Passive Soil Gas for Site Conceptualization

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Notes on slide 1

    1 Favorite

    Passive Soil Gas for Site Conceptualization - Presentation Transcript

    1. Use of Advanced Passive Soil Gas Technology for Site Conceptualization and Closure Strategies Harry O’Neill and Joe Odencrantz, Ph.D., P.E. Beacon Environmental Services, Inc. 24th Annual International Conference on Soils, Sediments, and Water University of Massachusetts -- Amherst October 21, 2008 1
    2. ROAD MAP • Spatial Variability of VOCs • Passive Soil Gas (PSG): Background and Technology • PSG Surveys to Assist in Design of Conceptual Site Model (CSM) • Example Site Application Results of PSG Survey and Previous Plume Depictions Change of CSM Results in Change of Remediation Strategy Quarterly Monitoring of Remediation Effectiveness Mass to Concentration Tie-In for Vapor Intrusion Evaluation • Conclusions 2
    3. Overcoming the Challenges from Spatial Variability Passive Soil Gas (PSG) sampling cost effectively characterizes sites with Quantitative Data for VOC & SVOC contamination in soil, groundwater, soil vapor or indoor air. Benefits of PSG Surveys: • Maximize the number of locations that can be sampled • Reduce uncertainty, surprises, and unforeseen costs • Make well-informed and appropriate corrective action decisions • Rapidly collect accurate data 3
    4. PSG Example Grid: 5 Acres at 100 ft Spacing PROPERTY BOU NDARY SG01 SG02 SG03 SG04 SG05 SG06 SG07 SG08 SG09 SG10 SG11 SG12 SG13 5 acres SG14 SG15 SG16 SG17 SG18 SG19 100 ft spacing SG20 SG21 SG22 SG23 SG24 SG25 SG26 SG27 SG28 SG29 SG31 SG30 SG32 SG33 SG34 Scale in Feet SG35 0 75 150 4
    5. Spatial Variability of Petroleum Contamination PROPERTY BOU PROPERTY BOU NDARY NDARY SG01 SG01 SG02 SG02 SG03 74 SG03 423 SG04 SG04 SG05 SG05 157 1,525 52 340 SG06 SG07 SG08 2,683 SG06 SG07 SG08 109 SG09 SG10 SG09 SG10 SG11 SG11 17,003 119 47 27 10,636 86 SG12 SG13 33,051 SG12 SG13 SG14 SG14 SG15 776 SG15 SG16 SG16 SG17 SG17 13,202 97,006 40 SG18 18,784 SG18 1,025 SG19 62,760 SG19 80 SG20 95,334 SG20 SG21 SG21 SG22 SG22 3,887 SG23 411 SG23 SG24 SG24 SG25 SG25 SG26 SG26 100,000 1,000 950 90,000 900 850 33 80,000 230 800 SG27 SG28 SG29 SG27 SG28 SG29 750 70,000 700 650 60,000 600 550 50,000 500 SG31 SG30 SG31 SG32 SG30 SG32 450 40,000 400 350 30,000 300 34 250 SG33 20,000 SG33 200 SG34 SG34 150 Total BTEX 10,000 Acenaphthene 100 50 0 0 62 Color Scale Color Scale Scale in Feet (nanograms) (nanograms) Scale in Feet SG35 SG35 0 75 150 0 75 150 5
    6. PSG Example Grid: 20 Acres at 50 ft Spacing A09 A08 G16 B08 B09 A07 C09 K20 C08 A06 G14 B07 M22 A05 D09 I16 B06 A04 C07 B05 D08 G12 M20 E09 K17 C06 I14 O22 B04 E08 D07 K16 F09 L17 O21 C05 D06 G10 O20 P22 C04 E07 F08 M18 I12 K15 L16 D05 E06 G09 M17 H10 N18 P21 Q22 D04 F07 K14 L15 G08 E05 H09 M16 O18 F06 I10 K13 N17 Q21 L14 P20 E04 G07 H08 M15 K12 N16 O17 Q20 F05 G06 I09 J10 L13 M14 K11 P18 S22 F04 H07 N15 I08 L12 G05 H06 J09 M13 K10 N14 P17 G04 I07 J08 L11 K09 M12 Q18 H05 N13 P16 I06 L10 U22 H04 J07 K08 M11 Q17 I05 L09 N12 P15 J06 M10 Q16 I04 K07 L08 N11 O12 P14 J05 K06 M09 Q15 U20 N10 P13 L07 M08 O11 Q14 J04 P12 K05 N09 L06 O10 P11 U18 K04 M07 N08 Q13 L05 O09 Q12 M06 O08 P10 N07 Q11 L04 M05 P09 U16 N06 P08 Q10 M04 O07 Q31 S12 N05 Q09 R10 O06 U14 Q30 Q08 N04 P07 O05 Q32 R09 P06 R08 S10 O04 Q07 P05 S09 U12 Q06 R07 T10 P04 Q05 S08 R06 T09 U10 S07 Q04 T08 R05 U09 S06 T07 R04 U08 S05 T0612,203 W10 S04 U07 V08 R03 U06 T05 W08 R02 S03 V07 S02 T04 R01 T03 U05 V06 W07 S01 U04 T02 V05 W06 T01 V04 W05 Y08 U02 U03 V03 W04 U01 Scale in Feet V02 W03 6 V01 W02 0 130 260 W01
