OBTAINING HIGH-RESOLUTION SITE DATA Kudos Figure 10 - Evidence (black striping) of thorough BOS 100® distribution.
nated, when compared to data obtained from collocated, pre-treatment borings. When slurry distribution appeared inad- equate (based on well response, i.e., no apparent reductions in TCE concentra- tions), forensic drilling was conducted to observe if seams of BOS 100® were present in the vicinity of nearby wells. Soil characteristics were noted during drilling for heterogeneities that might have caused slurry flow to deviate away from targeted areas.
Performance monitoring continued at designated on-site and point-of-com- pliance wells during the closure phase of the project. “Before” (pre-treatment) and “after” (post-treatment) monitoring results are shown in Table 3.
TCE in soil and 1,280,000 micrograms per liter TCE in groundwater) to closure levels, i.e., maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) stipulated by the State and/or EPA. Site-closure monitoring began in 2014 to ensure MCLs were sustainable at the property boundary. A No Action Determination was granted by the state in 2016 for unrestricted, residential land use re-development.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This project was completed by LT Environmental, Inc. (LTE) of Arvada, Colorado, USA, for a confidential client. Though the name of the client is not disclosed, permission by the client was granted to LTE to present the project details contained herein.
REFERENCES
Fetter, C.W. 2001. Applied Hydrogeology 4th Edition.
Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Fetter, C.W. 1999. Contaminant Hydrogeology 2nd Edition. Prentice- Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Freeze, R.A. and J.A. Cherry. 1979. Groundwater. Prentice- Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
CONCLUSIONS
Obtaining high-resolution data was essential in characterizing and reme- diating this complex site, given such highly-variable matrix anisotropy and heterogeneity. The accuracy of the CSM, the optimization in placing the BOS 100®, and the effective performance monitor- ing of the remedy made this project a suc- cess, compared to using the conventional data-gathering paradigm. DNAPL in the source areas was eliminated and the dissolved-phase plume was reduced from percent-level concentrations (up to 54,770,000 micrograms per kilogram
www.aipg.org
Guilbeault, M. A., B. L. Parker, and J. A. Cherry. 2005. “Mass and Flux Distributions from DNAPL Zones in Sandy Aquifers,” Ground Water 43(1): 70–86.
Robbins, G.A., A.T. Aragon-Jose, and A. Romero. 2008. “Determining Hydraulic Conductivity Using Pumping Data from Low-Flow Sampling.” Ground Water 47(2): 271-276.
The Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council. 2010. Use and Measurement of Mass Flux and Mass Discharge. pp. 10-11.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. Groundwater Sampling and Monitoring with Direct Push Technologies. Section 1, pp.1.
“TPG congratulates Mark Krumenacher, CPG-10081 on being awarded, by the National Industrial Sand Association (NISA),
its
Recognition of Excellence Award. The award is NISA’s highest honor and typically recognizes a lifetime of achievement and contributions to the industrial sand industry.
Based in Waukesha, Wisconsin, Krumenacher is recognized as a leading expert on aggregate and industrial mineral mining; he has provided testimony before a wide range of state and federal boards, local environmental groups and com- munity advisory councils on issues associated with non-metallic mining. A member of the Wisconsin Industrial Sand Association Board of Directors and the Minnesota Silica Sand Rule Making Advisory Panel in 2014-15, he is actively involved in NISA, the National Stone Sand and Gravel Association, Illinois Association of Aggregate Producers, Industrial Minerals Association-North America, and the Society for Mining Metallurgy and Exploration.
Krumenacher is a principal with
GZA, a multidisciplinary geoscience consulting firm based in Boston, MA.
We at AIPG are proud of our member’s accom- plishments and would like to share them. If you have kudos to share, please send them to us to publish in the TPG.
E-mail to
aipg@aipg.org.
Oct.Nov.Dec 2017 • TPG 15
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56