DSHW-2010-035057 - 0901a06880198df7

Launch Systems Group
P.O. Box 707
Brigham City, UT 84302
www.atk.com
7 June 2010
8200-FY11-008
Scott T Anderson
Executive Secretary,
c/o UDEQ Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste
PO Box 144880
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114-4880
RECEIVED
JUN 1 5 2010
UIAH DIVISION OF
SOLID & HAZARDOUS WASTE
Z010.02JO\'=J
Subject: ATK Launch Systems Promontory Facility, Evaluation of the Enhanced Bioremediation
Pilot Test, Promontory EPA ID #UTD009081357
Dear Mr. Anderson
In March 2007, your office approved a pilot test plan to evaluate the in-situ enhanced anaerobic
bioremediation of perchlorate and solvent contaminated groundwater at the ATK Promontory
facility. Attached, please fmd a report evaluating the results of this testing. ATK plans to continue
to monitor the wells specified in the plan to assess the long term effects ofthe treatment.
Ifyou have any questions regarding this report please contact Paul Hancock at [phone].
Sincerely,
David P. Gosen, P.E.
Environmental Services
irector
EVALUATION OF THE ENHANCED BIOREMEDIATION
PILOT TEST AT ATK LAUNCH SYSTEMS
PROMONTORY, UTAH BURING GROUNDS
RECEIVED
ATK Launch Systems J^N 1 5 ZOIO
Promontory Facility . u IAH DIVISION OF
Prnmnntnrv I ltah ^^LID & HAZARDOUS WASTE
l-Tomontory, Utah ZOIQ OZOi^
May 20'rO
EarthFax
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Engineers / Scientists
7324 South Union Park Avenue, Suite 100
Midvale, Utah 84047
www.earthfax.com
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 BACKGROUND 1
1.2 SITE CONDITIONS 2
CHAPTER 2 - GROUND WATER MONITORING 3
2.1 ANAEROBIC DEGRADATION OF CHLORINATED CONTAMINANTS 3
2.2 TEST AND SAMPLING PRODECURES 4
CHAPTER 3 - ANALYSIS AND RESULTS 6
3.1 GROUNDV^ATER WELLS AND GENERAL SAMPLING INFORMATION 6
3.2 FIRST-ORDER DEGRADATION RATE STUDY 6
3.3 INDICATOR PARAMETERS 8
3.4 FIELD PARAMETERS 8
3.5 CONCLUSIONS 9
4.0 - REFERENCES 11
FIGURES
Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure IA Layout of Promontory Veg Oil Pilot Test
Figure 2 Log of Concentration for Perchlorate vs Time at Well C-2
Figure 3 Log of Concentration for Perchlorate vs Time at Well A-5
Figure 4 Log of Concentration for TCE vs Time at Well A-1
Figure 5 Log of Concentration for TCE vs Time at Well C-2
Figure 6 Log of Concentration for TCE vs Time at Well A-5
Figure 7 Log of Concentration for TCA vs Time at Well A-1
Figure 8 Log of Concentration for TCA vs Time at Well C-2
Figure 9 Log of Concentration for TCA vs Time at Well A-5
Figure 10 Point Decay Rates of Perchlorate for Different Wells
Figure 11 Point Decay Rates of TCE for Different Wells
Figure 12 Point Decay Rates of TCA for Different Wells
TABLES
Table 1 Study Area Monitor Well Information
Table 2 Table 2. Summary of Analytical Resuits
APPENDIX
SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL WELL DATA
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
EVALUATION OF THE ENHANCED BIOREMEDIATION
PILOT TEST AT ATK LAUNCH SYSTEMS
PROMONTORY, UTAH BURING GROUNDS
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
ATK Launch Systems ('ATK") and its predecessors have operated a rocket
propulsion system manufacturing and testing facility since 1957 at a location
approximately 70 miles northwest of Salt Lake City, Utah (Figure 1). During the first 20
to 30 years of facility operation, wastes such as spent solvents and energetics were
disposed of primarily in unlined impoundments or directly to the ground surface, as was
the common practice at the time.
Extensive investigations of soil and groundwater contamination at the facility
have occurred since 1985. Since that time, many monitoring wells, observation wells,
and piezometers have been installed and monitored, including over 120 wells at the
Promontory facility. Groundwater monitoring and soil surveys indicate the presence of
contamination plumes within and adjacent to the plant boundaries.
To assist in future decisions regarding groundwater remediation, ATK conducted
a pilot test to evaluate in-situ enhanced anaerobic bioremediation of perchlorate- and
solvent-contaminated groundwater at the Promontory facility during August 2007. Under
the pilot test plan, soybean oil was mixed with water pumped from well T-2 and injected
into well A-1. As indicated in the work plan, approximately 8,000 gallons of oil was
injected into the aquifer for this test. After the test, monitoring of treatment progress has
be accomplished using existing monitoring wells at the site. Samples were collected
from the injection well (A-1), the extraction well (T-2), and the adjacent wells to analyze
for perchlorate, target volatile organic compounds, and anaerobic bacteria.
The purpose of this document is to evaluate the impact to water quality from
injecting soybean oil Into the groundwater based on graphic and statistical analyses of
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
collected data. Furthermore, a final suggestion regarding the enhanced bioremediation
plan implemented at the ATK Promontory, Utah burning grounds is proved in this report.
1.2 SITE CONDITIONS
The pilot test described in this work plan was conducted in the vicinity of the M-
136 burning grounds at ATK's manufacturing facility west of Brigham City, Utah (see
Figure 1). Groundwater at this location occurs in highly faulted and fractured limestone
at a depth of approximately 300 feet. Geologic structures in the area include thrust
faults, high-angle normal faults, and low-angle normal faults (Miller et al., 1991). Given
the extensive faulting and folding, hydrogeologic conditions in the area are complex.
North-south and east-west trending faults and fractures in the region appear to have a
significant influence on groundwater flow and contaminant migration. This influence
occurs not only from secondary porosity associated with fractures and solution cavities,
but also from flow barriers as less permeable units have been displaced into zones
adjacent to more permeable units.