    7. Spatial Variability of Petroleum Contamination A09 A08 G16 B08 B09 A07 C09 K20 C08 A06 G14 B07 M22 A05 D09 I16 B06 A04 C07 B05 D08 G12 M20 E09 K17 C06 I14 O22 B04 E08 D07 K16 F09 L17 O21 C05 D06 G10 O20 P22 C04 E07 F08 M18 I12 K15 L16 D05 E06 G09 M17 H10 N18 P21 Q22 D04 F07 K14 L15 G08 E05 H09 M16 O18 F06 I10 K13 N17 Q21 L14 P20 E04 G07 H08 M15 K12 N16 O17 Q20 F05 G06 I09 J10 L13 M14 K11 P18 S22 F04 H07 N15 325,000 I08 L12 G05 H06 J09 M13 K10 N14 P17 G04 I07 J08 L11 300,000 K09 M12 Q18 H05 N13 P16 I06 L10 U22 H04 J07 K08 M11 Q17 275,000 I05 L09 N12 P15 J06 M10 Q16 I04 K07 L08 N11 250,000 O12 P14 J05 K06 M09 Q15 U20 N10 P13 L07 M08 O11 Q14 225,000 J04 P12 K05 N09 L06 O10 P11 U18 K04 M07 N08 Q13 200,000 L05 O09 M06 P10 Q12 O08 Q11 L04 N07 175,000 M05 P09 N06 U16 P08 Q10 M04 O07 Q31 S12 150,000 N05 O06 Q09 R10 U14 Q30 Q08 N04 P07 125,000 O05 R09 Q32 P06 R08 S10 O04 Q07 100,000 P05 S09 U12 Q06 R07 T10 75,000 P04 Q05 S08 R06 T09 U10 S07 50,000 Q04 T08 R05 U09 S06 T07 25,000 R04 U08 S05 T0612,203 W10 S04 U07 V08 0 R03 U06 T05 Color Scale W08 R02 S03 V07 (nanograms) S02 T04 U05 R01 T03 V06 W07 S01 U04 T02 V05 W06 T01 V04 W05 Y08 U02 U03 U01 V03 W04 Passive Soil Gas Survey Scale in Feet V02 W03 Total Petroleum 7 V01 0 130 260 W01 W02 Hydrocarbons
    8. PSG Example Transects: 100 ft Spacing PRIEST DRIVE CUTLER DR. BROADWAY ROAD B-5 B-4 B-3 B-2 B-1 P-1 IP-1 C-1 C-2 IP-2 P-2 21ST ST. 22-3 22-2 22-1 IP-3 Sampling in Public PRIEST DRIVE P-3 IP-4 Right-of-Ways P-4 IP-5 23RD ST. 23-8 23-7 23-6 23-5 23-4 23-3 23-2 23-1 IP-6 P-5 IP-7 55-1 P-6 IP-8 55-2 P-7 IP-9 55-3 IP-10 INDUST. PARK AVE. P-8 55TH STREET PRIEST DRIVE ALAMEDA DRIVE ALAMEDA DRIVE A-11 A-10 A-9 A-8 A-7 A-6 A-5 A-4 A-3 A-2 A-1 55-4 P-9 Scale in Feet 0 150 300 8 55-5 P-10
    9. Spatial Variability of Chlorinated Plume PRIEST DRIVE CUTLER DR. BROADWAY ROAD 12 J B-5 B-4 B-3 B-2 B-1 P-1 IP-1 P-2 C-1 C-2 6J IP-2 Identified 21ST ST. 150 22-3 22-2 22-1 145 IP-3 Property with 125 PRIEST DRIVE P-3 67 IP-4 Release and 100 P-4 6J IP-5 mapped PCE 31 5J 12 J 16 J 43 15 J 14 J 75 P-5 23-8 23-7 23-6 23-5 23-4 23RD ST. 23-3 23-2 23-1 7J IP-6 GW Plume at 70-ft bgs 8J 50 IP-7 55-1 13 J P-6 25 IP-8 12 J 28 55-2 P-7 IP-9 0 Color Scale (nanograms) 55-3 9J IP-10 INDUST. PARK AVE. P-8 55TH STREET PRIEST DRIVE ALAMEDA DRIVE ALAMEDA DRIVE A-11 A-10 A-9 A-8 A-7 A-6 A-5 A-4 A-3 A-2 A-1 55-4 P-9 Scale in Feet 0 150 300 9 55-5 P-10
    10. WHY PSG SURVEYS? PSG surveys are routinely performed to: • Identify source areas and release locations • Focus soil and groundwater sampling locations • Focus remediation plans • Identify vapor intrusion pathways • Track groundwater plumes • Monitor remediation progress 10
    11. PASSIVE VS ACTIVE More Interpretive Power for Vapor Intrusion Evaluations PASSIVE ACTIVE/ PASSIVE Time Integrated Samples Effective in Most Soil Conditions PASSIVE Passive Targets a Broader Range of Compounds 11
