11111? - United States Environmental Protection Agency11111? ATTACHMENT 1 HOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES Colder Associates AR30560U. ELIZABETHTOWN-HOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE PROPERTY

11111?

ATTACHMENT 1

HOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES

Colder Associates AR30560U

ELIZABETHTOWN-HOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

PROPERTY OWNER:ADDRESS:

PA

Water Supply Source;, (private WelQ Public Other(Please arde one) —————

If other, please describe: , ',• . ____ '.'•_______If you circled "Private Well" above, please answer the following questions:1. Use of well wateK(t)iinkingXJVashing Agriculture Livestock Other(Circle applicable use$) ,———•

2. Date well installed (if known): -3-1- (.*3. Installation company (driller): M^^rs ra-s.4 Well yield, in gallons per minute: 30*5. Well depth, in feet II*?.'6. Well diameter, in inches: £(*\**\ **&•*.«7. Water level below ground surface, in feet: ' ______''8. Depth of pump below ground surface, in feet \SQ9. Pump capacity. In gallons per minute; . . •

' ' . " . .»10. Depth of casing, in feet __11. Any additional information: ' ,

12. Location of well on property: frboY H«* t .~ Vs '

' '

.O'.

J

AR305605

I. 'EUZABETHTOWN

•'

HOME WELL SURVEY QUESHONNAIRE

PROPERTY OWNER: VCe^-V i.

ADDRESS: -3*5-

Water Supply Source: CPrivateWelD Public Other(Please circle one) : • . ' • • • .

I f other, please describe: • • • ' • • - . • ' ___. ____ • . • " •If you circled "Private Well" above, please answer the following questions:1. Use of well watersCPrmldng fWashing*) Agriculture Livestock Other

(Circle applicable uses; —7"—2. Date well installed (if known):3. Installation company (driller):4. Well yield, in gallons per minute: . A.*"5. Well depth, in feet « 3BS*6. Well diameter, In inches: . £*( WV -s JtUg»7. Water level below ground surface, in feet . ;8. Depth of pump below ground surface, in feet: _9. Pump capacity, in gallons per minute: _10. Depth of casing, in feet __11. Any additional information: :

•*•"X"«? -

12. Location of well on property:• '

AR305606

EUZABETHTOWN

HOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

PROPERTY OWNER; O, 2ADDRESS: v\

Vftr

. Water Supply Source: PrivateWelQ Public Other(Please circle one)

If other, please describe: • ___ ____ • ____ If you circled "Private Well" above, please answer the following questions:

1. Use of well water Drinking ([Washing Agriculture Livestock Other(Circle applicable uses)

' . • ' . • • ' • • ' . • ' . . • • . . • • ' . •2. Date well installed (if known): a— \<?-3. Installation company (driller):4 Well yield, in gallons per minute:5. Well depth, in feet6. Well diameter, in inches: (ftf(9*t.7. Water level below ground surface, in feet , ' .8. Depth of pump below ground surface, in feet . \«5o*9. Pump capacity, in gallons per minute: •10. Depth of casing in feet '• •

11. Any additional information:

12. Location of well on property: .KeV iO ; ** \£' • ' ' • . . . . / - . x •

. • ••• .-•• I—1

AR305607

v •••.

.", EUZABETHTOWN


PROPERTY OWNER: R. F .

ADDRESS: i^v/cx \cr\e

Water Supply Source: CPrivateWelQ Public Other(Please circle one)

•i ' '-If other, please describe: /••.•'• _________;___•If you circled "Private Well" above, please answer the following questions:

I. Use of well waterCpriAkJngj Washing ) Agriculture Livestock Other(Circle applicable uses) ~ ""~—— ,

2. Date well installed (if known):3. Installation company (driller):4. Well yield, in gallons per minute:5. Well depth, in feet6. Well diameter, in inches: •''7. Water level below ground surface, in feet ., .8. Depth of pump below ground surface, in feet -zoo9. Pump capacity, in gallons per minute: ____10. Depth of casing, in feet ,.-.•" '•11. Any additional information:. .

» Vot v <N«»l.' \eO >-g!\c«»^ V r~s>**• >v., ^ .<o*ni>*\t

\OM

12. Location of well on property: • _-",• " " • ' " . .

• . •'••.; -'. " • • • : . . ' *•' i i

flR305608

ELIZABETHTOWNHOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

PROPERTY OWNER: y\\f. «*tsADDRESS: 3/7 V«A«A'_

Water Supply Source: CgivateWeJT) Public Other(Please circle one)

If other, please describe: - ' '• ••'_____'.'•''.''.'•!• _________If you circled "Private Well" above, please answer the following questions:1. Use of well water Drinking (Washing) Agriculture Livestock Other(Circle applicable uses) ———

2. Date well installed (if known):3. Installation company (driller):4 Well yield, in gallons per minute:5. Well depth, in feet

6. Wen diameter, in inches: kVsVeg)7. Water level below ground surface, in feet ______8* Depth of pump below ground surface, in feet ins9. Pump capacity, in gallons per minute: ;______.10. Depth of casing in feet _11. Any additional information: .

Cooe^

12. Location of well on property: . ' ' . - . x

ELIZABETHTOWN


PROPERTY OWNER: VV

ADDRESS:, . "I <\' \/ -A*r*

Water Supply Source: (Private Wejlp Public Other(Please circle one)

If other, please describe: " '• • . . " ' . • • • •• - • .. - -If you circled "Private Well" above, please answer the following questions:1. Use of well water: Drinking (Washing) Agriculture Livestock Other(Circle applicable uses) ' T — . •' ' • '

2. Date well Installed (if known):3. Installation company (driller):

' ' • '• . .- ,

4 Well yield, in gallons per minute: VS

5. Well depth, in feet6. Well diameter, in inches: : L* (p>\rc7. Water level below ground surface, in feet ____8. Depth of pump below ground surface, in feet \OO*9. Pump capacity; in gallons per minute: • -_____10. Depth of casing, in feet '.___11. Any additional Information:

v>3e\\

12. Location of well on property:

flR3056IO

ELIZABETHTOWNHOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

PROPERTY OWNER: U,ADDRESS: 5\

Water Supply Source: CrMvateWelD Public Other(Please circle one)

If other, please describe: - •____________' • •If you circled "Private Well" abpve, please answer the following questions:1. Use of well water rmidng) Washing Agriculture Livestock Other(Circle applicable uses) ——-—-

2. Date well installed (if known):3. Installation company (driller)::4 Well yield, in gallons per minute:5. Well depth, in feet

6. Well diameter, in inches:7. Water level below ground surface, in feet8. Depth of pump below ground surface, in feet9. Pump capacity, in gallons per minute:10. Depth of casing, in feet11. Any additional information:' '

12. Location of well on property? t %+ji.' . *

ELIZABEIHTOWN' ' - •. '•. \,


PROPERTY OWNER: T. Mus*e.r»ADDRESS:

Water Supply Source: ffrrivateWelQ Public Other(Please circle one) •

If other, please describe: '••'' ••; • ' _____ . _____ • ________If you circled "Private Well" above, please answer the following questions:

1. UseofweUwater;( riiu ng!Y aThin£) Agriculture Livestock Other(Circle applicable uses) — ; ——

2. Date well installed (if known): <g:-\«?-«tfe *3. Installation company (driller):4 Well yield, in gallons per minute: ; \o

5. Well depth, in feet :6. Well diameter, in inches: -,**'C<£w\7. Water level below ground surface, in feet '• •'8. Depth of pump below ground surface, in feet VT.g'*'9. Pump capacity, in gallons per minute: .' •10. Depth of casing, in feet11. Any additional information:

o*gO f .

12. Location of weU on property:• • . - . • . ' ' • • • ' " - . • x

AR30S-6I2

EUZABEIHTOWNHOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

PROPERtYOWNER: -.. 5'W«e ______ j

ADDRESS: I'V \JfcWU \V,*a

PIV

Water Supply Source: Private Well Public Other(Please circle one) . :

If other, please describe: _ ______ ; _______ < • _____ j ___If you circled "Private Well" above, please answer the following questions:1. Use of well water: Drinking Washing Agriculture Livestock Other. (Circle applicable uses) • • '

2. Date well installed (if known): ________________3. Installation company (driller): . • ' •;'4 Well yield, in gallons per minute: . • •5. Well depth, in feet , __. _______6. Well diameter, in inches: '7. Water level below ground surface, in feet ___ • • ' -.8.- Depth of pump below ground surface, in feet ___ __________9. Pump capacity, in gallons per minute: ; • ; - • .10. Depth of casing, in feet . .11. Any additional information: : ,. , * ^

fi i*<* ~ \ /Cs T VV»


vy

flR3056!3

EUZABETHTOWNHOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

PROPERTY OWNER: & \CVsc

ADDRESS: q\ \\T02..

Water Supply Source: CPrivateWelO Public Other(Please circle one)

If other, please describe: ••.••• .: •'" ____- ________If you circled "Private Well* above, please answer the following questions:1. Useof wellwater:(bri king (wishingj Agriculture Livestock Other(Circle applicable uses) "

2. Date well installed (if known):3. Installation company (driller):4 Well yield, in gallons perminute: *7

5. WeU depth, in feet ZIP6. Well diameter, in inches: 4" (foe g./»Cc<-

7. Water level below ground surface, in feet •8. Depth of pump below ground surface, in feet -2.00 (?\9. Pump capacity, in gallons per minute: _________10. Depth of rasing, in feet11. Any additional information:


AR30561U

EUZABETHTOWN


PROPERTY OWNER: U*A\ ft ,»ADDRESS:

Water Supply Source: (Private WelT) Public Other(Please circle one) —————

If other, please describe: ' . _____•.-••'' '-.-•"If you circled "Private Well" above, please answer the following questions:1. Use of well water: Drinking (Washing) Agriculture Livestock Other(Circle applicable uses)

2, Date well installed (if known): l*\S \ (yVew»s o'-c.UJ >3. Installation company (driller): - : ':4 Well yield, in gallons per minute: . •: -5. Well depth, in feet PS6. Well diameter, in inches: ; ____jLl!_____£iiLfe7. Water level below ground surface, in feet • •8. Depth of pump below ground surface, In feet \~*>o (tgpVc 2-ir*.;59. Pump capacity, in gallons per minute: \<£ (9«.«- .fe. Pv10. Depth of casing, in feet . •• ____'m11. Any additional information:

. O


C-fD»)A

HR3056I5

ATTACHMENT2

WATER WELL INVENTORY REPORTS(Obtained from the Topographic andGeologic Survey section of PADER)

Colder Associates .-.««-• r irAR3056I6

CH Endnx.mtttt-1 Betouir ' : TOPOGRAPHIC AMP GEOLOGIC SURVEY W-1-W.I fcmnto-R«P«tof «ci USE ONLY

'~tT I Phy»iO. P™»;. ——— _U.S. B*si»___ — .Topo.^ • )m4»nmAct «*«______ ————— ——— i ———— _*QU«-

g 7(CIRCLE ONE)coipwa. **fc tatfnL cm*fCtRCLtONE)

.NO:.—VM—————,——dtpfeCAtmicai/Bfeiogicai natysitjnadt; __Y«K___Na_

.ft.

Otpnt » Badnxk^Jy_^____a Landtorm, al Sit*I———————;—•———L^^temcLE ONE»Surface___OfflCt USI ONLY

PI.ni»ii

WrtHLOg «f3« — TI

/. -» A/

__________ . .. — £•*•i VF! m 1 ^W >

U>«atE__a(TM.vi-v« /~ > «~-Tttl YWd "-*«' n»«<g5Sg» pu—M* (CIRCLt ONE)

ff.

SKETCH MAP

Efl-TOS-W REV. OT 9 MAIL 1ST COPY TO PA. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

î»partnt*nl of Emtronmtntel RMOUttn TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC SURVEY —......-. - - n , "~*•———' HBB B PvOivfy n*Vp _TtT i

St CBL-'-"—'.Ut—————:—;———»-«"f ; ; '; l nytla Piw..——_U& BMto

~. _^^ _ _ (CIRCLE ONEt "Owntnhlp——tsb<>,n aM. MM-. -_» i

7 t:— **—*-

Olt» Drtl-a mnnm year

Watar Lvxl Bator* T*M ______________«.Lav<lit End of Tttl_____________«.

'»• V7———BP-*id Method—————» «OfjSZr> (konpM (CIRCLE ONE)________h.

Langtn ol TM« X K.

ER-TGS-15 REV. 07/63

P-*> *» B**nai >sr • undton» at Sit*

|S>gtac«_J_.0

D«p«»

Log

W But.—OFncaug ONLY] -»__ _ 3*"'*' 9r f-f&WASU.——. ^ n «. ' ^ V>T !?4/ 3 >»/x>4/7V / e<7~

SKETCH MAP >«<>««» •(«!» ne't. m>nrr.:-t

MAIL 1ST-COPV TO PA. GSOL

Department cl Eiwlronmeiiui B»»ourcet TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC SURVEY Waiw. WtB in y Acpvt

Wiluaik W*M Locitton OirvcttoraiCmCLEONE) _ ^

Casing Maiart*) —Watt «-"—

Uv*t« End e* ?•«

TOPOGRAPHIC AND OEOLOCIC SURVEYD«y«tra«nt ct Enftoonm«nU1

Buin ' omcC USE ONLY!

(CWCLEONE)r, »e». »cii«m«. x. aumimnn »•»

Wen GroutedOat* DriUod innntn yur

»• «*«i e*fon Teal

T*,. Yield MetttodDrawdown

SKETCH MAP OMiuu'rouw net MWMCTOT Kf«ou. «r>un-w etmminn r Qb>w fT:.ll*rf'*rM"- '"' "ER-TGS-15 REV. 07/63

MAIL 1ST COPY TO PA. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Department ot Enrlronm«frt»l Resources ____________TOPOGRAPHIC. AND GEOLOGIC SURVEY Wg1ef WejOFFICE USE ONLY

Physio. Pro*Aquifer

We* Log• Mncmmei

WeU Sit*—Township ft. Landtorm *t Sit*ONE)

Addresser P.O. Bo»Bearing Zon*a(t|

c————————————————.P*e«>.-..cmct USE ONLY)ixuaii. urigieeii, nod.(CmCLSONE)

Wei GroutedD*t*Drittd monm; .«-•WMrLMlB*fOf*T**t

U«*J at End ol Tew

-rtl Wl "ItTfinrf

1ST COPY TO PA. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ~ .5& sH&V £ """•-• I££1 t- ^ - :

r D«p*rtm«nt of Ei»ffcoom*nM R*MUitt«t _____ TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC SURVEY

-"W»t« W*|

From ~

' undlomi at SJt*ONEj

M own*r» *ddr*t* . em*t mm *•) sit* *ddr*a indKti* on t*»*n*. Dapm to Water B**rmg Zone* P).

Wrttwo Wet Loetticrt CH

CnemleabBiologleal Anaiyii* made Y*K____NQ!WeROapUi Development narn* (M aoe-cable

Casing material — steelottl*f

ICIRCLEONBWe* Finrsn eSr* "c-facf««». MfivmdmonMwe« Qrouied ' Yes.Date Drilled montn w...Water Uvel Bettx* Test ___ ______ »

Lev*) UJEndol Tcst

Test Yield MeinodDrawdown

SKETCH MAP »die*i* -:>-•* no't •• •»c t*> .wir>v rvtiu**Length ot Test. nu'4iii*.r_in • •• ---.------- - -— --- - --"S--S REV i »

AtKI W*~< T "-——w—•- ••- -••«_•• i rr. -.- • *v-w*- V--W.I.V*. t,- T T •«» *t _ ny - - .. Ou»rr«» t'Ojet (» -;«a r: »• Hire » mow du c»e-i MI

fl K O U D 0 I 3 MAIL 1ST CC=Y TO W. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

«paftmeM ct Enrlronmen-l RCTOUTCTS_____ TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC SURVEY Watef Wtfl mwntofy ReportWctiLog

'FVom — Te.- OFFICE USE ONLY,.

id KM* I Township/

.ewnefs Mdr*u k ether than *M *lte address Indicate en reverse Depth lo Wtwr BMring Zones (1(CmCLEONE)tm*a ewt. Mm. etwnty(CIRCLE ONE)

ft. Casing Unfltheating Oia.

puttie. Casing mneriat - sieei.

ryp* Construction: Rotary. Cable. Oth«r

«a«0mit*d—-*•*.MM Drilled month r"'Mt*r U«*l Before '"•

SKETCH MAP lrieica>eieut*iie >nterieei»ne.aattait.*t»<rtri«».«eme)er«

MAIL 1ST COPY TO PA. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ER-TGS-15 REV.

TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC SURVEY

lysls made: ___ V«s:.__No_

HCth 01 T«St.

VTGS-15 REV. 07/E3MAIL 1ST COPY T.C PA. GEOLOGICAL SURVEV

o, Environment* Resource._________ TOPOGRAPHIC ANJ> GEOLOGIC SURVEY———— W..*c W*. to-»to~ Report.,v . C FWE USE ONLY •• -.,,... t, - • .~v.~. .*.-. •$' | jjyu,,,, yn,,

* ? •<" ' Landlorm at Srte'a*, f—— n. . _ _ _ ONEJ

II owr r eiwess i* other tnan *•« site address indicate on reverse. Depth tc, Wster Bearing(DRCLI ONE)convee. IIM. tMeret ceuny(CIRCLE ONE)

CnamicaUBiologleal Anal«»m*dK Y*K"

ft. CasJng length

Casing material - steWTptastic. Casing mawri*t - steM.otnerType Construction: Rotary. Ctbte. "*»r£t.

tClRCLE ONEJiom<l.

Well Grouted———Yes.D*t* Drilled month yearVra!*T.U»*)B*lor*T<

SKETCHUAP indicate ram* no .1

«i«»o*~ let"-TClHOnr IMpOn £U**.*. ..«.-..> >«rtfntfH oEnrrofirn»nt«l BMeorctft TOPOGrUPHJCAND GEOLOGIC SURVEY

i-jr--:-» &«t>»y/£S>ff<'.'• C-rffSi'

Depth to *e*er.Bearin(CIRCLE ONE)

(CIRCLE ONE)nouunr. imgtMik. MOO. MMuken aemt*.

ONE)

II wa DiameterCasing Lartath

Casing material -> stML

rp* Construction: Rotary. Caw*. OtherRCLEONE)

e* F'ft'VU—-Sap rwejatw rioriito/iie•H Gn>uted___Y*s.it* Drilled month yearliar Uv*l Selor* Test

co»"»l bncf« 't»'o«« *K a- KI/» to mew oi*t«ncM t»nw«n. IMw iMWrn. (mlWM:ngth el Test.

MAIL 1ST COPY TO PA. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ER-TGS-'! =£. 6/86

Department cf EmrrronmentBl Resources _______ TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC SURVEY »„„_.„._ .__. „.wmer we* tnwnlory ResortOFRCE USE ONLYSt «2Co._ ——— *-«S*Q. ——— Act

Depth to Bedrock

i, n ewner* •**•*! .ether than <î sfteMdrea Indicate en IWVWM.i ___ (CIRCLE ONE)

' Cnemiceir&otoslcat.Analysis made: Yes. WraH DftODl

Casing UngthCasing OU,

ft. CnlngungthCasing OU.

Casing material -cme>

Casing material - ateet.

Type Construction: Rotary. Cable. Other(CIRCLE ONE)

Date Drifted month yearWaur Ln*l Before Test

t*v*l

Te»l Yield Method

SKETCH IMP

MAIL 1ST COPY

TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC SURVEYDtMrtmwrl of EmtreniMfttit A**ourcM

V JGIKLEONE)«w_i>j£Bc iiwr. MWe«

Addrwsftr P.O. Box

B ewner* *ddr*ss to ether then w*o *n* *ddr*«s torjcn* en(CmCLEONE)

Oevatopinerit name

Casing material — *weiplastic. , ejrter

Type, Construction: Aotary. Cattle. Other,(CIRCLE ONE)

Wen *

OriMed month yearLevel Before Test

SKETCH MAP me*ew rcuit no'* i e->fenei e»T>»i*r.«» SUM)*! -:--i •••;»•• -.-»>, •»aio't«.=s* etc

MAIL 1ST COPY TO PA. GEOLGICAL SURVEY

TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC SURVEY Water Wei bnemory ReportOFFICE USE ONLY

JTOSO..

Env!———tntrt Re*ource.

Wen SIM I Townshio/

ner* address is other than we* sit* address Indicate on reverse.(CIRCLE ONE)

OwnershiB__,ghpe«». eon**, iwe. *rter*l e~rt»- (CIRCLE ONE)

Mut»*. bn(

Sattwaur zonesAnalysis made: Yes

Weft-Depth X*5<5——ft. We»Oi*m*W De.elopmem name

Casing LangtMCasing Oia,Casing material — stee).plastic, other

Type Construction: Rotary. CabM. Other

Casing material —otn*r

We*Wen Grouted———Yea,DawDrtted month yearWatar L*«*l Betor* Test

vs&gg*0"*SKETCH MAP Weeteroutera m.-rieeJ-ns.wax rj.urehee.

Mine*, enooes. ntfneos. ew. Be aura w ine«

.•!«•.•• .-..-; ::.-i.~.- ..V;/-«.'--., -j_- i..-r-•••r'V-CJ.*..TOPOGRAPHIC ANO GEOLOGIC SURVEYDepartmeM ot EmironmenUI Resource*

|Pa. B*sln _OFFlCg USE ONV

ChemictVBIologicaUknalysis mad*;Wen Depth

Casing Materiel —WeU Oiameter_2

Wen Grouted ___ YeeDate DrrilMd mnnm rear

water Lev* Betor* Test

Length ol Test———f.——————«r —————;———— mm. SKETCH MAP ****» na» no..en Tr»«. .r nn. _. .. ' eu«"«e. O"a{ft WIIOKI « a. iE*-TGS-15REV. 07/e3 MAIL 1ST COPY TO PA GSCWOGlCAL SURVJEY

Department et Environmental Resource* _____ TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC SURVEY Water Wen Inventory Report.

Fn»- — fo

Bastii _OFrTCE USE ONLY)

water Level Betor* TestLevel «tEmt-cf Test

field _fest Yield Methoa_____*

MAIL 1ST COPY TO PA. GEOLOGICAL SURVEYlength et TeatER-T'—'-IS REV. 07/83

jjepwtment •! Ern*onmental Resource* " * " ;— ~ - VoPOGRAPHIC"Arib"OEOLOGJC SURVEY " " '*"""*""""*'''w',£'*i'!?liHti*ri*tf#l " **

Tc

[Pa. B«in__OmCE USE OM.YJ

3hemle*l«iologicat Aralysis made: ____V*s:___No_

Jaslng M*t*rial —Well Diameter

nnieh j-jj-ICIRCLE ONE!

mnmn »«., g "

•en Yield Methodirewdown

«,mDM rcmCLE ONE)

SKETCH MAP I>*««.'«M net"R-TGS-15 REV 07/63 ' ' etfii-w. enepei re-iOMi. eit *. tan

MAIL 1ST COPY TO PA. GEOLOGICAL

APPENDIX G

EUZABETHTOWN LANDFILL CONTENTS(SCA Submission to USEPA - October 8,1992)

AR305625

Waste Management of North America, Inc. .Normeast Region Office . 'Environmental Management Department •1121 Bordentown Road . . :MorrisviHa. Pennsylvania 19067 •215/736-2000 'FAX 215/736-0518 .

.' • " •• ' • ' • • ' . ' • . • • 'October 8,1992 Federal Express

US. Environmental Protection Agency, Region HI .B41 Chestnut Building . •Philadelphia, PA 19107Attn: Ms, Sherry GaBagher (3HW23)

Sub]: Ettubethtown Undflfl ContentsDear Sherry: :Pursuant to EPA's July 8,1992 conditional approval of the WF3 Work Plan for EHzabeenclosed you win find the following: V

1. SCA's Investigation into Discrete Non-Domestic Waste Disposal Areas of theEOzabethtown Landfffl (Enclosure 1).

2. Qualitative Assessment of the Presence or Absence of Hot Spots -ESzabethtown Landfffl,October 1992 (Enclosure 2).

The above findings, in conjunction with the review of aerial photographs, documented site viste, andthe exhumations discussed in Section &2.1 of the Work Plan, in our opinion, suggest that no discretenon-MSW disposal areas exist at Efizabethtown LandfBL .R is SCA's opinion, excluding any contradictory Wbrmation yet to be obtained, that additional effortsto identify and characterize discrete non-Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) dfeposal areas are unwarranted.Consequently, SCA believes that dfecrete non-MSW dsposal areas should not be considered hi thedevelopment of remedial alternatives to be evaluated In the Feasibility Study.Please contact the undersigned should you have any questions concerning the above;

• • - ' ' . • • ' ' •* •

Representing SCA Services of PA,

Glen A. SchuteProject Manager

Kcnard C. KarrRemecSal Project CoordinatorGAS:RCK:lcv

•Enclosures' ' "•• : -.'-.. • • •••'•. _ . . • _ . • f'

AR305626

ENCLOSURE 1

sex's INVESTIGATION INTODISCRETE NON-DOHESTIC WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS

AT THE ELIZABETHTOWN LANDPILI.

EGA is providing the following report in response to Attachment Iof EPA's Notice of Conditional Approval of the RI/FS Work Plan forthe Elizabeth-own Landfill ("the Landfill") dated July 8, 1992.Specifically, this report provides SCA's findings regarding theLandfill contents and its conclusions that no discrete non-domesticwaste disposal areas exist at the Landfill.This report provides evidence as suggested by EPA's comments topage 20, paragraph 5 of the RI/FS Work Plan for the Landfill.

Reviev ef Interviews vith Former Landfill Workers

After discussions with the Assistant Regional Counsel for thissite, EGA determined that the only interviews of former Landfillworkers to be reviewed were the unsworn statements of Harold Shank("Shank11) and Jay Myers ("Myers") taken by TechLaw Incorporated forEPA on November 3, 1988. SCA's review of those unsworn statementsfound very little information regarding disposal areas in generalat the Landfill and no information showing discrete disposal areasfor specific types of waste. The only portions of the unswornstatements relating to these issues are:

Shank Statement, Pages 24 and 25t Shank, when asked if therewere any specific areas for disposal of specific wastes, statedthat "It was all put together.11 .' «

Shank Statement, Pages €5 through 68: Shank explained thatthe oils and chemicals in drums generated by one company werepoured on the ground and burnt at the Landfill. ,

Myers Statement, Pages 21 through 23: Myers stated that emptydrums that had been used to collect trash did come to the Landfilland were .disposed "in the hole".None of the information gathered by TechLaw Incorporated providesany evidence of discrete non-domestic waste disposal areas.

Additional Interviews vith Former Landfill Workers

SCA has conducted additional interviews with Shank, Myers and 'JamesWay ("Way") in order to determine the Landfill's disposalpractices. The following summaries provide the results of thoseinterviews. _ •

Shank Interview: Shank recalled that the only drummed wastesaccepted at the Landfill were from two companies. Shank statedthat liquids from one company were used as a fuel source to bum

AR305627

excess brush and trees at the Landfill and that full drums wouldnot have been disposed directly into the Landfill. The burning ofthe excess brush and.trees always occurred in one specific area andusually took place when it was raining or in the winter months.Shank or Way would empty the contents of the drums on the pile ofbrush and trees and then the pile would be ignited. Shankexplained that the empty drums would be crushed and disposed in theactive area of the Landfill..Regarding the drummed wastes from another company, Shank statedthat this waste consisted of scrapings of undercoating drippingsfrom the floor of the company's spray booth. He stated that thiswaste was in a solid form and that it was placed in 55-gallon drumsby the company. Shank explained that these drums were disposed inthe active areas of the Landfill at the time of disposal. Shankstated that there was no designated disposal area for these drums,which were the only drums of waste disposed at the Landfill.

Myers Interview: Myers stated that the only liquids that cameto the Landfill were those contained in 55-gallon drums from onecompany and laboratory egg wastes generated by another company.When asked if any trash or waste was burned at the Landfill, Myersstated that he was not aware of any such occurrences. Myers didrecall that there were a couple of fires at the Landfill caused bythe disposal of hot ashes there. .

' • • :•.' .'. • . - / •" . :way Interview: Way worked at the 'Landfill as both a truck

driver and equipment operator while the Landfill was operated byUnited Disposal, Macke Corporation and SCA. When asked aboutdrummed waste accepted by the Landfill, Way stated that the only55-gallon drums that he were accepted by the Landfill weregenerated by two companies. •Regarding, the drummed wastes from one company, Way stated that hewould pick up between 1 and 4 55-gallon drums of liquid wasteseach Friday. Way explained that these wastes would be stored nearthe pit burn area used to burn trees that had been cut down at theLandfill as well as excess brush and wooden trash. He stated that,at least once every other month, he would empty the drums in theburn pit, ignite and burn the trees and, brush, and then bury theempty drums in the active portion of the Landfill. Way furtherstated that the burning of the trees and brush would usually occurin the early morning and preferably when it was raining. Whenasked if the drums containing these liquid wastes were everdisposed directly in the Landfill, Way stated that these liquidwastes were enlv used as. a fuel source to burn the trees and brushin the burn pit and were not disposed in the Landfill itself.Regarding th.e 55-gallon drums from the other company, Way statedthat he would pick up between 1 and 7 drums each Friday from this

' ' ' ' '

RR305628

company. Way stated that these drums contained solidified driedpaint from the company's spray booth and floor scrapings. Wayexplained that the drums would be disposed in the active area ofthe Landfill at the time of disposal. Way further stated thatthere was no designated area of disposal for these drums at theLandfill. Way explained that, around 1970, the company beganplacing these drums directly into the United Disposal; roll-offcontainer at its plant. Way stated that these drums would be mixedin with other general plant trash generated by the company anddisposed in the active area of the Landfill at the time ofdisposal. Way stated that the drums were the only drums containingwaste that were disposed in the Landfill.. . - • • - • •

f ' . ' . " - - ' • • '

Since both Shank and Way stated that there was a specific area usedto burn trees and excess brush at the Landfill, SCA accompaniedShank and Way to the Landfill and asked them to point out the burnpit area. This area is shown on Attachment I to this report.

. . . " . . - . , ' . i • .Comprehensive Review of All Landfill RecordsAs previously indicated to EPA, the only documents relating topossible activities at the Landfill are the "customer cards" and"customer list" that were attached to SCA's December. 27, 1988supplemental response to EPA's Section 104(e) information request.As stated in that response and as a result of an additional review>of those documents (the only known Landfill documents), there is noinformation available to indicate the nature and quantity of wastesdisposed in the Landfill nor is there information regardingdisposal locations for those wastes. • .

ConclusionsThe evidence described above clearly shows that drummed wastes fromonly two companies were accepted by the Landfill. This evidencefurther shows that the liquid wastes from one were used as a fuelto ignite trees and excess brush that were burned at the Landfill.It also shows that the drums from the other were always disposed inthe active area of the Landfill and not in any specificallydesignated area. The evidence also found that, no other liquidwastes were accepted at the Landfill.The combination of these facts and the results of SCA'sinvestigation have found that there are n_> discrete non-domesticdisposal areas at the Landfill.

