the decrease and steady state vacuum for each of

the monitormg points. : dditionally, a low contaminant removal rate was noted throughout the test. The

results of the inittal lower aquifer pilot test indicated that the extraction well was experiencing restricted

flow. The lower aquifer SVE pilot test was discontinued to allow for additional development of the well.

3.2.2 Upper Aquifer SVE Pilot Test

3.2.2.1 The SVE pilot test was started on June 16, 1999 and ran through late June 17, 1999. The test was

conducted on the upper aquifer well DPNGA-1. Excessive backpressure on the exhaust line caused the

liqmd ring pump to shutdown. The pump was secured and the system was restarted on June 18, 1999.

Airflow velocities during the first 48 hours of the test ranged from 60 to 90 acfm, with an overall average

61 acfm for the first 48 hours of the test. After 48 hours, the air flow velocity decreased to 25 acfm,

81625 08D 3-2

503 48

where it remained for the duration of the test. The plot of well vacuum versus time illustrates that stable

vacuum condttions were not achieved at any of the momtonng points located m the upper aquifer test

area. This was hkely the result of varying water level condmons experienced throughout the test.

Because each of the monitoring wells were sealed for vacuum measurements, the change in water level

within the well resulted in a variation in the monitored vacuum level. Portable FID readings recorded

during the test indicated that volatile organic compounds were being removed during the upper aquifer

test. Based on the low levels of volatile organics detected in the gas samples, the majority of the FID

readings were attributed to methane. TCE was reported in all but two of the gas samples at levels with

concentrations ranging from below the Practical Quantitat_on L_mit (PQL) to slightly above the PQL of 1

_g/l.,. Tetrachloroethene (PCE) was also reported during the latter pomon of the test at levels below the

PQL of 1 I.tg/L. A test log, pressure decline data, air flow data, and contaminant concentration data are

provided in Appendix G.

3.2.3 Lower Aquifer SVE Pilot Test No. 2

3.2.3,1 The second SVE pilot test conducted on the lower aquifer began on June 22, 1999. This test was

performed after addmonal development of extraction well DPNGA-2. An initial air flow velocity of 75

acfm was achieved. As the test proceeded, the air flow velocity was observed to continually decrease,

and within nine hours from the start of the test, remained static at approximately 25 acfm for the duration

of the test. The plot of well vacuum vs. elapsed time (Appendix G) illustrates the decrease and steady

state vacuum for each of the monitoring points. A low contaminant removal rate was noted throughout

the test, with TCE reported in 29 of 40 samples analyzed, and PCE reported in 1 sample. Concentrations

were below the PQL of 1 p.g/L in all samples (Appendix G). The dual phase test run at the lower aquifer

was terminated on June 25, 1999 due to insufficient airflow.

81625.08D 3-3

5O3 49

4.9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.0.0.1 The purpose of conducting the DPE pilot test was to determine the potential effectiveness and

feasibihty of applying this technology with respect to site specific characteristics for remediauon of the

groundwater and subsurface soils. In general, the results of the DPE pilot test conducted on the upper and

lower aquifers suggest tt'at alternative remedial approaches should be considered to achieve the des,red

clean up goals for the subsurface soils and groundwater.

4.1 UPPER AQUIF ER

4.1.0.1 The results of tht," pilot test indicate that the upper aquifer consists of relatwely low permeable

silty/clayey soils and has a small saturated thickness (often less than 10 feet). Previous data collected

from the site indicates a sow horizontal migration of the contaminant mass (LAW, 1996b). This supports

the relatively flat gradien and low hydrauhc conducuvity values observed in the upper aqmfer. The low

pumping rates observed during the DPE test are consistent with the low rates of groundwater recovery

obtained from the shallow recovery wells located on OU 9. It is therefore unlikely that any remedial

technology, Including dull phase extraction, based solely on groundwater extraction and related water

table drawdown would be feasible. Based on the review of the pilot test data pertaining to the geology of

the upper aqmfer, pursuing further consideration of the DPE technology for the upper aquifer Is not

recommended.

4.1.0.2 In lieu of pursuing additional pilot testmg m the upper aquifer, it is recommended that other

potenttally feassble technologies be considered. Based on the current understanding of the nature of

contamination and aquifer characteristics, two enhanced contaminant reduction methods are

recommended for further .:onsideratmn: Gas/Nutrient Flooding and Chemical Flooding. Gas or ennched

air is the treatment agent m Gas/Nutrient Flooding. Gas/Nutrient flooding is a physical, chemical and

biological process where the agent Is dehvered through mjectmn wells or direct-push wells. The

controlled Introduction o'" predetermined mixtures and quantmes of air, nitrogen, phosphorous and/or

methane optimize the nu.nent balance for bioremediatmn. Chemical Flooding is a chemical process

where the agent is dehvered through rejection wells or direct-push wells. Surfactants, solvents or redox

agents z,re the treatment agents in Chemical Flooding. In this technology, no chemicals or nutrients for

micro-organisms are added to the rejection fluid. The agents are selected based on their ability to alter the

properties of solutmn interfaces Upon contact with the contamlnant(s), the agents bring about an

81625.08D 4- !

5g3 50

mcrease m the total aqueous solublhty of the chemical components, thereby acceleratmg the d_ssolution

process.

4.1.0.3 In addition to injection wells and direct-push chemJcal-nutnent delivery methods, analyzing the

applicability and feasibdity of horizontal subsurface structures, for both the delivery of

chemicals/nutrients and the recovery of contarmnants (i.e., backfilled trenches, perforated ptpes, and

horizontal wells) is recommended. Analyzing the applicability of permeable walls/gates for m-sltu

treatment of contaminated groundwater is also recommended. It should be noted that an evaluatmn of

potentially apphcable technologies will be developed and presented in a brief report that will be prepared

under Task Order 26.

4.2 LOWER AQUIFER

4.2.0.1 The performance of the dual phase extraction pilot tests conducted on the lower aquifer produced

results margmally more encouraging than the results for the upper aquifer. Overall, the pilot tests indicate

that the lower aquifer consists predominantly of relatively low permeable sdty/clayey soils. Due to the

stratigraphy of the formation, lowering and maintaining a depressed water level could not be achieved.

This resulted in poor performance of the tests and produced low air flow and low contaminant removal

rates Based on this information, pursuing further consideration of the DPE technology for the lower

aquifer is not recommended.

4.2.0.2 In lieu of pursuing additmnal DPE testing in the lower aqmfer, it is recommended that other

innovative potentially feasible technologies or ahemate remedial strategies be considered. It should be

noted that an evaluation of potentially applicable technologies will be developed and presented in a brief

report that will be prepared under Task Order 26.

81625 OgD 4-2

5O3 51

5.0 REFERENCES

Cooper, H.H. and C.E. Jacob, 1946. A generalized graphical method for evaluating formation constants

and summarizln;; well field history, Am. Geophys. Union Trans., vol 27, pp. 526-534.

Dames & Moore, 1989. Remedial Investigation Area 50, Open Storage Area and National Guard Area.

Defense Genertl Supply Center, Richmond, Virginia. Contract No. DACA 65-86-C0131.July 28, 1989.

Duffield, G.M., HydroSOLVE, Inc., 1996-1997. AQTESOLV for Windows; User's Grade.

HydroSOLVE, Reston, VA, 100 p.

Engineering-Science, 1_92. Draft Remedial Investigation Field Work for Fire Trammg Area -

Residential Well Survey, Defense General Supply Center, Richmond, Virginia. Engineering-Science, Inc., Cgntract DA December 1992.

Home Engineering Serv ces, Inc., 1998. Quarter 6. Monthly Operations & Maintenance Report. May 1,

1998 to May 31, 1998. Report #18. Groundwater Pump and Treat System OU 9. DefenseSupply Center, P,ichmond. DACA 21-95-C0083. June 23, 1998.

Jacob, C.E., 1963. Dete'mining the permeabihty of water-table aquifers. In: Bentall, R., edttor, Methods

of determining permeabdlty, transmisslbdity, and drawdown. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1536-I, p. 1245-I271

Kresic, N., 1997. Quantitative Solutions in Hydrogoelogy and Groundwater Modeling. CRC/LewisPublishers, Boca Ration, New York, 461 p.

Kruseman, G.P. and N.A DeRldder, 1990. Analysis and Evaluation of Pumping Test Data (2nd ed.),

Publication 47, Intern. Inst. For Land Reclamation and Improvement, Wageningen, TheNetherlands, 37( p.

LAW, 1992. "Final Sampling and Analysis Plan for Remedial Investigation and Expanded SiteInvestigation." Defense General Supply Center, Richmond, Virginia. Law Environmental, Inc.,Contract No. D,a CA 87-90-D0023, August 1992.

LAW, 1995. "Draft Fi lal Focused Feasibility Study Report for OU 6 - OSA/Area 50/NGA Ground

Water." Defease General Supply Center, Richmond, Virginia, Law Engineering andEnvironmental Services, Inc., Contract No. DACA 98-94-D0016, July 1995.

LAW, 1996a. "Final Remedial Investigation Report Addendum for OU 6-OSA/AREA 50/NGA."

Defense Supply =enter, Richmond, Virginia. Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc.,Contract No. DA CA 87-94-D0016, January 1996.

81625.08D 5-1

503 52

LAW,

LAW,

LAW,

1996b. "Draft Final Focused Feasibility Study for Operable Umt 6." Defense Supply Center,

Richmond, Virginia. Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc., Contract No.

DACA 87-94-D0016, July 1995.

1999a. "Work Task Proposals for Investigations at Operable Umt 6 (OSA/Area 50/NGA Ground

Water) Operable Unit 8 (Acid Neutralization Pits Ground Water)." Defense Supply Center,

RJchmond, Virgima. Law Engmeenng and Environmental Serwces, Inc., Contract No.DACA 87-94-130016, January 1999.

1999b. "'Draft Natural Attenuation Studies Report." Defense Supply Center R_chmond,

Richmond, Virginia. Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc., Contract No., DACA87-94-D0016, December 1999.

Moench, A.F., 1993. Computation of type curves for flow to partially penetrating wells m water-table

aquifers, Ground Water, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 966-971.

Moench, A.F., 1996. Flow to a well in a water-table aquifer: an improved Laplace transform soluuon,

Ground Water, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 593-596.

Neuman, S.P., 1974. Effect of partial penetration on flow in unconfined aquifers consldenng delayed

gravity response, Water Resources Research. Vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 303-312.

Theis, C.V., 1935. The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the rate and duration

of discharge of a well using groundwater storage, Am. Geophys. Union Trans., vol. 16, pp. 519-

524.

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Department of Interior, 1985. Ground Water Manual, U.S. Government

Printing Office, Denver, CO, 480 p.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1990. Ground-Water Contamination and Movement at the Defense GeneralSupply Center, Richmond, Virginia. Water-Resources Investigations Report, 90-4113.

81625 0gD 5-2

503 53

0

V

"i _

5O3

V V V V V V V V V _ V V V V V V V V V

oooooo_ooooo oo_oooooovvvvvv vvvvv_vv vvvvvv

• _vvv_vvvvv__

_ _ o

__a_!_-_'o o, , o_p , ,__,_

5_

503 55

0

Z_

0

V V V V V V V V V V V V V V _ V V V V V V V

V V V V V V V V V V V _ V V

v_ _mm vvv vv vv vvv

_o

_0

vvvvvvv_

vv __

VVVVVVVV

vv_ _

i_ill

iii_l

o _ _ _..__1_

503 56

Q.

_3 57

_ _i_.- _

a.

_ ._1_. __ _ _oo

.... o_ _.1_ .-"

c_

_J

..0

"_

N

O =

<_

"OO

E

1:3. ¢_

N

_o

_O

503 58

•-o

_, o,,

I_

z z

0

< _ < < < <

z _z z z z z

m

o.

,o

5113 5.9

"oo o o _ -- -- --

2 ° o

-__ _ i _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _"._ _, _ _,_ o o o __o __o

, _, _, _, • _ _,

T T T T T T T

,'_ Z Z Z Z Z Z _z

< < < < <

0

0

m.

c_.1

H

r_

d

0 0 0 0

u IJ ¢.1

_ o _'_ o _'_ o

oO O0 _o

< < .<

503

0 0 0

0

-: -- _ -_ _ -- --

< < < < < < <Z Z Z Z Z Z Z

0_2

e_

t_

81

r_

°!

tr- _11o o oi_

E_J o

c_oo

oo

Qo

<

0

"7

Z

oo

t_

r,l

0

c_

C_

Z

r_

c_

oo

C_Io0

<

0

0

0

<Z

oo

c_

QO

<L_

c_

_st_

o

.<Z

o

<

cl_ v

c_tlq

oo

oo

oo

.<

0

0

r_

'7

<Z

,,t

_0

.o

e-q

Qo

c_

m_o

L_

c_

o

Imi

.<Z

oO

oO

t_

0

c_

<Z

eL

e_

_4r_

_, ,o

z_.=r_

0

503

_lO O0 ¢(0 O0 O0 O0 O0

,< ,< ,< < ,< ,< ,<

t=,)0 0 0 0 0 0 0

=-_ =-°8 =_ =-_ -_ _'_

-- "7 "T -- "7 "7 --',_ ,,o ,,o ,,$ ,,o ,,o ,,b

< .< < < < < <Z Z Z Z Z Z Z

0m e- f-i

< < 0' <

82

oo

5O3 63

°!

o

0_

0_

.=_

oo

I

O_

0

"o

0

=

o_

m

.¢Z

,.z

c__q

m

o_

0

z

0

o

oI'N

m

.<

o

o

<Z

z,

I'N

M

0

o

<Z

t_

9r_

o

0

"_ = o

Z

z

I'N

0

o

o

cq

z

g_

o

¢,_

o

._.o__=

o_

<z

N

t_

¢0

F- • E

£'4

<

O

O

=_

E ""-6 _0 ,o

<Z

L_

o,

m

e_

<Q.

0

o

=___o_

t_

Z

_n

"c)

<

m

e_

<C_U_

0

0

O

E _

f'l

<Z

e_

<f'l

o_

m

<

O

O

i=

_O

<Z

<

,A

m

<m

o

0

_ua7-.-r,

m¢N

<Z

<

<m

O

e_

o

_ue

e,,

<z

<'-r

503

t_t

.<_J

0

e_

o

<Z

<

e_

t'N

503

=

.=

,_= m ,,0

05

¢3

_o

m

<l,d

0

"0

O_

o,,

<Z

"0

<

J

_o

0

0

0

o;,

<Z

"0

<

ooc5

<

0

0

<Z

<

<

0

f,It'N

<Z

e_m

<

o<

_ v

<

0

<Z

<

<

0

"_ m 0

<Z

<

<

<

e_

>

gO

o

L=

O0

0

0

0

0 _

t'Nt'N

Z

en

I'N

m

0

0

A

Z

e_

e_

m

0

0

_R

9

Z

I

m

0

_J0

__o_

el}

r_

Z

m

0

el}

Z

0

_J0

"_o

_u. o

e,

z

ve_

_03

¢b

m

0

0

Z

5O3 67

_D

E

X

O

O

e_

<

o

<Z

<0

0('N0

m

<

0

O

<Z

J

<

0t't0

0

0

<

0

E ,-

f_

,b

<Z

<

O

O

O

<

U_

O

(D

e,,

<z

<

<

0

0

,b

<Z

011

<

0

0

<

0

<Z

<

<

0

uO

:=-=o

I'N

<Z

<_0

e_

Ct_

e_

_., .tJ

z

oO

_0

oo

<

0

t_(.)

ed_

.=_ O_

r_ _ ,_ Z

C_

m

<

E ,-

<Z

<

<

c

0

Q

4

<Z

I

<

<

0

0

rN

<Z

I

m

<

Q

I.)

("4

<Z

<

M

<

--r_9

d_

<Z

ee_

<

5O3

r_

<Ok.

"_o".7...L_

<Z

re_IN

<

503 69

0 =

0

I,=

m_

J

0

0

i=1

m_ e=

.<Z

,-m

f',l

_< ,,,

0

m

o

E ,-

<Z

m

<

_<

.<

r_

._=II II

-r

t-',l

r_

503 70

TABLE 2.4

SUMMARY OF AQUIFER PARAMETERS

OU 6 PILOT TEST

UPPER AQUIFER PUMP TEST

Defense Supply Center Richmond

Richmond, Virginia

Well ID

Transmissivity

ft2/min

MWNGA-I 0.00696

M_-NGA-2 0.0372

0 0597

Specific Yield

0.0131

Hydraulic Conductivity

ft/min cm/sec

5.58 X 104 5 58 X 10 .4

3.10 Xl0 "3 3.10 Xl0 "3

3 10X10 "3 3 10 X10 "3

3.10X10 "3 3.10XI0 "3

3.10XI0 "3 3.10X10 "3

3 10 XI0 "3 3 10 X10 "3

3.10X10 "3 3.10X10 "3

sanle same

0 0059

M_'NGA-3 (Thels) 0.00485

MWNGA-3 (C-J) 0.1147 0.0035

MWNGA-4 (Theis) 0.0582 0.0025

MWNGA-4 (C-J) 0.0464 0.0056

MWNGA-5 (Theis) 0 0434 0.0025

MWNGA-5 (C-J) same same

Notes" ft2/min = squa_: feet per rmnute

_min = feet per rmnute

cm/sec = cenlarleters per second

81625.08D Page 1 of I

71

TABLE 2.5

SUMMARY OF AQUIFER PARAMETERS - LOWER AQUIFER

PUMP TEST OU 6 PrLOT TEST

Defense Supply Center Richmond

Richmond, Virginia

Well ID Transmissivity (ft 2/min) Specific Yield

MWNGA-6 0.0474 0.071

MWNGA-7 0.0558 0.0057

MWNGA-8 0.0796 0.0009

MWNGA-9 0.0526 0.0204

MWNGA-10 0.0731 0.0028

Notes: ft2/min = square feet per minute

503 72

TABLE 3.1

SUMMARY OF GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS RESULTS

OU 6 PILOT TEST

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER RICHMOND, RICHMOND, VIRGINIA

Well I.D. AFprox. Sample Percent Percent Unified

Depth (ft) Sand Silt SoilClassification

DPNGA-I 6-7.5 33.7 66.3 CH

DPNGA- 1 10-11.6 39.1 60.5 CL

DPNGA- 1 16.2-17.4 8.8 90.7 CH

DPNGA- 1 21-23.4 18.3 81.7 CH

DPNGA-2 16-17 27.7 71.7 CH

DPNGA-2 22-23 80.8 18.5 SM

DPNGA-2 26-27 86.8 12.7 SM

DPNGA-2 29-31 67.6 12.0 SM

81625.08D PREPARED/DATE: JFL 3/2/00CHECKED/DATE: DP 3/20/00

503 73

0

DSCRBOUNDARI_

\

COAST LINE

.5

APPROXlMA3 ESCALE IN MILES

503 '74

NATIONALGUARD AREA

U.S. ARMY ENGINEERING AND SUPPORT CENTER HUNTSVILLE

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER -- RICHMOND

RICHMOND, VIRGINIA

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER -- RICHMONDAND SURROUNDING AREA

Source" Dames & Moore (1989)

RGURE ,FILE (}ATE 29 SEPT 98PREPARED/DATE KLA NUMBER

CHECKED/DATE L_S ]PLOT OA_ 29 SEPT 98

p._ .o_ 1 - 112001-7-1620 FILIENAME 00919"71620

< < +ML_I

<

0'I-- _ 1 _<mm _i <

=-_ " _ '<_ _ _ _ "® iO_ <

......................... _;F.'_ " _ ............................................................................... Z:_ ........ +

_ ®

m

_'_I _® _TTTTT_<G I I I lillllllllllllli

o_+ I u_lu_,,II,,l,,,l,l,llllI' I_i< _J II ]11 III III.l'r _"P3 ffl

_z _ _e _e lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll•_ .,,1 < w _o

MI

? _--I+ < +®+=_+, .... ____+,_

r

° ip,+.I r-.

, l

: .L._< Q

-- J__ ®

_:e av<:_ ±nvHesv --'-J •0

r

r_ _i_

0_LZ_

F_

A A

II

|

II

)

\ \ \,,,,:

_,_-^ 2<A I TANK I _ TANK \ % ,_t_,,.-,

B,_._G,_8 Ew_o_: \I ANGA-2 \ X_ \

ANGA-_ _[_,,e_.,t.,A_ , \ \ \

ANGA_4_,,_ u _",I--\

MWNGA-IO ur"_'"- " AN'GA_I @EW-b8

\

AEHA 21A At HA-25A

@

B _F_Ae3O,,\ \\

AEHA- 27A

Ew-u70

:w_o_\

l- :

®

®

@

AI

A /M_GA-3MWNGA-5_ rMWNGA_ 2

AEHA-28A

FRACTANK I #-'_P°LY

_X,J TANK

AEHA- ,31A@

USGS -B4

EW_U_ UgOS B

Z\

0 1(

SCALE IN FEET

\DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER--RICHMOND

RICHMOND, VA

OPERABLE UNiT 6BUILDINGSF'DICE

PILOTSTUDYDUALPHASEWELL

PILOTSTUDYMONITORINGWEI.L

PILOTSTUDYPNEUMATICMONITORINGWIDJ,,.

0U9 EXTRAC'noN_IELL-UPPERAQUIFER

OU6 MONITORINGVtlg.L

PILOT STUDY GEOLOGICALCROSS-SECTION LOCATIONS

AREA 50/NGA GROUNDWATER_REP_tCDBY:.

_HI:CK_DB_,

_NO.

JFL 2/7/00 FI_JRE _ _1_N.umm 13 JAN 99PLOT _1_

12001-8-1625 1--,_ 07.DEC 99Fill _ OU6PILOTSTUDY-2

I

("ISM) 33A3"I V3S NV3M :3_O_V J.33_ NI NOU.VA3_3

c. o_ 8I I I I I I

oI

g

o

_ o___ _<

,,<,n,,

i I i i i i i

('ISM) _ V3S h'V3M 3AO_V 13tl NI NOIIVA3_3

oC

Lr

v

o _I I I I L i i I I i I I I I

\

z

I

I I I i I

('lSf( 360_ _ i_l) NOt_V^3_

T__c_.

I i I i i i I

Z0 _-

\\

\\

%

<:'\V_:X-/A \

I

wo CC 9 O0/OC/C 6_p £6£-30A\lsal-lOi,d\_OSl

II

I

\

i_////

=//

\

I_1 ,:, \v/;-,

.'J (IV(_

II •i , I

.... _ , !'[

<_-

[_ r - - _-n '_ ;] ,3,

_UO _'_ 9 00/0_'/[ 6MP 8-nbo'_°'-d°_d',":aJ--iOl'd\';gsP\ r

Z

CO

8

o

O.

o

mj= 1cO. D.

I _ 1I 1 _ _

,. ,® Q D "o E ,a _ Ill .J 5

.l l _*._ __l_ _ ........ _--. _--ll _---- _*-- _'" __ l _ _ : _ l V'._.__Ol._.l_ll_. _"_ I : _ _ = W l

_=_ _ "_ I 1 _ _ _ , _ 1 _

_ ,< _ <: o o _ '

_:_ _< _ _i_ _ _ i:-- o ia)

o.

. -r -.

1i

= -_ -_ _ _ _ _ " _ _ _ _ _

Z0

I

_a0u J"F o(,zoLU (_ I1

_gZ

u_

\dscr\pIIOt-Te_t\QUGP'LOT_JC)Y-2 dwg 2/23/'0_ 6 5_ _m

FRAC.v -- 2EA TANK$

LOWER AQUIFER

TEST AREA

7/.'

\ \

10P°LYTANK \ "

MWNGA-8 L, .,_

QANGA-2

(_M WNGA- 7

ANGA-.3 (LMWNG A 6

-MWNGA-IO D--PNGA-2ANIGA_I

,\

\

X\

G

\

\

_E ,-t5 \

\

: -u-e

UPPER AQGIFER

TEST AREA

,_D- A- 27_,

.... E4;" ' --t,j3

- @ $

/

E _L. ,z-

MWNGA- 3

MWNGA-5_

_MWNGA-2MWNGA-4_

(_ MWNGA-1DPNGA-1

:E_A-28A

FRACTANK ] f'-'_ POLY_,.._ TANK

0

/

E,' -_5

AEHA_'4A

\

50 100!

SCALE IN FEET

\\

\

LEGEND:

®

®C

BUILDINGS

FENCE

PILOT STUDY DUAL PHASE WELL

PILOT STUDY MONITORING WELL

PILOT STUDY PNEUMATIC MONITORING WELL

OU9 EXTRAC'nON WELL-UPPER AQUIFER

OU6 MONITORING WELL

ARMY N IN RIN AN PP T H T

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER-RICHMOND

RICHMOND, VA

OPERABLE UNIT 6

PILOT TEST WELL LOCATIONS

UPPER AND LOWER AQUIFERSAREA 50/NGA GROUNDWATER

PR£PAR[D B_

JL 2/7/00FIGURE FIE DATE:

NUMBER 1 3 JAN 99

PLOT OAT["07 DEC 99

_---Z. rE N_. OU6PILOTSTUDY-2

C_EO(ED BY

KLA 3/27/00

RRO._C'_NO 12001--8--1625

503 83

503 84

APPENDIX A

WELL SURVEY COORDINATES

503 85

LAWTI3B.txt

Resource International, LTD

9560 Kings Charter Drive

Ashland, %FA 23005804-550-9200

Tues July 6, 19990

P.N. 94041.01 TASK 13

PROJECT: W:\9404101\Lawt13.pro

NATIONAL GUARD AREA

North East Elev Name

3679195.8297

3679196.4110

3678937.6921

3678937.7898

3679230.6820

3679230.6126

3678950.0338

3678950.4260

3679180.6527

3679180.6395

3678978.6077

3678978.5651

3679174.5435

3679174.4192

3678942.7744

3678942.9373

3678963.2853

3678963.0616

11789641.1463 107.07

11789641.1936 107.42

11789586.9352 111.78

11789587.1757 112.12

11789635.4386 106.80

11789635.9183 106.96

11789598.5202 111.13

11789598.5151 111.60

11789640.8234 107.20

11789641.2501 107.49

11789626.3529 110.28

11789626.0949 110.60

11789614.6851 107.82

11789614.9503 108.04

ANGAI 1"PVC

ANGAI TCASE

MW NGAI 2"PVC

MW NGAI TCASE

ANGA2 1"PVC

ANGA2 TCASE

MW NGA2 2"PVC

MW NGA2 TCASE

ANGA3 1 "PVC

ANGA3 TCASE

MW NGA3 2 "PVC

MW NGA3 TCASE

A/_GA4 1 "PVC

ANGA4 TCASE

11789577.1244 111.71 MW NGA4 2"PVC

11789576.8109 112.22 MW NGA4 TCASE

11789555.4437 112.31

11789555.0952 I12.56

MW NGA5 2 "PVC

MW NGA5 TCASE

Page 1

11789634.0613 106.56 Mw NGA8 2"FVC

11789634.2040 106.79 MW NGA8 TCASE

11789641.0693 I07.03 MW NGA7 2"PVC

11789640.8320 107.33 MW NGA7 TCASE

3679240.7801

3679241.0645

3679201.1838

3679201.4453

3679185.2985 11789643.4688 106.98 MW NGA6 2"PVC

3679185.2289 11789643.7736 107.37 MW NGA6 TCASE

,.,,,- 503 86

3679179.5006

3679179.3033

3679172.8467

3679173.1853

LAWTI3B.txt

11789634.9073

11789635.0076

11789605.1728

11789605.1444

107.20

107.61

107.99

I08.20

MW NGA9 2"PVC

MW NGA9 TCASE

MW NGAI0 2"PVC

MW NGAI0 TCASE

3678935.6982

3678935.8343

3679181.7574

3679182.0967

11789584.6516

11789584.8966

11789644.4402

11789644.4710

111.89

112.19

107.06

107.39

DP NGAI 4"PVC

DP NGAI TCASE

DP NGA2 4"PVC

DP NGA2 TCASE

3676392.6950

3675842.3810

11789248.8499

11789469.7899

129.29 MON

119.36 IRF

Page 2

503 87

503 88

APPENDIX B

BORING LOGS

DPNGA-I

MWNGA-I

MWNGA-2MWNGA-3

MWNGA-4

M'WNGA-5

DPNGA-2MWNGA-6

MWNGA-7

MWNGA-8

MWNGA-9MWNGA-10

ANGA-1

ANGA-2ANGA-3

ANGA-4

HTRWDRILLINGLOGPROJECT

E L.EV. DEPTH _$CA|I_ION OF MA'I_R LkI.S

(a) _) (¢)

I _.x,o

2-2 ,_ J_

I _3""

___.,,.._ ,,._ 7.,, ,,_, ,_R.,

V,.._,..'%.,._c,?+-'L_._t;"

E>_'L&v,EI- _,tr.,._.. t{,-_.