Previous investigations in the area have identified a substantially reduced
potentiometric surface slope in the vicinity of the M-136 burning grounds compared with
areas immediately up- and downgradient (see Table 1 and EarthFax Engineering
[2005]). This reduced slope is likely caused by a combination of two conditions;
Locally elevated hydraulic conductivities beneath the burning grounds (due to a
zone of extreme fracturing), with hydraulic conductivities in the area typically
being in the range of 500 to 700 ft/day and average linear groundwater velocities
in the range of 5 to 10 ft/day; and
The presence of lower hydraulic conductivity sediments immediately
downgradient of the site, creating a downgradient obstruction to groundwater
flow.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
CHAPTER 2 - GROUND WATER MONITORING
2.1 ANAEROBIC DEGRADATION OF CHLORINATED CONTAMINANTS
Significant research has been conducted since the late 1990s on the ability of
anaerobic bacteria to degrade chlorinated contaminants including non-organic
perchlorate and organic chlorinated hydrocarbons (see, for example, reviews written by
Nielsen and Keasling [1997], Xu et al. [2003] and Coates and Achenbach [2004]). This
work has resulted in the identification of several chlorinated-reducing bacteria, all of
which are facultative anaerobes or microaerophiles. As a group, these bacteria appear
to be ubiquitous and phylogenetically diverse.
Under anaerobic conditions, perchlorate serves as an electron acceptor during
the oxidation of organic material and is reduced according to the following pathway:
perchlorate -> chlorate -> chlorite -> chloride
The rate-limiting step is the reduction of perchlorate to chlorate. Hence, the reduction of
chlorate to chlorite and eventually to chloride and oxygen is relatively rapid, thereby
avoiding accumulation of chlorite as a toxic byproduct of biodegradation.
Under anaerobic conditions, chlorinated VOCs can be biodegraded by reductive
dechlorination pathways, as the following, which entail the replacement of chlorine
atoms by hydrogen to produce more reduced, less chlorinated products (de Burin et al,
1992; Bouwer, 1992; Chapelle, 1993; Belay and Daniels, 1987). Ofthe three possible
DCE isomers that can be produced from hydrogenolysis of TCE, several studies have
indicated that the cis-isomer of 1,2-dichloroethylene (cis-12DCE) predominates over
trans-12DCE and that 1.1-DCE is the least significant intermediate (Bouwer, 1994].
TCE -> DCE -> VC -> Ethene -> Ethane
TCA -> DCE -> VC ->Ethene
\ \
—> DCA —> CA —->Ethane
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
Substantial research has also been conducted in the past decade on the use of
organic substrates to stimulate microbial growth and enhance the anaerobic degradation
of chlorinated solvents (see. for example, McCarty and Semprini. [1994], Suthersan et
al. [2002], Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council [2002], and the Parsons
Corporation [2004]). Anaerobic biodegradation of chlorinated compounds is
accomplished by replacing chlorine atoms with hydrogen atoms in the following
oxidation-reduction reaction;
H2 + C-Cr ->C-H + H+ + Cl-
in order for this reaction to proceed, two conditions must be met;
• The oxidation-reduction potential must be low, since reductive
dechlorination is energetically favored only after oxygen, nitrate, and iron
are depleted; and
• There must be an adequate supply of organic substrate forthe production
of hydrogen, which serves as the preferred electron donor in reductive
dechlorination.
For anaerobic biodegradation to occur under field conditions, sufficient
fermentable substrate must be added to satisfy the background hydrogen demand and
create the reducing conditions required by the microbes over a sufficiently long time to
achieve the desired contaminant degradation. As this substrate is biodegraded, oxygen
and other natural electron acceptors (e.g., nitrate, manganese, iron, etc.) are depleted,
thereby promoting anaerobic degradation of contaminants. Typical substrates used lo
promote anaerobic biodegradation include alcohols (e.g., ethanol and methanol), low
molecular weight fatty acids (e.g., lactate), carbohydrates (e.g., molasses, high-fructose
corn syrup, and cheese whey), and vegetable oils. This latter substrate was used in this
pilot test.
2.2 TEST AND SAMPLING PRODECURES
The pilot test was conducted in the vicinity of the M-136 Burning Grounds,
located near the east-central portion of the Promontory facility during August 2007. This
4 EartliFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
facility has been used in the past for open burning of waste propellants and solvents. In
this test, soybean oil was mixed with water pumped from well T-2 and injected into well
A-1. The oil was added to the water at a ratio of 15 to 20% by volume, with mixing
occurring via an in-line static mixer or high-speed shear mixer. Then the oil was injected
into the water using a diaphragm pump, with the diaphragm constructed of nitrile, Viton,
or PTFE materials to ensure compatibility with the oil. As planned, approximately 8,000
gallons of oil was injected into the aquifer for this test.
The overall impact of bioremediation processes is assessed by evaluating the
temporal and spatial trend about contaminant concentrations around the injected well A-
1. Existing monitoring wells at the Burning Grounds have been monitoring the
contaminant plume since 1990. As designed, ground water contaminant concentrations
were sampled two months before and after the pilot test in 2007. Later, groundwater
monitoring was completed every three months starting in November 2007. Samples
were collected from the injection well (A-1), the extraction well (T-2), and upgradient well
(C-6), and the other wells located in the Burning Grounds contaminant source zone,
noted on Figure IA. Table 1 lists the contaminant concentrations sampled from since
1990, and also displays data that are missing, for example, both well A-1 and T-2 are
wells that had not been sampled in several years prior to the bioremediation test.
Other than perchlorate, target volatile organic compounds, and bromide, field
analyses was also collected for dissolved oxygen content, oxidation-reduction potential,
pH, water temperature, and specific conductance.
All samples were collected using standard groundwater sampling protocols used
al the ATK Promontory facility. All sampling equipment were decontaminated as
required by standard ATK protocols and were analyzed according to standard methods.
Chemical analyses were performed by the ATK Environmental Laboratory located at the
Promontory Facility, while biological analyses were performed by Nelson Laboratories in
Salt Lake City. Utah.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
CHAPTER 3 - ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
3.1 GROUNDWATER WELLS AND GENERAL SAMPLING INFORMATION
The Burning Grounds are located at the upper edge of the north-south valley
between mountain ranges east and west of the site. Like surface water, groundwater
flows from north to south. As shown in Figure 1, monitoring well C-6 is the only up-
gradient well among all monitor wells, with a distance of 1150 ft to well A-1. Parallel to
well A-1, well A-9 and well A-3 are located respectively to the west and the east of well
A-1 at about 1000 feet. Well C-2, welt T-2, well D-2 and well A-5 are all down-gradient
wells with increasing distance from well A-1. Results of analyses from pumping-tests and
calibration from a completed Visual Modflow groundwater model, are shown as hydraulic
conductivities in Table 1. Conductivities near well A-1 are relatively high at about 500 to
700 ft/day while other values generally range from 30 to 360 ft/day.