• " . ' " . - * ~

Attachment

AR30562.9

APPROXIMATE LANDFILL BOUNDARY* * . ; • * . . » ^ _ J *

_--;'." V •--. . . . ( . . - .

' . • . '

/ !.!•>

LOCATION OP BURN AREA

LANDFILL I AttachmentAssociates

QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE PRESENCEOR ABSENCE OF HOT SPOTSEUZABETHTOWN LANDFILL

Submitted to:- . • , • ; . - ! . - ;SCA Services of Pennsylvania, Inc.

1121 Bordentown RoadMomsville, Pennsylvania

DISHUBUnON:

2 Copies - SCA Services of Pennsylvania/ Inc.2 Copies -Colder Associates tic.

October 1992 ./ Project No.: .-923-6053

'AR30563I

Golder Associates Inc.305 Fellowship Rood. Suite 200Mt. Laurel. NJ USA 08054

October 7, 1992 Project No.: 923-6053

SCA Services, Inc.1121 Bordentown RoadMonisville, PA 19067 ,

Attn: Mr. GlenSchultz

RE: EUZABETHTOWN LANDFILL RI/FSHOT SPOTS SUBMISSION TO USEPA

Gentlemen: ...

Please find enclosed two (2) complete sets of Golder Associates Inc., QualitativeAssessment of the Presence or Absence of Hot Spots for the above project. It isunderstood that SCA I Services of Pennsylvania, Inc. will be incorporating this intotheir submission to USEPA on this matter.

Should you have any Questions, please do not hesitate to call.

Very truly yours,

GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC.

Ge&f ey-RTForrest, CP.Eng.Associate

GRF/bjtA:QAOCT.CL

flR3Q5632OFFICES IN AUSTRALIA. CANADA. GERMANY, HUNGARY. ITALY. SWEDEN. UNITED KINGDOM. UNITED STATES

October 1992 -i- 923-6053

i , 'TABLE OF CONTENTSCover Letter

Table of Contents i

SECTION PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

2.0 SITEfflSTORY/BACKGROUNb 2

3.0 APPROACH 3

40 ASSESSMENT 441 Introduction 442 Solubility Levels Versus Concentration 443 Temporal Trends 544 Air Quality • 6

5.0 SUMMARY 8

REFERENCES 9

LIST OF TABLES In OrderFollowing

Table 1 Solubility/Concentration Comparison Page 9

1JST OF FIGURES. ' • i -

Figure 1 Landfill Layout and WeU Location Information' - - ' , . " '

1 1 ' ' . - ' . ' . ' • ' < •

IJST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Temporal Trend Curves

Golder Associates „.._W30S633

October 1992 '•-!-•' 923-6053 >

1.0 INTRODUCTION .,r i •

At the request of SCA Services of Pennsylvania, Inc. (SCA), Golder Associates Inc. ""(Golder) has carried out a qualitative assessment of die historic site data to assesswhether specific disposal area "hot spots" are indicated at the ElizabethtownLandfilL This assessment has been conducted using a knowledge of site historyand the physical and chemical properties and temporal trend curves of chemicals

, detected in groundwater samples. • • . .

In the context of this study, the term "hot spots" has been used to describe discretenon-domestic waste disposal areas utilized landfill operations. It is assumed thatthese areas would result in concentrated soiirces of contamination.

The indication of the presence or absence of hot spots at this site is considered tobe an important issue since an indication that hot spots may be present couldinfluence the scope of remedial alternatives evaluated in the Feasibility Study ofthe site. \

Golder AssociatesAR3Q563U

October 1992 -2- 923-6053

2.0 SITE HISTORY/BACKGROUND

• : •'•'• -'.- • • • ' :•'•'••'• • '' ' ' - " • .Information indicates that initial activities at the site occurred at some time around1960 to 1961 and involved excavation of sand and gravel from a shallow pit

' J • ' • - ' 'located in the south central portion of the landfill. It is assumed that excavationcontinued down to of just below the level of the groundwater table in the area.

Shortly thereafter, landfilling operations commenced and waste disposal and fillingactivities were reportedly carried out by the area fill method. Riling by trenchmethods was believed to have been used for the northern part of the landfillwhere the water table was not very deep. Available information indicates that noliner or leachate collection system was constructed below the fill materials priorto or during the operation of the landfill.

Landfilling activities continued until 1973 when the landfill was closed by PADERpursuant to a Consent Decree. At the time of closure, the landfill wasrectangularly shaped and approximately 16 acres in size (Figure 1). The northern(presently capped) area comprised about 12 acres and the southern (uncapped)portion comprised about 4 acres, including an area of about 2 acres which was theold sand and gravel pit

Golder Associates

October 1992 . -3- . 923-6053

3.0 APPROACH•••'-. ' -. ••-•• ... '. . :. .

Given the site setting discussed previously in Section 2 and a potential for hotspots acting as concentrated sources) of groundwater contamination, Colder1*assessment concentrated on evaluating existing information which may provideevidence for or indicators of the existence of hot spots.

) - ' ' ' .. ' *

At the Elizabethtown Landfill, essentially this involved the following:

(i) Determining what wells in close proximity to; the landfill wouldmost likely monitor groundwater contamination sourced from hotspots within the landfill

(ii) Comparing detected concentration levels of contaminants to levelswhich could be expected if the contaminants were being sourcedfrom a nearby hot spot Recent research (see Section 43) suggeststhat solubility levels may be used as an indication of die presence (orabsence) of a source comprising free phase liquids. At this site, thehistorical groundwater data suggest? that free phase liquids, ifpresent; would most likely comprise the non-chlorinated compoundsbenzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene (BTEX) or heavierchlorinated solvents (Table 1). :

(iii) Inspecting temporal trend curves, in conjunction with overallconcentration levels, to determine whether any consistent increase

- or decrease in trend is apparent and evaluating what such trendsindicate.

(iv) Assessing results of air quality monitoring at the site, to determineif volatile organics have been detected in air in localized areas or inhigh concentrations, which could suggest the present of hot spotscomprised of volatile liquids in the landfill materials above or on thewater table.

A discussion of the approach and assessment are provided in the followingsections of this report

ftR305636

October 1992 -4- 923-6053

40 ASSESSMENT

41 Introduction

Monitoring wells have been strategically placed geologically and downgradienthydraulically to intercept groundwater potentially impacted by landfilledmaterials. The results of analyses of groundwater in the monitoring wells (seeFigure 1) closest to the landfill show that these wells are most likely to provideindications of the presence or absence of hot spots.

Wells ED5R, ED9R, ED10, and ED13 are the downgradient monitoring wells closestto the southern (former gravel pit) area and wells ED2R, ED8R, ED11 and to alesser extent ED12 are those closest to the northern portion of the landfill. Thesewells are located to monitor groundwater quality at distances from 50 feet to 400'.feet downgradient from potential hot spot areas.

Temporal trend curves for selected chlorinated and non-chlorinated volatileorganic compounds (VOCs) detected in these wells have been plotted and arepresented in Appendix A. An assessment of these graphs is presented in Section4.3 below.

42 Solubility Levels Versus Concentration

An indication of the possible presence or absence of hot spots containing aconcentrated source of a certain chemical may be obtained by comparing thehighest detected concentration of the chemical against its aqueous solubility. Ithas been documented by Kueper et al (1992) and EPA (1992) that as a general ruleof thumb, if detected concentrations in groundwater exceed 1 percent to 10 percentof the solubility level for that particular chemical, then free phase liquid may beacting as a nearby source for the dissolved phase chemical.

Golder AssociatesAR305637

October 1992 -5- 923-6053

Table 1 presents a Solubility/Concentration comparison for major volatile organiccompounds encountered in the downgradient wells adjacent to the landfill andone upgradient well at the site (maximum detected concentrations only areshown). An inspection of this table clearly shows that maximum detectedconcentration for any of the chemicals are below the respective 1 percent solubilitylevel by one (1) to five (5) orders of magnitude.

• • • ' \ • ' . . - . . . . . . - > •

On die basis of these data, collected over the past 7 years, it is considered highlyunlikely that free phase liquids are present in hot spots at the site.

43 Temporal Trends

An evaluation of temporal trend curves may also provide a guide to the presenceor absence of hot spots. Iri general, a decrease in the concentration of chlorinatedand non-chlorinated VOCs in various matrices can be anticipated with time dueto their volatility, as long as there is no additional input from source areas (Le., ahot spot). ; " ' . ! '

Non-validated historical data from 1986 to 1992 have been used to compiletemporal trend curves of concentration versus time for chlorinated and non-chlorinated VOCs detected in groundwater samples from monitoring wells closeto the landfill (Appendix A). For the purposes of this study, it is consideredacceptable to use these data to make a qualitative assessment of the indication ofhot spots at the site.

- \ . - . • .Inspection of temporal trend curves plotted for the monitoring wells close to thelandfill reveals that all graphs show some degree of variability, but in general, theconcentrations of VOCs in the groundwater are gradually decreasing from thealready existing low concentrations. Of the trends plotted (see Appendix A) forthe chlorinated and non-chlorinated VOCs on a per well basis, 14 of the plots

Gotder Associates &R305638

October 1992 -6- 923-6053

show general decreasing trends, 4 show general upwards trend, and 5'either showa cyclical or a non-distinguishable trend.

For those plots where an overall decreasing trend is observed, It is probable thatthese plots may reflect a diminishing or depleting source that is not a concentratedsource. Given the low concentration levels, plots exhibiting no trend or cyclicaltrend may represent a constant, but not concentrated source. For those plotswhich show a general increasing trend, given the overall low concentration levels,and rate;of increase in concentration, it is unlikely that these graphs indicate a hotspot source area (see Section 42 above). .

As a consequence of the above, it is Golder's professional judgement that theassessment of temporal trend curves together with overall low concentration levelsshow that it is unlikely that specific hot spots could be the source of the chemicalsin the groundwater adjacent to the landfill.

• ' • : . . . ' ' • : • • ' • . ' • " ' • . • • " ' ' ' . - ' •4.4 Air Quality

. The presence or absence of hot spots may also be indicated by results of air qualitymonitoring. For highly volatile organic compounds known to be present ingroundwater at the site (Table 1), }t would be expected that these compounds bedetected in air quality monitoring as a product of volatilization from hot spots.

As stated in the RI/FS Work Plan, air monitoring with an HNu at the site duringvarious previous investigations including the FIT HI investigation, the Phase EHeld Investigation Program, and during die installation of die gas extractionsystem indicated no volatilization through the cap. In addition; during theconstruction of die gas extraction wells and trenches through the landfill for thegas header pipes, no substantial readings were obtained with an .HNu above theHealth and Safety Plan Action Level of 0.05 ppm.

Golder Associates ^•'( --.flB3056.39

October 1992 -7- 923-6053

Thus, the consistent non-detection of volatiles in air suggests that concentrated. . . . ' . . i . .

sources of volatile organic compounds are not present at the site.

Golder AssociatesHR.3056I4Q

October 1992 -8- 923-6053

. 5.0 SUMMARY

In conclusion, as discussed in this qualitative, assessment the following factorssuggest that there is no indication of concentrated sources or hot spots at theElizabethtown Landfill:

• • ' ' • ' • ' . ' . " . . ' • • ' . . . . .

• Maximum detected concentrations of VOCs in groundwater are farbelow 1 percent to 10 percent solubility levels. Concentrations belowdie 1 percent to 10 percent solubility levels are generally accepted bydie scientific community as a negative indication of die existence ofnearby concentrated source areas or free phase liquid. . ...

• The evaluation of temporal trends of VOCs in ground water indicatesa general decrease in concentrations for most compounds. Trendsfor remaining compounds are either slightly increasing or cyclicalwith no distinguishable trend. None of the discemable trends ortemporal variations suggest concentrated source areas. In all dataexamined, overall concentrations are well below 1 percent solubilitylevels. .

* Air monitoring previously carried out at die site does not reveal thepresence of VOCs in air. Some detects in air would normally beexpected if compounds were being volatilized from a concentratedsource area.

Based on the above, it is Golder"s opinion diat hot spots at the ElizabethtownLandfill are not suggested by historic data and appear to be highly unlikely.Consequently, absent any indication to the contrary, additional studies to identifyhot spots are unwarranted and the presence of hot spots within or beneath thelandfill should not be considered in development of remedial alternatives to beevaluated in the Feasibility Study.

Golder AssociatesAR3056UI

October 1992 -9- 923-6053 .

6.0 REFERENCES

1. Kueper, B.H., Feensha S., Rivett M.O., and Cherry JA A Series ofControlled Field Experiments to Study DNAPL Behavior: Implications forS$te Remediation. Proc. HAZMAT International Conference, Atlantic City,NJ, June 10-12, 1992.

2. USEPA Estimating Potential for Occurrence of DNAPL at Superfund Sites.Quick Reference Fact Sheet Publication 9355-4-07FS, January 1992.

A:QAOCTFTX

Golder Associates _flR3056i»2

.^

. n______:________•._____. - .1 1 1 1 1 1 * 1 1 1 1 9 1 1 1

i i i t i i i

1 ' ' fe N. «i ' «? r «? •> r_. 5 5:! g - S g oi - 5

S"I I 9 £ £ I I 9 I * I » * « I I

O «. I I «5 «0 ,1 I 1C I K I fi r «J IIs i^s 8 5

§eccccG&cccec c cPSciPlliiiliili iiii:

•V B. « O

Illlfef I !

AR30S6ti3

i

3

mn,.: u

i

< : ssjf aI ill

j [li'i. " 2S3- 3 22 - ••• . 2

i i

53 3 33 1 335

tt 9 i i '3' '3113' ITll I » 10 a » i « i ta.w i i i8 ' S'et ' ' ' 9 '

_ ig 10 Ul .' . i f|

ri * *i, i •i 3 • <a i i a i i i • a i 9

N M -: 06

a *. a .-;-» a 3 si jN

O I I I' I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 9 1

f O O O O O O Q O Q O Q O O O Q Q OiiMliilliiii ifii

31ll

!

c

•EDttSED13IED13D

TRAVEL PIT----- ED5R

023-6053EAM

HCCttD:

AS SHOWNOAK: 09/17/02RI N.: PA02-122

LANDFILL LAYOUT ANDWELL LOCATION INFORMATION

Golder Associates ELIZABETHTOWN LANDFILL. .. -1M-ajkua 4Ji «i.»-M — — Jt

APPENDIX A

Temporal Trend Curves

AR3056it6

CO,NED

0/6n)

flR3056lt7

S

-Jill

I5

AR305648

o

DCCM

sNED

AR3056t*9

• •

5I.QCO.yLLJ

AR30565Q

•3C

s

A" ' ' ' ' '

AR30565I

-QCO_MUJ

J I I

fl/6n)

AR305652

O

0)

.2£•ss_ooSJS-ii

CO

C.-CO ' . X • / * £ . - » • _,*•sQ

43 —— , ... ^ CMCON I

§t

AR305653

"i' S--6 UJ-3

^t

I- S M• Iti> - '- "- - 2•§ ^ Ti» §N _

ôQ

Tl I I I V

NOJD2_ox:oQQ-

HIoo6''' ' ' ' ' ' • ~ C\J

- . . - . ' • ; ; . - - ' • • W

(l/6n) uoj Jiuaouoo I• • • •*-•\3R305654

£LLJ

i1..1' '• ' .' . ' ' i1 "..' ' ' ' 'T" .

(l/6n)

AR305655

§

CO'SUJ

AR305656

5Q)«.Nin

4,,,,, , ,

ocCOa2ao

OD

CM

LLI

t

ftR305657

§8"8CO

UJ

1§

2o

__

_

6

0>T3

o£>

AR305658

IDCS

JDCO£LU

0/6n)

AR305659

*§

1_ _.>CCIsJSUJ

*•.'JONLG

nil i i i i i' '

ftR305660

3go

d/6n) uoj

<DTJ

OO

2_o6

AR30566I

CO

B-_COJMLU

111 i i i i i i5 .