,2.q 0 --

.qt,O _(p -

ENGFORM _A-,R, AUG14

(CI_11Nu_11_SHEET)

RESULTS ORCORE6_( NO.14) (e)

/x,_ _p,- . ._

¢2-"

1

t'

_I.*tTIC,_I BLOWCOUNT

q

/o

• I/

H

21_._

8

t_

P_5

g t_,

Io

fk

too

SHF.ETr"_X_,_Et"TS

r_W_q_(1_)

- ,.,'_ _,_-_ 3:_K

_._._---,o,,e_1_,,_-_

5O3 90

HTRWDRILLINGLOG ,,=..=.,==¢.'n

ELBt.(a) _T

5t 0 --

5_.0 -

3'; ,o --

3(,. ¢) -

3S, 0 --

_'I,o -

I r_;I,_.RIPTION OF I/,AI"ERI,II.S(¢)

(_'_,_ _,L_÷-{: _,,,J_yG,RAVCL.

/_O,O

EJ(GFORMr._nu• _..,AUG94

FIELDSCA_N_Gt G£OTECHs_udl_l.EtAUJ._ncALiRESULTS ORCOREgf_*NO. SAMPLENO

d) (e) In

t*lDu I .el _'_

u,z_-(5--t(,:,_, 5

HOLENUMSEIt

|LOWCOUNT_

(|) I (.) _I

II

HOLENO.

_ -1

:" _ _ ;'%" •

HTRW DRILLING LOG

)..scRo0-6 b,,,,,Ll:_,._P,1ol5t._"g.cV. I_FI'H _l,_v _lo_01:I_11_I/II,S '

(11 I_l

q_

q

_H -

(el

. ,,4 ._-__ ,;j_

qG

2

% -

,,.& '.4?.0 "F'ee.t_1_

(C(}ITIN_II(_',ISZ'(I&=T)F

IIL_ L%_ ORCORE_ NO,(¢I Ira)

03 91 ' - :_"". : -,'-',±-=, .

HOL£NUMB_J_

_t-_-tZ,a.g .o.,.o. bPD &A_-2_

503 92

LOC_TION$1(_TCH/COMMENT$

.Jr_ L J _ L _l_ L _i_ L _i_ L ..J_ L .l_ L _i_ L_i_ i _i_ L_l_ i _i_

--J_LJ_LJ_LJ_LJ_L I I I I II I I I .I i J__J___l__I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I l I I I I I I

-.-]--F _--F _-- F--I-- f---l-- F--I-- ]- -'_-- ]- -q-- T'--I-- T--I-- T--I--T--I--

-J-LJ--L J--LJ--L J-- LJ_L J_ L J_ L.j_.L____I,_=_-?-'7

-"I-F"]--Fq-F"]-F"]-F"]-T'q-T-I--]--1--T--I--T'-I--T--[--

-_,- _. - __,- __.- __- __,- __,- __.-_._,-_,-_-_,_ -,-I I

I I I I I I I I I ..I_'_T{_'I

_- -4 - 4- __ ,_ __ 4- -_-'4_-_ -I-I 1 I I I I I I I I -'1--_______+____.____.____.___' ' ' ' ' ...._'-i''____I I I I 1 I I I- t- _ - I- _ -,_<.-_

I I- I I I I I t I I IIIIIIIIIIII

_-_-_-_-_-_-

IIIIIIIII_Lt

11111111111

_8FO_ .... _,AU6_

I I , _ I Itl_l t_i!pit_)t_(:4_ _- I

+-._-"-_'<!- ._-:_- _-- - .t--t-I I I I I I I II ] I I I I I I

1-'-1--1---I--t---1--1---1--1---I I_I.L I I I I I II I I I I I I I I

I II I

- 1- -I-

I j_I I

L _l_ ± _l_I I I I'1- --I- "1- --I-

I l I I

T --I- 1" --I-J- _1_ .L --1_I I I IT --I- T --I-.L --1-- J- --I-

I I I II I I I--

4- --I- 4- --I-

I I I IT I r i-H --I-- "P --t-I I I I

I I I:1"--I--

£ J_ __J_I I I I

Hi

HTRW DRILLING LOG

ou-_ _,"__,f _,H-%_.._B,._. t {XPTX {_$CAt_'llONOF_"rr_.s(a) I (D) (¢)

(Ci_TINI._TIOIt

IIaELDSCRI_NINq G_OIT.CHSJJ_PLE

Rf_)LTS ORC_R[ Ilnv NO.

-J

#,0

&.g

LO

g,O

7.0

B,O

ENIi FORM Ln_l,.fi... AUG94

_ °"_ _,-__""._/(_'t,_'_r._

=;t%_;- _,_-_

503 93

J MO_ NUUS_R_v4 t4GA-

IUUtI.YTICALIIIL_W COU_T

?.

Z__

I Sl_ Sl'lE_

(h)

,o.,,.,o. /v,._ N___

503 94

•1,.. H_RW DRILLING LOG (_,'.._n_._,,

E[.E'V. ] CEPTH DE_IPI1ON OFMATERIA_.S FIELDSCREENING1GEOTECHSAuPLE]ANALYTICALIBLOWr,,OU_Tt(a) (D) (c) _.SULTS ORCOREII0X k0. _UE NO. (|) I

_) (e (rl

ll.O

HOLENUMBER

IS

I-5,0

15,C, -

{(_,0 --

17,0 --

_.o -

I_l.O -

i

m

,_._.,_._ _'_ _'_,_1

_c_3

I.o r_

/'_ rff.,-

,la

7

c5

Y

f.

f.

f

8

'1HOLENO.

b,_._:L-to _,,5 .r,¢u._'_K 8._. -_,,,,ck"[:15'.&_.a,..

;L C_ _,.._./

_._a_-_" __c,

HF

503 95

ELEV, DEFTH 2SF.RlPllONOF_lT_IAI.S L riELDSCREENINGGEO_IECHSAMPLEI_OU.'rrlcaJ.IgLOWCOUI_T R_aMa.qKs(a) (b) (©) RESULTS OgCOREgot NO. SAMPLENO. (gl (h)

(d) (e

.2 i ,0 --

/-l.O

_a.,o -

a_ T . _._

_¢,-_,,_. _ o._o_,. _

3.7,0 -

28o-

- _ o_,_ ,_-

- % _ _ GP,A_L

_8 FORM_'_41. AUg IM

_&=l,o

G

1

_o

I

_G

,8

_/_/_e L_'_.)

_.,_._ ,.e_ .,e,_

_._r_ ,__.,,,#

/. '_ _ re,...,..,o,.?

503 9G

HTRW DRILLING LOG (,_.,_o.._-r)I_OJECT

E_'V. I oem I oesc_,rno,OF-,1TeRW.Sd(,) I (b) I (c)

3.l..c) "

q

q

"Sqo -

q

_l.o -"

"5_,o -

._.o -

i 14o. °

! "_' E,St..P.,EMIl 101P,M r.nr.=l Ju...AU_ 14

HOLENUlagF..q

_F.LDSCREENING_GEOTECHSxupLEIANALYTICALISLOWCOUNTI REMARKSRESULTS ORCOR__r_ NO. SaUUPLENO. (g) I (_)

d) (.)

)_& =o,0

"z.£,

3Z

I.t _ te,o,,t,,off

HTRW DRILLING LOG (_'_'_"_

[U_V _m'H OESt._I_lONOFu,T_m,_.S(_) (b) (¢)

m

't7- --

m

_ m

"r_ -

,.f._, _

_3 -

F_L.D$CREENING I GEOITCH SAUPt.[

_SULTS I O_CO_ am NO.(e3 (,)

91_ -- 1,5

kN_.'rrlC.I.LI II.OW ¢._UNT

t ,°,

',"7

IB

503 97ffOLE _UI48[R

_k-5$_.[r $HZErS

P,r_ARKS

(a)

FJIIiFORM____.,,R.AU614

5O3 98

HTRWDRILLINGLOG f_."_'.%..._=--,,,-_--,-,,,y+.,t_._o_C_,__t<,_b_,#_r"°''"°''"t,4V,I l,,-I_r-_1. ¢0iwIPAIWY_ .i,- 2.DR II $1.111Clitlltll,_OR 'J

-- " I 4.#,,l_.,i"ll(il 'J . -- -- i:--ilo,>+<_t_t<_o,,,t-_ b.,il_t,<,:>,.Q,t_,g_ I _b,,<><.5,,#+C<,.'t-.-_,,<k_0.,,ti_,<1,,,.,,,_77'q111

• NAil[ 0F ORI_

_ _- _' _'_ _,_- > I &"_I.J._MANUFACTURER'S_e. Cir_OES_Gt4ATJC_r_I_ Oi ORJLL

#.m_s_or,_so_om,,,N_- i 1t,;,.6 -,,,,.,/_ -i-I_ _._A" I 1.0ul._.a_o_

12. _AERliURDE.II THICIOtt_i i_//_

12. DEPTH ORIUJEDINTO ROr_ I+_/_

14. TOTJILDEPTH OFHOLE

_8,0 4"._III &EOI"ECltNiC,I,L S,,UJFI,ES j OlSTURBF.O

20. SAMIsl._ FOR CHEMICAL ANALY5 I$ I

22. OISl_SmON OFHO_ I lI£,+'011.l.E,D

I

,OrAITlONSI_CHI_MMFHTS

3- F "G- r G- I--G- I-'G-

._1_ L/_ l/_ /_!_ 1_ J_I I I I I I I I I

IIlllllllllllllllltllllll4--_4--_4--_--_4--_--_--_--_--_--_--__t___1_, _ I-

IIIIlillllltlllllllllllll I

i I I I I I i-V_-F_-V_-T-i-T I i i i X_._- b T-i i_-P_-+_-+_-+_ _ P_ +_-+_-+_-_i-+_i-+-i- -i-

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

iiliilliilllllllllllxi__lllll_--_--r_--_--_--_--_--_--r_--_--_--_i--t--i--_--i--

-i i I IL- I IL- I i t t I I I i I , i I l i .i i i i I_.L_I -i ' / i "_-- 5 7 i [ i 7 i ; '1 ] '1 T '1 ] IT '1 I I I I

.'-_--L-I--L-I--L/--L--I--L_I_L_I_L_I_L.J_.L/ L_j /_1_/ 1 / i_IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

- G--FG-- r G-- F G- P G- P G- P G- _ G- _ G- T G- T-I-- T--I-- T-I-T--I-

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i i _G_b_ i i i iI 1 I I I I I I I _-- I I I I I I I I--_'1 _ '1 I '1-- I I

_--_--_--_--_--_--_--_--_--_--_--_--I--_--I--_--I--It111111111111111111_-_11111I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I-- I I

-,- I- _- i- -I- t--I- _ -i- t- _- +-_- +-__ ___,_ + _t_ __,_+_,_ ,__,_ t._,__ ,<l,,_._- _ t,,.l._l,_lG_,,__i i i II I- I I I I I I I L_.I _ I_ -- -- -- --_4--I ___ li_" -- __

-_Th'_'--5-_'-_g_A-I I I I I I I I I I I T I I T I I I / T 2.1 I-1 P--_ v-_ t--_ _-m _-"_-_-_-_-_-+--_--_ .r.__..,.-l_-.r-I--r-i-

l i I i I i I i ! L.J_ L'_T_GI't-'Ol P_f-'_i '''l i'_l__'c__i__ i_ i I I 1I l i I i I i i i I I I i I I 1 I I I i i i I I I i I

Bill FOI_M _-R. AUG 14-,_ b,._-<tt_l,_,.,u,+"P,t+_ _I, T %_+t_,i-,+..4-i£>_._I ,olllo. l_kIMGA--7

HTRW DRILLIN( LOG

(a) _) (el

I_flO,ltCT

I

/,0

5' 0/-.!

_,b-

_0

_.o-

_.-.I> 4-. ,.,°'._'t-

'f<...a._ uD (s_

503 99

ffOLENUMIER

F_LD$CNEEWING

RESULTSG[O11_¢HSltl.[ I_III_ALI IILOW¢ol_rrORCOREBrreNO $/_PLENO. (|)

OFe,r_ KS

(_)

503 100

I HTRW DRILLING LOG (_._m._,, __o_;_

_., I _., I (+

15.o

HTRWDRILLING LOG (=......o...=,El__. _FTH _'.A]PTION OF_IT.RIALS FRL_SCF,E£NmG G£OI_CHS_WPLE

(|| _) (©) RESULTS ORCORESift NO.(d) (e)

i-. _._'_ _, _u_

_.0 u

i

_o_= _, 0 U_-(oENGFORM _u __,,R,AUG94

k_ALYTIC,_I BLOWCOUP"

g

t6

II

t_

15

50

_o

SHEERS

(_)

,_, '_1,t1,_'_

_poo,,,-

,_, _1"1'_

5O3 I02

I HTRW DRILLINGLOG

iLiv, I ncm'N I OL_..RIpt_ON(_t'_

(.) l (_) I {cl

i

i

-4 -

3_

_0 --

i

I_ct bSclt 09.'6F,.IIIIiFORMr.nc__p..._ 04

(C_NI_'nON

RESULTS ORCOREB'_YNO.SA.IklP_NO. (|)(d) e Pl

L'Z.

|"z._

SO

HOLENU_t_

_'B_ '_'_"-i'

HTRW DRILLING LOG <_'._m.m_m

ELEV. DEPTH CESCAIFT10NOFMRTIRW-q FIELDSCP._ENtNGC,EOI_CHSNdP_(a) (b| (c) RESULTS ORCOPE8nv _0.

(_ (o)

_5

q_

Z

I

503 ]03MOLENUOdOF_

SHEk'f_ OF S_ _rTS

_LLTTlCALI iLOW COUNT P_l_ml_

.q_u_ NO.t (0) (h)

503 10,1

HTRW DRILLING LOG

q-Fq-Fq-F3-J--L J--L J--LJ_

IIIIIll

q-Fq-Fq-F_--_--_--_--_--

lllIlll

IIIIIII

IIIIIII

I I I I I I I

_ -- r'* -I -- i-- "-i -- i- --I --

I I L___LJI I I I I I I

-.-I -- i-- --I -- I- "-I -- I- -I --

--LI_LJ_LJ_L___

I I I I I I I

- -i - r- -I - f- -I - T- -I -

I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I

-I -- I- --I -- I- --_ -- 1- --I --

I I I I I I I

"] -- i- q -- V q - V "q -

•-!--I----I--t---i--it---- I-I I- I I I I

I I I I I--_ I

-_ i'- "I t-" "-I -- i'- "-I

I I I I I I I

I I I

JiGFORM _r.=..u..,AUI 14-

I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

i--I-i--_-F_-T-i-T-_-T-t- _ i _ I _I'- --I -- '!- -4 -- 'I- --I -- _ .-t -- .I- --I -- -I- --.] -- .I- --t -- # --I -- .I- _1_I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

' ' ' ' ' ' , , , , , , , _,_.___-T -,-_ - _ -__ _ _ - _ -__ _ -___ -_-_-,_. -,-.-,-

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

--l--

I

I

I

O_t e L_,S -6 _1%,_,-_.._,lo_ _,_,Ill

I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I AJ..____I I I I It- -1 -- t- _ -- t- "_ -- I- -I- _- --t- 1- --t--t_--I- _&-I-- 1- --I-- 1- --I--

_ L__r j_lj_L_l_ ___l_Lj_Lj_£_l_.L_l_I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

F--I-- F --I-- F q-- T" --I-- I- --I-- T -'I-- T --I-- T --I-- T --I-- T --I--

LJ--L_--LO-- L --I_ L J_ .L J_ __ _J_ I _I_ J_ _I_ J_ _I_

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I- -I -- i- -1 -- l- --i-- T" "l- 1- --I- T --I- T" -I-- T -I- T -I- T --I--I---I--'I---I--,I---I--_-.-_--_---I_.L__I_.L_I_ j__l_.l._l_.i._l_

I I I I I I I I I I I I i_l_u_GAl-'/ I I I In 7-]-7--]- n n I I I i '1-_ "1 T I I "1 I I--

I- --; -- 'l- -'1 -- 4- --I -- .I- --I -- .I- .--I -- ..I- --I --(_ --t _ .l_ _1 _ .l_ _1_ .l_ _l_

I I I I I I I I I I I l I _'A'I_--_.-_ I I I I I

F-_-F-_-F-_-]-_-]- i I I i I I I I i-T-I-

f- --I--{-,-"--i--_- --i--"i--'I--"I---I--"i-"-I--_ --I--"t:.--I--"i---I--'P--I-- -

' '_L ._'__ _.,__;_'__ -, _ _I , , I "1i i T ,--r--I--/-_ {:_"{'_--;T-_;M_4a_--2..T , , .Lr--_--t-_ _'_--I-I-_--_-_-/i-__ _ _---- I- ----1- -I-I t I I I _"_uC_-I° I v_JGA]-fl I 'I'_ I-'_ i , , --t--

....... I_ ...... _, , J II I _ I I I i I i I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I--"

HTRW DRILLING LOG (=_m._l,o._,503 105

lt_.l IIUllUlfil

_ _ G_-_PROJECT

I,i --

I

m

2.,6

5,0

"#,ll

li._Cilllill ON OF lliA'IT_ UllJ

(c)

-

- _ _,_ D._

PRGII6"I

END FORM _ _____, AUG 04

$_EENING I ,_,I_O_Cil SAMPLI_R£SUL'_,.I ORCO_'_rr"_O.

Ailitl.Y'l'l Cill.I BLOW

I

S_

P,E_KS

(_)

I,o -I4- _'e_#_

HOlENO.

PAOJECT

t_pl'H OEt_.qll_nON_ MAI_JRIAI.$'(a) (mj it)

533 106

HTRWDRILLING LOG (=.'._o._4_'_""='°" C-L,;,_,_,,_L,J,,__

I,.TS O_COl_B0X!;0..Sa,_tEUO. II) I

II, O

I

q

_bw

L"

(b

q

""== 'bc,_._ C,o.-(:,EMIlFORM _,e,_, _ 14

L_

g

0

't

3

,.j.

HOLENUMIIEA

_..Z_l_B.lg,_ I _OL_"O. _',_t.d_GA -_

II

HTRW DRILLING LOG

EI._. DEFf'H(a) (_)

"2..2.. --

2"t

2"5

_6

;_ -

[Ni FORM_A-_.., AUG94

ubt_,_lJ_lONO_MAIT.RLM.S/(c)

v_., ._k,_, t (.._,'_'t_,.,_1._r _,,.,.,._,,..,_.

_,_.,.,..,._ _ ¢,.L,ove

_;th I _-_ _ _'_

b,..J. 9,l,-{

(COHTINLIATION_ i )

FIELDSCP.JEENINGRESULTS.

'_(=,,- t,/,

6_: h'l

r _D-,- t.e.

503 207ROLENUMSER

nt Oll_CHSAUPt.EORC_RE60_ NO.

(t) '°'

1

k_

oD

L_

L_

SHEET SHE_'TE

R_lt5(_)

,,.t ___-_.(, _ ,,.,.J..

_-_-_s _o_o. _ _J_A-_i

_8

i

FIlE FORM tn_.., AUG $4

503 I08

I HTRWDRILLINGLOG (=...=_o._m

_. I.S_l _._.o.o_-*_Ls (J _Los_"_"m_'l_c"sx"_l*_Lmc_la'_o_'n-'iT(a) (_) (c) RESULTS ORCOREBC_NO ISkVPLENO.I(d) (o) m

/

3o

_,_ -

l

35

36

3-1 --I

_OLEN_ailF.R

__._._/St_ "r SHEETS

I(S%g" W

_,'t,,_ ,.%,2_-i

IfOLENO.

i

!

5O3 109

I HTIRWDRILLINGLOG (=""_'_"_ "°""°""ma,_.CT ' _ [ i,_-- - - N,,_ I',E--/4-#

C) _ r_.lu_ SHEET 51_1

E_. _PTH U_*I4I I_ION OF MA_LR Idl_ _" F_EL_ SC "-- _

P,I_IG c_mTcx s_us Aic_nC_l il.ow,-_u_t P,B¢_(a) _) (c) RESULTS OR COREBC_ NO S.UL'PLI NO I (0) (h)

, ' ' , r 1_ I,) I m I

I "'; !1I

'-_z- -" , ,

i

u,t

5O3 ltO

I .HT_W DRILLING LOG

• PROJECT

• FL,IMvlE OF DRIL.LER

I..,c_.,L,.g_'¢.Sl_S _0 TY_.S OF DAILUNGANOSAMPUNG EOUIPMF..NT

17.. OVE_BURO,F.NTHICYJqlF-.SS _//_

13. nF.I=TH0RILLfD _ ROCJC _/_._

10.DATF. S'rARTED / J 11.DATIE COMPI_:I"ED,

1S. DEPTHGI_UNOWA1T._ EN_UNTE_ED

16. 0EPTH TOWA'iTc.qAND [LAPSED 1'1M__ I_JIJJNG C_MF1.E'P¢O

17, OTHER WATER I.EVEL MEASURF.MENT5 ($PEP,IF_

UN_b-'1URiW.O I lg.TOTALNUMSER 0F _REBQ_(F,S_

,,.,o,-,,.,,_o,,o., 5o, o 4_-_ _

I ='°, tL SAMPLES FOR CHF,MICALANALYSIS I V0C

t "'--- t "- _-_ - /_i ""T t m_m'+'_- 'DISI_SITION OF HOU_

LOC_T'[ON$_'I_,tl_OMMBII'S

t I "T-_,po__ II'

sP,,ll_ F

,.-", +%<'1_

Illllllll

Ill 11111

III III

--_-- -_--_--

I1-1 III

III III

III III

III III

'-d

"1

Kli FORM Lnr,r--R, AUG N

Illlllltl

_--_--_--_--_--

IIIII]lll

Illllllll

1t1111111

_-C_-F_-F_--_-

IIIJlJ_JJ

I

t---

1

I

f---

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

-- I,-,-4--4- _-- +---4-- 4- --4-- 4---I-- 4---I-- 4---I-- --I--

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

, , , , , , , , ,-, ,-- I- --I-- "I---I-- 'I---I-- -I---I-- _-- -I---I-- --I--

I I

I

I

I

I I I

I I I

--I--'I--'I---

r I r

I I I

--'i-'--I--I"--

L J-- L J_LJ_L_

I I I I I I I

I I i I I I I I

- I- -_-,_± - _t- -r -_- -r -I-, t , .,_ ___l_ ,___,_ ,I I I I I I I I I I

-- 1- --'I- I- -'I- T --I- I- --I- "I---I-

_.I_--I_ J_ J_.!__l_ J._l-- J---l--

I I I I I I I I I I

--'r--l--T--l-- I--I-T-I--T--I-

I- -I - I,--I - _- -I - ,£--i _ .L --I_ .I..--I_ .I-_I_ J- _I_ .I._I_

I I I I I I I I I I 41_1_G,_1.-7 1 I I II I I I I I I I I I--';t_ 'I T "I I I I I

;- .-_-- .I-.-I-- 4- -I-- 4- -I-- 4- --I-_ --I-- 4- --I- 4- --I- 4- --I--

I l I I l I I I I I I_'AI_<2_-i I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

_- "-I-- P- --I-- +I-'-I-- "i---I- 'I---I-- "i---I-- _ -I--+" -I-- +- --I-- "I---I-

#; ,, ,__.., _ ,_,_I f

I ' i---I T I --I--T--l-- _- -I-/+_I_ -IT"+r_,,_.I-_-.-+-_IA-zTi I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I

-_-l-.-i-l--i- P'-i- I--I- l--

r I I I I I I I I l

I I I I I I I I I I

_ --i- I- -I - I- -I - I- -I - I- _ - ,I--I I I I I I I I I I

- -I - i" "q - F" -I - 1- --I -- r --i-- F --I-- F --I-- T" --_-- 1- --I-- "i- --i-- I- --_-- T --I-- T --I

_-__I---I--I--J--L--!-- L--I--L--I--L-J_.I-_I_.I__I_.L._I_.I__I___I__

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I f I I I I I I I I

i

HTRWDRILLING LOG

I,l.r_,t tPl'ION OFMATE.qUiLS

(c)

L (3-,3

HELl)$CP,_tN{

_SULTS

(m

"_'cT1_{.P,. _O-IoEL.cV. _FI_

(a) Co1

5 -

f

(CONTINLIATICIq

_.iu_ &,,.,.., _(.v,,,o_L,_L

C.EOI_CH S_'dPL.EOR CCP,E 9(_ NO.