Table 2 lists the recorded sampling data for perchlorate, TCE and TCA among
the above wells. The analytical results indicate that residual perchlorate, chloroform,
methylene chloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, and trichloroethene exist in the subsurface
beneath the Burning Grounds. The concentrations of perchlorate, TCE and TCA at well
D-2 are found to be higher than those values at up-gradient wells. When groundwater
flows to well A-5, the concentrations increase. Dispersivity can make contaminant
transport spread laterally from the source as it travels downgradient but may be
controlled by fractures and faults. Information regarding the 20 plus years of elevated
groundwater concentrations are shown by the existing residual contaminant in the plume
source zone. The wide range of contaminant concentrations among monitoring wells
illustrates the heterogeneous distribution of residual perchlorate and chlorinated VOCs in
the source zone {see Table 2).
3.2 FIRST-ORDER DEGRADATION RATE STUDY
Kinetic studies cited in literature (Nielsen and Keasling 1997) indicated that
degradation by dechlorination was first-order with respect to substrate at low
concentrations up to their solubility.
6 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
The concentration vs. time degradation rate can be important in evaluating
biodegradation processes at ground-water contamination sites. The rate constants in
units of inverse time are derived as the slope of the log concentration vs. time curve
measured at a selected monitoring location (usually called point decay rate constant).
The comparison for the point decay rate constant before the pilot test and after the test
can indicate how fast the change of biodegradation rate happens following the injection
of soybean oil.
Figure 2 and Figure 3 display the point decay rates for perchlorate at well C-2
and at well A-5. In the plot, the mean decay rate constant for perchlorate (Kpomt) can be
derived from the slope of the trend line. Kpom describes the natural attenuation decay
before the pilot test and the additional biodegradation with the affect of vegetable oil, not
accounting for dispersion and advance result, since the evaluation is limited to one point.
The blue points represent values before the pilot test while pink and yellow points are
values after the pilot test. Kp^mi before the test is about 0.0003 to 0.0004 per day;
however, Koomt increases two to three times higher at both well C-2 and well A-5. From
this, biodegradation of high perchlorate in groundwater is proved to occur faster under
the impact of vegetable oil compared to the initial less reducing condition.
Similarly, Figure 4 through Figure 6 shows that the efficacy of vegetable oil to
promote anaerobic biodegradation of TCE in groundwater at the Burning Ground region
of the ATK Promontory Facility. At the same time. Figure 7 through Figure 9 present the
same positive impact on biodegradation for TCA.
In order to further illustrate the function of vegetable oil in the biodegradation
process, the point decay rate constant vs. the distance from the injection point was
applied in the study. Because well A-1 is the only source for injected vegetable oil in the
test, the amount of vegetable oil would be greater the closer distance is to well A-1. On
the other hand, the substrate amount controls the reductive dechlorination rate. As a
result, the closer to the injection source, the faster the rate for dechlorination
biodegradation can be achieved. In this way, the distance to well A-1 with respect to the
degradation rate can be the criteria to evaluate the affect of oil on biodegradation. As
descnbed in Table 1, well T-2 is closer to well A-1 lhan well D-2, but is a little farther
7 EarthFa.x Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
away than well C-2. Figure 10 displays thai Kj.? is larger than KD 2 but smaller than Kc-2,
which proves the above theory to be predictive. A conclusion can be drawn lhat lhe pilot
test is efficient for perchlorate biodegradation in the groundwater. Not only for
perchlorate, chlorinated VOCs can also be biodegraded faster with the application of
vegetable oil, which is shown in Figure 11 and Figure 12.
3.3 INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Selected samples collected during the study, were analyzed for nitrate and
sulfate (natural electron acceptors); bacterial content (aerobic and anaerobic); and iron,
manganese, and selenium {natural electron acceptors as well as trace elements
important for the growth of anaerobic bacteria). Finally, selected samples were analyzed
for alkalinity, calcium, and chemical oxygen demand as indicators of conditions
important for bacterial growth or oil consumption.
Available sulfate and nitrate concentrations have not significantly increased or
decreased since the introduction of vegetable oil. Concentrations of iron (Fe) and
manganese (Mn) have generally shown a decrease in the majority of wells indicating
their use as electron acceptors in the anaerobic biodegradation process. Alkalinity,
calcium and chemical oxygen demand did not significantly change during the first six
months following vegetable oil injection.
3.4 FIELD PARAMETERS
Highly chlorinated VOCs mostly undergo reductive dehalogenation through co-
metabolism, giving the microorganism neither energy nor growth [McCarthy and
Semprini, 1994], Perchlorate makes a similar dechlorination process, which should
behave similariy. Samples were submitted to Nelson Labs of Salt Lake City, UT for
bacterial counts. The lab results show that heterotrophic bacteria exists in the study
ground water; however, the bacterial count cannot be evaluated until another round of
samples are included in the database to show the effect on biodegradation.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
Table 3 presents oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) values just before the pilot
test and various points after the test. The measurement of ORP changes from generally
positive to negative values after the injection of vegetable oil, confirming that anaerobic
conditions were occurring.
Under anaerobic condilions, TCE biodegrades in a reductive dechlorination
process that sequentially produces DCE, vinyl chloride and ethylene, as shown in
Section 2.1. Ethane also has been reported as a degradation producl. The concentration
of vinyl chloride at well A-1 at the beginning of the test was 0.0 |jg/L. One year following
the injection of oii, on September 12, 2008. it was found that the concentration of vinyJ
chloride was 4.1 pg/L as TCE was most likely converted to vinyl chloride during
anaerobic degradation. Vinyl chloride is a transitory step in the enhanced biodegradation
process and is short lived in the environment. Because we have not seen vinyl chloride
in the past and the values detected following vegetable oil injection are low, it is
assumed that and vinyl chloride results from bacterial degradation. Concentrations of
vinyl chloride will be monitored closely to ensure that the complete degradation to
ethane occurs.
If vinyl chloride is released into water, it is not expected to adsorb to suspended
solids and sediment in the water. The biodegradation half-life of vinyl chloride in aerobic
and anaerobic waters was reported as 28 and 110 days, respectively. Vinyl chloride is
also unlikely to bioaccumulate in plants or animals.
3.5 CONCLUSIONS
Under anaerobic conditions the chlorinated VOCs and perchlorate can act as
electron acceptors, and the presence of electron donors is needed to drive the reaction.