    12. TOOL KIT AND SAMPLER A PSG sampler is designed for rapid installation and ease of use in the field Note: Critical that each sampler contains an equal mass of adsorbent that is hydrophobic 12
    13. USE IN FIELD Installation of PSG samplers A single Sample Collection Kit is custom prepared and comes with all materials needed to perform up to a 60-point survey 13
    14. DEPLOYMENT DEPTH OPTIONS 14
    15. APPLICATIONS • Site characterization and site assessment • Remediation design and long-term monitoring • U.S. Department of Defense / Department of Energy • Pipelines and USTs / petroleum contamination • Dry cleaners / solvent contamination • Brownfields / industrial sites • Commercial property transfers • Superfund sites • Risk assessment • Landfills 15
    16. ROUTINE TARGETS Halogenated hydrocarbons Complex mixtures • PCE • Stoddard solvent • TCE • Paint thinners • DCEs Petroleum Blends • Vinyl chloride • Gasoline • TCA • Carbon tetrachloride • Fuel oil • Chloroform • Diesel • Freons • Jet Fuel • Chlorobenzene BTEX, MTBE and PAHs • Dichlorobenzenes • Naphthalene • Trichlorobenzenes • 2-Methylnaphthalene 16
    17. ADDITIONAL TARGETS Heavier PAHs • Acenaphthalene, Fluorene, Pyrene Ketones Explosives Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) • Mustard, GB, VX CWA Breakdown Products • 1,4-Thioxane, 1,4-Dithiane, Thiodiglycol Mercury (Hg) 17
    18. ADVANCED ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES • Analysis by thermal desorption-gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (TD-GC/MS) following EPA Method 8260B • Analytical results based on 5-point initial calibration • Internal standards and surrogates included with each analysis • Daily continuing calibration checks • Duplicate field samples • System daily tunes • Method blanks 18
    19. IN THE LAB Samples analyzed with TD-GC/MS • Thermal Desorption System (TD) • GC/MS • Analysis following EPA Method 8260B • Typical method detection limits (MDLs) from 1 to 5 nanograms GC/MS TD System Flow 19
    20. ASTM D5314-92 (2006) Standard Guide For Soil Gas Monitoring In The Vadose Zone Originally developed in 1992 and re-approved in 2006 Standard Sets Forth: “Soil gas monitoring has become a widely accepted method for locating subsequent environmental monitoring and remediation activities such as ground water monitoring wells, contaminant product recovery wells or excavations to recover contaminated soil.” 20
    21. ASTM WK 20609 Standard Practice for Passive Soil Gas Sampling Beacon is the primary author as requested by the Vadose Zone Monitoring Committee Chairman. • The guidance contains sections on Summary of Practice, Significance and Use, Procedures and Reporting Requirements. • Guidance on spacing and timing of sampler placement, analytical process requirements and interpretation augmentation with tie-in correlations is provided. • The final version is slated to be out in early 2009. 21
    22. Conceptual Site Model Elements from ASTM E 1689-95 (2003): • Identify Contaminants • Identify and Characterize Sources • Delineate Migration Pathways (GW, SW, Soil, Sediment, Biota and Air) • Establish Background Levels • Identify Receptors • Determine Limits of Study Area or System Boundaries 22