503 I11

I HOLE NUMBF.R

,-,_.o.I ,,,

q

L

3

JHOet:MO.

r SHE_ SHELrI'S

I_V_RKS

,._ r.(re..v_4

t_M6A-_

503 11.2

I HTRW DRILLING LOG (=,m._o.._,, j._.u,,,,_mo.r_'T£)tl . ,.._.i_, _ tsm'T s_s_ Lc.CL I 3

OF

=I_JU.YTICAM_ COUKT R_:t_UIKS

i

t"L --

I'4 L

Z

li,

19

F.NQ FORM ___ .-_., AUG 94-Lo,,_-- A _,'_ '-_-,_,-_-_

't

I

"5

b

'd

b

i

HTRW DRILLING LOG

(a) £o1

...0

-...I

"L"L-I,,=4

-I

,-..I

,,=4

Z3 ...,

.3..4

,,=4

al

--t

"4

.4

"--4

a_ .3.

.,,4

.3

_7 --4

--I

:l& "_"-'4

.,4

""I

,.4

I "_'e_ 1)5C_ &tl-bEN6 FORM _r_l_, A_ 14

Best Available Copy

1¢1

>_._-

.,_ ,_,. cck_

I _ SCR_Nmr- _OTEC_ S_PLER[SULTS ORCOREBCO(NO.

(_1 (*)

g C..-.O,(

36" " c,_

503 II3

HOIINU_fJ_

ltU_t'*qICl4.1BLOWCOUNT

I

S

5

b

,'I

"14

30

%

-Co_/_;_ I"°''"°"_,_.^-_

503 i14

HTRW DRILLING LOG (l_OlCrlNl.llTlOl_S1,11_'I'_

I1.

EMilFORM 50,56A-R, Alto 114 I _ _- _ -I g'2.._ N_

HTRW DRILLING LOGPRO,I_"T

EA,L_t. r_prH(a) 0_1

_. -

q$ -

I

_,{ -

n

45 -

4_

_9

OE,_..RIPTIONOi:MAIT=RiA_(©)

- _o,.,,,_3r,j_,....,L.,,:s_._._5o,o_

Eli6 FORM r_r_A .-ft.,AL_ 814

(_NT]I_JATIO_I t_J_W)

FIELDSCP_ENINGRESULTS

f'lr3 -. o *_

p __-_ o,'_

._,

503 115

_-I

_01_CH $_p_ _k_u.y'r_CALlBLOW¢ou_i"ORCO_ 8m'#O. ,_LE NO. |0)

J

i' ?

_L

_O

SHEET svd_wrs

P,_I_KS(h)

0,6 F, ,-_,.o,,,_.,(

503 1 16

"--- OISTRICT , NO II; NuMsrmR

I H1RW DRILLING LOG fo.+-+.,_,+-,+-._,.E.,:_,..,._'_,.,pp+_.+._, _+._:+t,.+I,.,,,,.+_,-,,,. ,, ,

, PROJECT , • 4. "nON , '+

,+.,,,.+o_p,,,u__+o.-,..,_ "4+.,,_+,,mm,'._o+m,+ - " - "+_"----'+_-_"'_+''_ " "'+++'_""+

"°""""'"""+" '-I ,.s-.'..,+_ -+-_ _,++,- u,,,-++,,+.. "_:,,J_++t ]_._++_+,_+,_.+..,+

12.OV_ltRUlIO_Tm!r_,m '_/J'_k

,. oermomu.e,,,,,'mRo_..)/,<_

& SURFAC_ ELEVATION

t_'7. et ,-__ _"L"

_o.ox'm _AX'IEO( _-t,<o_ _t n_ COM_-p.O

+.,p+/,_+- _ +/__e/e_

_. oa,m'roWArm,toOeu_,.o_.,m_ mLa,_-co.m.mo

17. O_IER WATI_R _ MEA_ ILI_F.NTS (SPECIJ:_

METALS I OT'H_i"_"C_PT_ I OTHER(SPECIFY)I 0114ER(SPECU_V321.+'I'0T_CORE

,,.m+_o_mo+.o,+ "/£, .O _+<+18. r-_O'/EC I_IIC,_.P_M PL_ 0_lu_uku

20+ SAMIq.ES FOR CHEMIPIL N4ALY_IS V_¢ I

22._i$_'OS_ONOFHOLE I _{_oqu.ED I &i0_HumNGWELL ]

LOCATION_,_ _C_,_i_,m_ ja

l- --I- l- --I- 1- --I- T" --I ji" --I--

4...-.I- .t_ --1- 4- --I- 4- --I--,

I I I I I I I I

I i I I I I i I

4- .--I- 4.- --I- 4- --t- 4- --I- --1- -

I I I I I I I I I

I - _-T,tm-__-

"-I - F -1 - F -I- r -I - r q - F -i - F -i- T- --i-- -i- -i-.-J--l,-.,-t--l,-,-J-- L-,,-J--L-.,.,J_t._I_ J,,_.,_J_.L..,_I_,,I_.,.j_

l I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

r ..M _ i- ,,-i _ i,..._ _ ,i_ _I _ i_ _i _ ,I_ _i _ <._ ,_I _ .,i_ ,_i _ .I_ ._.i _i i I i i i l i i i i I i i i l i

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

-.-+--I.---_-- f.-..-I--t.-..-I_t.-.--i_{..._f_ f_..___ _.._]_.t...._t -l I I I l I- I I I I

+ _ __ u__]+_ _ -I- _ -_-r , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

-t -- P--] -- t""t -- f-'-l--t--'l--_--Ill--'-t--i--1-- 1--1-- 1---i--_ --"I---I--_--I--

_J_L_I r i L._ _ _ L _ J .J_.L_I i i i r_L_+ _ i _ ___L_I_I I l I l I I I I I I I I I I I I l I l I I I I I I I

--I--;--I--I--i-- I--I -- I--_-- r _-- r _- l- -_- l- _- T _- l- -i- T --i- T --i- T --i----J -- L -_ -- L J -- L J -- L J-- L J-- L J_ J- J_ L J_ __ J_ j_ _i_ __ _i_ j_ _i_ L _i_

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

'-I-- r- -I - I- -I - i- -I - [- -'I- i- -I - T" -I - T" "i - T- -i- T" -I - -i--i- -F -i- ,.r-i- -r -i-

_ - I- -I - I- -; - ,I---I - ,L--I - ,i--.I- ,i-.-.I_ .i__i _ .I__i _ .i.._I _ .i__i_ .i__i_ _ _i_ _ _i_

i i i i i i 1 i i i i i i i i i i ii_J,,,v,%_t_:-+_>7_, _ i I

I "-I I I--F'-I I I I I I I I I "+'P'I I I _--I--'i'--I--

"4--_--_--_-_--4-- _ --4--4 --_B AP_'-_'LI-4--t-4---I-

i -i - i- q - F -_- T Q - T _- T _-_- T -I- T -I- T -i- T -t- T -I-,+-q+--,- +---,- +-..-,- +._,_ .+__,_.,._,_

I J J I _i_ I ,,._ + i I il_ I__ . , I I I [ ,

F-I -'- +--'-I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I

P,,lo'l--_'_ #,_u,+/-+-/+_,_I"°''""_+_J+A-,oHF

I I I I I

.-4 -- 1- .-+ -- I- .q --

I I I I I

-5-rq-Vq-

I F

, ,5-T_--I i----I--I--I

.J_! _ _ t

I I I I i Ie"m':m'P_--I:Z- oO-&,ENIi FOP, M r,.n_,_, AUO M

I H iHW DRILLING LOG (=,_==_=.PROJECT imM=_TOh

ELEV. OEvm r=_O,_ O_U.ATr_uu.s(a) (I)} (c)

i

'L

2-

"3

M

5

"7

- c'-z.s,u,.,rl,') _;_ _;_'..

503

PROJECT

BIG FORM _=-_.., _ 114

i17HI_EIIIJ_8EII

RESULTS(0)

I

GEOllECHSAMPLEANAL'I"rlcALIORCOREBnvNO, SAMPLENO. BLOWCOUNT(O)

e (f)

"1

T

HOLENO.

SHEET

RE_I_S(h)

_'_ #e '_'_'_'_I-

503 118

H -RWDRILLINGLOG

I _SCRIPllON (_ laiAT_ LAJ__(©)

m

(a)

tt -

t?_ --

t3

tq

t6

1"7 --

I_ --

_q

w

(-_,-3

_¢_,...._.,,p,,.,.,e_,_._..,.._tr,-,.. _._, *o ,. ,,; r. _,,_

m

FIELDSCPt_NING} GEOTI_C_4SAMPLEINqAL'fT1C&LJllLOWCOIJ3CrIRESULTS ORC_P.S9C_CNO, SAX_PLEi_O. (g) [

_-.. o Pp

$

b

5

4

b

t

I

3

HOU_ NUMRER *

(h|

fb t e coot_

_L _-_e_to-.-.',_o..,,._ c._._,_.O,._,_

&:) PvC

I_O.I£CT NOLENO. j,_ 'v'_ _ -dO

LlUi FORM r_r_s_, AUG 114 H_

5_3 11.9

El. lit'it li._l_iVlili Cl III'II.RII.S _ IClL_NIIII ORlie BOI I10. litlll ill I10.(i) _0) (C) RESULTS tiOiICH SI_VPLEk_L'tl_Ca, LI

(_ (i 0"1

23_

Z_

z7

a

m

- _{_ _,'_'_/,'_ _,t+._,,.,_,-/P_0":1 b

P_3_ i,t

I

BLOWCOL_(g)

I

5

't

I

't

Ii

_,,,_*o :'_-__

_,_ .fl- _=,_,_"

_._ _ _1_,

gOLEI_0. /v_ _(_A__ °

.503 120 _

I HOLENuMgr_R

HTRW DRILLING LOG <=._,,_o._.,=. _..,._._,_

• . _ _

| j |oj (c7 RESULTS ORCOREOnYNO. SkJaPLENO. (|) lit)

3_

3(,

_q -

3_ -

_._-_,,,,_.__,_,'_

}_trb=-a,Ore(_,,o..t

[o

S,Mli FOIW _-P... _ e4 }

HTRWDRILLIN( LOG

EL,EV.(al

r_PTI,I

503(CQYTINt_TIQ't _ i I

I_J,T:I_ IUR

'-4z "

N

'/7

"ta

I

_n__t'T

EWIiFORM u_A_.., AUG 114

'z" _'lJ'_JP liON OF k[A'J'F._ JAJ.S

(c)

-_',_t,',_,,_.

FIELDSCREtNING__ul_M SxuPLE_QL,I."tI'ICALI ilLOWC_UNTRESULTS ORCORE6ny NO. S._LoLENO. (g}

fGI ,

?is= o.3

I"_.

"z.o

30

121NOtENUMGC_

/v,,V,l z,J_& -_0

SMF='T SHE_.

503 122

I HTRW DRILLING LOGt ¢ou j.- .LL*._ c.,,_,_,_0.e<.',_"_ E_,c,',,r,>,_,,,..__,,,,a,(_.4o:_r..e,>

, PRn_CT

S P_E OFWtlI.L_

7 SI_$ AND TYPES OF DRILLING

AND SAMPUNG EOUIPMI_IT

0 L_'TRICT _ _ -_ HOUI _UMSER

2.0RILLSu_ffP.,c'toJ_ 'J SIREr SHEE

,_.,_..j.G,,.,_,_,,CDr,a,,,_ _L_. _:,,,

6.MANLFAC'nJRER'S0ESIGt4ATIONOFDRILL

I R,_.6-1,,,._.-I::L_ _<,Ar L,O_LOCAn¢,

I. SUR.%li_ELEVATIONt o7,,I 2. -_¢'t"

16 t.I_OT[CHNI_.,_. $_lM PLF.$

20. SAMPI.ES FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSIS I VO¢ I Mfi',a_ I

N/A- t _- I -- !I E,LC_:TLLED I MOmTORINe-WEU,.I

10.O_"tE$"fhKnioI 11. _TE ¢OMPLL_fl_

_-tb-.'a'l _ 5-1q-,_12.OV_SUROr_I_iCK_ESS l',Jl_ 18.l}£1q'_6ROUNOWATE.qENCOI,Im'E_EO

13. OE._ 0RILLED INTO ROCI( I_/_',_ 16. OF._ TO WA'J_ _O EL_0 "_ i,1_ AFTER rt RIL,I.I_ ¢oMp_-,r_t_

14. TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE _7._ WATER_ MEAS_ (SRC)F'tl

_/ 01SPO$ITION OF HO I¢

OTHERtSPE_FY) I _ (SPECrFY1I On_ER_SPECZFY}I 21.TOT_CO_

-1-- F''I-- F -I -- T" "-I -- F -1- r"'i- T-I- F--I-'i---l-- T-I- T-1--'7--1--'7-I I-

_ _ L- ._ - X- -_ -- L ._ - X- _ - L --J-- L ._ -- .L _ -- * .__ i .__ ! _J_ .U _l_ .L.

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 I I

I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,-_---P_-P_-_-_--_--P-_- _- _-I- -I-__L__L___L___L_I_LJ_L___L_I_L_I_ I I I t

' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' _ ' ' ' ' _,.E=_l'--'z__'' ' ' '--t--- -- i'- -1--1- m--1- --t-- I---1-- 1---_--(_--- A -I"-I-1---I-

-L-_LJ_LJ i I i I t I _ I i t I I ,1_I I 1 I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I

r-- --P'--I--F--I--T--I--T'-'I--T--I--T-'I--T--I--'I-----T--I--

l-- .-I -- L .-I -- L ..J _ L ._1 _ __ ._1 _ J... _J _ J.. _J_ J_ _1_ .L _ _ j. _1_

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I- "_ -- F -'1 -- F -I -- `7 --I -- `7 --1 -- `7 --I-- `7 --I-- `7 --I-- T -- -- T --I--L .-I -- L ...J -- L -.J -- J- .--I -- L -._-- L .--I_ J_ _I_ J_ _I_ J.. _l_ J. _l_

I I I I I I I I I I I _lt_v_daGA.I--_ I I I I1 I I I I I I I I I I--"_ I / I I --I-- I I

_- - -- _- -;-- 4- .-I-- _- .-I-- _- --1-- 4- .-I--(_ --I-- -I- --t-- 4- --I-- -I- --I--I I I I I l I I I I I I x"A'l_"_-I I I I I I

I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I t I I I I I

_ :-+-'-,I - - ]- I q i--T i I I /T _T_',_-z_ -_-

- _ -_- _._ - i-..__ `7-_-,,I--_-_,_Z_- i--i- I--i-L I )- L _'ff_c=_-_°l P_'i _ I _"aF_; _ I I I

i I _ I I I I I I I I I I I I _ I I I I I I I _ t

ENi FORM,_,_,__, AUG14

I I I I I I

--i -- i-- --t -- P" --t -- t- --I

I I I I I I

I I I

-t--t- _--

1 I I

I I I

--I--I--I

..'_J _ L ._I

I I I

- -I - I- "-I- -.I -- L- -J

I I I

m

m

i

m

I l I

t- -i -- t- -t

L__LMI I i I

I--I--I-'-I--

L --! _ 1_ ._1 _

I I I I

T-i-,r'-i-I_..J_L,.J_

I I I I

I t I I

-_ -- I- -i -- I- --I -- 1- --I --

I I I I I I I

IIIIIII

II-III I

t1111--[I

1111111

I I T'_ I__"I::L_E

503 123HOLE NUMBFJ_

JA _GA -

503 124

I HTRW DRILLING LOGEI_. _ IZSCR:vnoNOF_tATIm_I.Sla) Ib) (¢)

11+0 --

I:z 0 --

I

)ff,_ --

I

f_. 0

_+t.D

HOI,.ENuMgE,dlqA, ,,Jc..++,,k-_.

+'3

._.-,"" _,.,+e.:J._-'tt'/+,,,,.++....

_.o,Q °

m_o_cT_g C%UlII FORMIOSt_-Ii +_ 14

mLOSCU.ENmr-r:OT_C_S,--Pt.__.v'nc_.] _LmvcoumnSSIJL'r'S on c_ emrNO.S._ HO.I (I) I

"7

q

_G, "=o.ofp,

;Pib:

]

ff

/.

5

-3

?

-]

ff

tL

3-

.L_

5

Sl_e.g=T SHEETS

¢

5

H01E NO.

2,. #t" ,r+_'"'"l

9V(.. o--'_-," "_i,-

% _'1.r "ic_'_s.

i_ HTRW DRILLIN( LOG <_m._m_

5O3 125HOLENUMBER

ELEV. rCpTN OE._;_'nON OFME_qlALS(a) _) (¢)

"J-Z+0 --

I

,,,.,;.-_,.._ _,,,..,JJL_,iL_

FIELDSCREENINGRESULTS

(a)

i

INSI,',I_ ,.

ORCO_EB= NO ISAMP_ NO'I(e) (')

_6,O --

• -_ ,0

.2._ ,D --

q

%

-7

9

t'-I

a

8

5

EN6 FORM r.n_ ._.. _ M

z_O

0

HOLE NO, A_GA-I

3_.,o --,,

33.0 Z

3"1 . "

35 o_

i

_t, .o .-%-

" _l,O i

EMilFOI_I ¢nz_a-l_,_ 114

503 128

I,. HTRWDRILLING LOG

I:l_. [(a) _P_ OLq,C.qlP'llOMOFW,Tr_L,LtS(C)

HOLENUM6F.A Ica,mmarmN _ [ A._,.+_,o, .. A-_ ]

Ck+-. V..,.._ sm-r ,,_"5 ,.- I 5 oF g..,.]

+_l+#,o.l (0, j +-_- ,,m,t_

HOUENO.ANGA- 1.

14

I HTRW DRILLING LOGI. COMPANY

IL_._7:..,,:.,_,-._E,yo,,_.,_(,I_. _I 2. 0mu. SIJg,"0_'TR_"rO'R

4. !,.0CA_lON

8. HOLELO_LTI(_I

• -_-e,t (:r_'_ I '''=''_"''_-15. DEPTH6ROUNOWA_RENCOUMllB_EO

16. 0EFI3.1TOWA'r_ _0 EL_ _1_ _R"0RIIJJNG ¢_tlp_-r/=_

$. NIXIEOFORILLE_

7. $1_S N_DTY_ESOFDRIUJNGAND&,lIMPUNGEQIJIPMB_E

I _,_.% " "£'13 _G,O_-

,2.=..,.,oo,,.,0..,..- u/A

_4 TOTALDF_THO_HOLE3._.o _-t'-

I -- I27.D===_U:=_ONOFHOLE J 8ACI&"ILL.ED

503 127

17.OTXERW_TER_ MF._SUREI4ENTS{SPECIF_

ui__TU RILED I 111.T_TALNgldO£¢_(_ COP_80,_cS

I UET,_.S I

I Mu_£L_R_NGWI[LLI

LOCITION SI_'TCIUCOMMENTS

-i - i'- -i -- F -I -- r -I -- F -I -- r --I -- F --I--

--_L_--u'--L--_LJ_L--_L._I l I I I I I I _ I I r It t = _ t t I t J i-_-]-_-

I-I I I

q-F-i-i-q F-i F] _ q-_ =

...... I j LJ

---_--_-r--_ ,--_ _--_ ,--_

-'---- I r t twmtm,__-- ,_

iSe.tl2: 5 _

I---i-- 1"--1-- T--I- T--J-- T--I--T--I I--_- -J-- _- -J-- _--J-- J---I-- .L_I_.L_I_J _--I--

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

T-_-T-I-T-I-T-i-T-_-T-t- -_-'t- -'1 -- 4-. --I -- +- --I -- 4- --t -- 4- --t -- -I- --I-- --t--

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

+-._ _-._- _--_-_--'__ _-E_'__ -_- -,-I I I I I I I I

.-,"' ' ' '--,-r ,-;--,- ;"_ _-"_- -_- _-I- _:-I- 1--_- 1--I-IIIIILJIIIII__LI IIIIIIIIIIIIIiiii

Z_-LJ--L J-- LJ--L J_L J_L J_ Lj_L_IIIIIIIIIIIIIiii

n-rq-r q--Fq--rq--rq--rq--Tq--T--

IIIIIIIIIIIII

IIIIIIIIII

-4--1--I--1---1--I--4--

I I I I I I II t I I I I I

-_--P--_--P--I-- f---I--I t- I I I I II I I I I I I

"-l--I--'-l--i'- "I-- t""l--

I I I I r I I

1- --I -- ,L- .-II I

1 IH'----H--I II I1---1--

L II

I I I I I I I I I

Bill FORM _. AUG 114

I

IT"

J r r_ .L _l_ .L _t_I I I I I I I 1

-- T--l-- 1"--I-- 1"--I-- 1"--I--"

_ 1' _I_ I_I_.L_I_ .L_I_-I I I I I I I I

-T'-I-- T--I--T--I--T--I--"J--_-- 4-.__ 4---I_ 4-_l_ 4---l_ a---I-- 4---I---

I I I I I I i_Ir.l_(.;,M--/ I I I II I i I I i I i i -- t_ "i T "1 I I I i

-- 4-- -_ -- 4- -4 -- _. --I- 4- -_--_ --t- 4- --t-- 4- --I-- 4- --1--I I I I I 1 I l I _'/kl_'_-_ I I I I II I I I I I t 1 I I I 1 I I I I

-- +-'-_-- _- _-- _ "-_-- -i---t-- _---I--4---t---t---I-- +--I--_e _., _, , , ,

,J i T l I I /T I I T"..J-'I::::_IG,IA-ZI I I i-- 1"L --I -- 1- _ -- _- "1 "T" -I- -1 "_ "- -I -- 1" -- -- 1- --I -- '1- --I --

I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I

0-oo t-8-1/,,:x,_ 1"°''"°" AI,IGA-z.NF

,503 128

I HTRWDRILLINGLOG _=,m,_,,o,,,,_-nPROJECT IkS_CTOR SHEET SNI_

• [,_¢6

c.gtb I _.g_

_,_ - :_ _l_7,_/,')

- (_b4_

(,.0 --

_._ -. C_._'_,,_ o_ go-o_

_ _o_

.o c.,._;__;_,_-_-- - _-

.o.a _S___. OLL-6U411FORM r'nua4t, AUG 9,4

3

L

3

HTRW DRILLING LOG_O.IECT

(a) (b) (¢)

_ _//_ to,.r.,_¢."k'- '4_ c.\_._

Cm','_¢,,t/,'__1,0 --

_.0 -

L_5 :-

- _;_. ,_ ,_o_

_1, o _

" T_c._,._ _ sZL_c,_

_"1_) ..... . c_._y_ _ cL_ _/'

L%O -

503 129(CI_TINLIATIOel _ _ot.e _u,,.e_

_. _c_.._-__

o_ rml_ e,'n,NO..r,._m_ NO. O)

C

_,_-:- o, o rp-

I

q

ro

3

9

"I

3

l

b

5

, -: P_b-= _,l _,T,,, k).er.._}

[__._._bSc_. &_k-6 b.._ _:(ot .<_-,j,. ,__ ._ . , I,o,,,.o. __,_,-___,F_IIFORMSO_,_-R, AI_I_ - t._-,_OL _-_b__.._ I /_,£-_._r_ .z.

s _

i

• :_.._l_a, _,'__

503 130

I HTRW DRILLING LOG c=._'nPROJECT Ik_; R t

_.,_.4_lJ_lO_ OF MATERIAI.S _ S#..P.EENING I

HOI.E NUMIIF..q

&_C.-A-_..

(a) (c) P,ES_TS ORCO_ 80xNO. NO. (g)(d) (.)

_.t, D --

m

3.50 "

I_p "_o.1

't

t2_..

_o

r_

"1

;_. 0 -

"_"t,O --

o ,_ _*:- _-_,._,__..

_ _ _ _ :_'_._-a'_,,_

6 ":""¢_",-e,-_),

_,,_._ *_ _.').o

.

,,,,_,,3. t_',\\;,

,_._ _,'_.

3..0_,o-

FORMr_A_R, AUG94

I HTRW DRILLI3G LOG ,=,_._o._'_

"_c_, _-_ __,/o_%"_'°"01_;_:_"[I.,EV. O£PTH(a) fo)

'st.o "

_),. 0--

3"_ 0 -

3"1(_

3_,0 ..

_.o E

"_7,0 --

Z

Z

_,o

IPROJECT .

BIB FORW _ua ._., AUGM

(_F_LOSCe,EENm;t _O_EC_ S_P,;

RESULTS ORCO_ I1_ NO.O) (e)

I_I_U._'I_LI _UOWe__L_

_.o. I ,°,

503 131

$_

5 _,_

503 132

L.i-.1_ -_ I U,S . A-_._. _,_,_1_'_,_1_ b>.,_._,_L_WJk_A_Ir=A_ _1.coMe_ N_u._ J ,-, . I 2._;_IU,SUSCONT_=O_ _ _, ,___-_--L:-. "_ _ _tJA &_,• PRO_CT ^ . M P... ..-,, . 4.LOC,ATIO_^ f_ _.