Reductive dechlorination of TCE or perchlorate is not sustainable unless an electron
donor, such as methanol, vegetable oil, or acetate is provided [Fathepure and Tiedje,
1988; Freedman and Gossett, 1989]. The last sampling of perchlorate and TCA during
November 2008 showed a slight rebound of concentration In some of the wells implying
more electron donor is required for continued anaerobic degradation.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Tesl
Promontory Facility May 2010
Through the long term sampling study, indications are that using vegetable oil as
a substrate to treat volatile organic compounds and perchlorate in groundwater on a
broader basis at the Promontory facility would be successful.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Tesl
Promontory Facility May 2010
4.0 - REFERENCES
Belay N. and Daniels L. 1987. Production of Lthane, Ethylene, and Acetylene from
Halogenated Hydrocaibons by Methanogenic Bacleria. Appl Environ MiciobioL
53(7): 1604-1610
Bouwer, E. J., 1992. Bioiemedialion ofchlonnated solvents using alleniate electron
acceptors. Handbook of Bioremediation. Lewis Publishers Inc
Chapelle. C. 1993. Issues in computer-assisted analysis for one-word test responses.
CALICO '93 Assessment Symposium Transactions, (pp. 17-21)
Coates, J.D. and L.A. Achenbach. 2004. Microbial Perchlorate Reduction: Rocket-
Fueled Metabolism. Nature Reviews Microbiology. Vol. 2, No. 7. pp. 569-580.
DeBruin, H.A.R.; Jacobs, CM..I. (1992) Impact orC02 eiirichnient on the regional
evapotranspiration of agro-ecosystems, a theoretical and numerical study.
In; C02 and biosphere, J. Rozema et al. (eds.). Advances in vegetation science 14,
Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht {1992) 307-321.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 1991. Results of Long-Tenn Pumping Tests Associated with
the M-136 Buming Grounds. Project report prepared tbr Thiokol Corporation.
Midvale, Utah.
EaithFax Engineering, Inc. 2005. Groundwater Fiow and Coniaminant Transport Model
Report for the ATK Thiokol Promontory Facility. Project report prepared for ATK
Thiokol, Inc. Midvale. Utah.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 2006. Pilot -test Work Plan to Evaluate Enhanced
Anaerobic Bioremediaiton of Perchlorate- and Solvent- Contaminated Groundwater.
Projecl report prepared for ATK Thiokol, Inc. Midvale, Utah.
Fathepure, B.Z., J.M. Tiedje and S.A. Boyd. 1988. Reductive dechlorination of
hexachlorobenzene lo Iri- and dichlorobenzenes in anaerobic sewage sludge. Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 54:327-330.
Freedman, D.L., and ,1.M. Gossett. 1989. Biological reductive dechlorination of
leirachloroethylene and trichloroethylene to ethylene under inelhanogenic conditions.
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 55, 2144-2151
McCaity PL, Semprini L. Ground-water treatment for chlorinated solvents. In; Handbook
of Bioremediation (Nonis RD, Hinchee RE, Brown R, McCarty PL, Semprini L,
Wilson JT, Kampbell DH, Reinhard M, Bouwer EJ, Borden RC, Vogel TM, Thomas
JM, Ward CH, eds). Boca Raton, FL:CRC Press, I994;87-l 16.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility May 2010
Miller. D.M., M.D. Crittensen, and T.E. Jordan. 1991. Geologic Map ofthe Lampo
Junction Quadrangle, Box Elder County, Utah. Map 136. Ulah Geological Survey.
Salt Lake City. Utah.
Nielsen, R. Brent. Keasling, Jay D 1997. Anaerobic Degradation ofChlorinated
Hydrocarbons in Groundwater Aquifers or "Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Degradation"
eScholarship Repositoiy, Universily of California Waler Resources Center.
University of California, Multi-campus Research Unit.
hltD;//repositories.cdlib.orq/wrc/tcr/849
Parsons Corporalion. 2004. Principles and Practices of Enlianced Anaerobic
Bioremediation of Chlorinated Solvents. Project report prepared for Air Force Center
for Environmental Excellence, Brooks Air Force Base, Texas. Available online at
vww.afcee.brooks.af.mil/Droducts/lechlrans/bioremedialion/downloads/Principlesand
Practices.pdf.
Suthersan, S.S., C.C. Lules, P.L. Palmer, F. Lenzo, F.C. Payne, D.S. Liles, and J.
Burdick. 2002. Technical Protocol for Using Soluble Carbohydrates to Enhance
Reductive Dechlorination ofChlorinated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons. Projecl report
prepared for Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, Brooks Air Force Base.
Texas. Available online at http;//www.estcp.ora/viewfile.cfm?doc=CU-9920-PR-
Ol.pdf.
U.S. Environmentai Protection Agency. 1993. Guide for Conducting Treatability
Studies Under CERCLA - Biodegradation Remedy Selection (Interim Guidance).
EPA/540/R-93/519a. Office of Solid Wasle and Emergency Response. Washington.
D.C.
Xu, J.. Y. Song. B. Min. L. Steinberg, and B.E. Logan. 2003. Microbial Degradation of
Perchlorate: Principles and Applications. Environmental Engineering Science. Vol.
20, No. 5, pp. 405-422.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Miles
I 1 \ 1
0 10 20 30
FIGURE 1. SITE LOCATION MAP Earttftx
C:\UC1023\04\DWC\ncURC ZDWcy-iB-oe
9
A-3
INITIAL SPREAD OF
EMULSIFIED OIL.
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
AREA
LEGEND
® INJECTION WELL
O EXTRACTION WELL
S MONITORING WELL
0' 400*
FIGURE IA. LAYOUT OF PROMONTORY VEGOIL PILOT TEST E&TtlftX
ATK Launch Systems Inc.
Promontory Facility
Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
May 2010
Figure 2. Log of Concentration for Perchlorate vs. Time at well C-2
25
2 H
£ 1.5
05
0
19/2001
y=-0.0004xt 18.054
y--0.0016x + 65.977
9/1/2002 1/1'1/2004 5/28/2005
Time
10/10/2006 2/22/2008 7/6/2009
Figure 3. Log of Concentration for Perchlorate vs. Time at well A-5
39 ^
3.8
c
o
U 3.5 "5 o
9 3.4
3.3
3.2
y = -0.0003x + 14.423
y = -0.0007x + 31.799
1/14/2004 8/1/2004 2/17/2005 9/5/2005 3/24/2006 10/10/2006 4/28/2007 11/14/2007 6/1/2008 12/18/2008
Time
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc.