    23. Triad Approach – Managing Decision Uncertainty The generation of site data must be designed to produce a CSM that reliably portrays nature and extent of contamination in relation to the intended compliance and cleanup decisions. More options available for effective remediation than ever before. But accurate site characterization is mandatory for cleanup technologies to perform efficiently. Source: Summary of the Triad Approach, Crumbling, D., USEPA, March 2004 23
    24. Path of Least Resistance to Site Closure Need to Remediate in the Right Place & All the Time • Focused remedial efforts produce effective results • Avoid the Pitfall -- Many sites are not properly characterized Spatial variability of site is not adequately defined • Minimize data gaps to limit surprises • PSG sampling on a regular basis in a grid-pattern in and around the remediation systems gives a reliable snapshot of the performance both in close proximity to and away from active remedial areas. 24
    25. Example Project Site in the Northern California • Dual-Phase Extraction Combining Soil Vapor Extraction and Groundwater Pumping – Operating for 3 Years • Shallow Groundwater (Approx. 15 feet below ground surface) Clay and silt with sand stringers • Iron Oxidation/Precipitation Problems Causing Pump Failures • Snapshot of Remediation Effectiveness and Vapor Intrusion Risks 25
    26. TPH Dissolved Phase Where center of mass was believed to be present 26
    27. MtBE Dissolved Phase Size and shape of plume approximate 27
    28. Passive Soil Gas Survey Results – TPH C5-C10 DPE Remediation System D. SR GWT IN SVE LL MW-2 RO TOX 16 16 MW-6 MW-3 PV-12 350,000 143,871 PV-10 325,000 MW-1 11,800 77,686 PV-11 300,000 . RD MW-4 PV-5 PV-13 3,260 INS 8,471 349,915 275,000 PV-14 PV-9 PV-4 LL 14,122 250,000 RO 245,988 PV-3 10 PV-15 PV-8 30,890 225,000 16 MW-5 PV-2 MW-9 200,000 34,931 PV-7 PV-1 175,000 . RD DR IVE 150,000 INS WA INS Y MW-7 LL 125,000 LL PV-6 RO O R D 00 R 100,000 90 SID 15 . 16 EW 75,000 AL K 50,000 DR 25,000 IVE WA MW-10 Y 0 LEGEND RO Color Scale 1,000 TPH (nanograms) DR (nanograms) LL IVE INS MW-8 WA . PASSIVE SOIL-GAS SAMPLE LOCATION RD PV-8 RO Y AD INS MONITORING WELL LOCATION MW-8 LL GWT GROUNDWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM RO 76 SVE SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION 15 TOX THERMAL OXIDIZER DR IVE WA Y Scale in Feet DR Figure 9 VW Passive Soil-Gas Survey 28 Y 323 Williams Street, Suite D, Bel Air, MD, 800-878-5510 0 40 80 TPH Beacon Project No. 2129, July 2008
    29. Passive Soil Gas Survey Results -- MtBE DPE Remediation System . RD GWT I NS SVE LL MW-2 RO TOX 16 16 MW-6 MW-3 PV-12 20,000 MW-1 682 PV-10 18,000 6,579 D. PV-11 MW-4 PV-5 252 SR PV-13 16,000 19,255 1,828 LI N PV-14 PV-9 PV-4 4,117 L RO 27 446 14,000 PV-3 10 PV-15 PV-8 106 16 MW-5 12,000 PV-2 MW-9 289 PV-7 PV-1 10,000 D. DR SR IVE WA 8,000 INS LI N Y MW-7 LL OL PV-6 O R 6,000 R D 00 R 90 SID 15 . 16 EW AL 4,000 K 2,000 DR IVE WA MW-10 Y 0 LEGEND RO Color Scale 1,000 METHYL-T-BUTYL ETHER (nanograms) DR (nanograms) LL IVE INS MW-8 WA D. PASSIVE SOIL-GAS SAMPLE LOCATION PV-8 RO Y SR AD MONITORING WELL LOCATION LI N MW-8 OL GWT GROUNDWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM R 76 SVE SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION 15 TOX THERMAL OXIDIZER DR IVE WA Y Scale in Feet DR Figure 2 VW Y Passive Soil-Gas Survey 323 Williams Street, Suite D, Bel Air, MD, 800-878-5510 Beacon Project No. 2129, July 2008 0 40 80 Methyl-t-butyl Ether (MTBE) 29