•fl R305662

ICO

CO£UJ

AR305663

IS25niu

•CO.yLLI

' ' I XM I I I I I I

"'

<D-8 §5 N

o.0

I

t

AR30566**

CO

CON

II I I I I I T . Jl I I. :|. I I I I II I I I I I

fl/6n)

AR305665

ig

I05

COMLU

£

AR305667

••

5is_=_S«JQCO

S

0/Bn)

AR305668

CO.N5

I

•«D>.Q

Q< >o'

o>

5 ©i §5 N

Q>

2jO

6

I §

COCO

AR305669

Waste Management of North America, Inc.Northeast Region1121 Bordentown RoadMorrisville, Pennsylvania 19067215/736-2000 • FAX: 21&736-Q51B

December 4, 1992

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region in841 Chestnut StreetPhiladelphia. PA 19107 ,

Atto: Ms. Sherry Gallagher(3HW23)

Re: ELIZABEIHTOV/N LANDFILL RI/FS .ADDENDUM TO LANDFILL CONTENTS SUBMISSION

Dear Sherry,

Following our meeting of November 4, 1992, SCA Services of Pennsylvania Inc.. (SCA)wishes to provide further discussion relative to the "burn area11 located near the top of thelandfill (as shown on Attachment 1 of SCA's October 8, 1992 submission to USEPA) andthe groundwater quality of the site.' • • • ' • • . : • ' ' • - . - - " 'From the results of the interviews conducted with former landfill employees by SCA, it isSCA's understanding that the burn area was a location comprised of a shallow trench wherevarious liquids contained in drums were poured onto brush and tree cuttings and used asan accelerator to aid in the combustion of those materials.

Consistent with the approach presented in Enclosure 2 of SCA's October 8, 1992 submittal,SCA's further review of concentration data and time-tiend plots for chlorinated and non-chlorinated solvents (e.g., from Bore! ED9R) provides no indication that free phase liquidsare present in ground water in or surrounding the old burn area. In addition, we do notfind any conclusfre technical evidence which suggests any direct relationsliip between thebum area and the groundwater quality observed at the site.

Furthermore, we have not detected degradation of the air quality in this location at the site.Volatile compounds would be expected to be detected in air over potential hot spot areasif such compounds were present in high enough concentrations to represent hot spots. Theresults of the extensive air monitoring traverses conducted during the recent Phase 1A fieldinvestigation activities confirmed this finding. No detects of volatile organic compounds inair over, or in close proximity to the burn area were found. , . .

AR305670

Thus, the technical information available to SCA does not provide any indication that thei J burn area may constitute a potential hot spot area at the Elizabethtown Landfill requiring~ additional study. /

. . ' . * . . • ••'.-'• . ' •

. . Representing SCA Services of Pennsylvania,

GlenSchultzProject Manager „••

• ' . --7 .'

Richard C. KarrSuperfund Coordinator

AR30567I

APPENDIX H

PACKER TEST PROCEDURES AND ANALYSIS METHODS

AR305672

April 1994 ,H-l 923-6053

PACKER TESTINGIntroduction ,Drill stem testing was originally developed by the petroleum industry for thetesting and assessment of reservoir productivity. In recent years, drill stem testinghas become increasingly popular in the .environmental industry due to itseffectiveness in determining aquifer properties in low permeability rock, in amanner which is both more efficient and more accurate than most other aquifertesting methods. Outlmed below is a brief description of packer testing proceduresand equipment and methods used in the analysis of packer test results.

Packer Testing Set-upBriefly, the packer testing at the Elizabethtown Landfill Site was completed usinga double packer assembly with/three pressure transducers, to monitor headconditions above, below and within each test section. The packer assemblyconsistsof a pair of inflatable rubber cylinders separated by a section of perforated

' ' • ' . ' - ' • • ' • - ' 'steel pipe. When the packers are inflated, a test zone within the corehole isisolated from the rest of the corehole. Water is then allowed to flow in or out ofthe test zone via the perforated pipe/ and under controlled conditions. Aschematic diagram of the packer testing is presented in Figure 1. The packer toolwas equipped with a downhole shut-in valve for testing purposes and forobtaining head values in low permeability strata. The test interval length wasbased on the amount of stratigraphic and lithologic variability observed in the corerecovered from the corehole and was typically set at 14.4 feet Information gainedfrom this testing includes the variation in hydraulic conductivity between geologicunits and the variation in hydraulic head with depth. ••'

Borehole Drill Stem Packer Testing ProceduresThe general packer testing procedure is as follows:

1) Lower the packer assembly to the required depth;^—^ - •. *

• ' ' ' ' . . • • ' ' . « i .Golder Associates

AR305673

April 1994 , H-2 923-6053

2) Calibrate tiie pressure transducers;• - • ''" ' ' . . ' . • ' . ' .'' •

3) Inflate the packers using compressed nitrogen;

4) Measure. the stable water level inside the drill rod (Le., thepotentiometric level of the test zone). In a tight formation, close thedownhole shut-in valve to determine the static head value within thetest section;

5a) Add water to the drill rods above the shut-in valve in preparation. for me falling head test, or

5b) Pump water out of the drill rods in preparation for a rising head test(appropriate for shallow or above-ground potentiometric levels);

6) Open the shut-in valve allowing water in the drill rods to enter thetest section;

7) Monitor the change in head with time (flow period/falling head test);! ' ' • -• • . • ', i

8) Closing, of the downhole shut-in valve to complete the "shut-in"testing; and

9) Deflation/opening of all valves and packers. -

Figure 2 illustrates a Typical Packer Test Plot which was created to illustrate theresponse of the pressure transducers to the changes in head during a typicalpacker test event Transducers Tl, T2, and T3 are noted on Figure 2, and monitorthe pressure head above, within, and below the test section, respectively.Transducer T4 is submerged within the drill rods, and monitors the flow in or outof the system. The narrative below explains in detail the steps involved on Figure2 during a typical packer test and the elapsed time in which they occur on thisparticular plot:

• Steps 1 and 2 are completed before an elapsed time of 0 on theTypical Packer Test Plot

• * • . ' •

• At the initiation of the test the packers are inflated (Step 3), andsmall pressure pulses are observed at each transducer location (seen

Golder Associates

AR305671*

I. J

April 1994 H-3 ,: _,• 923-6053

at an elapsed time of 0 to 4 minutes). These pulses are caused bythe displacement of water in the borehole as the packer expands.

• At an elapsed time of approximately 4 minutes, the "shut-in" valveis dosed to isolate the test section (Step 4a). This causes a sharpdecrease in the pressure head recorded by transducer T2, because thetest section has been isolated from the effects of vertical gradients,etc., that occur above or below the test section. This pressure

i decrease is observed during an elapsed time of 4 to 16 minutes. Thedrop in pressure head occuts when the "shut-in" valve is closed, andT2 Is allowed to equilibrate to the static head within the test section.At this point in the test (an elapsed time of 16 minutes), the statichead of transducer T2 can be determined. • The reasons for the

; sudden drop in head at transducer T2 are the elimination ofwellbore storage effects and the presence of downward gradients inthis particular test This response is variable, depending on thepermeability of the rock unit being tested, and the presence ofupward or lateral gradients. <

• A volume of water is then added to the drill rods that suspend .thepacker system in the borehole (Step 5). There should be no evidenceof any pressure changes when the drill rods are filled with, or whenthey are full of water because the packer assembly is a controlledclosed system. A controlled closed system attempts to minimizeinput and output (i.e.; leakage) from the assembly.

• The water is released into the test section by opening the "shut-in"valve, to create a "falling head" affect (Step 6)(seen at elapsed time ofapproximately 16 minutes). A rapid increase in pressure is observedat transducer T2. This sudden increase in pressure is created by the.force of the water into theisolated test section when the valve isopened.

• This addition of water creates a "flow period" (Step 7) into theisolated test section (at an elapsed time of 16 minutes to 37 minutes).The water entering me test section attempts to equilibrate as quicklyas possible, but the low permeability of the rock unit in thisparticular test section prevents this. Therefore, the decrease in headthroughout the "flow period" is minimal. The "flow period" isallowed to continue for either one-third of recovery or approximately20 to 25 minutes.

• ' • ' ' » ; - ' '

• At an elapsed time of approximately 37 minutes, the "shut-in" valveis closed again (Step 8), isolating the test section (transducer T2).

' ' This allows the pressure head in the test section to return to static, • r . • •

. : , Golder AssociatesflR305675

April 1994 H-4 923-6053

conditions, because the test section is isolated from any influences(i.e., vertical gradients, etc.). From an elapsed time of approximately37 minutes to 59 minutes, tine "shut-in" period is allowed to continue,ideally until the head level recorded for T2 reaches static conditions(for this particular test this occurred at an elapsed time ofapproximately 55 minutes to 59 minutes).

• At the end of the "shut-in" period (at an elapsed time ofapproximately 60 minutes), the valve is opened again, whichconstitutes the end of the test The packers are deflated (elapsedtime of approximately 59 minutes to 63 minutes). The head valuesrecorded for each transducer return to static borehole conditions(elapsed time of approximately 63 minutes) when the packers fullydeflate, as illustrated on Figure 1.

Other information to note on the typical packer test plot is the pressure recordedat transducer Tl remains essentially stable at a static head value of approximately1183 FT-MSL Transducer Tl is located above the isolated test section, and shouldbe unaffected by the "flow" and "shut-in" periods which create pressure headchanges that are recorded at transducer T2. The head values recorded fortransducer T3 decrease at the beginning of the test (from an elapsed time of 2minutes to 10 minutes) and stabilize to static conditions throughout the remainingportion of the test The observed stabilization of the head values at transducer T3verifies that the borehole length below the test section has been isolated frominfluences such as vertical gradients, etc. The static head values determined withineach test section (T2) and below each test section (T3) can be used to determinethe vertical gradients within the bedrock. The presence of transducers Tl and T3also aids in detecting leakage above, below or within the straddle packer system.The types of leakage that can occur during drill stem testing is as follows:

1) Leakage of water through the drilling rods above the test section atthe threaded joints. This can be noted by an increase in pressure

" recorded by transducer Tl, but can also be noted as a drop in thewater level inside the drill rods after they are filled;

2) Leakage into the test section at the threaded joints of the packer1 assembly, which is evident by pressure changes recorded bytransducer 12 during the addition of water to the drill rods; and

, Golder Associates

AR305676

April 1994 ; H-5 923-6053

3) Leakage around either the top or bottom packer, caused from a poorseal between the packers and the borehole wall, which can beobserved by a change in recorded pressures for transducer Tl, T2 orT3 during any of the packer testing steps.

At the Elizabethtown Landfill Site, the transducer responses were continuouslymonitored for indications of leakage during each test When signs of leakage weredetected, the test was aborted and rerun.

Packer Testing Analysis Methods

The data obtained from the packer testing program were analyzed using twomethods. Data obtained during the "flow" or "falling head" period of each testwere analyzed using modified the Hvorslev (1951) method (U.S. Department of the

' • . - ',Navy, 1982). Data, collected during the "shut-in" portion of each test interval wereanalyzed using the Horner method (1951). Data from the "flow" and "shut-in"\ - • ' ' • ' . ' • . • • ' • ' . • • •

( , periods, as described above, are labelled on the Typical Packer Test plot (Figure1 • ' • • • 2 ) . ' . - ; . ' • ' : • - . . ' . ; , :-v;:- , . . . . . . . . - . - ; • "

Hvorslev Method .

• Hvorslev developed a method for the determination of horizontal hydraulicconductivity using measured values of head difference (y) versus time (f). Themethodology of data analysis requires the plotting of head ratio (percentage ofhead yet to recover) on the vertical scale of semi-log paper versus time on thelinear horizontal scale, and is presented in a stepwise manner for bom rising andfalling head tests as follows:

Stepl:

Plot y/yfl (logarithmic) versus t in a semilogarithmic paper. Note: y0 is the initial"• . .' • - - , • ' i

head difference and is equal h0 - h.

Golder Associates AR3056I7

April 1994 H-6 923-6053

Step 2: ,''

' ; . - • ' • ' • ' . : . ' • • ...- . • , 'Because yt and t are the only variables in the equations, the plot must show astraight line (this is usually between 50 percent and 90 percent recovery). In otherwords, the straight line portion is the valid part of the readings, and the curvedpart of the plot may be due to wellbore storage, skin or boundary effects.

Step 3; . •

- , ' ' ^

Select two points on the straight line portion of the curve and record their (*_,?»._)•and (*2/ yj,_) coordinates. Record the other parameters.

Step 4; .

Use the equation below to calculate the horizontal hydraulic conductivity (K):

x 30.48 cm/sec

where: rc . = feet.x .*• 'feet •;•

• . • t =5 seconds

. . . . .

Horner Method •

The Homer analysis method requires the plotting of head recovery versus Hornertime, ft which is defined as:

where: f =» time since the beginning of the flow period- ' ' • • • < ' =s time since the "shut-in" valve was closed

The slope (m) obtained from this plot is defined as:m = dh/1 log cycle (of Homer time)


• ' ' ' ' • . - • • ' , • • • ' ' : ' ^ - - • • ' • . ' • ' • • , - '.'' ' • ' ' ; • ' LApril 1994 . H-7 923-6053

' - ' ' ' ' ' . , ' . . " ' ' - ' ' N

The determination of the hydraulic conductivity (K) is based on Homer's ,VV modification of the Theis recovery method. The hydraulic conductivity is

estimated from the equation:

nan ;cm/sec

where: Q '•= the average flow rate during the flow period (gallonspermin)and .

L= length of the test section (feet)

At the Elizabethtown Site, the strata encountered .were found to be relativelypermeable. For this reason, induced head differences quickly disappeared after thevalve was closed at the end of the first part of the test Therefore the Hornermethod of analysis was not feasible or appropriate for many of the tests.

t ' ' . ' .

REFERENCES

Horner, D.R., 1951, "Pressure Build-Up in WeUs", Proceedings of the Third WorldPetroleum Congress - Section n. .

Hvorslev, M.J., 1951, "Time Lag and Soil Permeability in GroundwaterObservations", Bulletin 36, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways ExperimentStation, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

i .' ' • if ' .

U.S. Department of the Navy, 1982, "Soil Mechanics, Design Manual 7.1,"Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities and Engineering Command, Alexandria,Virginia.


}

;.W

•

/ j

TESTZONE

. *

i

INSTRlCARF

(i

SHU1. • VAI

STR/PACAS6E

r '

1

'MENT 1HER 1^

i, V^

\T

r-iN r~jVE *l

r **

"•DOLE;KER•MBLY

1

CJ"

•—\

4 ———————— FLUSH JOINT CASING

_^__^—rELECTRICAL CABLES• ^ ^ (TO GROUND SURFACE)

• .' itDDCD nrrROOiiDC TIJ* norîi^Kr>

.« ————————— MIDDLE PRESSURE TRANSDUCER(T2)

i OWFR PRPCCIIDP TD A fttCnil^CD '

(T3). 1 H ANoUUOtn rticooUHc LINto

, (WATER FILLED TUBES)ft ——————— -SHUT-IN VALVE LINEh (TO GROUND SURFACE)

- ———————— PACKER INFLATION LINE• j (TO GROUND SURFACE)

M '

C

. • • • . . . ' • • - • - • " • • • • . . ,u* T2 PRESSURE LINE

- ———————— PERFORATED PIPE. - • • •

< ———————— EXTENSION

^ —— —————— PACKER INFLATION LINE• ———————— EXTENSION

' - '• ' .' • • • "'

_ • ' ' ' f%f* "* B«T_Î D1 A FCT* % ^}f *O C?