Promontory Facility
Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
May 2010
4.5 -|
4 -
3.5
c
•I 3
V 2.5 u
5 2
gl.5
_i
1
0.5 J
Figure 4. Log of Concentration for TCE vs. Time at Well A-1
y =-0.0001 x +8.3189
y = -0.0027X
•
\
+ 108.45 ^
0
8/11/1987 5/7/1990 1/31/1993 10/28/1995 7/24/1998 4/19/2001 1/14/2004 10/10/2006 7/6/2009 4/1/2012
Time
Figure 5. Log of Concentration for TCE vs. Time at Well C-2
3.6
35
3.4
3.3
32 -I
• •
y = -6E-05x +5.5295
y=-0.0006x +26.498
3.1
3
29
2.8
8/11/1987 5/7/1990 1/31/1993 10/28/1995 7/24/1998 4/19/2001 1/14/2004 10/10/2006 7/6/2009
Time
EartliFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc.
Promontory Facility
Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
May 2010
Figure 6. Log of Concentration for TCE vs. Time at Well A-5
y = -8E-05x +6.5866
y = -0.0007x +30.757
4.5
4 -
3.5 -
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
6/11/1937 5/7/1990 1/31/1993 10/28/1995 7/24/1998 4/19/2001 1/14/2004 10/10/2006 7/6/2009
Time
Figure 7. Log of Concentration for TCA vs. Time at Well Al
c o O
"o (3 O
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
8/1
y = -0.0002x+ 10.787
y = -0.0012x + 45.
1/198 5/7/1990 1/31/199 10/28/19 7/24/199 4/19/200 1/14/200 10/10/20 7/6/2009
7 3 95 8 1 4 06
Time
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc.
Promontory Facility
Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
May 2010
3.5
.2 2 5
2
0) I
O c o O 1.5
o 1 -
0.5
0
Figure 8. Log of Concentration for TCA vs. Time at Well C-2
y = -0.0001x+7.0717
y = -0.0006x +26.951
12/23/1988 9/19/1991 6/15/1994 3/11 /1997 12/6/1999 9/1 /2002 5/28/2005 2/22/2008 11/18/2010
Time
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
25
2
1.5 ^
1
0.5
Figure 9. Log of Concentration for TCA vs. Time at Well A-5
y = -0.0002x +9.5759 y = -0.001x +44.29
0
5/7/1990 1/31/1993 10/28/1995 7/24/1998 4/19/2001 1/14/2004 10/10/2006 7/6/2009 4/1/2012
Time
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc.
Promontory Facility
Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
May 2010
Figure 10. Point Decay Rates of Perchlorate for Different Wells
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
8/6/2007
y^O.OOOBx- 30.399
y=-0.0016x +65.977
y = -0.0009x +37.501
11/14/2007 2/22/2008
Time
6/1/2008
• Well T-2
A Well D-2
• Well C-2
9/9/2008
4
3.5
2
z 2.5 ^
i 2^
O
1.5 1 -I
0.5
0
Figure 11. Point Decay Rates of TCE for Different Wells
y = -0.0005X + 23.49
y = -0.0006X + 25.649
y = -0.0027X + 108.45
• Well A-1
• Well T-2
• Well D-2
8/6/2007 11/14/2007 2/22/2008 6/1/2008 9/9/2008 12/18/2008
Time
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc.
Promontory Facility
Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
May 2010
2.5
•B 2
o
0.5
0
Figure 12. Point Decay Rates of TCA for Different Wells
8/6/2007
y=-0.0002x +11.607
y = -0.0008X + 32.071
y =-0.0012x +45.6
11/14/2007 2/22/2008
Time
6/1/2008
• Vl/ellA-1
• Well T-2
Well D-2
9/9/2008
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc.
Promontory Facility
Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
May 2010
TABLE 1. STUDY AREA MONITOR WELL INFORMATION
Well No.
Water level
(ft)
Screen level
(ft)
Hydraulic
Conductivity
(ft/day)
Distance to A-1 1
(ft)
A-1 4290.16 4275 730 0
T-2 4287.4 4247.3 510 340
D-2 4289.43 4259.8 552.5 481
C-2 4287.4 4247.3 510 339
C-6 4288.1 4251.9 30 1150
A-5 4288.71 4271 190 865
A-9 4290.29 4273 145 981
A-6 4290.2 4259.6 360 1618
A-3 4584.98 4540.71 54 1280
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc.
Promontory Facility
Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
February 2010
Table 2. Summary of Analytical Results
Perchlorate (ug/L) TCE (ug/L) TCA (ug/L)
DATE A-1 T-2 D-2 C-2 A-5 A-1 T-2 D-2 C-2 A-5 A-1 T-2 D-2 1 C-2 A-5
02/26/1988 14536 12177 5255
12/08/1988 3100 1000
08/20/1990 1600
11/21/1990 5300 2800 7900 2200 990
03/20/1991 2600 6400 1200
08/22/1991 430
11/14/1991 450
03/05/1992 600
05/29/1992 1700 3600 940
060/5/1992 890 6000
10/27/1992 11240 16789
06/02/1993 1863 6337 921 14889
05/24/1994 3500 1870 5000 1700 620 10000
03/24/1995 5100 4300
05/04/1995 1950 4300 595 8000
04/08/1996 2200 4800 570 7700
04/20/1997 1970 6620 449 6360
04/20/1998 1690 3660 313 4770
04/21/1999 3010 160 3940
04/18/2000 3350 188 3730
04/01/2001 3200 3110
05/05/2004 6210
05/02/2006 4360
06/18/2007 22.9 22.1 1260 71.9 3890 1210 1240 2200 1230 2710 128 124 271 295 1520
10/15/2007 0 19.3 235 50.1 3340 60 1180 2690 1390 3060 3.9 110 299 110 1690
11/12/2007 0 17.7 888 44.3 3290 36 885 2330 1270 3040 2.6 101 248 113 1660
03/10/2008 0 15 706 17 879 2060 0 79.8 216
06/12/2008 0 11.2 588 19.8 2210 0 729 1800 1030 1990 1.8 72 258 105 962
09/24/2008 0 24.8 476 38.3 2310 6.6 696 1790 839 2080 4.2 63.8 186 91.8 1020
06/22/2009 0 23.3 387 63.8 2500 30.4 736 1840 939 1840 4.2 55.4 188 65.3 754
EarttiFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc.