5. _ Of ORILL_ 6. I_UFACT1JI_R'$ D[._C_IATION OF0_LL

7. S[;F.SANO TYPESOF DRILLINGMdO SM,IPUNG EOUII_II_T

12. OWcRBURDEN'l'_uK.V._'_

13. DF._ 0RlUJ[D INTO RO_

14, TOTAL DEPTHOF HOLE

1II GI_OT[Clffi I_IU..,_PI.F_

20. SA.MF1.F.SFOR CltEMIGkL A_I_LYSIS

_/p.-2?. _iS _,._,S_ON OF HOI.I[

LOCATION$1_vl'CII/COl_¢'_df_

HA-

Ul_ I UH,BP.U j

$.SU_EI.WAT_ON

tO7. '-l& -F'ee'I"--

18. DI[Pl_I GROUN_ATER ENCOUNI_cF_D

16.DEPTHTOWATERMiOEUCoS'EOTII_ _ ORIUJNGCCl,I Pt.E1_

17. OTHER WATER LEV_ MEI_UREMFJ_T_ (SPECFY)

UNI.qbiURBF.O_ J 19.TOTAL_UMIF_R OFCOREIII_I:ES

i 21. TOTAL COREMETALS__ tJ OTHER__(SPECIF'Y_ OTHER (SPECIFY) 01)tER _ RECOMERY_-- %

I MONnOaBe-WELLI OTn_(S_EC_Pt_ 22.SJG_Td_O_/q_PECIOR_/

-- I---I-- I---I-- I---I-- I---I-- I---I--

.L. _l_ .L_ --1-

- T Q- T-u- T -I- i- -i- T -I--- _- _ -- _- _-- 4- _-- 4- --I-- 4- --I--

-q-rq--rq-Fq--rq-rq-r--_--_--L_-- L_--_--L__L_

IIIIItlIIlll

IIIIIIIl[lll

-_--_--_--_--_--_--__

IIIIIlllllll

I I l I I I I I I I I I

--I--I--I--I--I--I---I--I---I-- f---l-- f--

I I I I l I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

-t - r- -t - t- '_ - t- -'_ - t- m - r ,m - ,r- -n I j _ I LJ_LJ_I I I 1 I I I I I

-i- r-_- r-_- r-l- r-I-:-J--LJ_L-I_LJ_LJ_

I I I I I I I I I

-I-- r--i - i--I- I--i - i--i -•-1 -- L .-I -- 1-- ,-! -- 1.- ..1 _ L _J _

I I I ; I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I

-4--I--4--I--I--;---I--I.---I_

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

-e_-_-_-m_±_,-_-_-_-_-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _

-v_-r_-v_-@-_-v-_-v-_-v-t-L_I_L_ I I I l l .I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

r--i-T- -_-_- I-_--I-_--I---I--T--

L J-- L J_ L _J_ L _J_ J_ J_ J_ _I_ __ _

I i i i I I I [ I i I I I

I--'I--I--I--I-'-I--I--'I--I---I--I---I--'I---

___I_ J.__I I I

-- I---I--T---

- J-_l_ J- __

I I I

--T--I--T----

-__ _. __ - ___ _ __ ____ _____ _. ___ _. ___ ___;_

I I I I I I I I I I _F I I t I I I I I_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .4_ 4___ @ A__.___-I- 4--_- 4--_-

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I tIIIIIIIII

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiiiii

- " _ - " _ - _ _ - _ _- _ _- _ _- * _- _ _- _-_- _-_.V- * -'- + -i-_A-,, , _ ,_ ,- , , _ ,

-i i-_,,,,,, r_%-, -)F-,TI - - - - - -' I--'-- -_ LJ L___L___L___L_i I i l_c#_i _ _-I _ I _ I_I_

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I

Flit FORM....2. AUG94 H

HTRW DRILLING LOG _,_.o.,._

ELEV CEPTH DE_iP_oe, I OFMATERLALS

/, 0

¢/

7

(c)

C_.L.A_t

_,_'__ (_,_'._

ENII FORM _A_, AUG94

FIELDSCREENLNG_,_-U_ SA_p_ _ANN.YllCJU.I8L.OWCOU_TRESULTS ORCOREBOXNO. SAMPLENO. (9)

a) e) if)

)

,f

503 133HOLENUMBER

SHEET SHI_'T

D.'t ,c'l.- .'_,,_'_

- \;--O_l-_-I&_% HOLEMO./_l, JGrt_-_

503 134

I. HTRW DRILLING LOG :==_,_==_

(a) (hi (c) RESULTS ORCOREin',' NO..?,AJ_LENO. l)d) ,,)

i

HOLENUId6EA

,,1,_,,,.___A-"5

/,/ °

15 -

/_ -

/7 "

tP _

t?

_Ov_,dL _ 0"_00_'e

¢U-,1=,t CtL_

rdllII FORM ¢_=-¢=-,R,_ 04

_G---,o.o

P_o,*

_tts _.o.o

5

I

->

5

"I.

3_

q

| ,

,r...,,.. .,/:

HTRW DRILLING LOG (CIIrTINi_llON

i

I

I

3

<_

3

_t

"t

Ii

iI

8

Io

I HOll NO.

503 135

HOLENUMBER

t,"l _,t" cel,.o_o)v_

•_ ed%"il_,,_,, --

6""l _ ,,,.,ll._ J

'*t, _ -,',..,._,_.._

m

503 136

HTRWDRILLINGLOGPRO.IF._

(CONTINL._TIO_ISHEE'Ti

I

I

3f -

q

32.

9'4 -

3_

3"/ -

39 "

F.IIIIFORMIx_r"RI-R..,AUGll4

•_ _',,t.

C_,_

PIO= I,o

%,_=0, C,

_3

#_ ?,.If 5_,,a_ ,,_,_o,___,_;_.o".o.,_J_=4-_

14. TOTAL OE.I_H OF HO I1:

voc I

r -i-- ]- - -I-'-I-

,--_ ,_-,__r'- i- -i--_-

L__L__LJ_I I i I

t'-- -- t---- -_-I-

L__L_ _L_I_I I I I

I-- -- t-"_--1--1--

I L I r I_i I I I I

r- --I---I--I--1--

L-J-- L .J_ L_I_

$r.tl.E _,

T--i-- T--i-- T-I- T-I- T-I- T-I ]L "1-

_':- "--:- "--:- '--'- " -'- _-'-'' ' ' ' T-'-"T-I-T-I-T-I-T-I-T-I-T-I- -I--_- +- -_- _- _- _- -I- _- -_- _- -I- -_--

L ___ L ___ L J_ L _i_ L _1 / i_ / __1_ .III I I I I _ I i I i

L_l_ L _l_ L _l_ L J_ L _i_ L_I I I I I I I , [ .,,I I I

1-.-1- _--i- .I--_- _"-_-_';'--t- _--I._ i I I I I I I i I I

I I I l I I l I I I I

T" -3-- T-I-- T--I--T--I-- T--I-- T --

2 --I -- .L --I _ .L _] _ .L _1_ .L _1_ .L _

_ J. _l_I I

-- "1- --I--

.L_I_

I I

-- T --I--

_ .L _1_I I L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

-I - [- _ - _ "3 -1- "_ - F" -] -- r _- F _- T _- T _-- T --I- T -I- T -I- T -- -- T --I--

I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I i I __.._._,&-.r7 I I I Ii [ i F i i i [ i f i T i _ i f I i i _'--I-- T-I- T-I- T-I-

- _-'-_ - ;- -4 - _- _- _" _- _- _- _ _- " -_- _- _- _- -_- @_-"t_--_- -_- _- -i- ,.4--_-' ' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ i _ , , _ _ _ _ _ I"i- F "3- F "7- r 3 - F _ - r -I- F -_- T -I- T -_- T -_- T -I- T -_- T -I- T -_-

I-_-_-_-, _-_-_ _- - -_F_-_ ,+-- _ -- _ --I -I-_ --I.... I-- --I--

"_ li_ I _ I I l I I'-''''' '' ' _' -_-,'_,7_-___- , ,],,,,, ,-r, r_C_.;-_-,- -, ---i.-_ i.-._ I-_-_--_ I--_-_ T -_-

I - I-"I- _4_ _T_T -',-T-',-1--'---L I I I L / I ! I I I I I I_

I I I I I I

FORML,lu_. ADO14

I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I

HI_

593 138 ..... -

HTRWDRILLINGLOG =_"_="_'_"_ ""-'"'.",,.,OU+D,...a..P__),l,_ S",_ d. ,,, , . _.+,,-,.,.,.,+,-.+.

r ;aI

i

" "e"_,(s,',1¢ _.') ';_L_-._

5 -,_,+o_

-" , "+'-

: _ __ -_..... .___;

_':1 -_" "

.._ , e.j,+l_k ,t,,_l/.,.t.,.,h ,$ ,e, ,c_.,_ tj

: . +,,+thct._'< G'-,-)._ .5"

""+'+'+o_)-_5L._t_k.,,,..+_,-Io't-,_%.,,_ J.=,_-e,-,.,'=_ "'+""-A._G_-,-.ta:_,+,+.no,,, 'm+.=.k_..,_ I_

503 139HOLENUMIFJHTRW DRILLING LOG (=_m._o_s._ _.___

£L_. rcvm OSSC_,:mON_: _t_-_UIJ.S _ SC_mNr-

(4)

n

_ -

_, -

I_rL_OL_-_

Bill FORM _A-It, _IB 14

',wo_',_""',_, {_'LL,_L A

[_'_ =-C_.'_

GEOTECHSAMPLEORCORESl_ NO.

(e)

k'_U.'mCALI IIL0W COU_IT

(°'

5

"1

Y

"7

SHEET SHEETS

503 140 "'::_

• S

' ' (_ (1) " _)

!

c; _,'t _:'e ,-.,._.,o_ t

't

)-('e,_o,...,-_,

S

5

7..",

HI

i HTRW DRILLING LOG (_n_.o._._'n1

PROJECT _ _ INSPECTOR ,

I:LEV. DEI_H _@TION OF_T_LtA.S FIEI.DSCRI_NING GEOI1ECHSA_IPUEi_AL._IC_I.I IILOWCOUWT(a) (c) P,F.SULlli ORCO_ Sr_ NO. SAJ_LENO. (g)(_ l (I)

b_

'_r','yr,'_ _,L_,_" -

_,,_l _ _-*,-"_

*_'I -

a

a

i

i

p_o_ bg-b

i i

,,_ _H' 'f'_(._l{ "_

,f

N

F.NliFORM _,z_, AUQ94

503 _41_OI.IENUMR_

(h)

' ; .q ,,,,v_

5O3 142

I,.=,,HT,_Rw DRILLING LOG

20. SNilPI,,F.SFOil LANALYSIS

C

22. DiS_',_$mONOFHOLE

7-- I'- 7-- F 7-- F 7-- F 7-- P 7-- F 7-- ]" 7- ]--I-- T--I- 1---I-- T'--I-- T--I-- i"--I--

I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I f f I I I I i I I

I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I__1 I I I I

7- t 7-I I ._.J/" I I I I I I

i I I I I I I I I i --I-- --I-- T--I-- T II I I I 7--1 7-i"7-i-7-F7-_ I I I I T_ilT

-t t--_ t--t-t--t-i--_-t---t-p-.t_4___.i__t_.i__t__i,_i_.l__t_.i__i_.t._i -I I _[vt,.._A)I,,,_,,-_-_-_-_-_E_.J I I I I I I I I I I I I /fi I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I--ll_ i ; i ] '1 T i

I

I _ _ _ l _ _ I _ _ I _ _ I _ _ I _ _ I _ _ I _ _ I _ --II "l - --I-- : --I7_cJI"I-_-7-L/-L'_-L-I-L-J-L_I L I L I i I Iz/I I I I .....

"_ , , , I_,, ,, , , , , ,--, _--, "-i--_---,--/l_'--,--'i---i--_---,--_:,-- ,"_"_?.___:-7--F-7--rT-_" 7--1"-7--rT--I-7--1-7--T'77/_-'_--I---I--'F--I - --I--_ L-_.l_ l_ _l _ l..'%l_ I_ ._l_ l_ _J_ __._l_ .t-._l_/l_l_,=.& ,__.. / _l_ .I-_i F 1 _l_

_ I I I I I "1"",_1 I I I I I I I ,,I,l_il_#_l_ll"i(--_4:-l__ I "l--I-I i i II i i

7--i----I-- F 7-- P 7--'___7-- r 7- P 7-- T 77"T 7-- T--I-- 1---I-- T--I-- T--I-- T--I--

-_- _" -: -_- .: -4- ___ue_:-_ ___: Z- ;- -; -; -J_: _ _ _ _,_= _,____,_I I I I I I I I I I I1

' ' ' ' '- l- _ - _-._ - I- ._ - l- q _ i- _ _ l- _', tilx'l "_/_"L_ _- 4 - _- - - T -i- i- -i- i" -i-i _ I i i i i i _ x,'41111_N_iH I, , , , _- -_- _- -i- 4- -i-

...... . ",, ---- -- I I I I I I I

_ _ +__I I- I I I LU I I I I f iI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

-I--i-'-1--I-'-I--1----I--t'---I--t---I--1----I--1---i--1-.--

i i i i t L J _ L I - L I L _i_ L _i _ L _

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IFIlt,OJtCT

ENli FORM 5&_-il, AU6 Ill

-- "1---I-- 4---I-- "I- --I-- +" --t-- ff---I--

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I

-- 1---I-- 1---1-- 1---I-- 1-

-- / I / I I I I _1_ I

I I I I I I I I I

I "°'''°" bPNGA-I

I-I_RW DRILLING LOG

[LEV.(a)

n_PTH

_.N

- __ r

_.,,,, ptt-_'i,_,.,:'_,1

(COt,ffINUATION SH_! )

BC_ = t,a

Imrc.:_

F.J4QFORM 50._k,.R. AUG9,4

I

"L.

7--- Or

(n)

J.o..,o. _p _ GA-I

"7/

5O3 144

I-i RW DRILLING LOG (¢¢_'¢nI_,IAI"IONSHY'T}

I:LEV _J_ I _,V_RIFnON OFM,&T'cRUU.S F_LO SCREENING ¢J:OllECH SAMPLE )ANALlfTICALI ILOW COUNT(a) (¢) P,FJULTS ORCOREg_ NO. ,SAMPLENO. (11)Iol (e) m

_ _.,,_,,,-,C-_,_'_,'__l,_ _- 6.7

13 "

_,o.c¢.-

- ,j.,,,_. ,.,._._

_.- _ ,3.Ft

_,. (:t"

PROJECT

EgGFORMS_SKA-R._ 114

P_O:- _."r

eub=, L1

_c, _,'_.p_,-- _._

S"

!

"Z.

El6 FORM 50._-R, AUG 14

503 146

! HTRW DRILLING LOG

I-t--

I

IMO.IE_ _,, .

EN8fORMS0,_141,IUJQ14, cR. p'A I'''°"

I-IIIIlltitfllttltill_jlltIliltllliltttiltltllillll_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-I-_-I-_-I-

L_-LJ-L i i i _ J_L_i _ i L_:___i___i___t___t___i_IIIIItilllllllllllllllrlll

I 1 I I I I -'1--1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I T-I- I

-I i i , i r , i , i _ i i , d_.i i _ i

"3 - r- 3 - F -i - i- "] - r -_ - -i- T -i- T -i- T -i- T .'_I_'_'C.,;-_'_,_;'-i-

-_ T5 T-_ T- 7 -_-_-_ - T , , ; - -,- T -,- T -_- T 7- T -I- T -,- T -,1--1 1---1 "I-,- _--, - _-.,,.- _-._- _--1- ._- _-._- 1-._-_-,- 1--,- 1--,- 1--,-

I I _ _1 _r I l LJ_LJ_LJ_L I I I i I I I I _1/__ I I -- /__I__.L

L I I__I I I_1 I I I i i "1 I-I-T-I-T2f-T-i- I I I I I I

T --I -- --I --

;_l_ L/ LJ_L.j-__J_/__L_I_L___L._]__/_j_//_j_.L._I_ .[.--l--.L--l--/--l--/

I I I I I II'_ ' II I I I _ I I I I I I ,_e_J_ ,T--I-- r _ r "7- r 7 - r _ _ - r -'1- T 7 -_C_ -]- _ -A__ -i-

._ L- _-.__-._____.___.__________ _ -T--- 4- --4 J- --1- .t- --I- .1- .I- --I-

I I I I I I I I I' I I ' I '/___, [ , ,r/ill J___-]--I I r3--r_ _f_ll _rr-I_-I-T-I- I I i I I I I "1' T I

4- _- _- _- _- -t- 4- _ -I-- _"" _"-_ - _- "_- _- -_ - 4- "-_ _ _'_',,"7"._'_ _ - --I-, I I I I , I , , _;_/_lMIkl}q't'_l'll I I , I l ' I J i ,_/

--I I i-"7-i-_-i--I-r.-I.Ti- T-I- T-I- I- I -II I I I I I I-_--P''-i f--'l-_-'-I--l--I-_i_'-L-i---_--_---I- _- --I- _- --I-- +" --t-- "1---I--+--I--

"7 -- r -_ - F- "3 - F -i- F -i- F "-I- T- "-i- 1- -I- T -'1- T --I- T -I- T --I-- T --I-- T--I--

-I--L-J -- L J--LiI--L--t-- L .J_ L -J_.L/_ L__I__ J__J__ .L__I__.L__I__i__I__ J..

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I.. HTRW DRILLING LOG <mm,_.o.m_m° _cr< c,_-6_u_ _,t°_ t "`+++°__,_,(*) Co) (c)

q

q

2._ "

-5 "

i

,.f

_++,..-p,.,-+,t_,J._.,-(2.¢_.,.+x+c.t,_,_.+,_. ._,m+-

5

( -

"7 -

-

"_--/ _ d,_.h.r;--r-._Aet'.'..-

+,+,.+is__,.,v_B_,,,_ tt,,,+t_.',li• s'_t+e,+(.++_4y

REIn SCR_NING GEO31_CHSAMPU__SUL_ OnCO_BOXNO.

(_ CO)

5; = o,_P ID_ 1,"7

_-o,&

503 _47HOLENUMSF._

_w ,J(=-,%-t

IA_IALTTI_U.IBLOWCOU_T

L

Z-

2-

Rr_C_RK$(1_)

EMIlFORM _'t -R..,_ 14

5O3 148

""=_ DSr.'.P,.OO-_E.MG__RM,., --=,_. AI_

HTBW DRILLING LOG <_m:_m_ .o".o,-,.1_ _T • II_lu_ SHEET

El._'t_ IAlil_ liilii v'i'i_.lii ill _ _m_l- o,_,_,,... -

(,) I Ill} I Ill ,I

. _,_,..,......__ rA._,vn_ "L.

c_,te I SxLT

_,,_ e._l._ _ .

_. --_--- ---, ,m. SILT-. ,_-*_+Tl_l,t-<ls_,__.._l_,t_t _ -- e,D:z.y

2-

1

tol - _ h,_,I_"I

. P t'C:i++_ ,i+

/

H1-RWDRILLING LOG _'.._o._-nPROJECT

£LEV. D£PTH _L_" .urn OFIdA_LI_.S r(a) (b} (c)

F"EI.DSL,_U:HINIRESULTS

5 0 3 -_-49HOl,.£NUIdS_

_V3 I',.JG_, _ I

_,_, ': I_ 0_._4 SA_dpt.E[ANAL_trlr.IILIDLOWCOUNT R_d.4.ql_OACOP,I 6_ NO. SAMPLENO. (O) (h)

(. P)

,..{

,-/

H

503 150

HTRWDRILLINGLOG

I1-111111

I I I I 1 I I I-n-mm- mm-_-_-_--

_ _I_LJ_LJ_L_I I I I t I I I

I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I

-- t- _ -- I- _-- I- -_-- I- -I-- I- -_-- I- -

-- L I I I I I I I I I I _II I

,_L_J_,iIlll

--_--l--_--l--

III1___1Iit1111111111111

:_cR _:,k_J, VA I"°_'°" _w_!

l"_= Opeo.l,i,_'_._t"6 -Pi/otT_,fr

Ek.EV. OE_R[_rrlON OF _ATE_ALS

(_

• _ i_ _._(h)

FIELDSCR_.H_Gpr_EO'_CHSamPLE_ANAL'rI1CALIBLOWCOROTRESULTS ORCOR_BOXNO.IS_U_PLENO.J (g)

(_) (e) (q

2-

2.

i"

_u_.

_ -----_ _0. _ --'_'-'_

EMilFORM 505_A-R. AUG 04 "

I HTRW DRILLING LOG (=,,,=,=._"n "°"""" I_14(_.-,k- Z '

I [ .3 OFE_. OE_ OESCAIP'n_O__'r_ucs m_ SCP._N_NG_o'_cx s_,p_ IAN_v'nc.,Uji_Owceum. i_w_( ) _o_ (c) _S_LTS ORco_ 8_cNO.S,U_PLENO.l (o) iN

II

l.(, --

I] -

'_'_" _'v_ _,'=,_v__3

pltOa.cr

iNI;FOPall_u_ _, AI_ 14

a (_) _N_NC GEOI£_ISAadpLE_Ut_U.Y'NC_.IeLOWCOIJ_T P,/uW_IQ '( ) (©) _.U_I_ ORCO_80XNO.IS_U.¢NO.I (g) n(a) (e) I _) I ( ) I

9

_L-t_ --

._/,,_[ _ o_/_-

O.,.,,___,L_o a._h _'1+

I

,1.1

a

_.6

m

I

t "'_ b_c_, 0o-6 &,a_f£,_ P,'[_-_+

3

S

7_

HOLENO.

503 154

DISPOSITION OFHOe_

,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,liliil,,ll

_--_-,--_-_ ,-,-,-__ ______+______._-_-_-____,___,_____,_' '-A_'_w_c_-_- ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' _ ' -'.Z '--' ' ' ' 'q-F]_eL]-F ,-, ]-F--F-_-T-,-_--, T-,-_7-T-i-T-_-T-_--_--m"l-- r_%--t---_--1-"_--_---t--_---_--_---t--l---I --_"_'--t--1---I--l"--l--'l'--I--

I , '_L-_-._LJ_LJ_L_, L J t , i I : L J_L_I_L_I_.L_i_'_--;'-"_ , , 1',,,%1 , I , t--I--I--_--1--_---1 T,_/-- , , i , i i i i

- -I - r- "-i - I- "l - 1-""'1 _" L- _ - _- _ - _- _ - ,,i- --i - ,.r ,,-i _'-'1

_--,_L_,_,_._ L_,_.,__,_ : -'- " -'- '- -'- "-'-] I I I t I I t_ I I I t i t t _ I_ f ,.l_it_,l _ J_l I--t _ .LI/I_je_.._I--1_ J- _l_

ff --[- r --I- r ",ilk-r --I--

-_- _--_- _--_- _--_- _--_-_ __ L __ a _c__ ._ ___i_ _._i_ _._i_ _._i-f I I I I l___r i t II'/ I I i t I t I I I J. i I

-_-r-_-r-_-r-_ ]-m'_-_T_rr-,;_--,-r-, r r-,-r-,-Tq-T ,_-_-_-_-_-_--_-_-.-m,-_-dl;T--._.__,=.._ _,.4___l___i___ I_,,,,,,,,,, t ,,,,, j,,"_-F'_-F'_-F-_-F'-I-F.-I-L_" t-T-i-T- T T-I-T-I-T l-T-i--_- _ -_- _--_- _ _- +-_- _ _i_- +-__ +-_ + + -,- +-_- +-,- +-i-i _- _ i _ i i LJ I j_i i ii i i i i i i , i i i i i ,

J I I t I t I i i L-J_L__LJ_L_l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

EI_ FORM"'_' .'.,AUG14

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I

-- 1- --I -- 1- -'1-- "i- --I-- 1- --I--

_L t t i i t_L_t_.L_t_I I I I I I I I I I

H'

HTRW DRILLIN[ LOGEI-_/o

(_) %_ u_iP'TION Of MATERIALS(c)

C4;v_.L,,,_,."_

'2..

m

m

-, __L,.,,,,_-.'_._,._ "_y-

a

u

m

7

)ROJICC'lr

?

" _.:_% 4. _,_.,_ _,..,_,

- _C_,.,, .,,_,_,b -,,_A

(C_NUATI(:X',I SHEET)

I_ELDSCReeNiNGi G_OI_CHSAMP_¢ _AN_I.YTICJI,kl BLOWCOLD4Te,_U LTS OACORE60X NO, |,SAkU_LENO, (g)

T'I_b'_O,'I

,)}

3

6

HOLENO.

L_ L

503 155HOLENUMSF..R

SHEEr

(_)

- fl.'k_ _f_A_..,.

Hi

] HTRW DRILLING LOG (=n,_oNs,,_I

I _._- ou-0 _ _¢,_'_l._,ac/_..._....._EI.L='V. I_T _l_ll,'n ON_ &_(:) (c)

-- ,iI'I_ 4-,--..:9_, _,-,,.,v__.&_,/{'tD:o4

II

m

_%'=o,4e

B&:o,q

c.u_,y

I

15 -

15 -:

I

I

_7 -

I_ -I

_ I

_EI.O$CI_NSe- I ,"_Offc.q_p_ I_L'mCAU KOWCOI_I"IK_.SULTS OgCage8"' t_O. SAI,_U_NO4 (E)

(@ (m ") /

NOI.E N UM@E,_

(a)

" /.o -¢'_,-,¢,,,,o_

'2.

G

I

Z

z T-e ,,_,,e.,.-%.

7_

f

_o. _.,,,,_ _._ __

IIF

HTRW DRILLING LOG (=,=._.o._,,..P_OJ_'T

_:L.£V. _P'rM OEi,;_.ud 05 u,_(a) _o) (c)

PROJECT

m

.2_, "

22,,.

a

Z5 --

w

.,3m

z."[

21

2'1 -

5,L'_ -'+-,,,1'[',.,,,-_,_,ub

HOLENUIAB_

$CRI_NING _01_CH SJUAptCIA_LyTIC,j_I BLOWCOIJ_TI_UL'rS OR CO_ B_ _0. S_,Me_ _0. (g)

141 1.1 tr)

I_ _"2.,I

Ell6 FORM _l_, AUG IMI

PID"2,3

,b

(a)

_ m_io. t_,v _ _GA-_

50Z 158

7-- r" -I- i'- -'1- F -I -- I"- "G-- F -I- l" --I- T" -I- T--I-- T --I-- T --I-- T--I-- T--I-- "F--I-,.,-1-- L --1 -- L.-I-- L /-- L,-,.I-- L,...I_ L .,_I_,J.,.,,_I_,,L,,_I_ j_ _.,,1_.1_,_1_ .,L__I__ .L.__I__ j,..__|-

i i _ i i i I i I i i i I i i i i i _ i i I I I Ii i _ i I I i i i i i i i i T-i i i I i i i i i T

4 - I- 4 - I- 4 - ¢- --I - I- 4- _- - - i- _ - 4- 4- 4- 4-- 4- 4- 4- --I-- 4- --I-- 4- --I-- 4- -I-

_i_L_l_L_i_L_i i i i I i i i i I i I i i i _i _i I i, _ i i i i- i- 7 - F 7 - F 7 - i- 7- T 7- T -,- T -,- T ,-qr_-_p___T_l

-_ - _- -_ - v- _- 4 -_- _--_- _- -_- t- _- _. ___ ,. __ #_ ___ __-I- _,_-I- _ -- _--_-I-i i i _dl_._w,v(_.-_-& I i I i i I i i I I I I .l_/___I I _l ! _l

-i-i-_-E_E_-F I-i -i-'_-'l-'_-i-T-1-T-I-T-1-T74'-T-i-T I-I I-

- _ _ - _ %- _ _ - _ _- _ -_- _ _- 1- "-1- 1- -_- r -_-ir'-i- 1- -I- 1- -I- 1- --i--I_L/_LJ_,.LJ_L._t_L i i r i i i i I _/_ i I I ,L .L_I_

I I i I I 1_1 i I I --i--7--1-7--i-7-i--T/_'--7--1-7--1-- i --i-- i i

- m -1 - _ "7 - rm_- 7- r 7- F 7-- T 7-- _ 7--/_" 7-- T -_-- T --i-- T --I-- T --I--L'- L--_---_.._. j_.__.__._l -

I I i I I I I I_ I I I I I I _ I I I I I I IM©I._ i- r n - F "7- F n - r _ 7 - P "1- T 7 _u_C_I_vX 7- r -I- r i_7 " --I-

l_k i I I I I/k3_j_i/_l I I Ln'l i I I i I I/ i_i_i I -i-F_-F7 r-T'-q-_,r-F-i..7-i-T-I-T-i-T-i-T-i-T-i- I i

4 - t- -_ - i- 4 - !- 4 - !- 4 - l- -I_- 1- t_ilT,,.i._._l_ _ _ 4_ __ 4_ __ 4_ _1_ .1. _i_ 4. _t_

2 _ L _' _ L J _ L 2 _ L _ _ L _' .._"r--L" h'_-_ _ , j.i I i i i i i i i ._ W I, g-I-T--T-i-T-i-g-i-T I-T-I-

-t - l.- .-i - l- .-i - t.,-.-I - t.- - - t.--.i,!_4- .i.- .-t- .i- - - +- --I- .i---I- -i- -i- -i- -I- ..l- -i-_i_l-_Ji_L_l_L._i_L_ I I I I I i i

I I I I I I I I I _1I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I --

-i -- t- -I -- i- -1 -- i- --I -- i- - -- I- --I -- _" "I -- _- "-I -- "1- -- -- "i- --I -- "1- --I -- -1- --i-- -I- --1-- -l-

i_! i _ I I .I_L_i_LJ_L_i_L_I_L_ i i i I _ j i .l_l_i_I I I I t I I I I t I I I t I I I I I r I i i I I I

I _loJ[ci #._ .