    30. TPH Comparison -- GW Left and PSG Right 30
    31. MtBE Comparison -- GW Left and PSG Right 31
    32. PSG Survey Results -- PCE Previously Not Characterized DPE Remediation System . RD GWT I NS SVE LL MW-2 RO TOX 16 16 MW-6 8,795 MW-3 PV-12 10,000 403 MW-1 1,455 PV-10 298 9,000 2,094 D. PV-11 MW-4 PV-5 369 SR PV-13 8,000 1,692 7,375 LI N PV-14 PV-9 PV-4 1,687 L RO 716 386 7,000 PV-3 10 PV-15 PV-8 1,271 16 MW-5 1,618 6,000 PV-2 MW-9 1,756 PV-7 PV-1 5,000 D. DR SR IVE WA 424 4,000 INS LI N Y MW-7 LL OL PV-6 O R 3,000 R D 00 R 90 SID 15 . 16 EW AL 2,000 K 1,000 DR IVE WA MW-10 Y 0 LEGEND RO Color Scale 1,000 TETRACHLOROETHENE (nanograms) DR (nanograms) LL IVE INS MW-8 WA D. PASSIVE SOIL-GAS SAMPLE LOCATION PV-8 RO Y SR AD MONITORING WELL LOCATION LI N MW-8 OL GWT GROUNDWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM R 76 SVE SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION 15 TOX THERMAL OXIDIZER DR IVE WA Y Scale in Feet DR Figure 6 VW Y Passive Soil-Gas Survey 323 Williams Street, Suite D, Bel Air, MD, 800-878-5510 Beacon Project No. 2129, July 2008 0 40 80 Tetrachloroethene 32
    33. PSG Survey Results -- TCE Previously Not Characterized DPE Remediation System . RD GWT I NS SVE LL MW-2 RO TOX 16 16 MW-6 288 MW-3 PV-12 1,000 25 MW-1 40 PV-10 40 900 150 D. PV-11 MW-4 PV-5 30 SR PV-13 800 26 312 LI N PV-14 PV-9 PV-4 94 L RO 125 368 700 PV-3 10 PV-15 PV-8 817 16 MW-5 132 600 PV-2 MW-9 180 PV-7 PV-1 500 D. DR SR IVE WA 46 400 INS LI N Y MW-7 LL OL PV-6 O R 300 R D 00 R 90 SID 15 . 16 EW AL 200 K 100 DR IVE WA MW-10 Y 0 LEGEND RO Color Scale 1,000 TRICHLOROETHENE (nanograms) DR (nanograms) LL IVE INS MW-8 WA D. PASSIVE SOIL-GAS SAMPLE LOCATION PV-8 RO Y SR AD MONITORING WELL LOCATION LI N MW-8 OL GWT GROUNDWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM R 76 SVE SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION 15 TOX THERMAL OXIDIZER DR IVE WA Y Scale in Feet DR Figure 5 VW Y Passive Soil-Gas Survey 323 Williams Street, Suite D, Bel Air, MD, 800-878-5510 Beacon Project No. 2129, July 2008 0 40 80 Trichloroethene 33
    34. PSG Survey Results – 1,1,1-TCA Previously Not Characterized DPE Remediation System . RD GWT I NS SVE LL MW-2 RO TOX 16 16 MW-6 502 MW-3 PV-12 6,000 214 MW-1 PV-10 5,500 1,008 D. PV-11 MW-4 PV-5 5,000 689 SR PV-13 299 LI N PV-14 PV-9 PV-4 4,500 357 L RO 179 PV-3 4,000 10 PV-15 PV-8 1,436 16 MW-5 184 PV-2 MW-9 3,500 5,776 PV-7 PV-1 3,000 D. DR SR IVE 2,500 WA 221 INS LI N Y MW-7 LL OL PV-6 2,000 O R R D 00 R 90 SID 1,500 15 . 16 EW AL K 1,000 DR 500 IVE WA MW-10 Y 0 LEGEND RO Color Scale 1,000 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE (nanograms) DR (nanograms) LL IVE INS MW-8 WA D. PASSIVE SOIL-GAS SAMPLE LOCATION PV-8 RO Y SR AD MONITORING WELL LOCATION LI N MW-8 OL GWT GROUNDWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM R 76 SVE SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION 15 TOX THERMAL OXIDIZER DR IVE WA Y Scale in Feet DR Figure 3 VW Y Passive Soil-Gas Survey 323 Williams Street, Suite D, Bel Air, MD, 800-878-5510 Beacon Project No. 2129, July 2008 0 40 80 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA) 34