Promontory Facility
Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
May 2010
TABLE 3. ORP VARIANCE AT MONITORED WELLS
Date A-1 T-2 D-2 C-2 A-5
06/18/2007 202 -17 116 5 17
10/15/2007 -75 1.2 33 30 49
11/12/2007 -140.6 34.6 72 38 71
03/10/2008 -120 34 45.2 -30 -6
06/12/2008 -111.6 -105.7 -99.4 -107.2 -105.6
09/12/2008 -145 -123.4 -115.7 -104.1 -103.2
06/22/2009 -241 96 14.9 -55.3 -40
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
ATK Launch Systems Inc. Evaluation of Vegetable Oil Pilot Test
Promontory Facility February 2010
APPENDIX
SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL WELL DATA
EartliFax Engineering, Inc.
Burning Ground Veg Oil Project
Well A-1
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
6/18/2007 22.9 29.2 8.3 45.2 12.4 128 1210 202
11/12/2007 0 2.4 0 3.1 0 3.9 36 -75
3/10/2008 0 0 8 7.9 49.1 2.6 17 -140.6
6/12/2008 0 0 14.4 7.5 103 0 0 -111.6
9/23/2008 0 0 18.8 8.4 207 1.8 6.6 -145
6/16/2009 0 0 17.5 10.9 209 4.2 30.4 -241
-250
Burning Ground Veg Oil Project
Well T-2
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
6/18/2007 22.1 35.2 9.7 40 16.2 124 1240 -17
10/15/2007 19.3 32.5 8.8 36.1 15.5 110 1180 1.2
11/12/2007 17.7 296 8 29.4 13.8 101 885 34.6
3/10/2008 15 24.8 6.2 289 12.5 79.8 879 34
6/12/2008 11.2 23.5 6.2 26.6 12.9 72 729 -105.7
9/12/2008 24.8 20.8 6.1 20.2 11.8 63.8 696 -123.4
6/16/2009 23.3 20.7 5.3 30.1 14.7 55.4 736 96
Well T-2
150
100
50
-50
-100
-150
-^^^ ^ ^ c9> & c?> c?> c?> c?> ^ 5^ S <?>
Burning Ground Veg Oil Project
Well T-2
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform. . DCA . DCE CISr1-2 DCE TCA _TCE ORP
6/18/2007 22.1 35.2 9.7 40 16.2 124 . -1240 -17
10/15/2007 19.3 325 8.8 36.1 15.5 110 1.180 1.2
11/12/2007 17.7 29.6 8 29.4 13.8 101 r 885 34.6
3/10/2008 15 24.8 6.2 28.9 12.5 79.8 : . -879 34
6/12/2008 11.2 23.5 6.2 25.6 12.9 72 T. .729 -105.7
9/12/2008 24.8 20.8 6.1 20.2 11.8 63.8 • 696 -123.4
6/16/2009 23.3 20.7 5.3 30.1 14.7 55.4 736 96
a. a.
1400
1200
1000
600
600
Well T-2
P»—TCE
S?' ^ ^ J?' c?> Sb* ^ 5^ c?» c? s? s? 5? S?
Buming Ground Veg Oil Project
Well C-3
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/19/2007 8490 111 141 591 8.1 1360 5160 -49
10/16/2007 7950 114 125 704 7.3 1420 6480 -15
11/12/2007 7790 120 134 757 7.2 1590 7380 19
6/12/2008 9380 89.5 108 468 5.3 979 5530 -105.1
9/11/2008 9370 84 3 108 584 54 1090 4700 -124.4
6/16/2009 11700 93 118 614 6.9 1020 5470 -39.8
Well C-3
150
100
50
a. 0
CL
-50
-100
• Chloroforni
—•-DCA
—•—CIS-1-2 DCE
—•-ORP
• • /\ • • •
-150 ^ . : ^ • I . . , . , . . , .
Buming Ground Veg Oil Project
Well C-3
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/19/2007 8490 111 141 591 8.1 1360 5160 -49
10/16/2007 7950 114 125 704 7.3 1420 6480 -15
11/12/2007 7790 120 134 757 7.2 1590 7380 19
6/12/2008 9380 89.5 108 468 5.3 979 5530 -105.1
9/11/2008 9370 84.3 108 584 54 1090 4700 -124.4
6/16/2009 11700 93 118 614 6.9 1020 5470 -39.8
Well C-3
12003
10000
^•^v<,<^^ d>Vv ^A^^ V^VV^^ ^^^^^^
Burning Ground Veg Oil Project
Well D-2
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/19/2007 1260 122 29 105 37.7 271 2200 116
10/18/2007 235 127 232 114 358 299 2690 33
11/12/2007 888 123 22 8 109 345 248 2330 72
3/10/2008 706 959 17.2 78 27.1 216 2060 45.2
6/12/2008 588 114 21.3 89.4 324 258 1800 -994
9/12/2008 476 99.6 20.7 97.2 29.9 186 1790 -115.7
6/16/2009 387 90 17.8 832 25.7 188 1840 149
Well D-2
150
100
50
-50
-100
-150
/ / / J' J'J' -.^ J'J'J' ^ ^ ^
Buming Ground Veg Oil Project
Well D-2
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/19/2007 1260 122 29 105 37.7 271 2200 116
10/18/2007 235 127 23.2 114 35.8 299 2690 33
11/12/2007 888 123 22.8 109 34.5 248 2330 72
3/10/2008 706 95.9 17.2 78 27.1 216 2060 45.2
6/12/2008 588 114 21.3 89.4 32.4 258 1800 -99.4
9/12/2008 476 99.6 20.7 97.2 29.9 186 1790 -115.7
6/16/2009 , 387 90 17.8 83.2 25.7 188 1840 14.9
Well D-2
3000
2500
2000
Q.
Q.
1500
1000
500
Burning Ground Veg Oil Project
Well C-2
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/19/2007 71.9 122 28.8 102 37.8 295 1230 5
10/18/2007 50.1 36 9 458 26.4 110 1390 30
11/15/2007 44.3 36.8 9.3 49.4 26.3 113 1270 38
6/12/2008 19.8 349 8.7 35.8 25.5 105 1030 -107.2
9/23/2008 38.3 31.5 8.1 37.4 24.8 91.8 839 -104.1
6/19/2009 63.8 248 6 30 22 65.3 939 -553
Well C-2
300
200
100
• Perchlorate
- Chloroform
DCA
DCE
•CIS-1-2 DCE
TCA
ORP
-100
-200 < . , . : . , , . . , , ^
:
Buming Ground Veg Oil Proiect
Well C-2
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA - TCE ORP
7/19/2007 71.9 122 28.8 102 37.8 295 -^1230 5
10/18/2007 "50.1 36 9 45.8 26.4 110 . 1390 30
11/15/2007 44.3 36.8 9.3 49.4 26.3 113 y '1270 38
6/12/2008 19.8 34.9 8.7 35.8 25.5 105 1 1030 -107.2
•9/23/2008 38.3 31.5 8.1 37.4 24.8 91.8 ' . 839 -104.1
6/19/2009 63.8 24.8 6 30 22 65.3 939 -55.3
Well C-2
1500 T —
1250 •—.