'--*pe,',,._l_i'}.,t'_"6 -'P¢Io'I"Te,_T,_Cl'_ gC<l_,,.,o,_.W,_ I'''°" MWNC,,_"-YEN6 FORM _"_.., AUg M

H/

503 160

I HTRW DRILLING LOGl_ql_£gTJ

(_

t'k

L'_ -

.-

_5

_9

tg "

l_,_ _-_ t_.,t,. P_s

RESULTS ORC_P,£B_CKO. SAMP_ NO._ (g)

"7

Z.-

3

5

G

HOLENn.

PROJECT

5O3 162

UNOISTUP.II_9 19. TOTAL NUMOF..qGF _ Bmr¢_

22. DISPOSITION OFHO,¢

-I-- F-I- F'-I- F--I-- F q-- F -I- F-'l--'r--I--'F--I-- 1---I--'F--I--'F--I-- 1---I-- 1---1--

_ -- / _ -- / --I -- 1-- .-I -- l --I -- / --I -- & ..4 -- 4- --1 -- ,I- --.I __ ,,L..__1'._ .1_ __1__ .L. __1__ .1_ __1__ &

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I l l l I I --I-- T"

-'1--1----I--I----t--I"---I--I----I--!---I--I---I--,1---I--.I---I---t----I--.I---t--.I---I--.I---I--4---I--.

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I l I% I I I_1

-i - i- q - T "q- i" -i - ;" q - T q - i- Q - T -I- T -I- T -I- T -I- T _:llr_.-_;'__-_.-. I-•-I -- I- --I -- I- --i -- I- --i -- f- --i -- I- "-I -- f- --I -- "I- --i- 'I- --I- -I- --I- 4- --t- :I_--I- _J--I- "_"'-_"_7"--_--I-

r , ,31_._W_'___-,..5,_ I i , , I I , I , , I I _l/l__ _ I I i I I]-i-T_-]-i- I-I "_-F-i-]-'-i-T-i-T-i-T-i-T'_,('-T-I-T-i-T-i-

I i I-F-]'-"_-i F'l-I "-I-r-1-T-I-]--i-T/_[-T-i-T-i , -,-,-,-._ - F- -_ - F--I- r-_ 'm- T- -_- r _- T-_-- I-_--/_" --I--_---i--I- --I--I---I--I- --I--_=_Lu _L-_L L -u_ -=_ -u_ _i_ _,_ _i_

' ' ' ' ' ' ' I_ I ' ' I ' ' # , , , , l l i_e_4d_l i- -I- r m - r m - r m - r _ m - r m - i-m -_I_TuJOC_-_ -i- T -I- T _'_ -I--J--I--I--I---I--I-J--L4-_--I--I---I__-_I/_'i. 4_ j__l__._l_J__l_&._l- A_I_

-'_ L -2'_ ' J _ L '#_Idm_' ' ' ,..',i , , , , , , , iI ,_,_i i i F i i _ F--T'-I]-_-_,_'-r-t._ii--i-T-i-T-i-T-i-T-i-T-I-T I

-4- i- -i - t-. -4 - l- -i - i- -i - +- -i_- +-t_-,_r,,i'4_i_'-_H- _ .-I- .l- -t- 4- -I- 4- -I- 4- -I-2_LJ_LJ_LJ_LJ_LJ_T_'E'"F_'', i , , l i I I J. L i_

I i i i I l i i i ._-"i._l_T-i-i--i-T-i-T-i-T-i-T I- i -i.-4 -- _ --i -- _ --I -- _ --I -- #.,- ,,-I-- b _-i- _ --I-- 4-,. ,--t-- 4- --t-- -t- --I-- -I- --I-- ,.,I- --I-- 4- --t--

+_'___ II_ L_I_ L

_1 I-_1 I i I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I

I I i I I I i I t I I i i I I i I I I i I I I I

-l--l-_--l-_--l-_--l-_--l-_--_--_--t---l--_---l--t- _--_---l--_--l--_---l--

/ i I I 1 I t I J I t t f / I / i I_ I I__ I / I / t /_1_.

i t I i i I i t I t i I I i I I t I I I i I I I I I I

Iqlillt_i _

I,. HTRWDRILLINGLOGcoernNuA'n_

503 1.63HOLE NUu6EA --

'_..-- (:F 9

(h)

503 i_4

°

" ;-_t,'_ I 7,_qR ,.

It

_,l_l _-_f _L_"

a

/B

t_

6

u

,,,.__ _,_ey

. '_'_ _ _"

: _'t_e/L _-_-_c_-- ._,_ _ _ _-L

lq

-./

|

z..

1-

Z..

7_

2.

-/

gOl_ 140.

503 165

_$_L_" liON OFMA'/_LJJ(c)

SCReeNINGRESULTS

(ol

_,_1_'I S,UJPLE*kNALYI"IC_.I8LOWC_UNTORCO_ 8_(NO. SAMPLENO. (g)

5

"7

-7

[SM_ SHEETE_oF ¢_KS

(h)

I

I

H

503 166

-i

HTRW DRILLING LOG

I

-I- r -i - I- -i- F -I-- r -I- F'q- F_- r-i- r-i - T--I- 1--I-T--I-T T

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIi

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIii

4-F4-F4-_4-_4-_q- _4-_4-#4- _4-__i___i___iillIlllflllilllllZllill i

EN6 FORM _._.._._-R...AUG94

-1--t---i--t---l--l--1--t---i--l-'--l-- I--1--I---I--1---I-- 1---I--1---l-- I---I-- _--i--_--

l 11 1 1 ILl I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I i i

, i i; -_-T-_-F-,-TS-T "_, i i_]z-l- 7-._- r _-r- _- r _- r m- r m- r m- r m- r m- _ _r-i- _-i- _-"- _'- _'- u'- u _- _ "- _'---_ _-_ = u_-_l_-_l_._

-I - F -I -- F -I -- F -I -- r- -] - 1---1- F -I - "F" --I-- T --t-- 1- --I- T -I- T -I- T -

• I-,-I-. .",-.",-? i-':i i I i I i i i i F I i t l i i t i i I i i i i T-i-

-I -- _ -I -- I- -! -- _ -4 -- l-- --I _ ,_ _4 _ l_ _1 _ 4_ _1 _ 4_ _ _ 4_ __rA_._l_ 4_ _i_ 4. _1_l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

-_-r _-r _-r n-r -,-r -,-r -,-r n-r-,-r-,cm,,; - r_-,-r -,- T-,---I- 4- --I-

I I I I I . i" .L'r: i o'i b'l_-b-__i _ i._ ._i _ i._ ._i ,_ _M.fr.;_.,_ ..1 - - I ,ITT _ T i i

I I I I I t _1 I I I I I _ _ _ljl_/t__A_l-_l._ _1_ I_ _1 I_. I_ I_ _1_I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

,""-"_Oi,_,4.t,,_,ct-S _;to't"TT_t , ]b-_, _4.._.-..t,Wtt-- I"""°-__._ t-e,-u>;_5 bP 14(_A-;;2_ "

m

I

, , i i , i i i , i i i i i I i i l t i i i I I T--"-t- i'-_- i--i- i--i- f---I- f--t- _-i- .i--i- .i---i- .i-_-.i--i-.I--t-.i- l_ .l..

i i i I I I i 1 I i I I i I i I I ILl i I I i I II i I i i I i i I I I I I i l I i-- T _ T_I,3_A_'_T -I- T -

503 167

__s._ j__;

• _" OF _IELEV. DEPTH L_ k117110NOFMATERIAZ.S FIELD$CAEENING£=EO_E_4S,LMPI.IEI_YTI_LLI GLOW_ UNT R_KS

(a) (hi It) RESULTS OR_*OREBOXNO, SAMPLENO. (g} (hi(_ o)

. f " /

/.o

_.'_ --

S,O

1,0

-.3 ..... _'___

EMBFORM _*_, AUG 94

I

I oo,

HOUENO.

503 168

,_,,,-,, I,,,.,,,._ __.L___(_I,EI.W. _FrH 0ESCl;IPllONOFMA'RRIAI.S FELOSCI;_ffiNG _01_CH SAuP_ NUJ.YTICALIILOW COURT RBa_KS I

(a) _ _ (¢) RESULTS ORCOREBCO(NO.SAMPLEMO. |) (h) _" |

I%,O -_.

_,o_,_ ,_lO.t _ _ _l_h_

*_,o.-.. _1

LI _ ,O_ _ -

o07PROJECT

ENGFORM r_ul'.R, AUG94

-,---,- _÷;-_,_.__-_o-_4-_.

/"

/

_b

_ L-b-_

t_

%

ff

it

_H

"1

ti

q

5

¢

2. ¢ ¢'4_ ¢,._ V _,_

Z.' "/"_ <Z_

_,__ _.

HOlE NO.

DI_l,.IGA .-D- II

503 189

503 I70

APPENDIX C

WELL CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAMS

DPNGA-1

MWNGA-I

MWNGA-2

MWNGA-3MWNGA-4

MWNGA-5

DPNGA-2

MWNGA-6MWNGA-7

MWNGA-8

MWNGA-9

MWNGA-10

ANGA-IANGA-2

ANGA-3

ANGA-4

TYPE II

Law Field Represematwe _. _. _ 14t_,,. "_ v,_/_,_

Ddlling Contractor _.'L._o,_ _,_l,,_,4 J_',L_'lu_ ('b, _::_-,

Ground Sudace Elev_on _(1 , t_ -_¢(:'t"

TOp Of Screen Elevation _.0 [o O'L. ;eO.'_'"

Reference Point Elevation __ l. L_I _Ce

- iState Water Level (> 24 Hrs. After Dev.) q .HI .yr./_ ('Z,l_l 5at;el<

Meas. From Reference Po=m (Dates_me) _/-i_l-_-/ _41

DnllingTechnlclUe ._,_.O__ 5"_,..--

AugerlBit Size And Type 2o_-=_-;,_J,-'rD _ _,_5-,^_&-r-_

Borehole Diameter | _. D "- i _, L. "1_L_

Screen Material "r_n.u_l_ %£_-_,._.- 40 Pvc _._u._,,tk_Manufacturer _,S _;[t-_,,---'_-o_ '_.eev_

Screen Diameter _-,'_.1_ _ _ Slot Size O. Of 0 "i_.-_.

6,5-;_._-0b. _ ,,RlserMaten_l 1"7"_,_',[ _.J,,_.,_.e 46 i NC.

J Manufacturer _:7r._¢-¢, <,,,.-,_v_.co. .,[..._L.,

Riser Diameter _ ,O- ;,,,J,_e.. "T'_

Type Filter Pack <_;I fro _ G£adabon _o-)._Filter Pack Manufacturer ._ ,- ;"I I p t-<; ._u, ¢¢ /./,_c..

BentoniteTycm _<'Ibi_,- " _" 5_'_t_-(k,_&

Manufacturer L_r'l_o._ e _,,. ..... o _ _<., '

Manufacturer _/_ u..=V_,*P_#

Amount Sand Used i _ - _ l_ _4

Amount aentomte Used (Saal) _'D _ L<;. (I -% ,_<dl,'M l:_Amount Bentomte Used (Grout) _ ! _<. _ '

Amount Cement Used (Grout) _ - _¢1 /_ _=_ _.

He,_,,O_Sl,c_,up .--_ PL_,_k,_i_,,_,Dimensions Of Concrete P_d _ f/- x. _.L_ _. _1-[ _. _,_._$

Depth To Top Of Bentomte Seal (Bgs) '_. 3 "_PPl'"

Depth To Top Of Filter PacX (Bgs) _,0 _'_'e(_'_

Depth To Top Of Screen Sect=on Threads (Bgs) I _ .4 _, ._P,=_"

Depth To Top Of Screen (Bgs) i O, _ _e#.,_

Depth TO Bottom Of Screen (Bgs) _!.,(_ 7 -_,_-

Length Of Open Screen 9, I_ "_t ,'_

Depth To Bottom Of Screen Section Threads (8gs) _-_J,"J ( _"

Depth To Bottom Of End Cap _.O, 5 l) -_e,_

-Total Depth Of B0nng (8gS) _--_. 0 -_ee'_ _RemarKs _a'% =- _Pl_,_ (__,-_,.,,,,_ _C ¢._,

503 171

DUAL PHASE EXTRACTION WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

Well L0ca_on _J_'_,",_-t_._}_<,.,_J.C-_._ VcJ,_

Date o'_/'_q'_ _.,, ,_,_

_'_ wE_V%__RO'_,,I • I_s'rs (

I vAc°u""--_I J "...... i

,,,, _N_,,,oH:::l ,:,_ _:_

:::::iI:.::::

_ RISER

i:i:.:il::.:.t!::ii:I.'..

TO_ OF _

BENTONITESEAL _-'-'-"........

--- [..-..-.::.:::g,.o, i*o,

TOPOF l, ::: _'"

FILTER PACK _TOP OF SCREEN --

SECTION THREADS TOP OF

• ::".;::"'.:.': SCREEN,'.:.::.._ ..'.:::;

.=.I:-.;--'.:..::.. ::'..I "::"

=: ::::,:.:_::::!:,!:':,:::':-_::!! SC.EB.

=_ .::'..:i 'i.':::'1,-.4 :" ::'_::'.:.:

.o,_o.O,,_REE.:..'-__ I_,::..:;_:1E=,,_,SECTION THREADS -- _ _"-_;:::::._

CONCR_ _ DROUT.... *.4: ...... BENTONITE D:"::'::'t FILTER PACK

i

t-

,¢l:1

Ddfler: _J_¢/ ['_112'_ s

Discrepanc=es

Checked Sy" Date:

TYPE II SU Well -- Rev. ,5/E

503 17?-

TYPE II MONITORnKG WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

Law Field Representative _ r, r__ _,_. _,J.UL

Ground Sudace Elevation ] i l. 12_ ._C__T"

Top Of Screen Elevation IGt ,'T_ -_'_ _-_"

Reference Point Eievatzon _ _ I . '7 _ _'e _-'_-

Statzc Water Level (> 24 Hrs. After Dev.) _",_, 3 _ee_

Meas. From Reference Point (Date/Time) "_-/_ _q / 2_Z

DdlhngTechmque _o_._fiU_ C_JcP=V-" )_u_:xev-"Auger/Bd Size And Type _', _. _ -, ,_ r_, T _u

Borehole Diameter _, <_ -,,^ L_

Screen Matanal -'_,r;,/L._ C._j_ u_l_ 40 _,VC

Manufacturer __,-,[_r.--, %_.-_,,r* , _c.

Screen Dmmeter 2. C -,'p<._. T__r'_ SlotSize _ ,CID ,_,l ['-

Manufacturer _'),,-,IJ_,r_. _o A w / _ _ . PU.._ ( .

Rzser D,ameter 21, O -, v.L(A. _----J.._

Type Filter Pack _'t i'c_ _oJ._. Gradatzon _Ja, 1. [/_-1o"_Filter Pack Manufacturer /.",,-,//,_.-__ c-_._,r_Kco .[._z_

Bentonite Type _J_U'_" "_,'-_- ;//B _,,'_o..,_. _ ,_0_Manufacturer L_,_i_n_ _._.,_cr _C, -

Manufacturer (",.,,_ _: r _1 _-

AmountSan_Used _ - 5_ "_' _'_,_

Amount Bentonite Used (Seal) / - 5 ,4 .l[_",.. _,-_J., LOT--Amount Bentomte Used (Grout) _; I_,;

Amount Cement Used (Grout) _ IL_ _N.,_

_e_tO, St,ckup 0.3t_ I_,', _,_,,_

Dimensions Of Concrete Pa0 ._ "_- _'" _" _ "/

Depth To Top Of Benton=te Seal (Bgs) _. _ _=_"C"

Depth TO Top Of Filter Pack (Bgs) _, "_ "_P--.d"_'-

Depth To Top Of Screen Sect=on Threecis (Bgs) /_ ./j_ _e'l--

Depth TO Top Of Screen rags) l_J , 3_ _e_"_

Depth TO Bottom Of Screen (Bgs) I c_,-I '7 _ _- t'E"

Length Of Open Screen <_,_ "_ e'_"-

Depth To Bottom Of Screen Sectmn Threa0s (Bgs) 2.&.. _ "_e_T

DeDth To Bottom Of End Cap _O ,_/b "E'f_e'_- I=,_

_'otal Depth Of Boring (Bgs) _-'2. , U -('¢C'_

Remarks FI _ sk v_,-,_.,,.-Ir , _,o _(} .

Project Name _'_J- _,_<..,I

Pro_ctNo. x:_o_-_-I,_25 We, No. /%'?'J_/_

WELL COVER _L_ _'_ PROTECI"NEl l=ocrs (3)

I | " I

[--,,.3 CONCRETE_AO [.1".', ":.l-] r'l

.:::.1[:::i ....

, .'-',I ; RISER

i'.'.1

TOP OF _ _TOP OF SCREEN -- _

SECTION THREADS & :':;':'="q-'.:: TOPOFscREEN _ _

_, ::::':____;'::'.'_=, :'..:,;, ,...:.:_Ol(,q, ,,,, . ,.,.,

•,",_ _ "_ SCREEN

= ':':" i'i

:.=:.,: 3 BOI"I'OMOF

iiiii:?::iSOTTOM OFEND CAP i!:: ........

*_'= i i i l •

{NOT TO SCALE; ALL MEASUREMENTS IN FEET)

CONC_E _ _,_o_r ...... BENTONITE FILTER PACK

Onller:

Inspector

O=screDanc_es'

Checke_ By" Date:

TYPE II SU Well -- Ray. 5/95

TYPE I] MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

Law Field Representative

U

Ground Surface Eleva_on I II ,(-,O _cet

Top Of Screen Elevatton ID I, t% _e_"_-

ReferencePomtEievatlon (1_, _ ..._ep"_-

State Water Level (> 24 Hrs. After Dev.) _. 2,."I _'C"Meas. From Reterence Pomt (DateJ31me)

DrilllngTechn¢lue t"_o(lg_J _PJ,...,_. 2_'+'-_er"

Auger/Bit Size And Type z.t', _, _, -,' .+,,& "r_ U

Borehole Diameter _, _ -, :,¢ L..,. __

Screen Matenal -_tP+_J_e,_ _-_cL,p,.l_,Jp L/_ ._/_.

Manufacturer "_r,l{e,'_ _,2. ..... c , _..

Screen Dtameter ;_.. 0 -, ,.,,L-, _T--L_Slot Snze

Manufacturer _.. !l._,_ "_ ,"/,,L_ / /-L_ ,

R=serDaameter 7-.,O -, = :{_..

Type Filter Pack _ Graciatlon A)_,. _ ,_/0- _._ri_ter_'acKManufacturer _r-;Lh, r_.. _-ru_ -E'_ ,

BentonuteType e::_u.,'x.--_to+,,_ "_'R_ _¢v.t"tcow_,e_ C_pSManufacturer _,-',ll+,,..-<. o _u;¢¢. ; ,_,

Cement Type "_ r."__P_h_Manufacturer _, kre_e

Amount Sand Use_ "_ - 50 _ _s

Amoun,Banton,teUs_(Saa,) _ _ i_, _,%Amount Bentomte Used (Grout) I_,=_

Amount Cement Used (Grout) _._ O_N_L,-, _¢u_

He,ghtOfShckup (_."_'7 _'e_'_" _]t,,-L,,'_.u

-J 3" "Dimensions Of Concrete Pad X ×

Depth To Top Of Bentonate Seal (Bge) _, ,_ "_'-e

Depth To Top Of Filter Pack (Bgs) _./..;, '_'("C

Depth To Top Of Screen Sechon Threads (Bgs) t_, I P') _¢e'_-

Depth TO Top Of Screen (Bgs) [O,H.I _e_1_

Oept_To BottomOf Screen(Bgs) _o ,_)"I_'e¢'_

LengttlOf Open Screen 9¢ _0 :eel"

Depth To Bottom Of Screen Section Threads (Bgs) :2.0. t5 -_ _"

Depth TOBottom Of End Cap ZD.SD

Total Depth Of Bonng (Bgs) 7--'._, _ "_Ce¢._"

'J O

503 173

Project Name _cx" I_.01.)-'_ _u_t _ ? _/,;\ ._.,_

ProleCtNo. 1_.._0L-_-}{_2.'5 WellNo. _,_It_GA-Z

LOVCKING

WELLCOVER I PRO_lV_

I I ,:i:l:i-*,o

_ - I F,.j

I:-::-!u.,r," L .'!

F:.:.:.'

eENTONFrESEAL [

-- !_

TOP OF _ . .

TopoF SCREEN '_

",, ',', "' . TOP OF l

• ; :::' ._--------_;.'.:: SCREENz' :':: :":::_1 -":'_'-.'"

¢o, *,- , *../___..;._.._ _ - SCREEN

:.::.:._ :....:_;:.::_..': :..

• eO"_rOM OF

+ o+s aBeN SOREENsac,+,.R O, i:;i:iEND CAP

(NOT TOSCALE:ALLMEASUREMENTSIN FEET)

CONCRETE ':. ,'i GROUT

:..... : BENTONITE P.. _ FILTER PACK

UDr,ller" Lt ;_._ p "_'_-SInspector" _'1_ _'V_ L._

Olscrepanctes:

CheckeO By Dale:

TYPE IISU Well -- Rev. 5/95

503 174l--re.l=..=.

TYPE II MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

Law Field Representatwe_

Ground Surface Eleva_on _ %0 • k) 0 _--e e_

Top Of Screen Elevation I O O, _ J_e,"_-

Reference Point Elevation t _,O • _ "_ ¢ 6_

Static Water Level (> 24 Hrs. After Dev) _ • 47,. _'[Meas From Reference Point (Date/33me) '4 -(EL .qq ,/'Z_'f

DrilhngTechnlque _n_[D,,, _'_ev_. _._e_"

Auger/Bit Size And Type fl F,_ - ,' v, ,_ ""_

Borehole Dmmeter I_, 5 _Ce.-e."("

Screen Material "T_r_ (-_ct*_._ _0 _V(....Manufacturer _)¢-_.L_,o_r_ qoA_tr_L . tJ,_c

Screen Diameter 2,..0 -t'_k ,.._-_Slot Size O, el0 -f'v,c._

ManufaCturer |_f'_:[%_n/_ ",_OA_,,LL . Ub_(.,

Riser D,a.,lleter 2 .,0 - ," v_t L_

Type Filter Pack _ Gra_:latton_'_

FilterPack Manutacturer _.-:tb, r,._ :::lO_u;rJ_-: .,_J_, '

Benton,teType _IJUl. -I_. %/8" "_,_'_,_,_-e d,_$(;ManufaCturer _- _ I(_.@ _,_,_ , r_( .

Cement Type "_t'Y_ ¢'_

Manufacturer t_j._ _k,-F#e

Amount Sand Used _,_1_ ,_'_ _._U_

Amount BentonRe Used (Seal) t - _ 1_ _,c_,_Amount Bantomte Used (Grout) Io - I _ s

Amount Cement Used (Grout) 2. - '_ !,_ _,OL__

HelghtOfStlckup _,_. "_'P't" _I_L_ _._'_l_

._: _,' _,,_D,menmons Of Concrete Pad K x,

Depth To Top Of Bentonite Seal (Bgs) _, 0 =Cp_-t-

Depth To Top Of Filter Pack (Bgs) _. c_ -_'_,_

Depth To Top Of Screen Sect=on Threads (Bgs) | 0 .o_ "_eL_

Depth TO Top Of Screen (Bgs) I/_ ,32, "_e_l"

Depth To Bottom Of Screen (Bgs) I_ _-/_ J_<_"

Leng_ Of Open Screen _/'/2, -_d_ "_"

Depth TO Bottom Of Screen Section ThreaOs (BgS) 2-0, O Z "_e,,]

Depth TO Bottom Of End Cap ZD,5" 1 _¢'_

:rotal Depth Of Bonng (Bgs) _.3.. 0 .'_'e_("

%1

PrOleCt Name

Prelect NO. t_.oo¢-b- I&_._; W_No.__IIW

Date 0 5/_._{ct¢{ T_me _{'t'_J

LOVCKING

WE=. II VENTEDc_P_ J • II

i'.':'::_ R,SER.':.'.' i."_

"'' I-'.'-'J

BENTONITE SEAL I_';;_

iiiii["_rE-]

T..... ,333._ r.'.'.1

P-}LTER PA= _" -'.l-- _

_o_o_SCREEN_.".:::':'lss=,oN, REAOS

• ":.:': . ..

=: ! "."..__: E!_, K:.':.'_---:..:.t

_.:..: :T..:.tSOrrOM OF SCREEN_::.::!.I. _

SECTIONTHREADS _':::'i:!:I

so ,o o ;..:!.!i::ilE_oc,_ .'-,.:,.-_.:.:_.:...?:.!

TOP OFSCREEN

SCREEN

80TTOM OFSCREEN

(NOT TO SCALE: ALL MEASUREMENTS IN FEET)

CONCRETE ' "";. _ GROUT..... .,.