•* . , ' .•* ' : ! • •

•* ' '' • •-• ' ' '•* . ' . .- "

•»", 823-6053 $c*t£: NM QrMPMATir HIAnnAMi0""* EAM . OA1fc 04/01/93 QpM« •*• ^ ^ • ftt f HA • *** At 4 E < ' ^^ _ _ _ ~/T/t «*•«•. muz-lev *>^»nAr\ni e BAf*lfI?B AQQPMRIVTS777 ——— %% ———— ««^ 03 STRADDLE PACKER ASSEMBLY

Gddeir Associates ELIZABETHTOWN LANDFILL WORE 1' • ™ ***** . . . H f^ f^ f^ fm- _** _m . ^

<

, wnjuoodu

oCO

*OlCO

CO

JM Nai 923-6053DUST. EAM

SCAtE

04/05//93PA02-184

SU8TITU: Q3

TYPICAL PACKER TESTDATA PLOT

Golder Associates ELIZABETHTOWN LANDFILL

\.

APPENDIX I. : -, •

PACKER TEST RESULTS

OAR305682

TABLE 1SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WEUTESTNO.

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETER

LENGTH TESTEDDEPTH RANGE OP TESTED ZONEDEPTH OP ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OFDEPTH OP ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL

STICK-UPTOP OP CASINO ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION

DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OP CASING)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION ,

INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (H&HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OP SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OP RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HOS - Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OP SLUG TEST (t; T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OP RECOVERY TEST (t; T -

ED171 . '

Z55 INCH3.78 INCH

202.00 FTBG3

17.00 FT46.20 FTBG3T 63.2065.90 FTBG3T 2010036.40 FTBGST 43.50

6£0 FT529.65 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL

42.90 FEET BELOW TOC486.75 FTMSL

486.28 FT522.33 FT36.05 FT498.29 FT24.03 FT

5.67 MIN9.83 MIN

*

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

"•

.

SLUGTESTRESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

• , ' ' • /

(HI-H1VCHI-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA1.51 1.6190.00 SEC 90.00

2.34E-Q4 CM/3 2.71 E-04SECCM/3

-RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS.

AVERAGE PLOW RATE(KHYDRAUUC HEAD)/dILOQ a/HiHYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

t

1.53 GPMNANA CM/3

M————AR305683

~u

^^

Q

\ r

* COLd

00

LlJ .v j. «rt —' CN

Lv T >l . <^s k

.*i1

_l__-I I I I I I I I I I

O CN " f U) 00 T- CN ' ' f tO tD CN CN t tO« . « • « I * • ' « « • « • 4

•? ? ? ? ' T T T T ' 7 7 7

(U) OI1VU OV3H OnnVfcOAH NT• *" . • '- • ' • ' ' '

AR30568U

TABLE 1 ,SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELLTESTNO.


LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEDEPTH OF ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHODEPTH OF ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL

STICK-UP ' .TOP OF CASING ELEVATION • .GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION

DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW, TOP OF CASING) , . . •GROUNDWATER ELEVATION

INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (H<x)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos -Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST 0: T - 0)

..

ED172 . . ' • , , . . '

2.55 INCH3.73 INCH

202.00 FTBGS

17.00 FT170.00 FTBGST 187.00 FTBGS.189.70 FTBGST 202.00 FTBGS41.90 FTBGST 167.30 FTBGS

2.6Q FT525.75 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL


483.22 FT' 524.93 FT

41.71 FT494.75 FT30.19 FT

9.40 MIN12.40 MIN


(HI-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)x60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA1.64 1.6572.00 SEC 72.00 SEC

mmmCUIS. 3.57E)4 CM«' • . ' '

RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULJC HEAD) / d|LOG (T/T)1HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

2.67 GPM5.83

3.35E-04 CM/3

OoldwAneelatet AR305685

00

(u) oiivfc ov3H onnvucuH NT

ftR305686

Io

CNd

Q - - - - - - - - - - - *

UJ

LJ

LJ 00d

o00

CO -

oo toUJ <j

o

cr£* - -

o tn. o in o & o in oSCN CN *• ^- Q Q 9? 2tn «n to io 05 to ^ •*

(JLJ) ov3H onnvaaAH

AR305687

i

I

T

37(O

T•t—i

i

o

TABLE 1 -SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELLTESTNO.

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETER . ,BOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)

LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEDEPTH OF ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLYDEPTH OF ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY

STICK-UPTOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION

DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING)GHOUNDWATER ELEVATION

INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi -HOS)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos -Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T -


(HI-HlV(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY '

RECOVERY TESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATE(KHYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)]HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

<

ED173 • ' '

2.55 INCH3.76 INCH

202.00 FTBGS

17.00 FT v155.10 FTBGST 172.10174.80 FTBGST 202.0042.10. FTBGST 152.40

2.50 FT525.65 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL


479.99 FT516.71 FT36.71 FT493.54 FT23.17 FT

6.03 MIN 'NA MIN

TR2 DATA TR4 DATA.1.35 1.5770.00 SEC 70.00

. 3.31E-04

NA GPMNANA CM/S

FT BGSFTBGSFTBGS

-• • .

SECCM/S

4

Golder Associates 'AR305688

i

N 00 Ol »" T-Ti ', ..(u) oava OV3H onnvacuw NI

•' * -

AR305689

U


WELLTESTNO.

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETER 'BOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)


STICK-UP ^TOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION

DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION

INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (HI)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (HOS)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi • HOS)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor) '

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T • 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T - 0)

. •-• • ' .. -• » . . . • ' • ' • ' -

ED174 . •'':• •

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

202.00 FTBGS

17.00 Ft140.10 FTBGST 157.10 FTBGS159.80 FTBGST 202.00 FTBGS41.60 FTBGST 137.40 FTBGS

2.50 FT525.65 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL

44.10 FEETBELOWTOC481.55 FTMSL

482.50 FT523.5.6 FT41.06 FT486.81 'FT36.75 FT .

22.87 MINNA MIN

- ... . • , .' , : '••':' .-'';;•'''. ' . .<•'.''SLUG TESTRESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-HlV(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

•' ' ~" • •


HHHlCM/s 2.78E-04 CM;S •RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULIC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/TIJHYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

CO

fI

Si <A' '55 <J 1^- «

O -i- ' -CN »O ^J- in <O N 00« « « * •

'? ? 'T T .T ? ?

(JJ> OI1VH OV3H OlinVdOAJH NT •

ft R 30-5691

"L/TABLE 1 : : . * . . • • • • - _

SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELLTESTNO.

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETERBOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)

LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEDEPTH OF ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY ' .DEPTH OF ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY

STICK-UP'TOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATIONDEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION

INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGININQ OF RECOVERY TEST (t;T - 0

' "if

ED175. ' ;

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

202.00 FTBGS

17.00 FT125.00 FTBGST 142.00144.70 FTBGST 202.0041.60 FTBGST 122.30

2.50 FT525.65 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL

44.10 FEET BELOW TOO481.55 FTMSL

481.28 FT512.02 FT30.74 FT483.56 FT28.46 FT

6.67 MINNA MIN

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

• ' . . ' ' . ' . ' • : * ' ' - .SLUGTESTRESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-H1V(Hi-H2)(T2-Tl)x60 .HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY


2.26E-03SECCM/S


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)]HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

Golder Associates AR305692

• >

0 pit 1 C

0

LU o5 t

=**0

CO

f\

sLd • x ^

O CN • "t <O 00 i- CN• «

i«

00d

6 Z

PI +

O

CNd

- CN ^<0 00 CN CN ^fr <O! « . « « • ' I ' • • «

T. ? 7 7 7 7 , ' 7 77

ouva ov3H onnvdOAH NT

AR305693

TABLE 1 ,SUMMARY OF HYDHOGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELLTESTNO.




DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING)GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONINITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - HOS)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T1 • 0

. --.I • . ;ED176

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

202.00 FTBGS

17.00 FT110.00 FTBGST 127.00 FTBGS129.70 FTBGST 202.00 FTBGS41.68 FTBGST 107.30 FTBGS

2.50 FT525.65 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL

44.18 FEET BELOW TOC481.47 FTMSL .

481.70 FT515.87 FT34.17 FTNA FTNA FT

11.50 MINNA MIN

• ' ' ' - . . • • . ' • * . • • •


(HI-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2 DATA TR4 DATA1.78 . 1.6216.00 SEC 18.00 SEC

llilillCM/S 1.38E-03 CM/S

RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSI?

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULIC HEAD) /dlLOG (T/T)1HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

Golder Associates AR305691*

rbJ t

=J 2LJ o

. _ q

LJ c!__ <o1 ***O |-JCO

,

•

<

'

'i> T

JT

- c

,'

M- H

/r

* ^

-.

t u

x •

1

0 (I

£

o r

•

^

s 0

,

X

0 C

7jt-

-

' •

/

— r

'

\

f

• ,C

/

j

1 *

•t

'

f) ^

x

t U

s

0 <J

x

/

o r

/

v C

/

0 C

.

n c

'W

5o

too

. J < Jd u

1 ''w ^ Vp;;"iCNd

°

N

ouva ov3H onrwacuH t>n

ftR305695

TABLE 1 '•'} ...vSUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELLTESTNO. v



STICK-UPTOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION .


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi -Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HOS -Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T « 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST 0; T • 0

'"'•.'

Ep177

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

202.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT48.50 FTBGST 62.9065.60 FTBGST 202.0040.40. FTBGST 45.80

2.50 FT525.65 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL


485.50 FT520.44 FT34.94 FT .497.49 FT22.95 FT

. 31.87 MIN36.13 MIN

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

-

• . . . . . • • ' • • • . . , " ' . < .SLUG TESTRESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA . TFMDATA1.65 1.93

120.00 SEC . 120.00iHHHCM/S 3.22E-04

SEC .CM/S

' • • : • • ' ' • ' ' •RECOVERYTEST • ,RESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD)/d[LOG CT/T)1HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

1.43 GPM£.08

2.43E-04 CM/S

v ! ' ' • . . . • •ft R 3-056.96

Golder Associates

I I I I • 'I I I L 1 1 1 1 L I I I I .O * CN *IO •* IT) <0 N 00 C • *- . r CN K) IS • 00 O1 ' CN

il I l I I I I I I I I I I I I l

CM) ouvy ov3H onnvyoJkH NT

OLJ

LJ

LJ

°S-' - ' : '' . ' " i* • ' " ' '• ' .- -

CO

m

><LJ

o '

o

00

co ' -is • * <o in • •<*• r o c N T-oen o cj> 01 en en en en 5?

N . • . ' ' • : ' ' . / ' • • ' ' ' • - : • . . • • •

*

io

T

ICD

CMI


WELL .'TESTNO.



STICK-UPTOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION •


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (HI)HYDRAULIC HEAD ATTHE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI • Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD ATTHE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HOS • Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST 0: T -

ED178 . • ' - • • ; ' - ;

2.55 INCH ' •3.78 INCH

202.00 FTBGS


2.50 FT525.65 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL


482.34 FT522.95 FT40.60 FTNA FTNA FT

1' • ' • .

2.20 MINNA MIN

/ • • .• ' . • ' • ' • ' . • • . ' • • : • • • . ' ' . • - , , . •SLUGTESTRESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-Hiy(HI-H2) . . ' • . . - . . -(T2-T1)x60 ,HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA1.06 .1.08

240.00 SEC 240.00 SECHmiCM/3 1.38E-05 CM/3 '

RECOVERYTEST ,RESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS .

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / dlLOQ (T/T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CMI3

AR305699Golder Associates

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i

-s

T - C N l O ^ l r i t t J l v flOKCIi »-'*-. C N l O ^ f r 10'.<O|SCOO1CNO CJ'CJ CJ < C) CJ CJ C) X *•; ^ *•; T; *•; ^ ^ *- Q

' TTT?:T'T,'

(jj> oiivu ovsH onnvuoAH

AR305700

•J

I


WELLTESTNO.


LENQTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEDEPTH OF ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLYDEPTH OF ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY



INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HI)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos -Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGININQ OF SLUG TEST (t: T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T -

ED179 • ' . . ' . - • ' • .

2.55 INCH3>8>INCH -

202.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT78.00 FTBGST 92.40 FTBGS95.10 FTBGST 20ZOO FTBGS45.20 FTBGST 75.30 FTBGS

2.50 FT525.65 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL '


480.24 FT '521.43 FT41.19 FTNA FTNA FT

2.03 MIN4.30 MIN


(HI-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)x60 'HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA1.03 NA

360.00 SEC . NA SECi|||i|Ol|CM/S NA CM/S

RECOVERY TESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS ' ,

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD)/ dlLOG CT/T)JHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY ,

NA GPM4.12NA CM/3

AB30570.J

LJ2 +

O «- <N rO ^t- IOU> S 00q q p p p q q o ,qd d d d d do d d i il i i l - I l l l l ' I I I I l l l I I

OllVd QV3H OnnVJdQAH N1

AR305702


WELLTESTNO.


LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEDEPTH OF ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLYDEPTH OF ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY '



INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (HI)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HOS -Hor) .;

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t: T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (1; T - 0

ED1710

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH.

202.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT96.00 FTBGST 110.40 FTBGS113.10 FTBGST 202.00 FTBGS45.20 FTBGST 93.30 FT BG3

2.50 FT525.65 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL


480.14 FT . '" '523.92 FT43.78 FTNA FTNA FT

7.00 MINNA MIN

• • • • • '• • • ' ' . '


(HI-H1XHI-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY '

TR2DATA TR4DATA1.91 t.89

720.00 SEC 720.00 SEC'ZsmmCMJS 5.17E-05 CM/S


AVERAGE FLOW RATE <d(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)1HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/3

Holder Ajwctatej A ft 3 0 5 7 0 3

co cn T- r- CMo T- CN.^ _ .'T ?

(u) ouvd OV3H onnvdOAH NTAR305701*

I


WELLTE3TNO.


LENGTHTESTED • ' vDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEDEPTH OF ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLYDEPTH OF ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY ,

STICK-UP . .TOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION

DEPTH TO WATER (BELOWTOP OF CASING)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION

INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (HOS)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos -Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T - 0

*

ED1711

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

202.00 FTBGS


3.00 Ft526.15 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL


480 39 FT523.47 FT43.07 FT522.54 FT0.92 FT

19.40 MIN23.07 MIN


(Hi-Hiy(HI-H2)<T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY


::l27E i5llCM/3 1.39E-04 CM/3.

RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS.

AVERAGE FLOW RATECKHYDRAUUC HEAD) / dlLOG (T niHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVnY

0.07 GPM0.42

1.36E-04 CM/3


U. ,. ••':'.'•'•'..;.;'"; .(u) ouva ov3H onnvdOAH NT

AR305706

' ' • . •. • »I . • • • .

OLJind

LJ « lN

f

§00CN

CO t

LJ 5> C,

o:Q

iK)

TinT

LJN

O ^ ', ' " jS' . • en

T

3

O Q O O O O Oen 00 r »"T . f -W *———• • >———' V __ - __

8 8 S S en 05 *

(u) OV3H onnvyaAH '„„-,AR305707


WELLTESTNO. /

'' . t •DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETER vBORBHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)




INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (HOS)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - HOS)HYDRAUUC HEAD ATTHE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HOS - Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t: T « 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST C: T • 0

ED1712

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

202.00 FTBGS


2.50 FT525.65 FTMSL523.15 FTMSL


480.54 FT517.81 FT '37.27 FT492.86 FT24.95 FT

16.17 MIN18.70 MIN

" ' • • ' • . ' ' • • ' ' . ' ' •


(Hi-Hiy(Hl-H2)(T2-T1)x«0 . •HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA2.45 2.77

122.00 SEC 122.00 SECmilMCM/S 4.90E-04 CM/S


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) /d[LOG (T/T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

2.61 GPM6.99 •

3.23E-04 CM/S


— 1 Ol

LJ gt

CO £

§6.