S a. a. 1125
IOOC
P ^ 0^ ^ ^ ^ Ci* c?
Burning Ground Veg Oil Project
Well D-6
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/23/07 0 156 9.6 106 18 551 1810 211
10/16/07 128000 132 7.9 102 17.9 470 926 71
11/15/07 0 129 6.7 96.6 15.1 475 769 86
3/10/08 129000 122 6.4 84.2 14.6 457 867 44.6
6/12/08 112000 131 6.6 81.6 16 410 854 -101.7
9/24/08 108000 108 6.4 87.9 14.7 460 906 -112.6
5/13/09 93000 125 6.1 92.1 15.1 534 1090 -5
Well D-6
300
200
Chloroform
DCA
DCE
CIS-1-2 DCE
•ORP
100
-100
-200
<^ ^ J?" ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ,5b* 5b* Ci* s?> f?> c? jf^
Buming Ground Veg Oil Project
Well D-6
DATE •J'Perchlorate'' Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/23/07 10 156 9.6 106 18 551 1810 211
10/16/07 ; 128000 132 7.9 102 17.9 470 926 71
11/15/07 il. „ .. 10 129 6.7 96.6 15.1 475 769 86
3/10/08 129000 122 6.4 84.2 14.6 457 867 44.6
6/12/08 ';• ,112000 131 6.6 81.6 16 410 854 -101.7
9/24/08 1 108000 108 6.4 87.9 14.7 460 906 -112.6
5/13/09 1 .93000 125 6.1 92.1 15.1 534 1090 -5
Well D-6
150000
125000
25000
^o** cf <f <c^ ^^"^ cf ^o-* o<!f s,*^
Buming Ground Veg Oil Project
Well D-6
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/23/07 0 156 9.6 106 18 551 1810 211
10/16/07 128000 132 7.9 102 17.9 470 926 71
11/15/07 0 129 6.7 96.6 15.1 475 769 86
3/10/08 129000 122 6.4 84.2 14.6 457 867 44.6
6/12/08 112000 131 6.6 81.6 16 410 854 -101.7
9/24/08 108000 108 6.4 87.9 14.7 460 906 -112.6
5/13/09 93000 125 6.1 92.1 15.1 534 1090 -5
Well D-6
2000
U ' • I • . . • , I — 1 1 . I , , . , .
^ S^J^ .S^ 5?* vS?* J>* Si* Si* 5?* ^ Sf^ 5?
Burning Ground Veg Oil Project
Well C-1
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/30/2007 11800 267 8.8 68.8 59.5 327 1080 -41
10/16/2007 14900 289 10.2 125 117 435 1540 23
11/15/2007 14700 326 9.8 119 116 484 1630 63
6/12/2008 14900 207 8 90.8 111 250 1110 -104.6
9/23/2008 13800 123 7.5 27.3 120 194 935 -1284
6/16/2009 19500 105 7.6 57.9 132 172 1010 0
-200
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ .S^ Ji* p* 5b* c?>
Burninq Ground Veg Oil Project
Well C-1
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA .DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/30/2007 .11800 267 8.8 68.8 59.5 327 1080
10/16/2007 •14900 289 10.2 125 117 435 . 1540 23
11/15/2007 '14700 326 9.8 119 116 484 1630 63
6/12/2008 " "M4900 207 8 90.8 111 250 1110 -104.6
9/23/2008 13800 123 7.5 27.3 120 194 935 -1284
6/16/2009 _ 19500 106 7.6 57.9 132 172 1010 0
20003
18000 •
16000
s a. a.
14000
12000
10000
Well C-1
C.'^'^ A J'J' ^
^^^''^^'^O^^^O^ 'f<,^^^ ^'^^ ^^^^cf 0^^^<f b*^^<^V V«V^~^ V
Buming Ground Veg Oil Project
Well C-1
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
7/30/2007 11800 267 8.8 68.8 59.5 327 1080 -41
10/16/2007 14900 289 10.2 125 117 435 1540 23
11/15/2007 14700 326 9.8 119 116 484 1630 63
6/12/2008 14900 207 8 90.8 111 250 1110 -104.6
9/23/2008 13800 123 7.5 27.3 120 194 935 -128.4
6/16/2009 19500 105 7.6 57.9 132 172 1010 0
2000
Well C-1
U 1 • ' ' . . 1 , , , . ,
^ Si* j:i^ .Si* o* ^ Si* .Si* J'J'^^^^J^^^^ Jb^
Burning Ground Veg Oil Project
Well A-5
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
9/6/2007 4720 453 33.1 269 9.6 1520 2710 17
10/18/2007 3340 470 32.4 283 8.7 1690 3060 49
11/15/2007 3290 451 34.9 280 9 1660 3040 71
6/12/2008 2210 473 21.6 158 10.1 962 1990 -105.6
9/24/2008 2310 434 26.6 189 9.6 1020 2080 -103.2
6/22/2009 2500 496 18.1 125 11.8 754 1840 -40
Well A-5
300
200
100
-100
-200
Se Oc No De Ja Fe Ma Ap Ma Ju J Au Se Oc No De Ja Fe Ma Ap Ma Ju
p- t- V- c- n- b- r- r- y- n- ul- g- p- t- v- c- n- b- r- r- y- n-
07 07 07 07 08 08 08 08 08 08 08 08 08 08 08 08 09 09 09 09 09 09
Burning Ground Veg Oil Project
Well A-5
DATE Perchlorate Chloroform DCA DCE CIS-1-2 DCE TCA TCE ORP
9/6/2007 4720 453 33.1 269 9.6 1520 2710 17
10/18/2007 3340 470 32.4 283 8.7 1690 3060 49
11/15/2007 3290 451 34.9 280 9 1660 3040 71
6/12/2008 2210 473 21.6 158 10.1 962 1990 -105.6
9/24/2008 2310 434 26.6 189 9.6 1020 2080 -103.2
6/22/2009 2500 496 18.1 125 11.8 754 1840 -40
Well A-5
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
a. 2500
Q.