! ..... : BENTONITE _ FILTER PACK

I

I

u,I

iI

Date:

TYPE It SU Well-- Rev. 5/95

503 175

TYPE II MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

Ground Surface Elevation

Top Of Screen Elevation

Reference Point ElevaUon

Law Field Rapresentattve _w_r | _.'J_ _ I_cLLo.-

u

Stat=c Water Level (> 24 Hm. Aftsr Oev.) _, _._ --_'t"Meas. From Reference Point (Date/Time) 4-_e,J_.q / _'_t_

Dnlllng TechnlOua _:'_a ___. L_.__ ;_.LI,_ 1- L%Auger/Bit S_ze And Type _lt

Borehole Diameter _* .,_ _ _¢(._ _

ScreenManufacturer " L'_J-¢L[.ILa_" _ ,I,_UL , _,J_ ,

Screen D,ameter Z ,O =,'u,L_x T--_._ Slot Size _ tOV.) -{ v,(._.

R,=erMator,al"C1__ C.-._I.,_ 4o F'_J(--Manufacturer I_tp, tL_JdX L._z_^_,_{J= :v_.¢.

Riser Diameter ,2,. _) - f 1_-¢_ _-.

Ty p,,,er ac. Gr a,,R..Fi]ter Pack Manufacturer [_ _ ; _.o.,_ "_O_tJ_re . _ L

Benton,reType <-_u_A _-_::_-,._'_y _/b' ,'_.¢w.'4lZ_J_ _j=.,_gManufacturer i_r,,_Le,r_ _4_,,i:_ . d._(...

Cement Type 7; ). p4_ n._Manufacturer I _ _._,_ .te'_- •

Amount Sand Used "_, _ _ 5D ~ t_, .1.1.1._

Amount Bentomte Used (Seal) | - 50 _o _,Amount Bentonite Used (Grout) Io 16<_

Amount Cement Used (Grout) I- _ J_ _c_

HelgntOfSIIckup _),_ "TC'¢e-"_ Leleu3 _¢-,:_0.

Dimensions of Concrete Ped 3/'X. _J ".K '_l h'J

Depth To Top Of Bentomte Seal (Bgs) _. 0 .'_-¢C"_"-

Depth TO Top Of Filter Pack (Bg._) _ ,0 -_ep,,'*k" L._ .5

Depth To Top Of Screen Sectmn Threads (Bgs) / _1_ 3_ "_¢e'_

Depth To Top Of Screen (Sgs) I O.bt_ _._:_-

Depth To Bottom of Screen (Bgs) ZO. _)(o J:',e E'_

Length of Open Screen _, ¢/2... _,ff E"t-

Depth To Bottom Of Screen Sect=on Threads (Bgs) 7..0, _5 _.e£_

Depth To Bottom Of End Cap _ .-tO -_._.'_-

:total Depth Of 8onng (Bgs) _..',2. ,0 _'e_'_

,,2

Well Locatton _) i_t,._. I'_'_,_.JL (".,_ #¢L_'_'e_.u.v.J_

LOVCKING

WELL COVER

VENTED CAP

WEEP HOLE --_._."

] CONCRETE 1:'i)i

!i!:ii!Lii::.iI

TOPoF =-(:':':

BENTONITESEAL _ L'.'::!

C---.!r--

TOP OF I_ """F_LTSRP.,,,CK I:":':_ "::::..TOP OF SCREEN "_,:..'.::.

SECTION THREATS ":i!:':] I'_ :';

:_! '":- ....:

= J:':::_ .'...._ i.;:.::-:___!:i;:."-_r

PROTECTW_POSTS (3)

t I STICKUP

:i!iI::':.:_IL.:I

" RISER

r.../__7.'-!

L-'.'2I.oo_

TOP OF

SCREEN

-- SCREEN

I1

_ __ BOTTOM OFSCREEN !

SECTIONTHRF._OS m ]

t

_.:.::. :::.:BOTTOM OF '"::":" :" ::"

(NOT TO SCALE, ALL MEASUREMENTS IN FEET)

CONCRETE ':" ":"':':i GROUT

i......r ...... BENTONITE FILTER PACK

II

=t0k.

o Or,,,ar',-..0,nspeotor"

Otscrepanc=es:0"_ Checked By. Date:

TYPE II SU Well -- Rev. 5/95

503 176

TYPE II MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

J Law Field Representaxzve (" r )

Ground Surface Ele:a_on _ )_.., 5(_ _("__#_Jt'- lJ

Top Of Screen E evation tO],_ -_e _'_.-

Reference Point Elevation I. t Z,"_I _e¢'_

Static Water Levei(> 24 Hrs. After Oev.) "_,7 `-ZJrl_ [_'_"_'_('_

Meas. FromReferencePomt(Date/Time) "l,-I/'_-q_ /'2-_t5

Auger/Bit S,Te Anci Type _ _¢, -, =_t _ I.E_

Borehole Diameter _, _ - i'_r_L,,,. _---_)

Screen Matenal _--_re_oJl _cL_,_. _ _._

Manufacturer _T, _er_; (_r_L¢ : r_ _c .

Screen Dmmeter )....d - tv.c(_.. _J_Slot S=ze _, Oi(_ -_.L

Manufacturer _,_,., t_ _ ¢¢-. "_ O_ _'l_ _ _ _ "

Riser Dmmeter .7.., _ -, _ • _

Type Filter Pao_ _ GratlatlO/i'i _J_" _`" (/l O"_, _IA_

Rlter Pack Manufacturer LTe, I I P_¢-_ %.-.¢,1,,u,_'r_ : _,

Benton=te TypeManufacturer I_t ,q I,,_N C._nu,'_ , _.c, '

u.;lc,'*'i'P--Cement Type

Manufacturer

AmountSanclUse_ "7-<-JO _6 _n,

Amount Bentomte Used (Seal) _ - _C ) _Io _-Amount Bentomte Used (Grout) _ O i_.%

Amount Cement Used (Grout) /,._ - _ I_ _._&

HelghtOfStlckup _"_,_._ "1_-" _o_(_)_ _,¢'_,_.LcL=

Dlmens,ons Of Concrete Pad _ "_ _ " _ (_ ,t

Depth To Top Of Benton,re Seal (Bgs) _, 5 "_£d-_b"-

Depth TO Top Of Filter Pack (Bgs) _', 5 "_Cte"_"-

Depth To Top Of Screen Sectlon Threads (Bgs) /_,AV _,e-cT"

Depth To Top Of Screen (Bgs) #0. _ _ "_e e'{"

Depth TO Bottom Of Screen (Bgs) Z_, _/, '-_e_

Length Of Open Screen _' '_ _ "_¢'_"_'-

Depth To Bottom Of Screen Section Threads (Bgs) _ ,_, -_.,ze'_'-

Depth TO Bottom Of Enci Cap 2D ,_ 3Ce_"_-"

:i'otal Depth Of Boring (Bgs) _,..?., C J,ct"

m

Date 0 _ / _,el_ °t "rime /ooo _J¢[

I vENTS0 CAP _ / • I

CONCRETEPAOLI\'_ I".'-I.1 I.-.I i[.1::l [."I.]K:: .:.']

, ..1

i

TOP OF I

BENTONITESEAL I---, ! i

b:--:t

TOP OF __" """ """ 0]_RLTER PACK I'

TOP OF SCREEN I" 1_..:::._ ::::.: SCREEN

¢Z, . .:. "l ", ":

in, I:..'_.::':_, L'.::._.i'- SCREENF-, i-::':r--'i::.:i<

** "..j .%'*_

<_1li......Z . ,..j,_% ,;

..:::._.__. :':.::I......-- _,..l SOl"tOM OF

_,.:.:l" ' .:i.i_#--'" SCREENBOTTOM OF SCREEN_ I

O.,NR OE :-.:;:; 'iSOl"tOM OF ! I

ENOcA_ :,:;","::':i"",I •(NOT TO SCALE, ALL MEASUAEMENTS IN FEET)

CONCRETE

=o=.o....... : BENTONITE

,_" i' , i GROUT

FILTER PACK

_ Onller:

Inspector"

Discrepancies:

Checked By _ate

I)

TYPE II SU Well -- Rev. 5/95

tAW

, RELOREPRESENTATIVE cLP

DRILLING CONTRACTOR

AMOUN? BENTONITE USED (SEAL)AMOUNT BENTONIT_ USED (GROU'r_

{NOT TO SC,4LE: LOCKING WELL COVERALL MEASUREMENTS IN F'_ET) __ . _ i _

I VACUUM,__ I / 'f' "1"|_PRO'_C_vE_ I '-I I -_ /s__P

C_RF_., PAq., l.'r.'..."'J v::-.':.t._ --_ _ _ _ K_::::_ I::.::.:f.J

C ' ",' ". ,.,, ,

DEPTH TO TOP OF _....-''_"--¢::J k..,'=_B"NTONITE """ / fz:.l _.*.--._= _=_._L r::.l L--oj

DEPTH TO TOP OF / _:#'?_':"':iFILTE_ PACK J _..':':_-_-':": -"i

_-_,0 _ b_ _::':'!:_.:::.:.;; LENGTHOF

ECRE=N _.::.-.!P-""'--" = SCREEN

CONCRETE E:'.::-_ •:.:!t:::::,----,:::::':;

' • : GROU c:..._, , •

BENTONITE _:":"J"--'_:::'_.::-'.:4: : -i'i LENGTH OF__FILTER PACK mNn r,_,__ .J-'.":":'; END CAP

..... :.:_.:.._/._:....:. f. o._ _.t-' DRILLER: • _,_1_',_

INSPECTOR:QA / QC DISCREPANCIES"

CHECKED BY:

,h.._ GROUND SURFACE 7

.,_

TOTAL DEPTHOF WELL (TOC

TO BOTTOM OF

TOTAL DEPTH

DATE.

Type III SU-RG, -- Rev. 6/94

503 I?8 - -" _- '

:='_ _PE III MONITORING WELL INSTAL_ON DIAGRAM

LAW

DRILLING CONTRACTOR

AMOUNT BENTONITE USED (GROUT) I _ I_ o

AMOUNT CEMENT USED (GROUT)

AMOUNT SANO USED <t - "50 Uo _,_.,_

STATIC WATER LEVEL (> 24/as. after dev.]MEASURED ON (O_ne)

ALL MEASUREMENTS IN FEET)

"FC,3 ;3 _3_ e -

DIMENSIONS OF

CASING

RISER 1

11 P

".,°

DEPTH TO TOP OF8ENTONITE SEAL

DEPTH TO TOP OF

CONCRETE

':, .'..'" GROUT

...... BENTONITE

,. 4. :., FILTER PACK

_:.-;:.'._-:::.,,_::;:"_'i'--'

SCREEN _ "_';':':i

t:,'tL ;:,',*

AP F_;{-_;:..'..:i

ST]CKUP

LENGTH OF

SOLID RISER.. _,..,.r_ _

"_O,Z.L

LENGTH OFSCREEN

LENGTH OFEND CAPo._.._L_--

. DRII I ER:__sQA / QC DISCREPANCIES:

INSPECTOR:

CHECKED BY:

GROUND SURFACE 7

DEPTH TOBOTTOM

TOTAL DEPTH

OF WELL_OCTO BOTTOM OF

TOTAL DEPTH

OF BO_ING (.bgs)

- I_

DATE.

Type U! SU-IRG. -- Rev. 6/94

503 179

TYPE Ill MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

PROJECT NAME _ S(_, 0U -/_ _( "P_t_ _ [St-"_'_t PROJECT NO. I;Lz_I--_-/6 3._

) ' ' V,'._,'._._DATE 0_1_3/_1 _lm!_ _ME f_s (_-_._ '

}ROUND SURFACE ELEVATION

TOP OF SCREEN ELEVATION IH,_| foot- UANUFACTURER_,_-t_Y "_.,(#_ tiC..

.EF_r=_EFOI.'rL=VAT,=. /O7, b:) £e_ C_.TT_E _.A_(_,[I(_ _ - " " ' MANUFACTURER " _+_-Lki'_'_'P-

TYPE FILTER PACK ;" GR"_DATION:_3 _','_ --.'.I L_ -T-_

RLTERPAeA_MANUFACTURER _U&AJ_ _Z)_ll'_ t_¢., BOREHOI._DIAMETER _......... ":_-,"..... _ _.AWSCRE,.. R"+-+ FAOTU.ER¢..-. eL,.

,CR,..o=-_=._-,O','-._=',_o..=_ o.,'".G=._=o. R,_{.,,JE,'....,.,,,h._t,,;.r..,.SE._=R_ "rLv_,J)M_ :;._J,___o "INC. A_OUNT._NTON_USE0(S_A_)I-_o d= _. '

MANUFACTURER _AJP| OIL_ _AJ/#tD _/¢_+ .- AMOUNTBENTONITEUSED(GROLrr_ ZD Ik_

RISER DIAMETER _,,O _t.L4 __.L_ .i AMOUNTCEMENTUSED(GRO_ _--_:j_/_ _¢:

OR,,,,.__C..,_UE(_. =_) __oo._ s..oO_EO.IH_._(_ - _ _,_,,_ sml_AU3ER/BITSIZEANOTYFE _"_5 ..... I_ "T'P% _ "-

0RIU.JNG TECHNIQUE (below c41sm_} _ STATIC WATER LEVEL (> 24 llt_ a_et c_ev.) _£),_ ( ' _-_'_" " MEASURED ON (Date/13me) q-./X_ / Ih._, P

AUGEPJEIT SIZE AND TYFE _. _. _ - ,' =, _ :T.._:_ /

(NOT TO SCALE;ALL MEASUREMENTS IN FEET)

DIMENSIONS OF

CONCREi_E PA_)'--

DEPTH TO TOP OF _ "¢.':.BENTONITE SEAL

DEPTH TO TOP OF

FILTER PACK --

_,...-_._-_

CONCRETE

GROUT• +, ,

...... BENTONITE

.:.;: .:.. FILTER PACK,,*.... ,f

t:.:;::: ..'::._

E:'> ""SC_I_EN _': :.:'=

".:':.__:..:':_

v _::....::._..:._• .':::" J'3""" F':.H ",,. I

? ,.,. . .:,l

N _:':"_--_:i:::..,E O CAP _:":':_I ,h t • .i

LENGTH OFSCREEN

p

LENGTH OFEND CAP

GROUND SURFACE 7

DEPTH TO

BOTTOM

TOTAL DEPTHOF WELL (TOG

! TO BOTTOM OF

_I_ID CAP)

TOTAL DEPTH

OF BO_NG (bgS)_B.oC.-P

'DRILLER. _Jo_ _e:t_'_QA / QC DISCREPANCIES:

tINSPECTOR: (_L,,',_,=t., V,.v,_..

CHECKED BY' DATE:

Type III SU-RG. -- Rev. 6/94

5O3 180 - --

TYPE III MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

BENTONITE TYPEMANUFACTURER

CEMENT "r'YPEMANUFACTURER

8OREHOLE DIAMETER

DRILLING TECHNIQUE (atx>m ¢asm_ _AMOUNT SAND USED _ ._..AUGEr/BIT SIZE AND TYPE _ _ _"

_all_,,._(_e.._/_._o x STATIC WATER LEVEL (> 24 hnL aRer dev=)_ ,._/_)DRILUNG TECHNIQUE (below casing)

REMARKS _' - -

(NOT TO SCALE:MEASUREMENTS IN FEET)

DIMENSIONS OFCONCRE-i_EPAD--

RISER

FH._,'_,d-

LENGTH OFSOLID _ISER

z3._-f,t-

DEPTH TO TOP OF

BENTONITE SEAL --

DEPTH TO TOP OFFILTER PACK --

CONCRETE

"..'.""J GROUT

...... BENTONITE=......

,..,.:.., FILTER PACK

t.-. ,. ..;.

END CAP _"_"1

' DRILLER: U0eJ.0 P_c_QA IQC DISCREPANCIES"

LENGTHEND

INSPECTOR:

CHECKED BY"

DEPTH TOBOTTOM

TOTAL DEPTH

OF WELL (TOCTO BOTTOM OF

TOTAL DEPTHOF I

DATE.

Type III SU-FIG. -- Rev. 6/94

503 18.1

TYPE III MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

OATE_"/'V" # o_l,-1,/__ME t,_i,,'_.,,,,,.,,_A.,-.

DIMENSIONS OF

CONCRE_TE PAD --

CASIN(

,'."

LENGTH OF

DEPTH TO TOP OFBENTONITE SEAL --

DEPTH TO TOP OFFILTER PACK

•P-.._.o _ _,_,, LENGTH OFSCREEN

SCREEN _ ,'_'_ J[,,-'t"CONCRETE

_...]..... GROUT

...... BENTONITE i..::;'_--ri:_..:l ''...... _.: ..]_:::: "..:.'.. LENGTH OF.,F,LTE"PA '<E',"OA' ENOOAR

' DRILLER: _ _ _ INSPECTOR:

QA / QC DISCREPANCIES. CHECKED BY"

_J_

DEPTH TOBOTrOM

OF CASINGI1,_ +l"

TOTAL DEPTH

OF WELL (TOCTO BOTTOM OF

TOTAL DEPTH

OF BORING (bgs)

DATE.

Type Ill SU-FIG. -- Rev. 6/94

5O3 182

TYPE Ill MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

PR=ECT_E b_P, OU-6 b_l _:t_ St_ PROJECTNO.WELL NO. P_'_ _- IC) WELL LOCATION _'r_l¢ _=- _0._ o_tiL

GROUND SURFACE B.EVATION / _) ;._. 3,D --_oJrT"

TOP OF SCREFJ_ _ATION 1'_1_1 _eE_

R_._ENCEPOINTB_=VAT_ l@7,qq Tr_,.,'Y

RLTER PACK MANUFACTURER _'_pt _¢¢, __¢_CE, k_,

SCREEN MATERIAL" t _" - " " C LAWMANUFACTURER _I_+t<+_'_IAV't'O- _'_'" : _;LI_J_0PV RB.D REPRESENTATIVE

SCREENOIAMETER _.,0-_¢_1> SLOTSlZE O'OI0-t'_t*

mEE..*TERm+_ _- 4OwcMANUFACTURER I_-¢l|or<. _Jtb_tJ,_,_a ! .[+v_C,

mtsEEmA,WST_R _ ,o -N,_kZC>

om,,,.aTEC.._UE<=o_,:_JAUG_S=S _0 _E _.

AMOUNT BENTONITE USED ISEAL) t-._O _/_ _c¢_AMOUNT BENTONITE USED (GROUT) _f_-I _

AMOUNT CEMENT USED (GROUT) 5-- _#//=

• , .. . STATIC WATER LEVEL (> 24 hnL _ _w.)

DRILUNGTECHNIQUE(belowcaImg). _o_._oL_ _OE_ ,_._ MEASURED ON (Data/T_)AUGER/glTSl2_ANDTYPE _'I,Z_-_c[_. "I'Si_) ----- tO--" _ .-,-P,_<_t • _._t'_t(..

• • _,,, ,,.,,-- _* t ...,,+- , I_rPE/SJZEOFCASJNG _L* LIJ -,_t._*,eo _ 'I-_

REMARKS x._.u,+,,,j._.,,_,,,o_. ,_.. "t-t.,..,,._ ,,v_,_t+.,+++,__u,.._,J_ (.t..,,6..+i.,_.,,,,.,,o_+.

(NOTTOSCALE:ALL MEASUREMENT'_ IN FEET)

!ii: -DIMENSIONS OFCONCRETE PAD --

DEPTH TO TOP OFBENTONITE SEAL --

._"I.5 Jee't"

DEPTH TO TOP OF

CONCRETE

GROUT

...... BENTONITE

PtLTER PACK

,'.'.'

.'+v _. t_ o qd,%'',

"*.'

.'.': LENGTH OF

•"".' SOLID RISES..'-' ",,o. 22. ,Pto+o.'

"-I-

t:.::-"._,;:: ..'.!_-::::. --+-;

SCREEN P:_"':_:: ":';

_::::_....::,::-;"_--_::";:1!'-:::._::-.:.,

_:.';::: +::":+:l

GROUNDSURFACE 7

DEPTH TOBOTTOM

OF CASIN_iI'I, &_ +1"

T

' DRILLER: __='P_RQA / QC DISCREPANCIES

TOTAL DEPTH

OF WELL (1"OCTO BoI-rOM OF

END CAP)r _LENGTH OF q_.3."/ -/,-_T

LE_.NG__OF____. I O'_O_L,N:_bOTHS) --

INSPECTOR: _- F _(_l._._.CHECKED BY: DATE:

Type III SU-FIG. -- Rev. 6FJ4

' 503 183

TYPE III MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

DATE

-i_m t.'_'_ BENTONITE TYPEMANUFACTURER

MANUFACTURER /_k_

B,5"",'w.& "r__t_ _ _,,.,_,.-<=,,,,,LAW

REM) REPRESENTATIVE (IL_. ,_C,__` ,,.,_'.^, _>

(NOT TO SCAL_;ALL MEASUREMEN7_ IN FEET)

DIMENSIONS OF

CD_CRETEP._p.--V._>¢_."

DEPTH TO TOP OFBENTONrTE SEAL --

DEPTH TO TOP OFFILTER P_CK

CONCRETE

GROUT

...... BENTONITE

• ....... FILTER PACK• ,t. • * *!

RISER

LENGTH OF

LENGTH OFSCREEN

_._ _

LENGTH OF _._.END CAP ___..G.._._-..L- .._t

GROUND SURFACE 7

DEPTH TO

BoI-rOMOF CASING

I_._-_

Y

TOTAL DEPTH

OF WELL (TOCTO BOl-_OM OF

TOTAL DEPTH

OFBORING_Ipg$)

I_' DRILLER: tu_ Jtj_

QA / QC DISCREPANCIES•INSPECTOR: _¢ _v_ _Lm_

CHECKED BY: DATE.

Type III SU-RG. _ Rev. 6/94

503 1B4

TYPE III MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

GROUND SURFACE ELEVAllDN I/_.__ ,_. "_Q#_" BENTONITE TYPE _ ,IJu_ _,UL_, _/_- '¢ C_4_S

TOP OF SCREEN EL_-'VATION 7B .ql_ ._" MANUFACTURER L_a_l_o_ _O, u',_L _.u_¢_ I

" MANUFACTURER _ u_k t_¢'_-¢

FILTER PACK MANUFACTURER _ t t_ _ _,4_u"_Cli_ - _,_ BOREH(_LE DIAMETER,I

=,,u_,cTuRER ,_ REPRESe,"rA_EC_,,,-',_,.K'..I_

SCREERO_,ET_J-_T S= _ OR,,,,_coNT_c'toR(2,,',.L,__%,,,.,,,,,cD,;I/:_RISERMA'I_RIAL "('_J_/_l,J _¥'hl_/l_-O NO "p_C AMOUNT EENTONITE USED (SEAL) | -- _'_ _1_ _ --

MANUFACTURER _'tt_JPP_ _',_^L_tEJ_ , kLt,CL._ AMOUNT BENTONITE USED (GROUT) Z E'Ik< V .

RISER DIAMETER J=*O -- _!t,,,.cl,__ T__ "-.AMOUNT CEMENT USED (GROUT)

"OONT=.OUSED I=,;,,,-' STATIC WATER LEVEL (> 24 hrs. after c_liv.) PJo'J¢ _,%_¢¢Mt_

DRILLING TECHNIQUE (below ¢a._) _ MEASURED ON (Dni/Tmm)

AUGEP_IT SITi= AND T_ E" q. _ -- _l_c_ T-._ T TYPFJSlZE OF CASING t 0 -- t _.1_. "_..L_ _d_l.l_L _ "_REMARKS " ' .... _

_NOT TO$C.ALE:ALLMEASUREMENTSINFEET)

i

|DIMENSIONS OFCONCRETE PAD--

DEPTH TO TOP OFBENTONITE SEAL --

DEPTH TO TOP OFFILTER PACK

,_ CONCRETE

..... GROUT

...... BENTONITE

FILTER PACK,....:..

T DRILLER:

CASIN(

C':;:;,_,:: " ::;_--::._.:--!SCREEN _i'.'. '/',

i:...:.:E-Z,_.;::...:_

ENDCAP _:.:?!-:-i]

LENGTH OF

LENGTH OF

LENGTH OFEND CAP

I

'V

LJ

GROUND SURFACE_

DEPTH TOBO'r'rOM

OPCASING_5,_

T

TOTAL DEPTHOF WELL (TOCTO BOTTOM OF

TOTAL DEPTHOF BORING (bgs)

_.o_ ..f._ __INSPECTOR: . e _ [m,_ _,_r_.

QA / QC DISCREPANCIES.CHECKED BY: DATE.

Type III SU-F1G. -- Rev. 6/94

5O3 t85

TYPE III MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

WELL NO. _:_.,_ -_J WELL LOCATION \I_,_-_- _,%_d. g,=_, - b_cR

• ' ,* _ " _. _, BENTONITE'typE

TOPOFSCREENELEVATIO_,. 3_'_ _C_ MANUFAC'rURSRL_,_'t_,__ _ _z_,_'_, =_'_c.

REFERENCE POINT ELEVATION I O _, _ _C e e. _ CEMENT TYP_ . "_4¢ _.. z._

_.I_ (/ __ ,, ._ MANUFACTURER (_ v_'_.. P¢.-_"e

TYPE FiLI'ER PACK "_i,L._.r_ ,,_ GRADATION _,._FILTER PACK MANUFACTURER '_,,:l_e.v- _ -_--.D,',,u_f__. /,]q.(.,BOREHOLE DIAMETER __ S. _ --_-(._. T_L._

MANUFACTURER , AMOUNT BENTONITE USED (GROUT) _._ I1_._

RISER DIAMETER ; |=0 (_L_ AMOUNT CEMENT USED (GROUT) ¢J-_ I_o _¢_

_- STATIC WATER LEVEL (> 24 hrs. _?,_r dev.)

o.,,.,._TEc..,ou__,o_.=,_,._ Ut _ _ _ ._UR= o_(o_)

(NOT TO SCALE:ALL MF,4SUREMENT_ IN FEET)

DIMENSIONS OF I_.oCONCRE_ _- PAD

DEPTH TO TOP OFBENTONrr_SEAL --

_,o_

DEPTH TO TOP OF

CASING -41

RISER

GROUND SURFACE7

SCRECONCRETE

GROUT.' ','.

...:::._ BENTONITE _"i.::14. _':::."-:!

:....:.: ;" FILTER PACK END CAP

' DRILLER: tl )a_QA / QC DISCREPANCIES,

LENGTH OF

SOLID RISER

LENGTH OF

S_REE_._,_n -PIT,

LENGTH OF.END CAPo.___j_____.]

DEPTH TOBOTTOM

f

TOTAL DEPTHOF WELL (TOG

TO Bo'rroM OF

END CAP)• _#.o

TOTAL DEPTH

OF BORING (bgs)

- f__INSPECTOR:.CHECKED BY. DATE.