CN

2- • »— '

U

00d

CN >o **t in <o N 00 en ^ *- c N » o ^ t in• 5 « « « il • « I • « • • • 4

<? ?'•? ?•???.? •! 7 7 777

(u) oiiva.ovaH onnyyom NT/

SR305709

J • •'•• -, . •'•• ' ' ' • ' , -i

QLJ

LJ

LJ

CO tQ_ q

**>' Q

LJXO

CM

' I

i»

in

2

m *? K) CN •*- o en 03 is <o in t to CM T- o en oo N <o in' ' •

U - " • : • ' - . " • . . ' • ' ' • , - : . " ' - ' • : -OV3H

H

1*~ . . • iI

in

AR3057IO


WELL ED19TESTNO. 1


LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLEZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL



INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HOHYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (HoS)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T«0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T»0)

• • • . • ' : • " ' • ; . • •2.55 INCH ,3.78 INCH

200.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT38.00 FTBGS TO 52.40 FTBGS55.10 FTBGS TO 200.00 FTBGS15.56, FTBGS TO 35.30 FTBGS2.50 FT .

503.90 FTMSL501.40 FTMSL


489.94 FT496.71 FT . " " •6.77 FTNA FTNA FT

4.27 MIN .NA MIN

\ - '


(Hi-Hiy(HI-H2) •(T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCnVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA6.68 . ' Z8130.00 SEC 43.00 SEC

1.26E-03 CM/S '• •

FIECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)JHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

AR3057Ii

O

QLJ

Ld

CMr— *°</) £

ElQ S

^

1«? rto •

I"1<0 -€ ~d P P

+

CMd

O »•; • CS »O *fr lO <O N, 00 Ct •- •-

d o <? f <? ? ? f • . < ? . . ' T

O.) onvy ov3H onnvwaAH NT

RR3057I2

<I

TABLE 1 . . ! --SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL . ED19TESTNO. 2

DRILL ROD DIAMETER .BOREHOLE DIAMETER . 'BOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)




INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HO -HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (I; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T-OJ

. ' • - - ' ' . '

2.55 INCH3,73 INCH

200.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT53.60 FTBGS TO 68.00 FTBGS70.70 FTBGS TO 200.00 FTBGS15.50 FTBGS TO 50.90 FTBGS

6

2.50 Ft'503.90 FTMSL501.40 FTMSL


485.81 FT502.83 FT17.03 FTNA FT .NA FT

5.60 MINNA MIN . .

• • • . ' " ' . . ' • - '

SLUG TESTRESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS .

(HI-H1XHI-H2) • - i(T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY


iZG€PS|ICM/S 1.88E-04 CM/3 ..


AVERAGE R.OW RATEOXHYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCTlVrTY

NA GPMNANA CM/3

• v . • - v.i

ftM v ' , AB3057I3Golder Associates

Cu> ouLVd yov3H onnvwaAH NT

Ci

AR30S7-U


WELL ED19TESTNO. 3



STICK-UPTOP OF CASING ELEVATION .GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION


INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HOHYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HOS - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST ft T-0)

2.55 INCH3.73 INCH

200.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT68.00 FTBGS TO 82.4085.10 FTBGS TO 200.00

. 15.50 FTBGSTO 65.30

2.50 FT503.90 FTMSL501.40 FTMSL


l

485.58 FT505.20 FT19.62 FT495.60 FT9.59 FT

8.00 MIN27.20 MIN

FTBGSFTBG3FTBGS

• ' ' . . • ' . ' . - • ' - ' • ' • ' . ' • -

SLUGTESTRESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS,

(HI-Hiy(HI-H2)(T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA. 1.03 1.0456.00 SEC 56.00

Iilf£M:lCM/3 4.14E-05SECCM/3

• ' • - . ' . • " . .RECOVERYTE3TRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOQ (T/T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

0.13 GPM1.97

5.82E-05 CM/3

t

Ooldet Associates AR3057I5

OJ> ouva OV3H onnvaoiH NT

flR3Q57l6

enaLJijJ2I—c_:LJ

Q.

g

<LJ

U

tc . . __ ,

CLJ) QV3H

CMI

CMI

00CMI

Q

oOTef - 3 +LJ> %

I

oqdI

CM•T


WELL ED19TESTNO. 4



STICK-UPTOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION v


INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HI)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (HOS)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - HOS)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos -Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t: T-0)

... - • ' -

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

200.00 FTBGS


3.00 FT504.40 FTMSL501.40 FTMSL


484.59 FT1 504.60 FT- 20.01 FT

503.11 FT1.49 FT

6.43. MIN27.17 MIN

.


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-Tl)x60 'HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA . TR4DATA1.02 1.02

238.00 SEC 238.00 SECKRPICM/S • ' 5.22E-06 CM/S


AVERAGE FLOW RATE ,d(HYDRAULIC HEAD) / d[LOG fT/T)]HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

0.02 GPM2.81

5.86E-06 CM/S

Golder Associates 4 R 3 0 5 7 | 0

Cu> oavy ov3H onnvyaAH NT

AR3057I9

-QLJLJ

LJ

I

COdI

LJ7T

Q- P.O £i-sco £ % ^Z> tW -.p? aLJ ^"• '. «B"

~ CMI

1C 'cp

CiJ) QV3H

CMI

00CM|

Q

' o

AR305720


WELL ED19TESTNO. 5

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETER 'BOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)


STICK-UPTOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION .


INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HOHYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI • Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos • Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T«0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T-0)

• '•-.' -'•' ' ' . _ ;

2.55 INCH3.73 INCH

200.00 FTBGS


abo FT504:40 FTMSL501.40 FTMSL


485.27 FT506.15 FT •2a88 FT420.00 FT86.15 FT

5.63 MIN26.17 MIN

SLUGTEST -RESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60 ;HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TFMDATA1.29 • 1.28

650.00 SEC 650.00 SECp2ii/c 05liCM/S 2.23E-03 CM/3


AVERAGE FLOW RATE .d(HYDRAULICHEAD)/d[LOO(T/T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

1.11 GPM13.25

7.26E-05 CM/3' . ' . .

AR30572IGolder Associates

\J

CiJ> ou.va W3H onnvaaxH

AR305722

o*QLJ

LJ

O «nX £

00LJ, &

tn

en

LJIO

o:a

CO*"" CM

o <TI* oo r*» <om ^ K J C M •—• o.3' 5=5 5 5 ? 5 5 $ 5 5

Cu>

CMI

7 9

CMI.

CMI

COCMI

AR305723

TABLE 1 . . . , . . .SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL ED19TESTNO. 6


LENGTHTESTED 'DEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLEZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL

STICK-UPTOP OF CASING ELEVATION • 'GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (HOHYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (HOS)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi -Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HOS • Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST 0: T«0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T-0)

1

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

200.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT113.00 FTBGS TO 127.40130.10 FTBGS TO 200.0015.60 FTBGS TO 110.30

13.00 FT514.40 FTMSL501.40 FTMSL


484.80 FT498.11 FT1341 FTNA FTNA FT

7.57 MINNA MIN

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

- • • . ' ' ' ' ' • ' ' ' • . . . . '


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY


300.00 SEC 300.00|il! iB7|CM/S 1.62E-07

SECCM/S

• ' • • • • •RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULIC HEAD) /d[LOG (T/niHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

•

o.,.——u_ AR.30572V

Cu> oiiva ov3H onnvyaAH NT

AR305725


WELL . ED19TESTNO. 7


LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLEZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL,


DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION .

INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HOHYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (HOS)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HOS • Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t;T-0)

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

200.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT146.00 FTBGS TO 160.40163.10 FTBGS TO 200.0016.70 FTBGS TO 143.30

13.00 FT514.40 FTMSL501.40 FTMSL


484.57 FT492.38 FT

7.81 FTNA FTNA FT,

- 8.63 MINNA MIN

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

» . _ .. ' .

SLUGTEST 'RESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY .

TR2DATA TR4DATA1.34 '" 1.4016.00 SEC 18.00

• 1.10E-03SECCM/S


* ' - • . ' .

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG fT/niHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

Golder Associates A ft 3 0 5 7 2 6

en5LJ

LJ CO<+ ^ d

to eLJ tH- o. _ BB

LJ *

^

7r7

CM

<qd

CMd

o •• CM to . ** «*> <o • f* co ch «-~ * - . . . » • _ ; • * • ' • . - . I ; '

? ? ? ?

Cu> oiiva ov3H onnvyoAH NT

M305727


WELL ED19TESTNO. 8 '.. .

, - • ' . . . _ • f \

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETER •BOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)

LENGTH TESTED ,DEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLEZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL


• s • • ' -


INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HOHYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME tO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST C; T«0)

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH .

200.00 FTBGS


2.50 FT*503.90 FTMSL •501.40 FTMSL


485.90 FT492.89 FT6.99 FTNA FTNA FT

72.10 MIN ' ' ' ,NA MIN

SLUGTEST .RESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

.. '%'

(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2) •(T2-T1)X60 ,'.HYDRAULJC CONDUCTIVITY


4500.00 SEC 4500.00 SECi llElollCM/S NA CM/S


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T7T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCnVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

Golder Associates A R3 057 2 8

HYDRAULIC HEAD VERSUS

TIME: WELL EDI 9

TEST #8 (161.0 FT TO 175.4

FT)

f\

• •

' '

•'

..

..

..

.

'

•

../

1

- i .

:j1r

If

•

*

/

^

- .-;.

• •

•

•'.

• , •

D «n *- »n CM m KJ to •+ m «rd L - 1 CM 1 Kj 1 «+ 11 1 \ 1 1 1

O00

s !,+

oixva OV3H onnvyaAH NT

AR305729


WELL ED19TESTNO. 9


LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLYZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY



INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD 0 0HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (HOS)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos- Hor) - ,

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TESTJt; TVO)

/

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

200.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT .176.00 FTBGS TO 190.40193.10 FTBGS TO 200.0017.20 FTBGS TO 173.30

13.00 FT514.40 FTMSL501.40 FTMSL

30.20 FEET BELOW TOG484.20 FTMSL

483.87 FT605.65 FT21.78 FT489.97 FT15.68 FT

6.03 MIN8.87 M!N

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

SLUG TEST .RESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)CT2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA . TR4DATA1.22 1.2624.00 SEC 24.00

6.57E-04SECCM/S

' , . • '• ' "RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG 0/T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

1.47 GPM3.29

3.86E-04 CM/S

*


0LJ

. iLJ E5 **•. 0

01

a 1< ~LJ £x.fc

u

2:-J<u.

c

t

• ^.

^^^1 •

•-

-

•7r-pd/

r

^f^

/r*"/£.

£

,/i

\

Xp

3

^^

.

) _ CM HJ •* tfj <O K CO 01 •m » » • • • > • • • »

? 7 •?••.? ? f ? ? ?

•*CM

CM

•*•

00-0

•*o

o

^

Cu> oiivy dv3H onnvaaAH NT

flR30573!

i J

:G

CLJ) av3H onnvaoAH

6R305732

TABLE 1 . -,SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL ED19TESTNO. 10


LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OP BOREHOLEZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL



I •

INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (H03- HOT)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST 0; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t: T«0)

2.55 INCH178 INCH

200.00 FTBGS


3.00 FT1504.40 FTMSL501.40 FTMSL .


484.99 FT - -501.68 FT1&67 FT499.76 FT ,

1.90 FT. .

9.77 MIN29.83 MIN

!

SLUGTEST ,RESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS. -

(HI-Hiy(HI-H2)(T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY


246.00 SEC 246.00 SECH9HIHCM/3 5.93E-06 CM/3

RECOVEHYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSI

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD)/ d[LOQ (T/T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCnVITY

0.03 GPM3.35

6.48E-06 CM/S -

AR3Q5733Golder Associates

S » - . * - • « . «« »-••••-. • *-

M< 1

Cu> onvy OV3H onnvwaAH NT

AR30S73U

enoLJLJ

LJ2 F'&!oo s(£ 3LJ ~> 2

• =*B

Q &5< £LJOC •*

CMI

00CMI

Ov- . O <Jl GOS S 5 5

dI

oqdI

CM

T

<oT

CM

o~s

AR3Q5735

TABLE 1 'SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL ED19TESTNO. 11

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETER,




INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hot)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos • Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST Q; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T«0)

< . \ • ' ' ;".

2.55 INCH3.76 INCH

200.00 FTBGS


3.00 FT504.40 FTMSL501.40 FTMSL


484.45 FT505.85 FT

21.40 FT503.31 FT ,

2.54 FT

9.63 MIN.32.37 MiN

' :' ' ' .


(Hl-Hiy(Hi-H2)CT2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA1.04 f 1.04

420.00 SEC 420.00 SECIPS3E1SS1CM/S 5.30E-06 CM/S

RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSI?

AVERAGE FLOW RATECKHYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG CT/T)lHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

0.03 GPM5.90

4.34E-06 CM/S

W3Q5736Golder Associates

« <o h- oo <j» ' . »• «- CMO O O O Oo o o o o o o o o i o o o o oI I I I II I I I I

Cu> oava ov3H onnvyaAH m

AR3Q5737

O-> QV3H

AR305738

TABLE 1SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGld TEST RESULTS

WELL ED20TESTNO. . 2

i . "

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETERBOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE) '




INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HOHYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t: T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t;T-0)


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAULIC coNDucnvrryRECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS.

AVERAGE FLOW RATE .OXHYDRAULIC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)]HYDRAULIC CONDUCnvrTY

. •

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH .

250.50 FTBGS

14.40 FT211.60 FT BGS TO 226.00 FTBGS228.70 FT BGS TO 250.50 FT BGS3.30 FT BGS TO 208.90 FTBGS

14.10 FT426.30 FTMSL412.20 FTMSL


413.14 FT428.66 FT15.52 FTNA FTNA FT

41.90 MINNA MIN

- . ' , . .


1200.00 SEC ~ . NA SECli li$|CM/3 ' NA CM/S

NA GPMNANA CM/S .

oiivy o\f3H onnydQAH NT*

TABLE1SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS.

WELL ED20TESTNO. 3


LENGTH TESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLEZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL



INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (HOS)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HOS -HO!)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST 0; T»0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST fl; T-0)

i • . .

2.55 INCH178 INCH

250.50 FTBGS

14.40 FT200.00 FT BGS TO 214.40217.10 FT BGS TO 250.50130 FT BGS TO 197.30

14.10 FT426.30 FTMSL412.20 FTMSL


409.18 FT420.24 FT .11.08 FTNA FTNA FT

35.07 MINNA MIN

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

SLUGTESTRESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS.

(T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCnVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA2.41 . NA

J54.00 SEC- NAiw566i P CM/3 . ' NA

SECCM/3


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUCHEAD)/d[LOQ(T/D)HYDRAUUC CONDUCTMTY.

NA GPMNANA CM/3

AR30571*Golder Associates

O ... -.

oCNQLJ

-JoLJ C

r— "//% o(/In-LJ t

q

V_J kJ m*m J/)

o Ij

2' . ••'• c

"

i¥. '

3 »C

• J

/

kj %

c? '

\\

/

rM *r c

>

•.

f

•

•j ' •• â c

'

• .'

^

t- u3 C

•

^;

1

T <l

?''' 'C

H

"

D ri5 *

— — #

^ cf c

^ ^

^ r

0 <D C

h "

?