    35. Change of CSM Results in Change of Remediation Strategy TPH and MTBE Mass Lateral Extent Greater than Limits of Current DPE System: Requires Additional Wells Chlorinated Solvent Plumes: Requires Additional Investigation, Treatment System Modifications and Additional Wells Quarterly PSG Survey to Monitor the Effectiveness of the Remediation System 35
    36. Advancements to Passive Soil Gas Technology Added Feature: MtoC Tie-In. [Measure Not Model] • Perform active soil gas measurement at selected PSG locations after the PSG Survey exposure survey is completed • The correlation between PSG mass and concentration is applied to the remaining PSG locations to estimate concentration and risk • The interpretive power of PSG Surveys increases dramatically • Allows a Time-Integrated component to site assessment 36
    37. MtoC Tie-In – Application Process MtoC Correlations -- Passive and Active 1.3919 1.4821 Benze ne y = 0.0904x TPH C5-C10 y = 0.001x 2 R = 0.9255 2 R = 0.9375 10,000 Method TO-17 (ug/m3) 1,000,000 Method TO-17 (ug/m3) 1,000 100 1,000 10 1 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 PS G (ng) PS G (ng) Use Correlations for Non-Tie-In Points in PSG Grid Units SV-14 SV-15 SV-16 SV-17 ng 259 28 2,160 2,425 Benzene ug/m3 207 9 3,957 4,649 ng 58,033 37,313 325,988 460,879 TPH C5-C10 ug/m3 11,488 5,970 148,291 247,743 37
    38. MtoC Tie-In Points at Example Site DPE Remediation B-7 System MW-2 GWT B-8 SVE B-6 TOX MW-6 B-4 B-5 B-11 B-20 B-9 Tie-In Point PV-12 MW-3 B-21 B-14 PV-12B B-24 B-23 B-19 B-3 P-1 B-26 PV-10 B-13 MW-1 T-2-1 B-17 B-2 T-1-1 PV-5 PV-13 PV-11 . MW-4/4N PV-5B RD T-1-2 B-25 T-2-2 B-12 B-15 B-16 S LIN PV-14 PV-9 PV-4 B-22 B-18 OL PV-8 0R B-1 PV-3 PV-8B MW-5/5N PV-15 1 MW-9 16 PV-7 PV-2 PV-7B PV-1 D. SR MW-7 IN S IN PV-6 LL PV-6B L OL RO RD 0 0 R 90 15 IDE . 16 WA LK DR MW-10 IV EW AY RO MW-8 LL DR INS IV 38 EW . AY RD RO
    39. MtoC Tie-In at the Example Site MtoC Correlations -- Passive and Active BTEX C5–C10 PCE 10,000,000 100,000 Method TO-17 (ug/m3) Method TO-17 (ug/m3) 1,000,000 y = 1.6682x 1.2367 0.9637 y = 1.4027x R2 = 0.8975 10,000 100,000 2 R = 0.7534 10,000 1,000 1,000 100 100 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 100 1,000 10,000 PSG (ng) PSG (ng) 39
    40. Conclusions • Advanced Time-Integrated PSG Surveys can change the CSM Dramatically and Focus Remedial Efforts in the Right Places • PSG Surveys Allows a Time-Integrated Component to Site Assessment that is Valuable for Estimation of Long-Term Site Risks • Compliance with Regulatory Screening Levels in All Environmental Media Results in Closure: Best to Not Miss the Target • Mass to Concentration Tie-In Increases the Interpretive Power of Advanced PSG for Risk Evaluation and Concentration Estimation • The Use of PSG for Quarterly Monitoring Allows you to Check in on the Performance on a Regular Basis 40

    + HarryONeillHarryONeill, 2 years ago

    custom

    393 views, 1 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    Use of advanced passive soil gas technology for sit more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 393
      • 393 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 1
    • Downloads 1
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories

    Tags

    more
    -->
    What's New

    © 2009 SlideShare Inc. All rights reserved.