Type lU SU-RG. -- Rev. 6194

503 186

TYPE III MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION DIAGRAM

PROJECT NAME

WEll NO. /_NGA, -_ WELL LOCATION

PROJECT NO.

BENTONITE TYPEMANUFACTURER

MANUFACTURER /'_L,_:It..fc-'_e.._

LAW

o.,,,,._coN_=o.R_J S,....,b_m,..4.]:_IAMOUNT BENTONITE USED (SEALI | -- 50 Jl_ _ JAMOUNT BENTONITE USED (GROUT) _ - 119_ g J

AMOUNTCEMENTUSED (GROUT) _-- ell'-i _I_ Io_

_.OUNTSANDUSED _1- So _ _,_t_

DIMENSIONS OF / [.'_.'_".."_ ['i.":i _ _.0 _JC

CO,NCRE'_..P,A_ " I-_' L":.X " I

CASING --I_.'_'..'._..'._ _.:.'.:: LENGTH OF

__ S%DR_S_I

DEPTH TO TOP OF __.....'-_'---c::j r::.r

BENTONIT_ SECL / _-":'-'J E"'-"] I_-_.__; _ _ _

TOTOPO i --:ili;illFILTER PACK

b_. LENGTH OF

CONCRETE

'.". '.'J GROUT

..;... BENTONITE

FILTER PACK***,,.,.....,.,

• %,_ ,*,;z_

"":' _':' _ SGREENSCREEN _:':-:= 't ."Io -_,

._i":.'.'.m_." ::;:J

ENDCAP ENDCAP--.:: ..... ..:..- __._._..Q_ .--t_ ..J

GROUND SURFACE;

DEPTH TOBOTTOM

o_?_G

T

TOTAL DEPTH

OF WELL (TOCTO BOTTOM OF

TOTAL DEPTH

' DRILLER: _L)r.,_, "12,_,"_QA / QC DISCREPANCIES

INSPECTOR:

CHECKED BY: DATE.

Type III SU-F1G. -- Rev. 6/g4

503 _87

503 188

APPENDIX D

WELL DEVELOPMENT PHOTOGRAPHS

503 18_

503 190

503 191

3

503 192

503 193

503 194

503 195

503 198

5O3 197

503 198

503 199

APPENDIX E

GEOTECHNICAL TESTING RESULTS

LAWLAWGIBB Group MemberA

503 200

May 19,1999

Law Engineermg & Environmental Services,Inc.I 12 Townpark DriveKenncsaw.Ga."

Attention" Mr. Chris Knoche:

SubJectTransmittal cf Test Results: DSCR Dual Phase

Geotechnical Testmg Services

Law Engineering Project No. 12001-8-1625

Dear Mr. Knoche

Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. has completed the asstgned laboratory tests for the abovereferenced job. We are transmitting to you the tabular summary for each of the specimens tested. These are thefinal results, :hus, we have enclosed two copies of the following test results for your distr=butiotv

* Gram Size Sieve Analysis (ASTM D422)Moisture Content Test (ASTM D2216)

Atterberg Limits Test (ASTlvI D4318)

If you have any questions pertaining to these test results or require addttional informatLon, please do not hes=tate to

call us.

Sincerely,LAW ENGINEERING and ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC

Principal Technician

LAW Engineering and Envqronmental Services, Inc

396 Plasters Avenue • Atlanta GA 30324

404-873-4761 ° Fax 404-881-0508

I

5O3 201

GRAIN5

5 5 5_

tO0 _ _ _ a

80

70

w

E 6o

_ ,

_ 40

I]o I200 100

SIZE DISTRIBUTION TESTc C c

_'- o o _ o _

11F-'_I _"-. I

il •III ilI III I

It i_0.0 I .0 0 1

GRAIN SIZE - mm

REPORT

0.01 0.001

Test I% +3"

• 13 0.0

% GRAVEL

0.6

% SAND

27 7

% SILT

7_ 7

% CLAY

LL PI D85 060 D50 D30 0_5

63 38 0.27

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

• Gray Green SanOy Fat Clay

Pro)ect No.: 12001-8-1625.02

Pro]ect: DSCB-0U6

• Location: DPNAG-I-GT DPNAG-2 Bag @ 16-17Ft.

Date: May i4, i999

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT

LAW ENGINEERING. INC.

Olo CC Cu

USCS AASNTO

CH A-7-S (_7 6)

Remarks:

Tested by',_ //,".Y'/z'-_'''6-"

Reviewed _y: I_

Mo._.ure Content = 40.3%

FIOUP_ N_.

503 202

7OE_W

z soh

__5oi,if...l

_ 4oin

_0

0200

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST=_-

• ._ ._ _o o

100 w _ _ '_ _ " _" _. •

: I Ill_ II fill : \..I

_o: I : .tll '1 _' I

: II N_1 : :II t _:1

100 I0.0 1.0 O. i

GRAIN SIZE - mm

rest % +3"8 0.0

% GRAVEL % SAND

0.7 BO .8

REPORT

II

0.0i 0.00i

% SILT % CLAY

_8.5

LIpINL NP O. 3 t085 D60

0.17

°50

0.14

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

• Black Silty SanO

_o)ect No.: 12001-8-1625.02

-o)ect: DSCR Dual Phase OU-6

Location: DPNGA-2-GT DPNAG-2 Bag @ 22-23 Ft.

5re: May i3,1999

°30

0. 096D10 Cc Cu

USCS ' AASHTO

SM A-2-4 (0.0)

RemarKs:

TemteO by: _J-;_t _/_-"

AevleweO by: /6

Moisture Content = 22.i%GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTIONTEST REPOAT

LAW ENGINEERING. INC. Fioo_e No.

503 203

90

8O

30

20

O

200 100 10.0

DISTRIBUTION TEST

oo

i

:::: : T

iii•i i

tlNII::::: :

::::; :

: Jl I'1 I

i i id I

- '. '. : : t '.

.k. i

',::: : :

• "1I I:1 I

1.0 0.1

GRAIN SIZE - mm

REPORT

II

II

II'.'. :

II

II

0.01 0.00:

rest % +3" % GRAVEL

3 0.0 0.5

SAND

86.8

% SILT % CLAY

_2.7

LL PI D85 D60 DSO D30 Oto C c

NL NP 0.74 0.55 0 47 0.217

0 D_5

_Ogg

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASHTO

@ Black Silty SanO SM A-I-B

Project No.: 12001-8-1625.02

Project: DSCR Dual Phase OU-6

Location: DPNGA-3-GT DPNAG-2 Bag @ 26-27 Ft.

Date: May 13. 1999

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT

LAW ENGINEERING. INC.

RemaPkS:

TesteO Dy:JT'/J'T / X/r'f---

Reviewed by: _

Moisture Content = 23.7%

Figure NO.

503 204

IO0

DISTRIBUTION TEST

o o o g

REPORT

go

8O

7Orrw

z 6ob_

5oi,iLJ

4oB_

3O

20

_0

0

200 100 _.0.0 i.O 0.%

GRAIN SIZE - mm0.01

% SAND % SILT

57 6 _2.0

0.00_

LL PI 085 OG 0 D50 030

NL NP 8.J3 1.16 0.84 0.462D_O C u

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

• Brown Silty Sang w_t_ Gravel

Project NO.: 12001-8-1525.02

Pro]ect: DSCR Dual Phase OU-6

• Location: DPNB-4-GT DPNGA-2 Bag 0 29-31 Ft.

Date:Ma.______y i3, iggg

GRAIN SIZE DISTAIBUTION TEST REPOAT

LAW ENGINEERING, INC.

A-_-b

RemarKs:

Revlewed by:

Molsture Content = 2i.7%

Figure No.

503 205

GRAIN. SIZE_=

• . .N .c _c

iO0 _ _ _" -_ -_

oo _flIi' lIIllll_o_III IJIlflJl

lIIiSIIIiI,,_o lllilllll111_l

_o IIilllIIIIIIII30

o I;IIIllllI200 :100 _0.0

% +S" % GRAVEL

0.0 0 .0

DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT

IiIlll _l_l

II'IIiI: :l.llIJillll iI!rlII_lll_I. 'lil

i.O O.i

GRAIN SIZE - mm0.01 0.001

SAND

33.7% SILT 1% CLAY

66.3

LL PI D85 O60 D50

52 28 0 _9

O30 I 0_5

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

• Tan Brown SanDy Fat Clay

Project No.: 12001-8-_625.02

Project: DSCR Dual Phase OU-6

• Location: DPNGA-6-GT DPNGA-1 Bag @ 5-7.5 Ft.

Date: May i3. _9gg

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT

LAW ENGINEERING. INC.

USCS _--_SHTO

CH i A-7-B(_7.2)

Remarks:

RevieweO by:

Moisture Content = _7.E%

Figure No.

5O3 20G

tO0

90

8O

7On-W

z 6oI.L

_ 50U.Iu

_ 4on

30

20

_0

0200

GRAIN

I:III

I:II I

l llt

IIII

I:IIII'III

SIZE DISTRIBUTION

C

• IIIIIHill

IIIII

lllli;lilll

9 _ _ 8• Wb _i •

I II1:; ;

r ILII; ;

I 1141 I ]

: ::::: :

: ::::: :

I ;;:; ; ; ; :

I :::;; ;

iO0 _O.O 1.0

lllll

:IIII I

:1I I:i t

IIl:l I

O.i

GRAIN SIZE - mm

TEST REPORT

li

I I

O.Oi 0.001

_est % +3"

4 0.0

% GRAVEL

0.4

% SAND % SILT % CLAY

3g _ 50.5

LL PI 085 060 DSO 030 0_5 D_o CC

20 12 0.23

MATERIAL OESCRZPTZON USCS AASHTO

• Grown Saney Lean Clay CL A-6(4.4)

IPro)ect No.: 12001-8-_625.02 RemarKs:

TesteO by'_(--/ f.JF--'__.

Reviewed by: /-_

Project: DSCR Dual Phase OU-6

Location: DPNGA-7-GT DPNGA-1 Bag @ tO-l_.6 Ft.

!Date: May i3. t999

C a

Moisture Content = _4.2%

GRAINSIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT

LAW ENGINEERING. INC. Fig_.s No.

503 207

[00

9O

8O

7OrrlU

z solu

_: 5ou

_ 4o

3O

2O

lO

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION_=

.N .-= -=-=

"= "= -=_" "=" _ © 9 _ o 8 -_ 8

0 " :

200 100 IO.0

q "_ .llm

1.0 0.t

GRAIN SIZE - mm

TEST REPORT

I I

III I

III I

I

II::1 I

i

:;; )

I

I

I

J

i

0.01 0 001

rest % +3" % GRAVEL

2 0.0 0.5% SAND % SILT % CLAY

8 .8 gO .7

LL PI D85 O@0 D50 O 30 025 O 10 Cc C U

73 45

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS

• Ten Brown Sandy Fat Clay CH

Pro_ect NO.: 12001-8-_625.02

Pro]act: DSCR Dual Phase QU-6

Location: DPNGA-8-GT DPNGA-1 Bag @ 16.2-17.4 Ft

Date: Msy 13, 199£

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT

LAW ENGINEERING. INC.

AASHTO

A-7--6(47 0)

Moisture Content = 54.6%

Figure NO.

Remarks:

Tested by:_l _"4J/_""

Reviewed by: _J_

503 208

1o0

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT

9O

8O

7Orrw

z 50

_: 50

u

_ 4oO.

30

2O

_0

0

200 100 _O.O 1.0 0.1

GRAIN SIZE - mm

0.01 0 .ODe

TeSt % +3"

e: J 0.0

% GRAVEL

0.0

% 5ANO

18.3

SILT

8:1 .7

% CLAY

LL

59

PI 085

34 O. I_

060 D5O D30 O_5 Dio Cc C u

Moisture Content = 48.9%

Figure No.

Date: May 13. 19gg

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT

LAW ENGINEERING. INC.

Project NO.: 12001-8-_625.0@

Project: OSCR Dual Phase OU-S

@ Location: DPNGA-gGT DPNGA-i Bag @ 2i-23,4 fT,

Remarks:

Tested by: _ /_ l}/'''L_

Rev_eweO Dy: /'_

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASHTO

• Gray Sandy Fat Clay CH A-7-6(2g g)

• ' Best Available Copy503 20.q

GRAIN

6

tO0

90

8O

7Orrw

z6oh

Z 50UJ_J

_ 4on

3O

2O

0

200 100

I0

+3"0.0

_I J

SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT

10.0

% GRAVEL00 t

1.0 0.I 0,01 0.(

G;_AIN SIZE - mm

T% SANO % SILT [ % CLAY

gg g 0 1

I

CLLL PI

NL NP

°85 0_0 °50

I, 74 1 38 I 25

DIO C C

1.039 86_0 0 .91 I.E

_2.2

NATENIAL 0ESCRIPTION USCE AASHT0

• Tan Sano SN A-I--_

II030 015

O. gOi6 0

Prolect NO.: 12001-8-_625.02

PrOlect: 0SCA -OU8

Location: F_Iter Pack NO. 2 Bag

0. ate: Nay t3, t999

RemarKs:

Veste_ Oy.'-J_'qO/cJ_

Rev lsweG by:

GAAINSlZE OISTAIBUTION TEST REPORT

LAW ENGINEERING, INC. ¢ig_re No.

503 210

503 2ll

APPENDIX F

COLUMBIA TECHNOLOGIES, LLCDUAL PHASE EXTRACTION TEST REPORT

MARCH 15, 2000

212COLUMBIATECHNOLOGIES

5O3Operable Umt - 6

Dual Phase Extraetton Pilot Test

Defense Supply Center Rwhmond

June 1999

Dual Phase Extraction Pilot Test at

Operable Unit - 6Defense Supply CenterRichmond, Virginia

PREPARED FOR:

Law Engineering ar.d Environmental Services

114 Townpark Drive

Kennesaw, Georgia 30144

PREPARED BY:

Columbia Technologies, LLC

1450 South Rolling Road

Baltimore, Maryland 21227

Tel: (410) 536-9911

DATE OF REPORT:

March 15, 2000

COLUMBIATECHNOLOGIES

503Operable Unit- 6

Dual Phase Extraction Pilot Test

Defense Supply Center RichmondJune 1999

213

Summary

Equipment

Test Procedures

Discussion of Results

Lower Aquifer Test Run I.

Upper Aquifer Test Run

Lower Aquifer Test Run II

References

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

........................ • ..................................................... 6

APPENDIX A LOWER AQUIFER TEST RUN I .............................................................................. 7

APPENDIX B UPPER AQUIFER TEST RUN .............................................................................. 8

APPENDIX C LOWER AQUIFER TEST RUN II ............................................................................. 9

2

COLUMBIATECHNOLOGIES

5O3Operable Unit - 6

Dual Phase Extraction Pilot Test

Defense Supply Center Richmond

June 1999

214

Summary

On June 9-26, 1999, COLUMBIA Technologies, LLC (COLUMBIA) conducted a dual

phase pilot test at the National Guard Areas ('NGA) within Operable Unit Six (OU-6) at the

Defense Supply Center, located in Richmond, Virginia. Earlier investigations at OU-6

indicated the presence of both aromatic and chlorinated volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

in both the upper unconfined aquifer and the lower confined aquifer.

The objective of the dual phase pilot tests was to determine the effectiveness of using soil

vapor extraction (SVE) combined with groundwater pumping to remove contaminants from

the groundwater and to provide the data needed to optimally design a soil vapor extraction

system for site remediation.

A total of three dual phase pilot tests were conducted with COLUMBIA's automated SVE

pilot test system and skid-mounted liquid ring vacuum pump. Two tests were conducted on

the lower confined aquifer and a single test on the upper unconfined aquifer.

The SVE tests were coordinated with the removal of groundwater using both an existing

groundwater recovery well system and temporary submersible pumps placed either in the

test monitoring wells or in adjacent groundwater pumping wells. Several instances of

groundwater pump failure because of either power or mechanical failure resulted in varying

groundwater levels which adversely affected the vapor extraction test results.

Although a significant vacuum was achieved in the main extraction wells at both the upper

and lower aquifers, unusually low vapor flow rates from the extraction wells were observed.

In addition, low and inconsistent vacuum responses were observed in monitoring probes

placed around the extraction wells. These conditions indicated a restriction of vapor flow

existed from the recently dewatered vadose zone with the consequence of poor contaminantremoval.

Analysis of off gas samples indicated low concentrations of volatile organic compounds,

specifically trichloroethene and toluene, were being removed from the vadose zone above

both the upper and lower aquifers. Higher concentrations were noted from the upper

aquifer than from the lower aquifer. These observations would be consistent with the poor

vapor flow observed through the test wells, particularly on the lower aquifer, and are not

necessarily representative of the contaminant conditions of the aquifers.

In summary, steps need to be taken to improve the permeability of the extraction wells and

the immediate vadose zone surrounding the extraction wells before adequate SVE data can

be obtained. In addition, a more reliable method of setting and controlling groundwater

levels in the extraction wells will enhance the performance of an SVE system.

5O3 215COLUMBIATECHNOLOGIES

Operable Unit - 6Dual Phase Extraction Pilot Test

Defense Supply Center RzchmondJune 1999

Equipment

The SVE pilot tests were conducted at the Defense Supply Center Richmond OU-6 s_te on

June 09 - 26, 1999. The pilot test system layout is shown in Appendix A.

The vapor extraction well and monitoring probes were installed prior to testing under the

supervision of LAW personnel. A wellhead fitting, provided by COLUMBIA, was securely

attached to the top of the extraction well pipe to allow connection to the vacuum pump

system and periodic collection of vapor stream samples through a quick disconnect port

COLUMBIA also provided caps with a quick-connect fitting to connect to the top of each

monitoring probe for connection to the vacuum monitoring equipment.

The pilot tests were performed with an A130 Fulid-Vac® liquid ring pump assembly. The

pilot test system consists of a liquid ring vacuum pump, stainless steel air/water separator

tank, high and low level switches,demister for removal of 99% of entrainded liquid from the

vapor stream, make-up water valve, inlet s_ainer, all steel skid mounted. The vacuum

pump had a rated maximum air flow rate of 130 cubic feet per minute (cfrn) at 28 inches

mercury (inHg).

An instrument test section was installed in the extraction line prior to the vacuum pump.

The test section consisted of a pitot tube test port, a in-line Rotron flowmeter, a vacuum

gage, and a test port for sample collection.

The outlet of the vacuum pump was configured with a valve assembly, pressure gage and

test port. The vaIve assembly was provided to simulate the appropriate backpressure

anticipated for exhaust gas treatment in a full scale remediation system. Exahust gas from

the vacuum pump assembly was then directed to an elevation of I 0-feet above ground.

Support equipment included a 110/220V portable diesel generator, power distribution

system, groundwater pumps, hoses, collection tanks, and water level logging system.

Pressure decline measurements were obtained at the vacuum pump and each monitoring

probe during each pilot test using highly sensitive Dwyer magnahelic pressure indicator-

transducers mounted in a central monitoring console. The pressure responses from the

transducers were digitally recorded on a Fluke Hydra Series computerized data logging

system at operator-selectable sampling rates. Additional transducers on the monitoring

eo_asole were used to measure vacuum levels and air flow rates in the SVE pilot system.

Vapor samples were collected from the extraction well vapor sampling port during each test.

Vapor samples were returned to COLUMBIA's laboratory for analysis according to

modified EPA Met.hod 8010/8020 on a gas chromatograph equipped with a flame ionization

detector (FID) for petroleum hydrocarbons and an electron capture detector (ECD) for

chlorinated hydrocarbons. In addition, frequent measurement of both vapor contamination

at both the inlet and outlet of the vacuum pump were made with a Photovac Field FIDdetector.

4

COLUMBIATECHNOLOGIES

503Operable Unit - 6

Dual Phase Extraction Pilot Test

Defense Supply Center Richmond

June 1999

216

Test ProceduresThe pilot tests were conducted under the direction of LAW personnel. Test 1 was

performed on the lower aquifer, Test 2 on the upper aquifer, and Test 3 was a repeat of the

lower aquifer test after action was taken by LAW personnel to correct the observed low flowconditions observed in Test 1.

Each test consisted of:

Lowering and maintaining groundwater levels below the screened interval of the vaporextraction well.

Operating the SVE system at maximum vacuum to determine the total system response

Monitoring the change in flow rate, vacuum and contaminant level while operating a

maximum vacuum for an extended period of time.

Monitoring the change in flow rate, vacuum and contaminant level while reducmg system

vacuum in incremental steps.

A detailed log of events for each test is provided with each set of test results.

Discussion of Results

Lower Aquifer Test Run I.

A test log, pressure decline data, air flow, and contanainant concentration levels are provided

for the Lower Aquifer Test Run I in Appendix A.

The plot of Well Vacuum vs. Elapsed Time illustrates that each of the monitoring points

reached and maintained a steady state vacuum relatively quickly. However, once the initial

vapor volume was extracted from the subsurface test area, flow dropped to a relatively low

level for the remainder of the test. Additionally, a low removal rate for contaminants was

noted throughout the test. These conditions tend to point to a restricted extraction well

which will require correction before adequate SVE performance can be achieved.

Upper Aquifer Test Run

A test log, pressure decline data, air flow, and contaminant concentration levels are provided

for the Upper Aquifer Test Run in Appendix B.

The plot of Well Vacuum vs. Elapsed Time illustrates that stable vacuum conditions were

not reached at any of the monitoring points located in the Upper Aquifer test area. This was

likely a result of varying water level conditions caused by equipment and power failures.

Because each of the monitoring wells was sealed for vacuum measurements, the change inwater level within the well would result in a variation in the monitored vacuum level.

5

5O3 217

COLUMBIATECHNOLOGIES

Operable Umt - 6

Dual Phase Extraction Pdot Test

Defense Supply Center RichmondJune 1999

Portable FID readings indicated that some contaminants were being removed throughout the

Upper Aquifer test. Subsequent laboratory analysis indicated that the majority of the FID

readings were attributable to methane. TCE was also being removed during the test. A plot

of TCE concentrations versus time and flow is provided.

The instability in measured vacuum levels preempts any useful calculation of permeability

at the present time. Replacement of the groundwater pumps to control water level is

required before additional SVE data can be obtained.

Lower Aquifer Test Run II

A test log, pressure decline data, air flow, and contaminant concentration levels are provided

for the Lower Aquifer Test Run I in Appendix A.

A second test run was attempted on the Lower Aquifer following action taken by LAW

personnel to correct the low flow conditions noted in Lower Aquifer Test Run I. As can be

seen from the plot of Well Vacuum vs. Elapsed Time, monitoring well vacuums

continuously decreased througout the test period. Flow peaked at 75 scfm and decreased

steadily to a near zero conditon relatively early in the test. Additionally little or no

contaminant removal was noted throughout the test.

Further action is required to correct the low flow condition present at the extractiion well

before adequate SVE performance can be achieved.

References

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Engineering Manual EM 1110-1-4001

Johnson, P.C., M.W. Kemblowski, J.D. Colthart, D.L. Byers, and C.C. Stanley. 1990._A

Practical Approach to the Design, Operation, and Monitoring of In-Situ Soil Venting

Systems. Groundwater Monitoring Review, 10(2): 150- 178.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies Under

CERCLA: Soil Vapor Extraction, Interim Guidance. Office of Emergency and Remedial

Response, Washington, D.C. EPA/540/2-91/019A, 1991.

6

503 218

APPENDIX ALOWER AQUIFER TEST RUN I

COLUMBIATECHNOLOGIES

5O3

Operating Unit - 6Dual Phase Extraction Pdot Test

Defense Supply Center RtchmondJune 1999

219

TEST 1

Lower Aquifer Test Log

Date Time

11 June 1725

2050

12 June

13June

14June

15June

2110

2150

2155

2330

0230

1145

1300

1400

1415

1415

1622

0300

0600

0730

0820

0945

0850

0930

Log Entry

Start Test Run I

Vacuum pump shutdown on low water level. Suspect

high back pressure blowing down water from sealwater tank.

Restart vacuum pump

Verified vacuum pump maximum flow at > 130 scfmindicated with well suction line disconnected

Estabhshed 10" water backpressure for testing

conditions.

SYSTEM CONDITIONS:

10-inch water backpressure, zero bypass flow - systemflow indicates a maximum of 42 scfm.

Data logging system failure

Data logging restored

Secured data logging to download data files

Resumed data logging.

Shutdown vacuum pump to inspect inlet strainer.Condition normal.

Restart vacuum pump.

Improved seal on vacuum monitoring wells B & C.

Corrected electrical bias in data logging system.

Raining.

System shutdown as a result of power failure.

Restarted system.

Generator failure, unstable after refueling.

Generator stabilized.

Generator power unstable, secured data logger.

Secured Test Run I

503 220

m

m,=

I.,L

{,.},<

cm

E

r,

(..) _,,,<'_C9

"_(_

X:}

ILl

(.,)

E_I-

r_

d

,$

-r"

:''G

3" G

• L%

c

OOAO OOOOOOOOOOOOOAAOAOOO

OO OOO

QooQoQo_qqQoQqooQo_ U3

oooqqq QqQQooQoqQoooooooQOOOO OO O OOOOOOO O O OO OO O O O O

oooooo ooooQQQQ QoQQ_m_ _

ooooQQ _Q_QQQQQo_OQ_Q

OO O OOOOOO OOO OOO OO O OO OOOO OOO OOOO OOO OOO OO O OO O Oo O O O OO

_o_o__o=_5o_o5oo_ooo

O_

@c

"?,

T--

I,-

k X

r_-

"6

C

O..E0_

o'?

III

I--

B

b">

"r

>

S03

O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ' O O O O O

qqqqqqoooooqoqoooqoqooooo

__ooqqo_q oooooqq

OO O OOO OO O OOO OOO OO _O O O O O O Oooododdododoodddo ooooooo

oo_qqqq_oOoooooooo

_qqqqqqooqq_q_qqooooqooo

ooqqqqoqqqqq_qqoqooqqqq000000 O0 _

ooo_ oo o _ o _ o _g oo _ o o _ o o oo oO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

_o_oo_oo_oooo__o_

O_

_00

221

"6

503 222

F-

__=

o.9O0

,-r#__

O<

13.

E

a..

mm

l.u

<

_<

<

<_,--<

"_(.9

"o

LLI

._EI--

...ee

>

-r

#..

}

}

}

:-i"

=Z

000000 _ 0000 _ _ _ _ _ 0000000

O000000 O00000 O000 O0000000

6o o oo4d6o o odd oo o 6_ _ _ _ 4 _ _ _

00000000

doooddddoooo9999 do 999

00_ 00000000000_ 00_ _ _ _ _ _ O_

00000000000000000000 _ _ 000

oooooooooooo_o_ooooo

_ _ _0 O0 _ _0 _00 O0 _ 0 O00 _ _00 0000 _ 0 0000 0 _ _ 0000 0000000 O0000000000000000000

oo_ °°°_°_°e°°°_°°° o_oo_ 000000 _ _ O000 _

O_ O_

"? ?co _-

"503

¢0O-

o o

m_-

m ffl

a _

0.