—

— ««

Cc

(1(

*

<

<<

^

••1

COd

(0d

1 •

i >

CMd

OJ> oavy OV3H onnvyaAH NT

TABLE 1SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULT?

WELL ED20TESTNO. 4



snck-upTOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi) ,HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TESt (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T-0)

2.55 INCH '3.78 INCH

250.50 FTBGS

14.40 FT185.00 FT BGS TO 199.40 FTBGS202.10 FT BGS TO 250.50 FTBGS

3.30 FT BGS TO 182.30 FTBGS

14.10 FT'426.30 FTMSL41Z20 FTMSL


408.40 FT •414.45 FT8.04 FTNA FTNA FT

99.23 MINNA MIN


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-Tl)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY


llOiiPICM/S 8.91E-04 CM/S


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)1HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

Solder Aueetates AR3057U3

oCNOLJ

LJ^ ioo eLJ tHoQ |

w £*-*- </)

LL,

<*>

<4

CM

COd

<o ,_o <

CMd.

O '••••• <M *O A J - U J A O f»» . CD < h » - *•• • I •- • •. • • _» _• _• i •?^^ f^ ^^ ' 'C3 ^^ ^^3 C3 Cj • **•I I I I I I I I I

Cu> oiLvy ov3H onnvaaAH

i }' i

TABLETSUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL ED20TEST NO. 5



STICK-UP .TOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION

DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING)GROUNDWATEH ELEVATION

INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos -Hor)


•

SLUG TESTRESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAUUC CONDUCnVITY

RECOVERYTEST .RESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULIC HEAD) / d[LOQ (TfT)]HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

£55 INCH3.78 INCH

250.50 FTBGS

14.40 FT170.00 FT BGS TO 184.40 FTBGS187.10 FTBGSTO 250.50 FTBGS3.10 FTBGSTO 167.30 FTBGS

14,10 FT426.30 FTMSL41Z20 FTMSL


409.64 FT425.70 FT16.06 FT423.67 FT2.03 FT

24.33 MIN44.23 MIN

'. •


950.00 SEC 950.00 SEClt8lpiJi;;CM/S , 6.29E-06 CM/S

.

0.03 GPM4.27

5.47E-06 CM/S

Gotder Associates

<

5 ° 5 8 8 g 8 S5 § § 5 - 2 5-S-S.5 £ £ *d d d d d d d d o* d i d d d d d d d d dl I l l l III l l I l I I l i I I

Cu) ouvy ovsH onnvaaAH NT

flR3057l»6

CMdo

tNoLJ i ;»fsr i <o

X i.

LJ5LJE00

Si00 t

Q<LJ

Q

qd^1 > loo« ; - . _ • . : • . , ,

CMCMI

i

CMI

i •? °4 r: 9 <" °° f- •. <o * ..•*•' KJ • 'CMCM • CM CM CM CM *~ v ^- T— »— »— »— v*>' '

flR3057«*7


WELL ED20TESTNO. 6





INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t; f «0)

. -

2.55 INCH.3.78 INCH

250.50 FTBGS

14.40 FT .155.00 FTBGSTO 169.40 FTBGS172.10 FTBGSTO 250.50 FTBGS3.20 FTBGSTO 152.30 FTBGS

14.10 FT.426.30 FTMSL412.20 FTMSL


406.83 FT426.29 FT19.47 FT423.75 FT

2.55 FT

22.03 MIN .44.63 MIN

• • • - . . , . • • ' i


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60 ' 'HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY


950.00 SEC 950.00 SEClilSESislCM/S 5.71 E-06 CM/S '


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)JHYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

0.03 GPM5.37

4.61E-06 CM/S

Golder Associates A ft 3 0 5 7 k Q

«- o - CM no «*• tn <o r 03 01 «- *- CM ^ •* m <oq q q q q q S q q q o -.--:-.-:-o o o cji o o oo 0 0 , 0 o o c:, o c:,

C±j> oiivy OV3H onnvyoAH NT

oCNQLJLJ

r-QiLJPQ_ E

000 2D tCO qQ- 8LJ z,

Q ft<UJt-LJ

O

Q«o m . • «t to CM . . • *- o5 5 5 5 5 5 5

(u) QV3H onnvyoAH

4R305750

toT

i

oP.+

•**:CMI

<0CMI


WELL ED20TESTNO. 7





INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)


i

Z55 INCH3.78 INCH

250.50 FTBGS

14.40 FT140.10 FTBGSTO 154.5fr FTBGS157.20 FTBGSTO 250.50 FTBGS3.40 FTBGSTO 137.40 FTBGS

6.00 FT418.20 FTMSL412.20 FTMSL

I

9.40' FEET BELOW TOC408.80 FTMSL

408.97 FT397.26 FT11.70 FT400.72 FT3.46 FT

10.73 MIN31.57 MIN

- • _ - • \ / _ • ' ' . . .


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2) ' . ,(T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA1.08 ' 1.53

290.00 SEC ' 290.00 SEC: , 1 .60E-05 CM/S 8.54E-05 ' CM/S

f ' • • • ' - • • . •


AVERAGE FLOW RATE ' ' , -d(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / dJLOG (T/T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCnVITY ' '

0.04 GPM1.04

3.6BE-05 CM/S

OolderAnoclatei AR30575I

CO

i <P+

CM

I*;?

Cu> onvy ov3H onnvaaAH NT

AR305752

oCNQLJLJr-o:LJZ p{__ E

S«n

tct: 3LJ

co

< ILJIE

O

a:Q

I

oqdI

CM

T

<o ^^ o« 3

CM

CMI

GOCMI

r* <o m • **• fj CM »-9 9 9 9 999

QV3H

AR305753

U

U

TABLE1SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL ED20TESTNO. 8



STICk-UPTOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi) 'HYDRAUUC HEAD AT SJART OF SLUG TEST (Hos) .MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)


• . . . ' ' , " •'•' . ' •

SLUGTEST ,RESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULIC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)]HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

. . . - • • . . . '

2.55 INCH .3.78 INCH

250.50 FTBGS

14.40 FT125.10 FTBGSTO 139.50 FTBGS142.20 FTBGSTO 250.50 FTBGS3.10 FTBGSTO 122.40 FTBGS

6.00 FT'41&20 FTMSL412.20 FTMSL


409.84 FT * '393.64 FT16.20 FTNA FTNA FT

10.20 MINNA MIN

" ' '.

TR2DATA . . TR4DATA1.82 ' 1.8068.00 SEC 68.00 SEC

lilSEisi?CM/S . 5.09E-04 CM/S •

NA GPM .NANA CM/S

Golder Associates AR 3 05751*

oCN

JTJ« ! . ' «oLJ

=itf>

CM.I- P00 £LJ t

\ < £LJ_c jso

CM

O «- 0* to • *h lO <O Is* CO Ct "" -» «^ W« » • • - • • » • • I " " *0 <f ° ° ° ° ? ? ? T T

Cu) onvy av3H onnvyaAH NT

TABLE1SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULT?

WELL ED20TESTNO. 9


LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONE .ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLEZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL


I


INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HO ,HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor) .HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)


• . - >


(Hi-Hiy(HI-H2) '(T2-T1)x60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

/ ' " ' ,

RECOVERY TESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS,

AVERAGE FLOW RATECKHYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/niHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

•

1 '\

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

250.50 FTBGS

14.40 FT105.10 FTBGSTO 119.50122.20 FTBGSTO 250.503.60 FTBGSTO 102.40

6.00 FT ,418.20 FTMSL412.20 FTMSL


409.00 FT .396.56 FT12.44 FTNA FTNA FT

10.23 MINNA MIN

TR2DATA1.60 . 2.4022.00 SEC 22.00

lMiii£CM/& . Z34E-03

NA GPMNANA CM/S

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

SECCM/S


'(J

9' 9

Ci-O ouvy dv3H onnvdQAH NT

AR305757

TABLE 1 • , . 'SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULT?

WELL ED20TESTNO. 10


LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE-ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL



INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos -Hor)


• • ' . . ' " .

2.55 INCH.3.78 INCH

250.50 FT BGS

14.40 FT90.10 FTBGSTO 104.50 FTBGS107.20 FTBGSTO 250.50 FTBGS4.40 R BGS TO 87.40 FTBGS

6.00 FT418.20 FTMSL412.20 FTMSL.


408.44 FT395.52 FT12.92 FTNA FTNA FT

11.13 MINNA MIN

* - . - * • . *


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-Tl)x60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY


lll®i3filCM/S 1.33E-03 CM/S

RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNEH ANALYSIS.

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUCHEAD)/d[LOQ(T/r)J .HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

OoldeiAitoclote.

oCMOLJ

LJ

o7!7

o0 ———— —————— ——— e

o

Q.

Xto

CM

CO

<P--

d • • • +1

•g0

o *^ CM, n + in « o r ^ cq oj *- —i i '-..?-• ? ? ? ? ' 7

Cu> oavw ov3H onnvaaAH NT


WELL ED20TEST NO. 11

DRILL ROD DIAMETER . • "BOREHOLE DIAMETERBOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)


STICK-UPTOP OF CASING ELEVATION 'GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi) .HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos -Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t: T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T-0)

. f

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

250.50 FTBGS

14.40 FT69.60 FTBGSTO 84.00

•; 86.70 FTBGSTO 250.504.50 FTBGSTO 66.90

6.50 FT418.70 FTMSL412.20 FTMSL

11.00 FEET BELOW TOC407.70 FTMSL "

408.28 FT .389.10 FT19.18 FTNA FTNA Ft

10.37 MINNA MtN

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

' " . ' • • • • . • • ' - • • • • ' . • ' . . . - - • •SLUG TESTRESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS .

(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)x60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY ,

TR2DATA TR4DATA2.32 Z17

. 538.00 SEC 538.00liltiloll CM/S . 8.44E-05

SECCM/S


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)1HYDRAULIC CONDUCnVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

I


U

CO <h »- «- CM

OILVH qv3H onnvyoAH NT

AR30576 I

TABLE 1 . . ; • . . , .SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL - ED20TESTNO. 12



STICK-UP 'TOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (HOHYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)


'

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

250.50 FT BGS

14.40 FT . ,54.10 FTBGSTO 68.5071.20 FTBGSTO 250.505.60 FTBGSTO 51.40

7.00 FT419.20 FTMSL.412.20 FTMSL

, 12.60 FEET BELOW TOO406.60 FTMSL

406.60 FT- 395.91 FT

10.69 FT397.79 FT

1.88 FT

10.50 MIN30.43 MIN

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

/-

• ; ' i . . • : • • • • - . • • .


(Hi-Hiy(HI-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

1

TR2 DATA TR4 DATA1.07 1.09

658.00 SEC 658.00lilliHI CM/S 7.52E-06

SECCM/S

" • . • . ' ' . 'RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS^

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG OVT)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVrrY

0.03 GPM .3.46

6.26E-06 CM/S


i' 3

i )<

Ci-> ouva OV3H onnvyaAH NT

aR305763

OCNaLJLJ

LJ \CM

O - - 'O «n

COt

LJ

U

QX<o to ** 2 S3 3^9 9 9 9 9 9

Cu>

dI

GOdI

P-

T • 3 +00

CM

CMCMI.

CMI

KJ

AR305761*

u

TABLE1SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS


DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETERBOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND.SURFACE)




INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)


/

2.55 INCH3.78 ! INCH

250.50 FTBGS


6.00 FT418.20 FTMSL412.20 FTMSL.

13.03 FEET BELOW TOG405.17 FTMSL

405.81 FT ,.394.83 FT10.98 FT397.18 FT8.63 FT

10.70 MIN27.17 MIN


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T!)x60 'HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA. 1.02 1.02290.00 SEC 290.00 SEC

iiii7£i|6l:CM/S ' 3.46E-06 CM/S

RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS < • ...

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULICHEAD)/cllLOG(T/r)l ;HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

0.14 GPM3.53

3.41E-05 CM/S


5 8 3 S S 8° ? o o o o

CiJ> oava OV3H onnvyQAH NT

AR305766

CNQLJLJ

LJ

o <"LJ

LJXU

LJ

o;***(O z> t

o

CMI

COCM

Q • • • . ____L^ to CM »- o on co9 9 9 9 9 8 8

CLI) QV3H bnnvyoAH

COdI

CMI

AR305767

TABLE1 , , •SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIG TEST RESULTS

WELL ED24TESTNO. 1




DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASJAK3)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION

INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD ATTHE BEGINING OF .SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

. ' f

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT273.60 FTBGSTO 293.00 FTBGS295.70 FTBGSTO 300.00 FTBGS-2.50 FTBGSTO 275.90 FTBGS

2.50 Ft395.20 FT MSL332.70 FTMSL

0.00 FEET BELOW TOC395.20 FT MSL

395.34 FT •375.05 Ft23.59 FT378.00 FT2.95 FT

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0) 20.33 MINTEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t;T- O\ 37.83 MIN

• ' ' . ' , - ' .


(Hi-Hiy(H!-H2) -(T2-T1)x60 'HYDRAUUC CONDUCnvrTY .


540.00 SEC 540.00 SECii:15l-HD6lCM/S 4.04E-06 CM/S


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULIC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T))HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY ,

0.04 GPMNA . ' . ' • . . . • -NA CM/S :

Colder Associates AR305768

^ C M » O ^ - O < O f ^q q q q q q q .d d d d d d d d d T o o o o o o o o ol l l l l l l I l l t l l l l l l l

Cu> OLLva OV3H onnvaaAH NT

AR305769


WELL ED24TESTNO. - • 2





INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD ATTHE BEGININQ OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)



(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY _

RECOVERY TESTRESULTS OF HORNEH ANALYSIS '••/

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / dJLOG (T/T)JHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

. . .

2.55 INCH3.78' INCH

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT254.60 FTBGSTO 269.00 FTBGS271.70 FTBGSTO 300.0Q FTBGS

1.36 Ft BGS TO 251.90 FTBGS

4.70 FT397.40 FTMSL332.70 FTMSL


400.41 FT393.12 FT

7.29 FTNA FTNA Ft

46.20 MINNA MIN

TR2DATA TR4DATA. 1.49 1.76

12.00 SEC 12.00 SECllilli)3lCM/S ' Z76E-03 CM/S .

• , • • '

NA GPMNA . 'NA CM/S

1 7

I

IO

CO Oj *-

d ? ••••«?" ? ? ? '

(U> OLLVW OV3H OITOVyQAH NT

AR30577I

TABLE 1 -SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL ED24 . . ,TESTNO. 3





INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi>HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi -Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT THEBEGINJNG OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DfFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t: T-0)

/

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

200.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT244.30 FT BGS TO 258.70261.40 FTBGSTO 200.00-2.50 FTBGSTO 241.60

16.80 FT409.50 FTMSL392.70 FTMSL


397.55 FT380.12 FT20.74 FTNA FTNA FT

20.40 MIN .15.50 MIN

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS


(Hi-H1V(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY


mtigmOMS 7.63E-04SECCM/S

i . . • . . •

RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS. -

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULlC HEAD) / dlLOG (T/T)JHYDRAUUC CONDUCTtVrTY

\

NA 6PMNANA CM/S

GolderAjsodate, ftR305772

. . .(JLd) OllVd OV3H OnnvyOAH NT

AR305773

TABLE 1 . •SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGJC TEST RESULT?

WELL ED24TESTNO. 4

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETERBOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLEZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVELSTICK-UP %TOP OF CASING ELEVATION .GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (HOHYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

• • '. iTEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t; T » 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T - 0)


(Hi-Hiy(HJ-H2)(T2-T!)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

RECOVERY TESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS,

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d(LOG (T/T)JHYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

200.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT229.30 FTBGSTO 243.70 FTBGS246.40 FTBGSTO 200.00 FTBGS-2.50 FTBGSTO 226.60 FTBGS

6.80 FT399.50 FTMSL392.70 FTMSL.


396.12 FT381.16 FT .18.26 FT .NA FTNA FT

9.53 MIN. 28.43 MIN

• ' ' . . .