- Perchlorate
- Chloroform
TCA
TCE
2000
1500
1000
500
^S^ ^ Si* Ji* Si* Si* Si* Si* .<i* Cb* Ci* Si* Ci* Ci* s5* Ci^ Ci^ s? ^•
Concentrations of Iron at Ml36 Wells
LAB SAMPLE ID ID SAMPLED ON TEST ANALYTE RESULT UNIT Trend DILUTION MDL EQL ANALYSIS_DATE
0711016-02 A-1 12-NOV-07 60108 Metals_W Fe 5150 ug/L
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
20 100 20-NOV-07
0803008-01 A-1 lO-Mar-08 6010B Metals W Fe 8210 ug/L In
c
r
e
a
s
e
20 100 12-Mar-08
0709007-01 A-5 06-Sep-07 6010B Metals W Fe 68. J ug/L n u 20 100 19-Sep-07
0711022-01 A-5 15-NOV-07 6010B Metals_W Fe 50. J ug/L De
e
r
20 100 20-NOV-07
0707042-01 C-1 30-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Fe 776 ug/L <u 20 100 06-Aug-07
0710034-02 C-1 16-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Fe 580 ug/L
De
c
r
e
a
20 100 23-Oct-07
0711022-04 C-1 15-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Fe 443 ug/L De
c
r
e
a
20 100 20-NOV-07
0707026-03 C-2 19-Jul-07 6010B Metals_W Fe 322 ug/L
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
20 100 23-Jul-07
0711022-03 C-2 15-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Fe 859 ug/L In
c
r
e
a
s
e
20 100 20-NOV-07
0707026-01 C-3 19-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Fe 3800 ug/L 01 20 100 23-Jul-07
0710034-01 C-3 16-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Fe 3570 ug/L
n t) u
Q
20 100 23-Oct-07
0711016-01 C-3 12-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Fe 2630 ug/L
n t) u
Q 20 100 20-NOV-07
0707026-02 D-2 19-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Fe 249 ug/L <u 20 100 23-Jul-07
0711016-04 D-2 12-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Fe 80. J ug/L
De
c
r
e
a
20 100 20-NOV-07
0803008-03 D-2 lO-Mar-08 6010B Metals_W Fe 44. J ug/L De
c
r
e
a
20 100 12-Mar-08
0707029-02 D-3 23-Jul-07 6010B Metals_W Fe 3480 ug/L 20 100 31-Jul-07
0707042-02 D-4 31-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Fe 905 ug/L ea
s
t
20 100 06-Aug-07
0710031-02 D-4 15-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Fe 124 ug/L
u 0) Q 20 100 23-Oct-07
0710031-03 D-5 15-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Fe 1060 ug/L 20 100 23-Oct-07
0707029-01 D-6 23-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Fe 219 ug/L 20 100 31-Jul-07
0710034-03 D-6 16-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Fe 63. J ug/L ea
s
e
20 100 23-Oct-07
0711022-02 D-6 15-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Fe 34. J ug/L u
Q 20 100 20-NOV-07
0803008-04 D-6 lO-Mar-08 6010B Metals_W Fe 36. J ug/L 20 100 12-Mar-08
0710031-01 T-2 15-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Fe 4980 ug/L 20 100 23-Oct-07
0711016-03 T-2 12-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Fe 2380 ug/L !c
r
e
a
20 100 20-NOV-07
0803008-02 T-2 lO-Mar-08 6010B Metals W Fe 2320 ug/L
w
o 20 100 12-Mar-08
Concentrations of Manganese at Ml 36 Wells
LAB SAMPLE ID ID SAMPLED ON TEST ANALYTE RESULT UNIT Trend DILUTION MDL EQL ANALYSIS DATE
0711016-02 A-1 12-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Mn 1270 ug/L
OJ
_c 5 20-NOV-07
0803008-01 A-1 lO-Mar-08 6010B Metals W Mn 824 ug/L
"o <u Q 5 12-Mar-08
0709007-01 A-5 06-Sep-07 6010B Metals W Mn I.IJ ug/L (U
_c 5 19-Sep-07
0711022-01 A-5 15-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Mn U ug/L
TJ <u Q 5 20-NOV-07
0707042-01 C-1 30-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Mn 32.6 ug/L <u 5 06-Aug-07
0710034-02 C-1 16-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Mn 28.6 ug/L c
T3
V
5 23-Oct-07
0711022-04 C-1 15-NOV-07 6010B Metals_W Mn 20 ug/L Q 5 20-NOV-07
0707026-03 C-2 19-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Mn 12.9 ug/L OJ
c 5 23-Jul-07
0711022-03 C-2 15-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Mn 10.2 ug/L
"u <u o 5 20-NOV-07
0707026-01 C-3 19-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Mn 53.1 ug/L cu _c 5 23-Jul-07
0710034-01 C-3 16-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Mn 24.1 ug/L
(J (U Q 5 23-Oct-07
0711016-01 C-3 12-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Mn 25.3 ug/L 5 20-NOV-07
0707026-02 D-2 19-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Mn 7.61 ug/L QJ 5 23-Jul-07
0711016-04 D-2 12-NOV-07 6010B Metals_W Mn 4.2 J ug/L
C
"u
(U
5 20-NOV-07
0803008-03 D-2 lO-Mar-08 6010B Metals W Mn 3. J ug/L Q 5 12-Mar-08
0707029-02 D-3 23-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Mn 1280 ug/L 5 31-Jul-07
0707042-02 D-4 31-Jul-07 6010B Metals_W Mn 12.8 ug/L OJ
_c 5 06-Aug-07
0710031-02 D-4 15-Oct-07 6010B Metals_W Mn 3.J ug/L
"o (U Q 5 23-Oct-07
0710031-03 D-5 15-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Mn 7.49 ug/L 5 23-Oct-07
0707029-01 D-6 23-Jul-07 6010B Metals W Mn 7.74 ug/L 5 31-Jul-07
0710034-03 D-6 16-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Mn 4.6 J ug/L QJ
c 5 23-Oct-07
0711022-02 D-6 15-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Mn 3.9 J ug/L
"u <u a 5 20-NGV-07
0803008-04 D-6 lO-Mar-08 6010B Metals W Mn 3.2 J ug/L 5 12-Mar-08
0710031-01 T-2 15-Oct-07 6010B Metals W Mn 75 ug/L cu 00 c 5 23-Oct-07
0711016-03 T-2 12-NOV-07 6010B Metals W Mn 81.8 ug/L 03 .c u 5 20-NGV-07
0803008-02 T-2 lO-Mar-08 6010B Metals W Mn 75 ug/L o z 5 12-Mar-08