E

rn

<

c_ _,

<

I.-

_ oo

_ qq0') ¢_

i

--?

5O3 223

"6

0-

503 224

i

!io,

i

0 0

t.O LO

iJ

/

f_4

Z Z Z Z

{° i,,

_i I.U "-

(JeleNt seqou!) uunn:_eA

0..J

,.,J..,.I

m".e0

"6

.m

.Q

0

f..im

,=mt_

_Be=

_e:L

Em:

o

:9

0

0

a.W

5G3 225

ZZZ zz_zzz

ZZ_Z ZZZZZZ=J

"" ZZZZZ ZZZZZZ,=1

i _o_ zzzzz zzzzzz--J

.d

_ _= zzzzz zzzzzz.J

503 226

221COLUMBIATECHNOLOGIES

503Operating Unit - 6

Dual Phase Extraction Pdot Test

Defense Supply Center RichmondJune 1999

APPENDIX B

UPPER AQUIFER TEST RUN

COLUMBIATECHNOLOGIES

503Operating Umt - 6

Dual Phase Extraction Pdot Test

Defense Supply Center Rtehrnond

June 1999

228

TEST 2

Upper Aquifer Test Log

Date Time

16 June 1705

17 June 0145

18 June

19 June

20 June

21 June

0330

0400

2120

0845

1410

1500

1600

1630

1830

1900

1925

1600

0003

0630

0700

0830

1450

0110

1145

Log Entry

Start Test Run I

Liquid ring pump shutdown on low water level -

cause excessive backpressure on exhaust line

Groundwater pumps secured

Groundwater pumps running

Test Run I Secured

Start Test Run II

Well E groundwater pump replacement m progress

Power lost - generator failure

Power restored

Groundwater pumps replaced

Power down

Power down for 5 mins

Power down momentarily

All groundwater pumps secured except Well E

Momentary power interruption

Momentary power interruption

Momentary power interruption

Reduced inlet vacuum to 15" Hg

LAW vented Wells A, B, & D

A & D vacuum readings responded

Wells E & C were satisfactory

Reduced inlet vacuum to 10" Hg

Secured Test Run l]

5O3 229

_0_0

o

o o.

0

,7 0.

o_ i_

> >

>

>

m>

U

>

>

d

m<

0

_-o

=0

"7,<<

W

0_00_00000o_oooooo00_0o __ ....

0000000_00_000_0 0 _ 0000_000o O00 0

0oooooo00__000000_000_ _000_

oo*ooooooooooooo 00_0000 _00_

_oooooo_oo_moo_ooooooooooooo_

_0 o_ o o

0 0 0 o

O.

503

C_o_

_EO<

UJ _.

I--

> >

m

>w<

O<=0

m<_--0

<<=0

Q

1,1,1

o

c_

(8>

N _ 0

O0 00000000

_ 0000000

00 C3000 O00 __0_C3_C3_0_0

C_

O.

503 Z3I

E

"o

0

n. >wE

n

ii

fl}

F

¢M o

"503

v

0

W_

OE'< a.

ILlv

--I

.Q

0

o00

_q

l

o0oo

I

o

U

(tudd) s6u!pea_l Old alqelJod

C) 0 00 C) ou_ c_ c)•e-- ,e-- I._

v

,'r _oU-

,r.;rit.

O

0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

,F-

(uJJ0s) MOl-I ;alUl

o

ooo

o0

._=

"0

0

503 233

0

IU >_=

0

<...

G. U

W

(1/5n) uop, PJJ,ugouoo _OJ.

04 C4 T- _.-

_ I I I

I0Qq..

O_ LU

C)

0

Ij, 0I

I

0 0 0 0

R

IY

IIl:II

J_

J

Z

:eT

I _' I I I I

0 0 0 0 0 0

(uJj0s) MOl_-I ;elUl

000

0Q

u3

(0

0

k-"0

(nQ.

mUJ

5O3 234

<D.,UJ

o8U

• m

c_F-o =_ _ _u

0 U= _ _ .=- _ "8

I-"

0o_>,m

o

503 _35

_ o om ooo_ oooo_m-J _ ZZZ,- Z ZZ ZZ Z

_ _oo_ oo_ooo _Z_Z_ _ZzZZ

_ _ _zz_0

m

.4 -J

.-=

.m

.J

Em

o ¢/)_" U) o

_ J

Q

N

oe-

Wm

0 " Z_: Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z _t

__ oo_ ooooooz ,- _- z z . z z z z _ Z co

"_o Zzzzzz

u. _ _

og

-;-_ZZ ZZZZZZ _

Z _ z z z _.. _ z z z z z z _ , ._

!_ °! ° Jzz o_ _

- = _ -_¢'_ _."o_ _ O_

._._ o = o _=_._=_ _ _._ uJ o_,.ro_ _ - __>. = _ _ N_ °_ --_

_03 236

t,n

o..=°_ ®i u.

. _ =?.,=_ zzz_ zzzzz

_ _-._9. _ zzzz zzzzz5=_=_ u

Q)

o

'_ _'_- _ zzz._ zzzzz _

._ ,-,-=- o _==o "_ xo

Z_ o-O ._<C u. o_ _ = Z Z Z _ Z Z Z Z Z

o o°m

•-, =o _ ooo°(=t ¢0 0=

_--

== 3 _ o, ',.'c_

C_I,- o "o "_ x,,,,,C

= o--o== ° - _=® _ _ 7<

_-°_ _ o -_ _

0,')

503 231

it)

_4,Z

tJ,,4,,4

.e

0

0

=.1

.e_

=.1

e,J

E

ffl

0

o

0

"00e-

0.Ul

{:2

%

_),-

EO

o

ooo_ ooooooz_z_ _zzzzz

ZZ 0 ZZZZZZ

ooo0_ ooooooZZ Z _0 ZZ ZZZZ

ZZZ_ ZZZZZZ0

ooo_ ooooooZZZ_ ZZZZZZ

0

mom_ ooooooZZZ_ ZZZZZZ

0

ooo_ oooooozzz_ zzzzzz

ooo0_ ooooooZZZNo ZZZZZZ

C

c c cm0

=_; =m

"_g_ o° ._--..T=

(,,)

(,9

(t}

U

o

..=

o

m g e_eU

0 II ,,_ 0

- _ _E

-.-._ _._

>

W_1O.

ffl

o

o

u

N

0

0e,.,£

i °?,

o

503 238

0,1

oooo oooo_ zz zz zz zz

4:== mamma _o LL_- N " _ Z Z Z _- Z Z Z Z Z Z Z

,.4,,,4

0

U

.ll

E

0

_!_ ooo_ooooooo-J " _ Z Z Z _- Z Z Z Z Z Z Z(0C]

.--I

g _=. _!_ oooooo,,ooooo•_ _ = zzzzz zzzzzz

m uu

_,_ _ zzzzz zzzzzz _

.. zzzzzz _ ,__.- ._ _,- m ZZZ_o _ _o

ee_ Z Z z _ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z

n ;= -

¢,_ =--' o =_'o

o= ._ -_ _=-=

=,iS= =

_c_

o '-'"_ _ 'J ====£ _- " = _"ec_ "_" _ _"= _ _ _ a'-_

_ _-_ _v.-ouJ:- ¢0 z _

u.I

Z

ILl.J0-

b5

m

¢[

0_bC00

0

.o

® ._

m

o_

o

m

COLUMBIA 2 3 9

TECHNOLOGIES

5O3Operating Unit- 6

Dual Phase Extraction Ptlot Test

Defense Supply Center Richmond

June 1999

APPENDIX C

LOWER AQUIFER TEST RUN II

9

COLUMBIATECHNOLOGIES

503Operating Umt - 6

Dual Phase Extractton Pilot Test

Defense Supply Center RzehmondJune 1999

24O

TEST 3

Lower Aquifer Test Log

Date Time

22 June 1920

2145

23 June 2025

2055

1535

Log Entry

Start Test Run if[ - Repeat of Lower Aquifer Test

after action taken by LAW personnel to correct low

flow conditions of the extraction noted m Test Run I.

High water level alarm (33 feet) in extraction well.

Pumped well down. Note: no groundwater pump in

extractmn well this test run, will require manual

intervention to pump down well when alarm activates.

System shutdown to install new groundwater

transducers in extraction well and well no. 6.

Restart system.

25 June Secured Test Run I]1.

"6m

_E_<

< .u-.c :_3mm-_

Qu.

D

_>

_4

<

a__<

<__<

W

0

9_

m

Q

o.

k C

I

i

}_y

;

}

503 24;

0000000 O000000 O000000000000

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooodoooooo6oooo6oooooddooooo

qqqq_q_memo©mqmeqe_m©hoo_oo

ooqooqoqqqqqqqqoqqqqoqooooo00000 O0000000000 O0000000000

00000000000000000000000_ _0

_ A A A A_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _# _ N N

0 O0 O0 O000000 O00000000000000_o©_o_o©_ _____oo _ _

000000000000000000000000000

000000000000000000000000000

-_, -?

a.

503 24Z

o_

,,, o=

"_ E __<0".1=

,<.u ,'1_.. ,,. #. ==

=0_U

a

c3

Em=>

B...

o'9,

<_,.<'_CO

0,.

w

"E

_EI.-

r',,

n

"i"

=...

g

5,

._.9.:E

A

=C

000000000000000000

000000000000000 O00

_QoQoQQQooooooooooooooooooodddddoodd

ooooooooooooooo_

000000000000000_0_

_1 t'N

CN

a.

5O3 243

0 0

0 0

S

(mjos) MOl-I dtund0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

T i i I

0

0OI

-_o p------"

i,i

='1

.J

I0

J

IE

o o o. o. o. o.

(§H u!) mnn0eA ],i)lUI dtUnd

o.C_

O

O

O

O

,¢-

OC)¢O

O

O

O04

._=

.EI"

"O¢1)

Q.

ILl

503 24_

n-- O1Z ¢

m_wO

ILI--

O0

Oo--N

(uJdd) s§uipe0_l Ol-I 01qeiJOd

O O O O(O t,O _¢f t_

I I ,

O

CO

J-- ,

f

Jr

o_,T

_5

<C tk

_T

J

O c3

-I

:r

Y

0

>

o. 0

_D

o. o o.O O O

(wlos) _o1:1

C)

C)t_

0oO

0

C_p,.

A

v

¢PE

o "0

•-- Q.

MJ

00_D

0

5O3 ?_15

zE

W o_

_wLu___.:,_E0"-,

C3

_:=0 _

\

/

//

i:

i

ZZZZ<<<<_mO0

"'] ] :If:

<_

//,

. /!I

(ID u') x;r (_

• ]

,J'I

• i_

r_ ,• J

C_

(Je;eM u!) mnn:_eA lleM

• !

_7

I7

C_

oo

O

<'] o<] C3

(q

4I- _ W

0

oc:3

0

Q

O

503 246

0

..4

0

#.

0

.c

C<

r_E

(D0

o90

o

"00

<a.w

<,J

.J

<

.J

,,J

,J

<

<0)

<,.J

.,J

<(I)

<,,J

ZZZZZ ZZZZZZ

_ ZZZZZ ZZZZZZ

.. 0 0 _ o 0 0 C] 0 C] C_ C)= ZZZ_-Z ZZZZZZ

0

_i_ _°°=°°°°°°°ZZ_-Z ZZZZZZ0

_i_ _°°_°°°°°°°ZZ Z ZZZZZZ0

_ _ooo_ooooooZZZ ZZZZZZ

O

_i_ ,°°°° °°°°°°ZZZZ ZZZZZZ

_i_ _°°=°°°°°°°ZZtYZ ZZZZZZ_D

;i_ °°°°° °°°°°°ZZZZZ ZZZZZZ

oooooooooooZZZZZ ZZZZZZ

.J

0.

----OU

U

-'2-.5

_c

U

U

O =

II) m iu ,,_

U

m

2U

O -- o

oN

oN

- .__N

! ozLO 0.-J

ffl

e_(%1

9e_

0

® ._

_D

_ o

503 247

#.mo

_:_ Z Z Z e_ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z

°(0

t_

o

C3 b.-

5_o

.-J

o

_i_ °°_° ooooooo0 _ ZZ Z ZZZZZZ

_ - o _

• ZZZZ_

0 " ZZZZZ ZZZZZZ

,_ _°}ooo_ oooooo _.ZZZZZ_

ZZZZZ_ _

_ zzzz

ZZZZZZ _ eo_

_ oooo_ o_=_o

c=_ =e - _.E :_ ,s "6

-- "I0 0

0 -=

,4

{J-4-4

0

4=

.m4_E

0

503 248

ZZZZZ

5 _

Q I_ D t_ 13 a _ D _ QZZZZZ_-_° zzz_z =o _

I

ZZZZZ

i _< _ o_o_o ooaoo

ZZZZZ

_ "_ " _ Z Z Z L'2- Z Z Z Z Z Z

E¢@Or)

o{@Io

o@@

@@

0e-

=E¢{0.UJOr)

,._ zzzo zzzzzz _- -_

-7 .. == (/)

©Z 3_. _ _'_ = Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z

13 _. e_ = _ zz z_ z ZZ ZZ z z -_ c

0 _ _. _ ZZ Z ZZ ZZ ZZ0 8

o_

=_=,== - . ,,= ==_ == =o ._- o_-E

..T=® .= ® = E'_ w

E , , , =_ _"_ E "= -_= :_ --o - _.- _-# ';=#6 ,.0 -,

1 "6

503 249

0

_i_ °°°_°°°°°°°Z Z Z ¢'_ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z

__.--'

8_

503 250

-_ .._ =oo_o ooooooZZZ Z ZZZZZZa

'" ZZZ ZZZZZZ 0 _0

a _ == z°°°'_ ZZZZZ

ZZZZZ

o _A:_ _ zz zzzzz•_, ,= _.

__ zz_ZZ

oooooo" Z Z Z Lm Z Z Z Z Z Z Zo

=--

33

oP

_3

_3

= C_0 _

£: 0 ---_ 0 _13

g _o_oO =® ® -

E

0

0t/)

m

R

c

o

==_J

o

o-

0 =

o _.®®- o_E

_E=

' t_o._

I_ "0 0

_o_= > -

o

_®_ z

Z "_ _ 0

® ._

_ o

503 25I

503 252

APPENDIX G

ANALYTICAL DATA SUMMARY AND DATA QUALITYEVALUATION OF OU 6 PILOT TEST EFFLUENT SAMPLES

5O3 253

APPENDIX F - ANALYTICAL DATA SUMMARY AND DATA QUALIFY EVALUATIONOU 6 PILOT TEST EFFLUENT SAMPLES

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER RICHMOND, RICHMOND, VIGINIA

F.O.0.1 The following sections present the analytical laboratory used and a discussion of the quality of

the analytical data for effluent samples collected during the pilot test. The comprehensive analytical

results for effluent samples associated with this site are presented in this Appendix as Table F-I. A

summar_ of analyte_ dcte_=tedintheeffluent samples from the site are presented in Table F-2.

F.1 ANALYTICAL LABORATORY

F.1.0.1 Lancaster I.,c.boratories, Inc. (Lancaster), Lancaster, Pennsylvania, performed the chemical

analyses of the effluent samples. Four samples were analyzed (LAEFF-1 through LAEFF-4). Effluent

water analyses were performed for volatile organic compounds by SW-846 Method 5030A/8021B. In

addition, one effluent sample (LAEFF-1) was analyzod for chloride by Method 300.0, alkalinity by

Method 310.1, and total hardness by Method 130.2.

F.2 DATA QUALITY EVALUATION

F.2.0.1 The procedures used by Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. (LAW) for data

evaluation end validat!on are described in the Final Expended Site Investigation (ESI) Work Plan

Adc_endum (LAW, 199_). In accordance with the ESI Work Plan, the data review was done by reference

to the following United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) documents:

• USEPA Contract laboratory Program, "National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review

(DraR) _, December 1990. Rev. June 1991, Pest/PCB 11/92.

• USEPA Region I, "Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Organics

Analyses", November 1988.

• USEPA Region H, "Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) No. HW-6", Revision #8.

81625.04D Page 1 of 2

503 254

F.2.1 Effluent Samples

There were no quality control (QC) discrepancies with regards to laboratory methods used, sample

integrity, holding times, laboratory control samples (LCSs), matrix spike/matrix spike duplicates

('MS/MSDs), surrogate recoveries, laboratory duplicates, and trip blanks.

F.2.2 Laboratory Data Ranortin2

The laboratory data was reported down to concentrations equivalent to the method detection limit

(MDL). Results below the reporting limit (derived by the laboratory) were flagged "J" by the laboratory

and were considered to be estimated quantitations. These flags were converted to "JQ" for our reporting

purposes to avoid confusion with estimated quantitations due to indeterminate bias ("J" flags).

F.2.3 Method Blanks - Results less than or equal to five times the blank concentrations (ten times for

methylene chloride and toluene) were qualified as estimated and flagged "3B', indicating that the results

may have a high bias. The volatile organic method blank for SDG DSR01 contained naphthalene at 0.2

mierogram_ per liter _g/L). No qualification was required, since the associated results were non-detect.

The total hardness method blank for SDG DSR01 contained total hardness at 1.6 milligram_ per liter

(rag/L). No qualification was required, since the associated result was greater than five times the blank

concentration.

81625 04D Page 2 of 2

503 255

503 256

APPENDIX H

AQUIFER TESTS WATER LEVEL GRAPHS

503 257

UPPER AQUIFER

a)E

t_

Q.

10.

.

0.1

0.01

0.0010.01

I_11_ I

I q l Ilrlq

0.1

, ,i , I I _ i k i ,i._

1. 10. 100. 1000.

Time (min)

503 258

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: _)NPGA-1

Test Date: April 20, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 12.

AQUIFER DATA

WELL DATA

Pumping WellsWell Name X (ft)DNPGA-1 0

Y (if)0

Observation Wells

Well Name X (ft) Y (ft)= MWNGA-1 3 0

Aquifer Model: UnconfinedSolution Method: Neuman

SOLUTION

T = 0.006959 ft2/mm

S =0.01309

Sy = 0.7356I_ =0.1

503 259

'E

E

t..,,

O

,

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

.

0.001

I i i lllll I

0.01

i i i i1_i

//

//

0.1 1. 10. 100.

Adjusted Time (min)

1000.

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGA-1

Test Date: April 20, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 12. ft

AQUIFER DATA

Amsotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1_.

Pumping WellsWell Name X (ft)DNPGA-1 0

WELL DATA

Observation Wells

Y (ft) Well Name I X (ft) I Y (ft)0 o MWNGA-2 I 20 t 0

Aquifer Model: UnconfinedSolution Method: Cooper-Jacob

SOLUTION

T = 0.0372 ft2/min

S = 0.005933

0.4503 260

0.32

E 0.24

O

O1

i5

_ 0.16

0

0.08

.

10.

oD

8

E

===

y ;_oa ° o ofo

_3

=====/,'°°°_°'°W°/,, , I , , , , ,,

100. 1000.

Adjusted Time (min)

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGA-1

Test Date: April 20, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 12. f_

AQU IFER DATA

Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.

WELL DATA

Pumping WellsWell Name X (ft)DNPGA-1 0

Y (ft)0

Observation Wells

X (if) Y ('it)60 0

Well Nameo MWNGA-3

AquiferModel: UnconfinedSolution Method: Cooper-Jacob

SOLUTION

T = 0.1147 ft2/min

S = 0.003501

503 261

10. i J

E8m

Q

O

,

0.1

0.01

0.00110.

I P I r r I I I

100. 1000.

Time (rain)

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGA-1

Test Date: April 20, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 12. ft

AQUIFER DATA

Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1_

WellNameDNPGA°I

Pumping Wellsx(ft)0

WELL DATA

Observation Wells

Y (ft) Well Name X (ft)0 o MWNGA-3 60

Y (ft)

0

Aquifer Model: UnconfinedSolution Method: Theis

SOLUTION

T = 0.05969 ft2/min

S = 0 004754

10.b _ _ j n,bl I , i '1 _ I'E'b ,,LJj

503 262

A

a)

EG}

t_

C3"O_P

"6

OL)

,

0.1

0.01

0.0010.01

' I PqlllJ

0.1

Pu

7ll_Fq_h i I i_llnll

1. 10.

Time (min)

i I I I IIIIP P i I I EEl

100. 1000.

Company' LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGA-1

Test Date: April 20, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 12. ft

AQUIFER DATA

Anisotropy Ratio (Kz./Kr): 1_.

Pumping Wells' Well Name X (ft)

i DNPGA-1 0

WELL DATA

Observation Wells

y(ft) I IWellName X(ft)0 o MWNGA-4 10

Y (ft)

0

Aquifer Model: UnconfinedSolution Method: Theis

SOLUTION

T = 0.05818 ft2/min

S = 0.00254

503 263

1.2

g

E®

_5

O

0 96

0.72

0.48

0.24

,

0.01 0.1 1. 10.

Adjusted Time (rain)

100. 1000.

y, LAWGIBBSCR, OU-6

II: DNPGA-1

te: April 20, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

d Thickness: 12. ft

AQUIFER DATA

Anisotropy Rabo (Kz/Kr): 1.

Pumping Wellsme X (ft)-1 0

WELL DATA

Observation Wells

Y (ft) Well Name X (ft)0 o MWNGA-4 10

Y (ft)

0

Model' Unconfined

Method: Cooper-Jacob

SOLUTION

T = 0.04643 fl2"/min

S = 0.005593

10.I I i _ _ I _ I

503 264

®E

.u_r_"O

Oo

,

0.1

0.01

0.0011.

I

10.

Time (rain)

100. 1000.

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGA-1

Test Date: April 20, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 12. ft

AQUIFER DATA

Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.

! Well NameI DNPGA-1

Pumping Wellsx (ft)

0

WELL DATA

I Y (ft) Well Name0 = MWNGA-5

Observation Wells

X (if) Y (ft)40 0

Aquifer Model: UnconfinedSolution Method: Theis

SOLUTION

T = 0.04337 ft2/min

S = 0.002502

503 265

EUCOO.._m

t=,0(D

0.8

0.64

0.48

0.32

0.16

0. I

1.

I L iJ h I = _ 4 4 I li I I i ,

/o

o 13

/10. 100.

Adjusted Time (rain)

r I I It1

1000.

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGA-1

Test Date: April 20, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 12. ft

AQUIFER DATA

Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.

Pumping WellsWell Name X (ft)DNPGA-1 0

WELL DATA

Y (if) Well Name

0 ° MWNGA-5

Observation Wells

X (It) Y (fl)40 0

SOLUTION

T = 0.04337 ft2/min

S = 0.002502Aquifer Model: Unconfined

Solution Method: Cooper-Jacob ( I

LOWER AQUIFER

,

,

i

503 267

3.

E8

O9

2.

,

,

1. 10. 100.

Adjusted Time (min)

1000. 1.E+04

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGA-2

Test Date: April 13, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 40. ft

AQUIFER DATA

Amsotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.

Pumpin:j Wells

Well Name X (ft)DNPGA-2 0

WELL DATA

Y (ft) Well Name0 o MWNGA-6

Observation Wells

X (if) Y (f-l)3 0

Aquifer Model: ConfinedSolution Method: Cooper-Jacob

SOLUTION

T = 0.0474 ft2/min

S = 0.07123

503 268

.

,

3.

a)E(3m

--_ 2.Q

,

J I I J I II1[

O, I I I f IIT_I

1. 10.

_ _ _ i jl_ I I k L J _$ I I t _ k I I 1

4

o D

o ° °

o o G

100. 1000. 1.E+04

Adjusted Time (min)

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGA-2

Test Date: April 13, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 40. ft

AQUIFER DATA

Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1_

Pumping Wells

Well Name X (ft)DNPGA-2 0

WELL DATA

Y (ft) Well Name0 o MWNGA-7

Observation Wells

X (it) Y (it)

20 0

SOLUTION

T = 0.0558 ft2/min

S = 0.005737Aquifer Model: ConfinedSolution Method: Cooper-Jacob d

q

,

i i i i i ii_ I i i i i i_ll I i _ i _ lilt I i i i i _lll

269

,

A

¢= 3.

"E

E8_m

•-- 2.

.

O. I

1.

, I qlllll

10.

o

o a_Tllll I i I IIl_II ; I I II_I

100. 1000. 1 .E+04

Adjusted Time (rain)

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGAo2

Test Date: April 13, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 40.

AQUIFER DATA

Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.

Pumpinr.j WellsWell Name X (it)DNPGA-2 0

WELL DATA

Y (ft) I Well Name0 [ . MWNGA-8

Observation Wells

X (it) Y (it)60 0

Aquifer Model: Confined

Solution Method: Cooper-J_.cob

SOLUTION

T = 0.07961 ft2/min

S = 0.0009523

2?0

,

,

_, 3.

"E

E8m

o.

2.i5

.

,

I.

I I I _ I I_I I

o

I T I I??111

10.

_ i i lit I I I _ * Illl I I I _ i _LL_

l//

i3 0 0 D/

I

I_Ii I q I I I IIII I I I I I 111

100. 1000. 1.E+04

Adjusted Time (min)

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGA-2

Test Date: April 13, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 40. tt

AQUIFER DATA

Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1_.

Pumping WellsWell Name X (it) I

DNPGA-2 0 t

WELL DATA

Y (it) 1 Well Name

0 1 ,=MWNGA-9

Observation Wells

X (ft) 1 Y (_)

10 I 0

Aquifer Model: ConfinedSolution Method: Cooper-Jacob

SOLUTION

T = 0.05265 ft2/min

S = 0.02039

.

503 271

i 1 i i I II

(DEu

a

°

,

,

.

.

1.

O

I

o/O O D O

t ,ttt,I , t _ iiii

100. 1000. 1.E+04

Adjusted Time (rain)

Company: LAWGIBBClient: DSCR, OU-6Test Well: DNPGA-2

Test Date: April 13, 1999

PROJECT INFORMATION

Saturated Thickness: 40. ft

AQUIFER DATA

Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1_:.

WELL DATA

WellNameDNPGA-2

Pumping Wells

1 X(ft) t Y(ft)0 0

Observation Wells

I Well Nameo MWNGA-10 X (if) 1 Y (ft)40 0

SOLUTION

T = 0.07314 ft2/min

S = 0.002851Aquifer Model: ConfinedSolution Method: Cooper-Jacob

I

503 272

FINAL PAGE

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

FINAL PAGE