360.00 SEC 360.00 SEC4.63E-06 CM/S ;! 4.1 8E-OS: CM/S

. . - . ' ' •

NA GPMNANA CM/S .'

Golder Associate. AR30577V

o o o o o o o oo o o o o

Cu> OLLVW OV3H onnvyaAH NT

AR305775


WELL ED24TESTNO. 5



STICK-UP .TOP OF CASING ELEVATION .GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (HOHYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi . Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGJNING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGJNING OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T - 0

' . ' '

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT214.30 FTBGSTO 228.70231.40 FTBGSTO 300.00'-1.30 FT BGS tO 211.60

-6.80 FT '399.50 FTMSL .392.70 FTMSL


396.64 FT . '377.68 FT22.26 FTNA FTNA FT

27,17 MINNA MIN

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

•-. •' '

' • ' • • • ' ' ' ' . " • ' '


(HI-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY •

TR2DATA . TR4DATAZ60 2.27

120,00 SEC 120.00l EWlCM/S 4.01E-04

\

SECCM/S

RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS.

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / dlLOG '(T/T)JHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CKVS

Colder Associates ftR305776

OLJ) diva ov3H onnvaaAH NTRR305777


WELL ED24TESTNO. 6





INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HOHYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos -,Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (l: T-0)

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT .201.80 FTBGSTO 216.20 FTBGS218.90 FTBGSTO 300.00 FTBGS6.10 FTBGSTO 199.10 FTBGS

4.30 FT397.00 FTMSL392.70 FTMSL

10.40 FEET BELOW TOC ,386.60 FTMSL

389.13 FT •362.35 FT26.79 FTNA FTNA FT

16JO MINNA MIN

• " ;


(Hi-Hiy(HI-H2)(T2-T1)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCnVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA1.06 1.04 /

1020.00 SEC 1020.00 SECiliigiliCM/S 2.20E-06 CM/S

• .-,. . . 'RECOVERY TESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS '

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / dfLOG (T/T)1HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

AR3d5778Golder Associates . ««/ /o

O t- CM 10o o o o qo o q' ' • ' t f. .CLJ) oiivy QV3H onnvyaAH NI

AR305779

j»j 53-oi »

la • •••*2E pj IF H oO


WELL " ED24TESTNO. 7


LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONE ,ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLEZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL



INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor).HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)


. . ;

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS


4.30 FT397.00 FT.MSL392.70 FTMSL


411,17 FT386.09 FT25.09 FTNA FTNA FT

14.63 MINNA MIN .

'


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)x60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA . TR4DATAZ55 NA48.00 SEC NA SEC

liisllilcM/s . . NA CM/SRECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS.

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

'•fl'fi'30578.6-Golder Associates

It.idCMQLU

LU oen

00UJ

< tUJ *

O

CO -Ko:

7

Cu) onvy QV3H onnvdSjw riSr " '

5.5

5.9 IME (

'+•:'

T

lder As

14 TI

4.7

4.5

CM *0 in «D r « en' ' '


WELL ED24TESTNO. 8



STICK-UP •TOP OF CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (HOHYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)


•' ;.- -. . ' ;• '

2.55 INCH ';3.78 INCH

300.00 FT BGS

14.40 FT169.10 FTBGSTO 183.50186.20 FTBGSTO 300.00

3.40 FTBGSTO 166.40

7.00 FT399.70 FTMSL392.70 FTMSL

10.40 FEET BELOW TOO389.30 1 FTMSL

388.19 FT376.51 FT11.68 FTNA FTNA FT

16.57 MIN ' ' ,NA MIN

FT.BGSFt BGSFTBGS

- •




270.00 SEC 270.00mmCM/S 2.02E-05

SECCM/S

. . . . . . . • ,RECOVERYTEST .RESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULIC HEAD) / dlLOG-(T/T)lHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

Golder<Assoctates

u

BOr ^ T - T - T - » ^ » - T - T - c

f.f f T'Tf f-T'T' .'

OliVu-qvaH onnvyoAH N~i

AR305783

TABLE 1SUMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL' 'TESTNO.

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETER .BOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)

LENGTHTESTEDDEPTH RANGE OFTESTED ZONEDEPTH OF ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OFDEPTH OF ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL



INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi -Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERYTEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos -Hor) .

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (t: T - 0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T -

SLUGTEST :RESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS



AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / dlLOG (T/T)]HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

ED2411

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS• t . ,

14.40 FT139.10 FTBGST 153.50 FTBGS153.50 FTBGST 300.00 FTBGS-ZOO FT BGS T 1 36.40 FT BGS

2.50 FT395.20 FTMSL ,392.70 FTMSL


393.20 FT394.51 FT9.98 FT

405.75 FT11.24 FT

39.90 MINNA MIN


f$||;!!! CM/S 1.14E-03 CM/S

ERR GPMERRERR CM/S

Golder Associates _ — n •AR3G578U

C\J

LUr "X

:tinto

LUt

oi. 00 2LU ~

O &LJ

00d

ID

I <rsi ^

" I+ o

ojd

o *- 04 ro •. • •' in uj r^ oq o> <- - *- ojdo' d d odd d d ' ^ ^l i l , l l l l l l I I

O •:. • • -' .; . '/;'V '. : • • -") : . . ' • • • . . . • •

• . . (u) oiivy OV3H onnvaQAH NI • •

TABLE 1 . . - • . - .SUMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL • , . 'TESTNO.


LENGTHTESTED .DEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEDEPTH OF ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OFDEPTH OF ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL



INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (HOHYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)


€D2412

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT124.10 FT BGST 138.50 FT BGS293.00 FTBGST 300.00 FTBGS-2.00 FTBGST 121.40 FTBGS

2.50 FT395.20 FTM'SL392,70 FTMSL


395.39 FT380.95 FT16.75 FTNA FTNA FT

1.50 MINNA MIN

SLUGTESTRESULTS OF HVOHSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA2.10 • £2748.00 SEC ' 48.00 SEC

;9XWE-04 :CM/S 1.00E-03 CM/S

RECOVERYTEST .RESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULIC HEAD) / dfLOG (T/T)JHYDRAULIC CCWDUCTWTY

NA GPM ,NA -NA CM/S


d d do d .d odd '..!" I I

I < 1CM <

+ 6

(u) ouva av3H onnvaoAH NI

4R305787

TABLE 1SUMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL . .TESTNO. • , • •

DRILL ROD DIAMETER .BOREHOLE DIAMETERBOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)

LENGTH IhSltDDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEDEPTH OF ZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OFDEPTH OF ZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL


DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION -

INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (HQHYDRAULIC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF SLUG TEST (Hos),MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT THE BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINJNG OF SLUG TEST (t: T-0)TEST ELAPSED TIME TO BEGINING OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T -


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)x60 • 'HYDRAULIC CONDUCTrvrTY


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULJC HEAD)/dlLOG (T/T)JHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

ED24'13

2.55 INCH '3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT113.10 FTBGST 127.50293.00 FTBGST 300.00-ZOO FTBGST 110.40

2.50 FT.395.20 FTMSL39Z70 FTMSL

0.50 FEET BELOW TOC394.70 FT MSL

\394.78 FT385.29 FT20.79 FTNA FTNA FT

' 3.10 MINNA MIN '

TR2DATA . TR4DATA2.30 2.11

484.00 SEC . 434.00i$iI-fc4S CM/S 9.05E-05

. NA GPMNA.NA CM/S

FTBGSFTBGSFTBGS

- *

SECCM/S

-

Golder Associates 4R305788

C\JI I V—u«

CN

LU gt

*«=O 'ti

___________A00

L^ ™ CN -' fo ** iO - o r - oo o

d d' d d , d- o" d d dI I l l l I I I l

(ij) oiivy av3H onnvyqAH NT

flR305789

00

^ <

CN

TABLE!SUMMARY OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TEST RESULTS

WELL ED24TESTNO. 14

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETER :BOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)



DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION .

INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (l; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T-0)

1

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT101.10 FTBGSTO 115.50 FTBGS118.20 FT BGS TO 300.00 FTBGS7.40 FTBGSTO 98.40 FTBGS

3.00 FT395.70 FTMSL392.70 FTMSL


384.85 FT362.79 FT22.06 FT ,NA FTNA FT

15.63 MINNA MIN

' ' ' t


• . / '

(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2) .(T2-T1)x60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY i


738.00 SEC 738.00 SEC5 3E-06:CM/S 3.86E-06 CM/S'

\ '


AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / dJLOG (T/T)JHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

'-_, . « AR305790Golder Associates

J »J J1}o1 1

oO

CLJ) onvy QV3H onnvyaAH


WELL ED24TESTNO. 15

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLE DIAMETER -BOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)

LENGTHTESTED . vDEPTH RANGE OF TESTED ZONEZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLEZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL

STICK-UP ( ' . ,'TOP OF CASING ELEVATION •GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION

DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION ~

INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TESt (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF. RECOVERY TEST (t; T-0)

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT83.40 FTBGSTO 97.80 FTBGS100.50 FTBGSTO 300.00 FTBGS

7.75 FTBGSTO 80.70 FTBGS

2.65 FT395.35 FTMSL392.70 FTMSL


383.62 FT .369.35 FT14.26 FTNA FTNA FT

38.80 MINNA MIN

SLUGTEST ;RESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-H1V(Hi-H2) ,(T2-Tl)x60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY >


iS E-M-CM/S ' 5.76E-04 CM/S

RECOVERYTEST .RESULTS OF HORNEH ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAULIC HEAD)/d[LOG (T/T)]HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S

ftR305792l • ,

Golder Associates

CMQ

gCO t

o:

o ( | ^ ,jn* g

CO

4O.6

40.2

39.8 IN)

A T4

TIME

T2

Golder A

3938.6

O • • «•; oj iq ^ iO! iq fx q en T-' f i ? . f T f " ' 'oiivy QV3H onnvyaAH

AR305793


WELL ED24TESTNO. 16 .

DRILL ROD DIAMETERBOREHOLEDIAMETER ' .BOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE)




INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi) 'HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)


' t - -

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT.. 65.10 FTBGSTO 79.50 FTBGS82.20 FTBGSTO 300.00 FTBGS7.40 FTBGSTO 62.40 FTBGS

3.00 FT , •. 395.70 FTMSL '392.70 FTMSL


384.21 FT366.50 FT • ,17471 FT 'NA FT .NA FT

63.53 MINNA MIN

• ' . ' . ' " " ' • ' ' - . . ' • • •

SLUGTEST ,RESULTS OF HVORSLEV ANALYSIS

(Hi-Hl)/(Hi-H2)(T2-Tl)x60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA , TR4DATA1.89 . "1.69

290.00 SEC 290.00 SEC11:!2SElJ4lCM/S ' 1.06E-04 CM/S


AVERAGE FLOW RATEcKHYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)1HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPM'.. NA

NA CM/S

AR30579U

T

oiivy Q\?SH onnvyoAHAR305795

.1o


WELL ED24 <TEST NO. 17

DRILL ROD DIAMETER £55 INCHBOREHOLE DIAMETER 3.78 INCHBOREHOLE DEPTH (FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE) 300.00 FTBGS

LENGTHTESTED . 14.40 FTDEPTH (RANGE OF TESTED ZONE 50.10 FTBGSTO 64.50 FTBGSZONE BELOW PACKER ASSEMBLY TO BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE 67.20 FTBGSTO 300.00 FTBGSZONE ABOVE PACKER ASSEMBLY TO WATER LEVEL 4.40 FTBGSTO 47.40 FTBGS

STICK-UP 6.00 FTTOP OF CASING ELEVATION 39B.70 FTMSLGROUND SURFACE ELEVATION 392.70 FTMSL

DEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING) 10.40 FEET BELOW TOCGROUNDWATER ELEVATION 388.30 FTMSL

INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (Hi) 388.90 FT .HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos) 366.83 FTMAXIMUM HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi-Hos) 22.06 FTHYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor) NA FTHYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos-Hor) NA FT

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0) 0.70 MINELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t: T-0)_____- NA MIN____________•_

SLUGTEST .RESULTS OF HVORSL V ANALYSIS.

(Hi-H1)/(Hi-H2) '(T2-T1)X60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

TR2DATA TR4DATA1.11 • NA

1080.00 SEC NA SECili&iiiicM/s . NA CM/SRECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATE ,d(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)]HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNANA CM/S


t.1)

o • -- CM _ Û t " C J « * - ' . « - « I J » - » « K « r t » " ; T - T - T -

? f -f'-T T'T'T'f •-??••• ',-'? T 'f'f

Cu) onvy QV3H onnvyaAH

AR30S797





STICK-UPTOP OF'CASING ELEVATIONGROUND SURFACE ELEVATIONDEPTH TO WATER (BELOW TOP OF CASING)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION

INITIAL HYDRAUUC HEAD (HOHYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hi - Hos)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAUUC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0) .ELAPSED TIMETO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t; T-0)

, ' " • " .

£55 INCtt .'.'-•'.3.78 INCH . ' ' ' .

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT22.10 FTBGSTO 36.50 FTBGS39.20 FTBGSTO 300.00 FTBGS7.40 FT BGS TO 1 9.40 FT BGS

3.00 FT395.70 FTMSL

. 392.70 FTMSL

10.40 FEET BELOW TOC. 385.30 FTMSL

384.24 FT375.58 FT8.66 FTNA FT •NA FT

82.83 MIN, NA MIN

' ' ' . ' ' '


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2) " ' • - . - .(T2-T1)x60HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY


370.00 SEC NA SECII135P3IICM/S . NA CM/S

• . ' • . '*"RECOVERYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS

AVERAGE FLOW RATEd(HYDRAUUC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)JHYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

NA GPMNA . iNA CM/S

flfi30S798Golder Associates

(Q CT r- T- CM rOO

CM) "oiiya QV3H onnvyQAHflR305799





STICK-UPTOP OF CASING ELEVATION ' .GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION


INITIAL HYDRAULIC HEAD (Hi)HYDRAUUC HEAD AT START OF SLUG TEST (Hos)MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (HI - Hos)HYDRAULIC HEAD AT START OF RECOVERY TEST (Hor)HYDRAULIC HEAD DIFFERENCE (Hos - Hor)

ELAPSED TIME TO START OF SLUG TEST (t; T-0)ELAPSED TIME TO START OF RECOVERY TEST (t: T-0) .

\ . •

2.55 INCH3.78 INCH

300.00 FTBGS

14.40 FT37.10 FTBGSTO 51.50 FTBGS54.20 FTBGSTO 300.00 FTBGS6.40 FTBGSTO ,34.40 FTBGS

I

-4.00 FT396.70 FTMSL392.70 FTMSL


385.67 FT377.57 FT8.10 FTNA FTNA FT • - .

14.37 MINNA MIN

••: , - . 1 . -


(Hi-Hiy(Hi-H2)(T2-T1)X60HYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY


180.00 SEC NA SECililliiilcM/s NA CM/S

• - . - • • • . • \ . . .RECOVEHYTESTRESULTS OF HORNER ANALYSIS.

AVERAGE FLOW RATEcKHYDRAULIC HEAD) / d[LOG (T/T)JHYDRAUUC CONDUCTIVITY

' . i

NA GPMNANA CM/S

48305800Oolder Awoclates « « u u

11111? - United States Environmental Protection Agency11111? ATTACHMENT 1 HOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES Colder Associates AR30560U. ELIZABETHTOWN-HOME WELL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE PROPERTY

Documents